gkaufman

Alright guys just a random thread on just how fast our cars are. I of course ran a few datalogging runs using the sctx2 to get my 0-100 times and everything in between. I also timed an 80-130 mph run. The crazy thing is this car is right up there with much more powerful cars. My 0-100 times were 11.7, 11.9, and 12.0 seconds. Motor trend did a head-to-head test of the charger srt8 and the 05 GTO. The charger scooted to 100 in 11.9 and the GTO in 11.7. Both those cars develop over 400hp. The lovely '01 M5 and M3 arent even that fast. The 80-130 run I timed was 11.68 seconds and that is right next to a 2004 Mercedes-Benz E 55 AMG.. The mercedes is 90k and has 469hp/516tq.!! I just thought Id point out some numbers and to exclaim that I love this car once again. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img] I have the simplest of mods too ... id be interested to see some of you guys (0-100) times with much more mods... Probably more incredible.

HiRoller

I agree with everything you said except for the M5- it's a 500hp V10..

Performance
0-60 mph:4.1 sec
0-100 mph:9.5 sec
¼ mile:12.4 sec @ 116 mph
Top Speed:155 mph (limited)
Lateral acceleration:.87gBraking 60-0 mph:120 ft

I'm a BMW fan as well as a Mustang nut. I have a 2003 Dinan 540i that my Mustang works hard to beat. The bottom line is for half the price of my 540, this mustang rocks. With minimal mods, our cars can run high 12's. Back in the 60's most big blocks couldn't even do that!! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img]

gkaufman

You are correct for the new bmw m5 i was referring to the 2001 model years sorry [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img] No chance against new ones. 9.5 seconds *sigh*

HiRoller

In that case... You are correct!! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]

mudshuvel319

Lee: you run a 0-60 times of 4.1 sec with a tune, exhaust, intake and 4.10s?

gkaufman

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mudshuvel319 @ April 19, 2006, 10:44 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Lee: you run a 0-60 times of 4.1 sec with a tune, exhaust, intake and 4.10s?
[/b][/quote]

I believe he means the new BMW M5 does. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]

mudshuvel319

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gkaufman @ April 19, 2006, 10:48 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I believe he means the new BMW M5 does. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]

Okay, i got it.
in the original post, it asked for time slips from people, so i thought Lee was making a point about the M5 and then giving his stang's numbers. oops. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/nono.gif[/img]

Gunslinger

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gkaufman @ April 19, 2006, 9:13 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
This car should technically cost more...
[/b][/quote]

No, not really. Ford did a good job of going back to the Mustang's roots with the current version. Look back to the 60's Mustangs and even the Fox body models and what you'll see is a cheap little car with a good healthy engine. It doesn't have the excellent handling and ride of my previous BMW, or the rock-solid body of the various Toyotas I've owned, but you know what? I don't care. It's the quintessential American muscle car and I (we) love it just the way it is [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen.gif[/img]

HiRoller

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Gunslinger @ April 19, 2006, 12:59 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
No, not really. Ford did a good job of going back to the Mustang's roots with the current version. Look back to the 60's Mustangs and even the Fox body models and what you'll see is a cheap little car with a good healthy engine. It doesn't have the excellent handling and ride of my previous BMW, or the rock-solid body of the various Toyotas I've owned, but you know what? I don't care. It's the quintessential American muscle car and I (we) love it just the way it is [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]


[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/werd.gif[/img]

Shifty

Pssst, magazine drivers suck. And so does magazine racing.

RandyB

No doubt the Mustang is a great performance bargain. We can gripe about plastic, unpainted mirrors, etc., but overall Ford delivered! I like BMWs too btw. My daily driver is an '03 330i 6-speed and I love the thing. I have been watching for pics of the next M3, and it's going to be an exciting car with the 4.0 V8.

AnotherMustangMan

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Pssst, magazine drivers suck[/b][/quote]

Haha, you can best guys who drive the crap out of the cars for a living? Yeah, owning the car to better "learn" it offers some advantages in wringing out the best numbers, but Motor Trend will always drive the living stuff out of the cars because they DON'T own them.

That's why I agree with your second statement : <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>And so does magazine racing.[/b][/quote]

tkogt

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(HiRoller @ April 19, 2006, 8:51 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I agree with everything you said except for the M5- it's a 500hp V10..

