Had a gorgeous 69 Mach 1 (my favorite year!) roll up next to me this afternoon on a quiet 4 lane street and after a couple of blocks, we decided to play a little. From a roll, I initially left him but even with the throttle matted, he started gaining on me. I let off at about 140kph and he went roaring by... all I saw was the personalized plate with the driver's name and the numbers 428 on it. I don't feel too bad about being overpowered by a 428 Cobra Jet 69 Mustang... it's worth twice what I paid for my 05 GT!

 

Shouldn't your GT still be faster though?

 

Apparently not.

 

I took the Shelby out today for a little drive to warm up the oil, that thing never ceases to amaze me!, the power and torque is best described as "explosive"!, I can see though how the new cars with the high-tech computerized HP can give the ol' big inch cars a run for the money.
I really try to take it easy on the speed runs though, last I checked a decent CobraJet overhaul was $20k :nono:

 

Just for fun, I did a little internet searching and came up with these numbers for a stock 69 428SCJ Mustang:

Performance:
(Super Cobra Jet) 428/335: 0-60 in 5.7 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.9 sec @ 103mph

Stock for stock, we should be close to neck in neck, although, the one today had 36 years to be modifed from stock! There's no replacement for displacement.

 

I'm surprised too. The 05-06 GTs should be faster than ANY classic Mustang unless it has been modded. None of those cars from 64 - 73 (including the Shelby GT500 KR) were capable of hitting 60 mph in 5 seconds - again - unless modded.

Would've been nice to know if he had done anything to it - my guess is he had.

Still, bet it was fun.

 

It was from a roll so I didn't get the usual 05+ traction advantage. The 428 sounded wicked at full song as he rolled by... drool!

 

Speaking of drool...



:worship:

 

Wow!

 

I think my 06 GT could out run my 69 mach, but the mach turns more heads
when im driving it.

 

id kill for one of those

 

One thing to REALLY keep in mind when you are comparing reviews from the 60s and 70s to reviews done today: Tires have REALLY improved a LOT since the old Polyglas days! You stick a good set of sticky radials (say, like the tires our cars now come with) on one of those big inch muscle cars, and they will EASILY drop a second or more off their quarter mile time and almost as much on the 0-60 time. They had a LOT more power than they had traction.

Case in point: My cousin just finished rebuilding his '69 Mach 1 (with 428 Cobra Jet and my all time favorite car!). Understand, while this is a Concours quality car (he keeps getting second because the judges won't give him first with headers on the car!), the motor IS upgraded a bit from stock. Headers, valvetrain, etc. It's a running car. His first trip to the track (using the NOS Polyglas tires) neted him a best of barely above 14 seconds at Denver (uncorrected). He was pissed. Until he looked at some videos of his runs and noticed that both back tires where smoking the ENTIRE pass!

Next trip out, he purchased a set of DOT approved drag tires (I don't remember what brand). He was able to get it solidly into the mid 12 second range with nothing more than a TIRE CHANGE!. And after this trip he found that the linkage on his carb was messed up and the secondaries were not able to open. At all...

Unfortunately, I haven't talked to him in a while (I REALLY should get on the phone!), so I don't know were he got to since he repaired the carb linkage. Low 12? High 11? This is all uncorrected times at Denver, just for the record.

 

That car must have been severaly warmed up. I remember reading an article a couple years back about how a 66 GT350 compared to a 2002 GT, and it wasn't even close. Although a 428 has a lot more grunt than a GT350, a 2005 GT has a lot more than a 2002.

 

It is very much a hot car. He spend a LOT of money on that engine. FEs are NOT cheap engines to build, either stock or hot!

The point was that tires along made over 1.5 seconds difference in the 1/4 mile time and he was running the same, crappy tires they had back in the late 60s on his first run. Technology has definitely improved things abit.

Back in the mid 80s, this same car was his first car whil in high school. At that time, it was pretty stripped down (AC, emmision equipment, etc.). He ran at high 11 at Lubbbock on MT street tires. And the engine then was not NEARLY as hot as it is now. But I can tell you one thing: That 428 had SO much more grunt then my 05 GT has now it isn't even funny!

Now, he has a hotter motor, but he ended up adding almost 800 lbs back on to the car while restoring it. I'll never forget how much he wined about the $1200 he had to spend to purchase the A.I.R. pump that he tossed in the trash when he was in high school. I laughed my butt off!

And I learned from it! Every single thing that comes off my car (shifter, 8" front subs, stock horn and fog lights so far) has been wrapped up and stored away. When I restore MY baby, I'm not going to be purchasing overpriced parts to replaced the originals I tossed!

 

Don't forget to save those white plastic rings that are loosely hanging off of your A/C lines under the hood! Those will be priceless in 30 years! :P

 

I read some where that the 428CJ was actually closer to 390 + in HP, it was downrated for insurance purposes. I miss the old days of 400+CID, and now we talk in liters (darn french). I was surprised that the new GT is just 6 hp less than the GT350 of 65/66. I remember when mustang monthly would take each new mustang that came out and run it head to head with a 65 GT HiPo. But as the 80's ran on, it became difficult for the GT to keep up...so then they had a Boss 302 do the deed.

besides, I would not mind being beat by a classic anyday

 

I may be mistaken, but the HP raings from years ago are not direct matches to today. Someone else can probably pipe in on this with some real numbers/info.

 

I figured it was rated like today. Flywheel rating. either way the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times and speeds are a good yard stick to use as well.

Any of the more knowledgable in the classic stangs performance help us out?

 

I'm no expert on the subject, but in another post comparing old and new DiamondBlue said they are done pretty differently: