Shelby V6?
10/30/05, 10:11 PM
#81
I have a feeling that this car is going to be around 35K, so GT owners shouldnt feel bad becuase I'm sure that you'll end up getting the most power for your $.
10/30/05, 11:29 PM
#82
Post *****
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Location: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Posts: 18,613
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
wow... GT guys (not all of you, i know) getting riled up and trying to get jollies from maing fun of a V6....
ill agree that displacement is key in all out power struggles, but not in the grand scheme of things. there are soo many more factors needed for a succesful car, like price, and handling among other things
i think a S/C V6 GT350 with some suspension bits would totally rock. i'd love to own one of those. heck i'd love a base 6er with no options!!
they're all mustangs ppl and they all have potential in their own ways!!! if you dont like it then just go be happy with whatever you have and shut the putooties up and let us enjoy what we like.
geez, what happened to common courtesies like respecting other people and their views? if a 16 year old can see that those are important values, why cant everyone?
and back to the topic, im REALLY excited about this car. i high revving well handling V6 car is exactly what i think ford nereds to stay competitive with other smaller sports cars built for a track that isnt just a straight line...
and y'all have got to see that the 4.0 isnt just a "base" motor. look back to the sixties! most ppl who wanted a "peppy" lil sports car got a 289/302 notchback or something, while others were left to purchase huge cube beasts! but no one knocks the 289/302s becuase they still have a ton of potential
we need to look at the 4.0L in the same light. just cuz it aint the biggest baddest motor, doesnt make it a bad one. it had great potential, and a great future. i hope it stays for a while and to eventually own a nice 4.0 powered stang as a slick daily driver while so the ol' II dont rack up to many miles. and thats not to say its gonna be a grocery getter, im still gonna mod the thing, and take it to the strip. its a darn ood car.
longwinded, arent i? lol. anyhow, glad to see Shelby is making this car. if i had the cash, i'd be waiting in line to get one right now
ill agree that displacement is key in all out power struggles, but not in the grand scheme of things. there are soo many more factors needed for a succesful car, like price, and handling among other things
i think a S/C V6 GT350 with some suspension bits would totally rock. i'd love to own one of those. heck i'd love a base 6er with no options!!
they're all mustangs ppl and they all have potential in their own ways!!! if you dont like it then just go be happy with whatever you have and shut the putooties up and let us enjoy what we like.
geez, what happened to common courtesies like respecting other people and their views? if a 16 year old can see that those are important values, why cant everyone?
and back to the topic, im REALLY excited about this car. i high revving well handling V6 car is exactly what i think ford nereds to stay competitive with other smaller sports cars built for a track that isnt just a straight line...
and y'all have got to see that the 4.0 isnt just a "base" motor. look back to the sixties! most ppl who wanted a "peppy" lil sports car got a 289/302 notchback or something, while others were left to purchase huge cube beasts! but no one knocks the 289/302s becuase they still have a ton of potential
we need to look at the 4.0L in the same light. just cuz it aint the biggest baddest motor, doesnt make it a bad one. it had great potential, and a great future. i hope it stays for a while and to eventually own a nice 4.0 powered stang as a slick daily driver while so the ol' II dont rack up to many miles. and thats not to say its gonna be a grocery getter, im still gonna mod the thing, and take it to the strip. its a darn ood car.
longwinded, arent i? lol. anyhow, glad to see Shelby is making this car. if i had the cash, i'd be waiting in line to get one right now
10/30/05, 11:41 PM
#83
V6 Member
Join Date: May 18, 2005
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too owned a 90 fox 5.0 and just decided to cash in on the new v6 and only lost at the most .5 tenths of a second. I think these gt guys dont realize alot of us owned gt's before and decided it was time to consider other things like gas prices, insurance, and car payments. Dont get me wrong I love all mustangs and gt's included. I just wish the gt guys would be reasonable and admit the new 4.0 mustang does have considerable aftermarket backing and alot more capability than that of old v6's and for shiftey's cute comment about rice rockets, I know plenty of straight six turbo supras that will smoke his "big bad gt" in a heartbeat, along with some wrx's. We need to get with the program and realize that the reason we are here is because we like mustang's v6/v8 alike. If everyone had the same car this world would sure be a boring place.