Performance
0-60 mph:4.1 sec
0-100 mph:9.5 sec
¼ mile:12.4 sec @ 116 mph
Top Speed:155 mph (limited)
Lateral acceleration:.87gBraking 60-0 mph:120 ft

I'm a BMW fan as well as a Mustang nut. I have a 2003 Dinan 540i that my Mustang works hard to beat. The bottom line is for half the price of my 540, this mustang rocks. With minimal mods, our cars can run high 12's. Back in the 60's most big blocks couldn't even do that!! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]


i ran the bmw event at the track two weeks ago and got killed by the m5's, man they run hard!

the m3's that were'nt modded were about even with the mustang in lap times and i had quite a few that couldnt keep up with me.

im needing a saleen blower, a new short block, a couple of cams............


jay

Shifty

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnotherMustangMan @ April 19, 2006, 5:20 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Haha, you can best guys who drive the crap out of the cars for a living? Yeah, owning the car to better "learn" it offers some advantages in wringing out the best numbers, but Motor Trend will always drive the living stuff out of the cars because they DON'T own them.

That's why I agree with your second statement :
[/b][/quote]

I forget what magazine I was looking at but they mustered a 12.3 1/4 time out of a 2006 Z06. I'm not saying I could do better but plenty of people have cracked 11's with this car. Just one example but you see incorrect times everywhere in magazines.

Reminisce

Agreed with everything you said, except for the cost. Our cars are actually VERY well priced for what we get, and lets be honest, we're paying the majority of our prices for the performance of our cars than anything else. You can get a dozen other vehicles loaded with a sunroof, 6-10 speaker system, navigation possibly, 4-wheel independent suspension, leather, all the works, for less than a base GT at MSRP. But, you'd be hard pressed to find a car under 25 grand save the SRT-4, that can do what this car does on the street.

Lets face it, we're not buying our GTs for the sound system. I dont know about you guys, but I bought my GT out of a driving passion, the lust of the sound that throaty 4.6L makes, and the thrill I get when I mash the gas and get glued to my seat entering the passing lane. And the fact that we can do it with the best of cars out today, with arguably the sexiest styling of any new sports car in many years. is icing on the. Thats what we're paying for [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen.gif[/img]

pjdami

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gkaufman @ April 19, 2006, 7:13 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Alright guys just a random thread on just how fast our cars are. I of course ran a few datalogging runs using the sctx2 to get my 0-100 times and everything in between. I also timed an 80-130 mph run. The crazy thing is this car is right up there with much more powerful cars. My 0-100 times were 11.7, 11.9, and 12.0 seconds. Motor trend did a head-to-head test of the charger srt8 and the 05 GTO. The charger scooted to 100 in 11.9 and the GTO in 11.7. Both those cars develop over 400hp. The lovely '01 M5 and M3 arent even that fast. The 80-130 run I timed was 11.68 seconds and that is right next to a 2004 Mercedes-Benz E 55 AMG.. The mercedes is 90k and has 469hp/516tq.!! I just thought Id point out some numbers and to exclaim that I love this car once again. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img] I have the simplest of mods too ... id be interested to see some of you guys (0-100) times with much more mods... Probably more incredible.
[/b][/quote]

Nice numbers. Which of Doug's tunes are you running the 93 torque or the performance?

karman

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Reminisce @ April 20, 2006, 4:38 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Agreed with everything you said, except for the cost. Our cars are actually VERY well priced for what we get, and lets be honest, we're paying the majority of our prices for the performance of our cars than anything else. You can get a dozen other vehicles loaded with a sunroof, 6-10 speaker system, navigation possibly, 4-wheel independent suspension, leather, all the works, for less than a base GT at MSRP. But, you'd be hard pressed to find a car under 25 grand save the SRT-4, that can do what this car does on the street.

Lets face it, we're not buying our GTs for the sound system. I dont know about you guys, but I bought my GT out of a driving passion, the lust of the sound that throaty 4.6L makes, and the thrill I get when I mash the gas and get glued to my seat entering the passing lane. And the fact that we can do it with the best of cars out today, with arguably the sexiest styling of any new sports car in many years. is icing on the. Thats what we're paying for [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/yes.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img] WHAT HE SAID

gkaufman

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pjdami @ April 22, 2006, 8:13 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Nice numbers. Which of Doug's tunes are you running the 93 torque or the performance?
[/b][/quote]

Im running the 93 Torque tune. The torque tune just feels stronger all around even though it shouldnt be stronger up top. I wont know for sure unless I load the 93 performance and do some 0-100's after the car gets used to the new tune.

06GT

Most of those "more powerful" cars also weigh at least 400lbs more than the Mustang.

RandyB

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(06GT @ April 26, 2006, 1:57 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Most of those "more powerful" cars also weigh at least 400lbs more than the Mustang.
[/b][/quote]

Case in point - GT500! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img]