Is this true? 2007 Mustang GT Slower?
4/10/07, 07:30 AM
#1
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: June 25, 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this true? 2007 Mustang GT Slower?
From Wikipedia
The 2005-2006 Mustang GT is capable of performing a quarter-mile test in 13.5 seconds, with acceleration from 0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds.[8] The 2007 Mustang GT, reflecting an increase in weight from the 2005-2006 model years, runs a quarter-mile test in 13.9 seconds at 103 mph, with acceleration from 0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds.[7] Additionally, the '07 Mustang's front suspension is revised to improve steering response. Added to the rear suspension is a three-linked system which controls the vertical and lateral movements of the axle. All model years of the S-197 Mustang retain a live axle rear suspension providing the benefits of reduced cost and weight over a heavier, more expensive and complicated independent rear suspension, at the expense of more efficient handling. The 2005-present Mustang GT also comes equipped with a limited slip differential complete with the same carbon-fiber clutch discs used in the 2003-2004 SVT Cobra and the 2007 Shelby GT500. The differential is designed for the 31-spline axles and the 8.8" ring gear used in the S197. Unlike the Mustang GT, the basic V6 model without the 2006+ Pony Package lacks a rear anti-sway bar to prevent severe oversteer on hard cornering.[9] The 2007 Mustang V6 and GT chassis, suspension, and body shares many of the same construction designs as the GT500. Thicker sheetmetal support and extra welds can be found on the 2007 chassis. Re-designed strut towers on the '07 Mustang accommodate the wider 5.4 L 4V V8 engine in the GT500. Another example is the rear diffuser from the 2007 GT California Special package (GT/CS), also used for the GT500.
The 2005-2006 Mustang GT is capable of performing a quarter-mile test in 13.5 seconds, with acceleration from 0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds.[8] The 2007 Mustang GT, reflecting an increase in weight from the 2005-2006 model years, runs a quarter-mile test in 13.9 seconds at 103 mph, with acceleration from 0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds.[7] Additionally, the '07 Mustang's front suspension is revised to improve steering response. Added to the rear suspension is a three-linked system which controls the vertical and lateral movements of the axle. All model years of the S-197 Mustang retain a live axle rear suspension providing the benefits of reduced cost and weight over a heavier, more expensive and complicated independent rear suspension, at the expense of more efficient handling. The 2005-present Mustang GT also comes equipped with a limited slip differential complete with the same carbon-fiber clutch discs used in the 2003-2004 SVT Cobra and the 2007 Shelby GT500. The differential is designed for the 31-spline axles and the 8.8" ring gear used in the S197. Unlike the Mustang GT, the basic V6 model without the 2006+ Pony Package lacks a rear anti-sway bar to prevent severe oversteer on hard cornering.[9] The 2007 Mustang V6 and GT chassis, suspension, and body shares many of the same construction designs as the GT500. Thicker sheetmetal support and extra welds can be found on the 2007 chassis. Re-designed strut towers on the '07 Mustang accommodate the wider 5.4 L 4V V8 engine in the GT500. Another example is the rear diffuser from the 2007 GT California Special package (GT/CS), also used for the GT500.
4/10/07, 07:50 AM
#2
Mach 1 Member
i believe it's true
if you compare the base models.. 2005-2006 came with a 3.55 rear end gears, while the 2007 comes with 3.31:1 (3.55:1 are optional)
so in theory the 2005-2006 should accellerate a bit faster
if you compare the base models.. 2005-2006 came with a 3.55 rear end gears, while the 2007 comes with 3.31:1 (3.55:1 are optional)
so in theory the 2005-2006 should accellerate a bit faster
4/10/07, 09:41 AM
#6
GT Member
Join Date: February 24, 2007
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the rear-end ratio is really the culprit, then that's easy to fix, just buy a car with the 3:55 rear-end, it's just a $100 option.
Also personally I wouldn't draw just definitive conclusions from just two test results. Conditions might have been different, drivers might have been different, there are slower and faster cars, etc.
Also personally I wouldn't draw just definitive conclusions from just two test results. Conditions might have been different, drivers might have been different, there are slower and faster cars, etc.
4/10/07, 10:11 AM
#9
Cobra Member
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
At 100 mph, 4 tenths of a second is almost 59 feet.... That is a LOT more than "half a car-length". Almost FOUR car-lenths...
In my book, that is a LOT slower.
In my book, that is a LOT slower.
4/10/07, 10:26 AM
#10
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember, Wikipedia is made up of volunteers supplying the info. Anonymous volunteers at that. Take it for what its worth.
But yeah, that makes sense about the gears.
But yeah, that makes sense about the gears.
4/10/07, 10:40 AM
#12
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: April 14, 2005
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had an '05 GT auto 3:31s, now i have a '07 GT/CS 3:55s manual. I think just from SOP's the '07 seems a tad faster. It also has no rattles (so far) that the '05 had, all and all it seems a lot more tight...just my opinion
4/10/07, 11:20 AM
#13
Legacy TMS Member
I added the info about the new chassis/sheetmetal that I learned from TMS, but some moron keeps using magazine tests as gospel for performance figures. I think he's secretly a F-body Camaro owner. And yes, anyone can modify the info which is a good thing and a bad thing.
4/10/07, 06:25 PM
#15
V6 Member
Join Date: March 23, 2007
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if 4 tenths of a second really matterd, i.e. you were racing the car for cash (professionally or otherwise) then it really wouldnt matter what came out of the factory cuase you would never leave it stock. so really, for most of us, that 4 tenths only matters when having those hypothetical conversations with camero and firebird owners.
4/10/07, 07:12 PM
#17
V6 Member
Join Date: January 23, 2007
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My guess is the 4.9 second 0-60 run was from an early Mustang specially prepared for magazine testing. The later 5.3 second 0-60 run was from a heavily optioned California Special with side scoops, lower fascia, diffuser, dual power & heated seats, perhaps trunk amplifier/subwoofer and other options that add weight. Probably equally equipped 2005 and 2007 Mustangs purchased off a dealer lot would accelerate similarly.
4/10/07, 07:44 PM
#18
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
My guess is the 4.9 second 0-60 run was from an early Mustang specially prepared for magazine testing. The later 5.3 second 0-60 run was from a heavily optioned California Special with side scoops, lower fascia, diffuser, dual power & heated seats, perhaps trunk amplifier/subwoofer and other options that add weight. Probably equally equipped 2005 and 2007 Mustangs purchased off a dealer lot would accelerate similarly.
I don't think it was heavily optioned.
I do think it was run in cold fall/winter air with a very good driver.
4/10/07, 07:55 PM
#19
V6 Member
Join Date: November 8, 2005
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if 4 tenths of a second really matterd, i.e. you were racing the car for cash (professionally or otherwise) then it really wouldnt matter what came out of the factory cuase you would never leave it stock. so really, for most of us, that 4 tenths only matters when having those hypothetical conversations with camero and firebird owners.
In the world of drag racing 4 tenths of a second is FOREVER!. Folks pay big money to reduce their ET by that amount. Just though I'd put the proper perspective on that issue