10/31/05, 08:27 AM
#84
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: February 22, 2004
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm excited that they are making this Shelby. Yes, I may be in line for the GT500 but that doesn't mean I don't see the potential of the V6 Shelby or, like the other thread, throwing a turbo on it.
10/31/05, 09:49 AM
#85
GT Member
Join Date: September 29, 2005
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is kind of ridiculous.
GT owners come in here and then the hypocritical argument flies everywhere.
Basic assumptions based on the thread:
American cars are the way to go
Speed is a large part of what's important in a car
Anything mustang is fine
Now, arguments that have contradicted that:
a v6 w/ power adder, despite the fact it could smoke a v8 is unacceptable.
This argument is ridiculous since everyone seems to agree that speed is
most important. If your engine doesn't put 480+ to the ground, you don't
have the luxury of boasting that it can unless you take that 5k+ plunge.
Supras can beat GT's.
A great car, lots of respect although F&F somewhat cheapened them for me
while this is true, it is somewhat hypocritical.
A v6 is garbage because it's not a v8 (that's basically the argument)
See the above. v6s can and do beat v8's. potential is nothing unless you
capitalize on it. Unless your car runs 11's don't boast that it might be able to
run 10's if you made the investment.
Now that's just a quick recap of things I found ridiculous with this thread, although upon further review I could expand upon this list. This isn't a "lets all chill out and talk about mustangs" so much as a "lets not play the ***** game with our cars". Keep in mind this is the v6 board and lets all go about our business. :bang:
:notnice:
GT owners come in here and then the hypocritical argument flies everywhere.
Basic assumptions based on the thread:
American cars are the way to go
Speed is a large part of what's important in a car
Anything mustang is fine
Now, arguments that have contradicted that:
a v6 w/ power adder, despite the fact it could smoke a v8 is unacceptable.
This argument is ridiculous since everyone seems to agree that speed is
most important. If your engine doesn't put 480+ to the ground, you don't
have the luxury of boasting that it can unless you take that 5k+ plunge.
Supras can beat GT's.
A great car, lots of respect although F&F somewhat cheapened them for me
while this is true, it is somewhat hypocritical.
A v6 is garbage because it's not a v8 (that's basically the argument)
See the above. v6s can and do beat v8's. potential is nothing unless you
capitalize on it. Unless your car runs 11's don't boast that it might be able to
run 10's if you made the investment.
Now that's just a quick recap of things I found ridiculous with this thread, although upon further review I could expand upon this list. This isn't a "lets all chill out and talk about mustangs" so much as a "lets not play the ***** game with our cars". Keep in mind this is the v6 board and lets all go about our business. :bang:
:notnice:
10/31/05, 10:03 AM
#86
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Goliath@October 31, 2005, 8:52 AM
This thread is kind of ridiculous.
GT owners come in here and then the hypocritical argument flies everywhere.
Basic assumptions based on the thread:
American cars are the way to go
Speed is a large part of what's important in a car
Anything mustang is fine
Now, arguments that have contradicted that:
a v6 w/ power adder, despite the fact it could smoke a v8 is unacceptable.
This argument is ridiculous since everyone seems to agree that speed is
most important. If your engine doesn't put 480+ to the ground, you don't
have the luxury of boasting that it can unless you take that 5k+ plunge.
Supras can beat GT's.
A great car, lots of respect although F&F somewhat cheapened them for me
while this is true, it is somewhat hypocritical.
A v6 is garbage because it's not a v8 (that's basically the argument)
See the above. v6s can and do beat v8's. potential is nothing unless you
capitalize on it. Unless your car runs 11's don't boast that it might be able to
run 10's if you made the investment.
Now that's just a quick recap of things I found ridiculous with this thread, although upon further review I could expand upon this list. This isn't a "lets all chill out and talk about mustangs" so much as a "lets not play the ***** game with our cars". Keep in mind this is the v6 board and lets all go about our business. :bang: :notnice:
This thread is kind of ridiculous.
GT owners come in here and then the hypocritical argument flies everywhere.
Basic assumptions based on the thread:
American cars are the way to go
Speed is a large part of what's important in a car
Anything mustang is fine
Now, arguments that have contradicted that:
a v6 w/ power adder, despite the fact it could smoke a v8 is unacceptable.
This argument is ridiculous since everyone seems to agree that speed is
most important. If your engine doesn't put 480+ to the ground, you don't
have the luxury of boasting that it can unless you take that 5k+ plunge.
Supras can beat GT's.
A great car, lots of respect although F&F somewhat cheapened them for me
while this is true, it is somewhat hypocritical.
A v6 is garbage because it's not a v8 (that's basically the argument)
See the above. v6s can and do beat v8's. potential is nothing unless you
capitalize on it. Unless your car runs 11's don't boast that it might be able to
run 10's if you made the investment.
Now that's just a quick recap of things I found ridiculous with this thread, although upon further review I could expand upon this list. This isn't a "lets all chill out and talk about mustangs" so much as a "lets not play the ***** game with our cars". Keep in mind this is the v6 board and lets all go about our business. :bang:
:notnice:I completely understand how you feel Goliath! I myself dont quite undestand how it is that some who are faithfull to the V8 just cant accept the fact that 8 cylinders doesnt always equate to better.. Its like your trying to convince someone 2+2=4.. They know it equals 4, but for some reason, they want to continue to value it as 2.. It doesnt matter whether or not you combine both 2's.. They are convinced, that by the fact a 2 is a 2, even if you put another 2 with it, it couldnt possibly equal out to 4.. :scratch:
10/31/05, 10:40 AM
#87
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must stress, that I am not saying that the 4.6 is not better than the 4.0.. Rather that the 4.0 is good in its own right and should be respected for what it is.. Its basically an engine Ford crafted for the 2005 V6 Mustang, in which its become pretty much obvious that they did intend for the motor to have a very strong aftermarket life..
Some have said the V6's were produced for rental cars.. If this was the case, the motor would not put out an equal amount of power per cylinder as a 4.6.. I submit to you the numbers on their face value..
4.6L V8 HP per cylinder based on 300HP= 37.5HP
4.0L V6 HP per cylinder based on 225HP= 37.5HP
Now keep in mind the advertised HP rating of the 2005 SOHC 4.0 is 210 HP.. With a dual exhaust setup and a good tune its easy to see dyno numbers to the rear wheels based on the 225HP rating..
225x15%= 191RWHP
If you own a 2005 V6, you know that it doesnt take much to get the motor past this point..
Lets say for the sake of argument, we just used the stock HP rating of 210HP.. This is still 35HP per cylinder..
Now lets look at the TQ per cylinder of the 2 engines..
4.6L V8 TQ per cylinder based on 320FT lbs.= 40FT. lbs per cylinder
4.0L V6 TQ per cylinder based on 240FT lbs.= 40FT lbs per cylinder
Isnt it painfully obvious that the SOHC 4.0 engine is alittle more efficient in its usage of HP and TQ than the 4.6L V8?
Even for those who do not own a 2005 V6, and do not want to accept the 225HP rating, which is a commonly known 191RWHP, which everyone who owns one sees, you motor is only producing 2.5HP more per cylinder than the 4.0, and is equal to the 4.0 in terms of torque per cylinder..
This 2.5HP differece is most likley due to the DUAL Throttle body design of the GT, as opposed to the single 65mm throttle body of the 4.0.. In fact, if we look at it in detail, we see the GT is using a Dual 55MM throttle body, which equals 110MM of air intake, as opposed to just 65MM of the SOHC 4.0... Are some people choosing to ignore that the SOHC 4.0 is actually more efficient at creating raw power than the 4.6?
Carrol Shelby is not ignoring it for sure!
Some have said the V6's were produced for rental cars.. If this was the case, the motor would not put out an equal amount of power per cylinder as a 4.6.. I submit to you the numbers on their face value..
4.6L V8 HP per cylinder based on 300HP= 37.5HP
4.0L V6 HP per cylinder based on 225HP= 37.5HP
Now keep in mind the advertised HP rating of the 2005 SOHC 4.0 is 210 HP.. With a dual exhaust setup and a good tune its easy to see dyno numbers to the rear wheels based on the 225HP rating..
225x15%= 191RWHP
If you own a 2005 V6, you know that it doesnt take much to get the motor past this point..
Lets say for the sake of argument, we just used the stock HP rating of 210HP.. This is still 35HP per cylinder..
Now lets look at the TQ per cylinder of the 2 engines..
4.6L V8 TQ per cylinder based on 320FT lbs.= 40FT. lbs per cylinder
4.0L V6 TQ per cylinder based on 240FT lbs.= 40FT lbs per cylinder
Isnt it painfully obvious that the SOHC 4.0 engine is alittle more efficient in its usage of HP and TQ than the 4.6L V8?
Even for those who do not own a 2005 V6, and do not want to accept the 225HP rating, which is a commonly known 191RWHP, which everyone who owns one sees, you motor is only producing 2.5HP more per cylinder than the 4.0, and is equal to the 4.0 in terms of torque per cylinder..
This 2.5HP differece is most likley due to the DUAL Throttle body design of the GT, as opposed to the single 65mm throttle body of the 4.0.. In fact, if we look at it in detail, we see the GT is using a Dual 55MM throttle body, which equals 110MM of air intake, as opposed to just 65MM of the SOHC 4.0... Are some people choosing to ignore that the SOHC 4.0 is actually more efficient at creating raw power than the 4.6?
Carrol Shelby is not ignoring it for sure!
10/31/05, 11:17 AM
#89
Team Mustang Source
Join Date: April 6, 2004
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could not believe the names I was called on another forum for mentioning this shelby V6, the insecurity and maturity levels of people makes me wonder.
On a more on topic note, anyone here going to SEMA to see this???
On a more on topic note, anyone here going to SEMA to see this???
10/31/05, 11:47 AM
#90
Cobra Member
Join Date: January 7, 2005
Posts: 1,252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well since I will be at SEMA all next week working the show & since Vortech uses my car at many of their shows I will wonder over to their booth and ask a few of the people " in the know" if this is in fact a reality? Seems to be a lot of speculation, so I will see what I can find out too =)
10/31/05, 11:55 AM
#91
Banned
Join Date: September 19, 2005
Posts: 1,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by subzero05@October 31, 2005, 10:50 AM
Well since I will be at SEMA all next week working the show & since Vortech uses my car at many of their shows I will wonder over to their booth and ask a few of the people " in the know" if this is in fact a reality? Seems to be a lot of speculation, so I will see what I can find out too =)
Well since I will be at SEMA all next week working the show & since Vortech uses my car at many of their shows I will wonder over to their booth and ask a few of the people " in the know" if this is in fact a reality? Seems to be a lot of speculation, so I will see what I can find out too =)
10/31/05, 12:05 PM
#92
FR500 Member
Join Date: August 23, 2004
Posts: 3,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll just sum it up by saying that my genitals are more than adequate for me not to feel "threatened" at the idea that another Mustang with 2 less cylinders could be as fast or faster than my GT.
Somebody is ALWAYS going to be faster, why not a 4.0
Somebody is ALWAYS going to be faster, why not a 4.0
10/31/05, 12:54 PM
#93
Originally posted by MSP@October 31, 2005, 12:43 PM
I must stress, that I am not saying that the 4.6 is not better than the 4.0.. Rather that the 4.0 is good in its own right and should be respected for what it is.. Its basically an engine Ford crafted for the 2005 V6 Mustang, in which its become pretty much obvious that they did intend for the motor to have a very strong aftermarket life..
Some have said the V6's were produced for rental cars.. If this was the case, the motor would not put out an equal amount of power per cylinder as a 4.6.. I submit to you the numbers on their face value..
4.6L V8 HP per cylinder based on 300HP= 37.5HP
4.0L V6 HP per cylinder based on 225HP= 37.5HP
Now keep in mind the advertised HP rating of the 2005 SOHC 4.0 is 210 HP.. With a dual exhaust setup and a good tune its easy to see dyno numbers to the rear wheels based on the 225HP rating..
225x15%= 191RWHP
If you own a 2005 V6, you know that it doesnt take much to get the motor past this point..
Lets say for the sake of argument, we just used the stock HP rating of 210HP.. This is still 35HP per cylinder..
Now lets look at the TQ per cylinder of the 2 engines..
4.6L V8 TQ per cylinder based on 320FT lbs.= 40FT. lbs per cylinder
4.0L V6 TQ per cylinder based on 240FT lbs.= 40FT lbs per cylinder
Isnt it painfully obvious that the SOHC 4.0 engine is alittle more efficient in its usage of HP and TQ than the 4.6L V8?
Even for those who do not own a 2005 V6, and do not want to accept the 225HP rating, which is a commonly known 191RWHP, which everyone who owns one sees, you motor is only producing 2.5HP more per cylinder than the 4.0, and is equal to the 4.0 in terms of torque per cylinder..
This 2.5HP differece is most likley due to the DUAL Throttle body design of the GT, as opposed to the single 65mm throttle body of the 4.0.. In fact, if we look at it in detail, we see the GT is using a Dual 55MM throttle body, which equals 110MM of air intake, as opposed to just 65MM of the SOHC 4.0... Are some people choosing to ignore that the SOHC 4.0 is actually more efficient at creating raw power than the 4.6?
Carrol Shelby is not ignoring it for sure!
I must stress, that I am not saying that the 4.6 is not better than the 4.0.. Rather that the 4.0 is good in its own right and should be respected for what it is.. Its basically an engine Ford crafted for the 2005 V6 Mustang, in which its become pretty much obvious that they did intend for the motor to have a very strong aftermarket life..
Some have said the V6's were produced for rental cars.. If this was the case, the motor would not put out an equal amount of power per cylinder as a 4.6.. I submit to you the numbers on their face value..
4.6L V8 HP per cylinder based on 300HP= 37.5HP
4.0L V6 HP per cylinder based on 225HP= 37.5HP
Now keep in mind the advertised HP rating of the 2005 SOHC 4.0 is 210 HP.. With a dual exhaust setup and a good tune its easy to see dyno numbers to the rear wheels based on the 225HP rating..
225x15%= 191RWHP
If you own a 2005 V6, you know that it doesnt take much to get the motor past this point..
Lets say for the sake of argument, we just used the stock HP rating of 210HP.. This is still 35HP per cylinder..
Now lets look at the TQ per cylinder of the 2 engines..
4.6L V8 TQ per cylinder based on 320FT lbs.= 40FT. lbs per cylinder
4.0L V6 TQ per cylinder based on 240FT lbs.= 40FT lbs per cylinder
Isnt it painfully obvious that the SOHC 4.0 engine is alittle more efficient in its usage of HP and TQ than the 4.6L V8?
Even for those who do not own a 2005 V6, and do not want to accept the 225HP rating, which is a commonly known 191RWHP, which everyone who owns one sees, you motor is only producing 2.5HP more per cylinder than the 4.0, and is equal to the 4.0 in terms of torque per cylinder..
This 2.5HP differece is most likley due to the DUAL Throttle body design of the GT, as opposed to the single 65mm throttle body of the 4.0.. In fact, if we look at it in detail, we see the GT is using a Dual 55MM throttle body, which equals 110MM of air intake, as opposed to just 65MM of the SOHC 4.0... Are some people choosing to ignore that the SOHC 4.0 is actually more efficient at creating raw power than the 4.6?
Carrol Shelby is not ignoring it for sure!
MSP,
As usual you mention a lot of good points backed up by hard technical data. You mention something that I actually been trying to find, which is a after market throttle body for our cars. Has anyone found one yet? This is on my must buy list once it is available.
Regards,
10/31/05, 01:10 PM
#94
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: September 10, 2004
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MilStang@October 31, 2005, 9:30 AM
I'm excited that they are making this Shelby. Yes, I may be in line for the GT500 but that doesn't mean I don't see the potential of the V6 Shelby or, like the other thread, throwing a turbo on it.
I'm excited that they are making this Shelby. Yes, I may be in line for the GT500 but that doesn't mean I don't see the potential of the V6 Shelby or, like the other thread, throwing a turbo on it.
10/31/05, 01:22 PM
#95
Cobra Member
Join Date: November 1, 2004
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not once in my post have i said the 4.0 is junk...heck it has the same hp rating as my 92gt..what was said that someone could slap a blower on a v6 and smoke a lightly modded gt..which in truth can`t be done...there is alot move involved than just slaping one part to the car..suspension,,exhaust ...i could go on and on..you can make as much power as you want to but it does you no good if you can`t put it the ground...
10/31/05, 01:29 PM
#96
Originally posted by Goliath@October 31, 2005, 12:52 PM
This thread is kind of ridiculous.
GT owners come in here and then the hypocritical argument flies everywhere.
Basic assumptions based on the thread:
American cars are the way to go
Speed is a large part of what's important in a car
Anything mustang is fine
Now, arguments that have contradicted that:
a v6 w/ power adder, despite the fact it could smoke a v8 is unacceptable.
This argument is ridiculous since everyone seems to agree that speed is
most important. If your engine doesn't put 480+ to the ground, you don't
have the luxury of boasting that it can unless you take that 5k+ plunge.
Supras can beat GT's.
A great car, lots of respect although F&F somewhat cheapened them for me
while this is true, it is somewhat hypocritical.
A v6 is garbage because it's not a v8 (that's basically the argument)
See the above. v6s can and do beat v8's. potential is nothing unless you
capitalize on it. Unless your car runs 11's don't boast that it might be able to
run 10's if you made the investment.
Now that's just a quick recap of things I found ridiculous with this thread, although upon further review I could expand upon this list. This isn't a "lets all chill out and talk about mustangs" so much as a "lets not play the ***** game with our cars". Keep in mind this is the v6 board and lets all go about our business. :bang: :notnice:
This thread is kind of ridiculous.
GT owners come in here and then the hypocritical argument flies everywhere.
Basic assumptions based on the thread:
American cars are the way to go
Speed is a large part of what's important in a car
Anything mustang is fine
Now, arguments that have contradicted that:
a v6 w/ power adder, despite the fact it could smoke a v8 is unacceptable.
This argument is ridiculous since everyone seems to agree that speed is
most important. If your engine doesn't put 480+ to the ground, you don't
have the luxury of boasting that it can unless you take that 5k+ plunge.
Supras can beat GT's.
A great car, lots of respect although F&F somewhat cheapened them for me
while this is true, it is somewhat hypocritical.
A v6 is garbage because it's not a v8 (that's basically the argument)
See the above. v6s can and do beat v8's. potential is nothing unless you
capitalize on it. Unless your car runs 11's don't boast that it might be able to
run 10's if you made the investment.
Now that's just a quick recap of things I found ridiculous with this thread, although upon further review I could expand upon this list. This isn't a "lets all chill out and talk about mustangs" so much as a "lets not play the ***** game with our cars". Keep in mind this is the v6 board and lets all go about our business. :bang:
:notnice:
10/31/05, 01:32 PM
#97
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ya know Im pretty sure it can be done. I mean, Pwrhouse did it, right? Scrmings pushing it now.
True you have to get it to the ground, but give some credit to our cars man, they're doing what everyone says cant be done. The numbers are here.
True you have to get it to the ground, but give some credit to our cars man, they're doing what everyone says cant be done. The numbers are here.
10/31/05, 02:32 PM
#98
Cobra Member
Join Date: November 1, 2004
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Zodiac@October 31, 2005, 4:35 PM
Ya know Im pretty sure it can be done. I mean, Pwrhouse did it, right? Scrmings pushing it now.
True you have to get it to the ground, but give some credit to our cars man, they're doing what everyone says cant be done. The numbers are here.
Ya know Im pretty sure it can be done. I mean, Pwrhouse did it, right? Scrmings pushing it now.
True you have to get it to the ground, but give some credit to our cars man, they're doing what everyone says cant be done. The numbers are here.
never said it could not be done but it takes alot of $$$$$$$$$$$
10/31/05, 02:43 PM
#99
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my area at the time a GT would have cost me at least $28K... probably closer to $30K... I picked up my car for $22K. I've put about $4K in performance mods... I acutally bought the car strictly for looks... and I refused to pay over sticker for a car... any car... performance was an after thought really.... orginally the car was going to be for the 16 year old but some how it's morphed into my show car... LOL!
So for $26K I've got a car that will go 13.4 on street tires.... I've seen a few "lightly modded" GT's that only manage mid 13s... and a lot of stock GTs that run in the 14s!!! I mentioned that that with a good set of DRs, I could possibly be in the 12s... Then I was told I "shouldn't be proud of a car that almost runs 12s" heck, I was PROUD of my car before the INK WAS DRY on the paper work!
And there are AWESOME GT owners out there! Your guys are great!!! They are actually the majority! Those are the guys who have supported me and given me lots of thumbs up. Including one of the most respected Mustangs shops around, Alternative Auto... Do you think Lidio would have given me the time of day if he didn't think the 4.0L was a good platform?
But to those few OBNOXIOUS GT owners... (of course some don't even own a GT) THANK YOU! You are my inspiration! You just keep me wanting to push my car until your so embarrased you'll never troll this forum again... But of course I realize your heads are so screwed up from to much carbon monoxide you'll never be embarrased.... but like the dinosaur... you're old ways of thinking will fade into extinction..
<RANT OFF>
Back on topic... it would be nice if Vortech could come out with a nice kit in the $2500 range for use 05/06 guys... Might just be possible... ???
And I'm really not that big of a Shelby fan... sorry guys... I know it sounds blaphemous (spelling anyone???) One guy questions Shelbly's mental state for lending his name to the V6... perhaps that poster was to young to remember the Dodge Selby Charger (or Charger Shelby) from the mid-80's... LOL
So for $26K I've got a car that will go 13.4 on street tires.... I've seen a few "lightly modded" GT's that only manage mid 13s... and a lot of stock GTs that run in the 14s!!! I mentioned that that with a good set of DRs, I could possibly be in the 12s... Then I was told I "shouldn't be proud of a car that almost runs 12s" heck, I was PROUD of my car before the INK WAS DRY on the paper work!
And there are AWESOME GT owners out there! Your guys are great!!! They are actually the majority! Those are the guys who have supported me and given me lots of thumbs up. Including one of the most respected Mustangs shops around, Alternative Auto... Do you think Lidio would have given me the time of day if he didn't think the 4.0L was a good platform?
But to those few OBNOXIOUS GT owners... (of course some don't even own a GT) THANK YOU! You are my inspiration! You just keep me wanting to push my car until your so embarrased you'll never troll this forum again... But of course I realize your heads are so screwed up from to much carbon monoxide you'll never be embarrased.... but like the dinosaur... you're old ways of thinking will fade into extinction..
<RANT OFF>
Back on topic... it would be nice if Vortech could come out with a nice kit in the $2500 range for use 05/06 guys... Might just be possible... ???
And I'm really not that big of a Shelby fan... sorry guys... I know it sounds blaphemous (spelling anyone???) One guy questions Shelbly's mental state for lending his name to the V6... perhaps that poster was to young to remember the Dodge Selby Charger (or Charger Shelby) from the mid-80's... LOL
10/31/05, 02:52 PM
#100
Aren't we all on the same team? For criminie cripes sake, (northern expletive) my kids don't bicker like this! Don't get wrong, it's great entertainment!
Since I have a GT, let see if I can have a little fun here and add to the fire, just for fun of course.
"I proclaim all V6 drivers aren't running on all cylinders (which would be 8)!"
Since I have a GT, let see if I can have a little fun here and add to the fire, just for fun of course.
"I proclaim all V6 drivers aren't running on all cylinders (which would be 8)!"