Clino

I think it would be an even better move if it was rated at 400hp, but was actually putting out closer to 425. Kind of like the Terminator only putting out "390hp". I would love to see all the comparisons starting out with the question of whether 400hp is enough to best the competition, and then finding that it is even better than it absolutely destroys. It will give the 5.0 the reputation of the old motor.

classix_stang289

this is ford's chance to make a believer out of alot of people, to show them they can actually hang with the competition with smaller displacement. But all these "reported" numbers from evolution and so on sounds great and everything, but i will believe it when its offically announced and set in stone from ford . Until then its just talk, and everyone knows talk is bullsh*t.

eci

A base vette costs $15,000 more than a base GT, that's why. A base vette also hands a GT500 it's *** in most areas, you want a base GT to hang with a Vette for $28k? Not gonna happen. Corvette is on a different level than Mustang.

classix_stang289

if you want the camaro ss to be destroyed by a 2011 mustang 5.0, im sure it would also be able to breathe down a "base" vette's neck.

classix_stang289

im my opinion, the base vette should be included in the competition section for the mustang. Especially now with the new powertrain coming. Hopefully the potential is there. wouldnt it be great?

Boomer

Uh...wow

jedikd

In the 1/4 mile, sure. But performance is based on a heck of a lot more than that.

06StangSC

A guy I met that goes to all the Shelby drive events and sells the most Shelbys in the state told me they had a test mule around with the 6.2L they're supposed to put in the F150. I told him i only heard of the 5.0L...

bob

I'd have to disagree, the vette is just too different a car for the Mustang, now 3 series coupe or 1 series BMW, Camaro, Audi S5, ect all Mustang competitors IMO

Boomer

I have no doubt that companies (even ford) have stuffed a 6.2 in the Mustang.

I just can't see them actually doing anything production with it, not at this point.
Its a big heavy boat anchor by comparison.

Five Oh Brian

If you're getting beat by Cobalts, then you need to talk to one of the many fine vendors here at the site and they'll cure that pronto! Stock vs stock, you should be able to beat any Cobalt SS.

Bigjohns97

Arrow

Corvette decided to move into the supercar bracket long ago, yet for some reason still compare themselves to the Mustang, which, with the exception of the GT500, isn't considered a supercar. Go figure.

3-series are good cars, but I actually just got done testing a bunch for a friend who was looking to buy, and...nah. Sporty, yes, Mustang killer, no. Only advantage was the AWD, but that did add extra drivetrane drag. Better handling possibilities but less oomph.

The M-series is a different matter, but that's more GT500 territory and supercar at that. Still, the M's lost the KONI to the humble GT. Although the repeat race winner to compare to the Mustang in that regard wouldn't be a BMW or a Porsche...it's apparently a Mazda. Mazda didn't make the comparison list, though.

It'll be a mild handful, right up until the Camaro revs its nuts off...or its trans explodes...or its engine overheats...or its suspension falls apart...or the government owners say a new frame can't be built to replace the current discontinued one...etc...

Driven exclusively by c**ks so it doesn't matter... :P
Plus there's nothing Auti's putting out on the streets that a few aftermarket parts and a decent driver couldn't put to bed.

Such as?

The Challenger might be a competitor if they can figure out how to lose a ton. Nissan 370Z? I'm laughing...it hurts. Nissan GT-R? That's probably more like it, but we'd have to start comparing Ferrari's and Lamborghini's in the mix. The GT-R is more that kind of car build vs the solid mass-produciton baseline powerhouse that is the Mustang. I'm not saying the GT-R is Ferrari class, but the level of effort that goes into producing one is on par with the same intention. The Mustang is more of the worlds best baseline mid-range mass-appeal sports car. Lotus? The Lotus, even with its non-Ford-powered variants that are produced today, is a solid track car no doubt, but falls into the shadows everywhere else compared to the Mustang.

Although when you think about it, the Mustang is being compared more and more to supercars and other cult-following sports cars...that alone is a statement of its improvement, if nothing else.

I won't deny that a good Vette is tough competition for a GT500, but to say it hands it its *** is a bit much. But you're right, a 30K stock Mustang GT isn't going to play with a 45k supercar. A stock GT500 isn't to be ignored on the track. Put a little money into either and the Vette will have to reach into its wallet, too, though.

C&D did a decent comparison between the new GT500 and the new Corvette GS. Although the GS did slightly better than the GT500 (emphasis on the slightly) there was over a 7k gap between the two. 7k would buy that base GT500 a set of comparable tires, brakes, and at least a good tune, which would likely put the Vette behind (or at least match things up).

If anyone starts talking about the new ZR1, they shouldn't be comparing it to just a GT500. You'd have to start comparing it to a Super Snake or a 435S.

If GT owners are getting beat by stock Cobalts they need to either take the parking brake off or drive in a forward gear.

bob

Somebody somewhere wants the world to believe the Challenger is still a pony car, its really just a two door Charger so IMO it skirts the envelope for direct competition (I suppose by the same token a 3 series coupe is in the same boat)


In a drag race, sure the GT doesn't have much to worry about with the SS, on the twisties its another story. The level of handling just isn't there with the base GT stuff, while it handles decently, the base GT is more boulevard crusier/drag racer than 'ring runner. Can't say about the track pack cars (other than the brakes still need to be upgraded for some serious repetitive stop and go duty).

I'm hoping the track pack GT and '10 GT500 show up in this year's Lightning Lap for some comparitive assessment.

classix_stang289

hey what can i say, i have some wishfull thinking. im just venting what i would love to see.

Arrow

I think there's a lot of GT owners who are stock and also mildly modded who would disagree with that. There's a few folks even in my local club that are stockers and go play at the track.

Besides, it's hard to test these theories when the ricers are always so far behind.

bob

Your talking stock 235/55R17 and 235/50R18 A/S Tires with the mushy stock suspension Arrow? Put the same driver in each car (Cobalt SS and GT Mustang) and I'll still stand by my assessement. The Cobalt SS is the more nimble of the two.

Dixie_Flatline

Reread what he said, heck, I'll paraphrase : just because the SS is more nimble doesn't make the GT worthless by comparison. The world isn't an either or scenario and even nearly-enough is more-than-good-enough for a lot of folks.

Clino

Although I agree, how much heavier could the 6.2 be than an iron block 5.4 with a S/C on top of it??? I don't think it is impossible we will see it in at least a very limited production S/E such as the Cobra Jet.

MARZ

Again, to me at least, it makes no sense to look backward; going forward, one can surmise that Ford wants to lose weight across their entire vehicle lineup. Thus is the reason you'll undoubtedly see an AL-block "Condor" within the next year. I would expect the 6.2L -- a heavy truck engine -- to weigh much more than the AL-block 5.4L, even with a PD supercharger perched in-between its rows of cylinders.