Just drove a 2011 Mustang GT and I'm not sure I like it!
6/13/10, 12:42 PM
#42
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: November 3, 2009
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll probably need to drive it without the sales person and without traction control in order to really get a feel for the new 5.0. This motor likes to rev, but salespeople usually frown on that.
6/13/10, 01:59 PM
#47
GT Member
Join Date: May 7, 2010
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My buddy thought the same thing: I think he felt that his buddies 2008 was as quick as my 2011-until we raced and by 3rd gear I had 3 car lengths on him and still pulling. I think the 2011 is so much more refined it may to some people not feel as fast. I agree when I first test drove the car i was like yeah its fast but nothing jaw dropping IMO. Then again I came from a 2004 Cobra with some bolts on. None the less I think the 2011 Gt is going to be a tremendous car and hell I have a little account set up for mods once they begin rolling in. My 2cents
My high school friend bought a used 1972 Chevy Monte Carlo with the 350 ci. We modded his engine with high-compression pistons, cams, headers, new carb, mallory ignition, etc and found a safe place to compare my 5.0 Mustang to his Monte Carlo. From the launch, I could easily get 5 car lengths in front of him, but by the end of the race, he beat me easily. I think this is where the "feel" comes in ...the off-the-line launch of a high-torque (early in the RPM range)/low-HP engine (in this case, my '79 5.0 140HP Mustang) -- it does feel strong ...but it's not sustained.
The 2010 Mustang GT that I owned was also interesting. Unlike the 2005-2009 GT 4.6's, the 2010 had the "Bullitt" 4.6 that boosted HP from 300 to 315. The 315HP in the 2010 Mustang 5-speed manual didn't feel nearly as strong to me as my 2005/2006 Mustangs' 300HP. The 2010's engine loved to rev more as though the torque/HP numbers might've been pushed farther up the RPM curve. But with only 15 more HP than the 2005-2009 GT's, it really wasn't worth the wait, IMO.
Back in the day, we used to call it "gettin' on the cam". That's the nice thing about RPM's ...they're worth the wait when there is horsepower up there. The 2011 GT 5.0 definitely has the HP and you won't have to wait long for it as evidenced by its track times.
Last edited by guest01; 6/13/10 at 02:23 PM.
6/13/10, 02:06 PM
#48
GT Member
Join Date: May 7, 2010
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you're on to something. While the lower (higher numerically) gears do multiply torque, the duration of that acceleration is going to be shorter due to the need to shift gears. The feel is interrupted every time the gear is shifted. I think we all agree this is just a feel kinda thing but coming up with an explanation for it is the harder part. And, again, I think your explanation is part of the reason (see my post above for another explanation).
Last edited by guest01; 6/13/10 at 02:15 PM.
6/13/10, 02:16 PM
#49
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Thread Starter
Yes, that 6 speed trans was not something I was used to. That could be a big part of it. It will probably get better once I have more time with a 6 speed.....
I think you're on to something. While the lower (higher numerically) gears do multiply torque, the duration of that acceleration is going to shorter due to the need to shift gears. The feel is interrupted every time the gear is shifted. I think we all agree this is just a feel kinda thing but coming up with an explanation for it is the harder part. And, again, I think your explanation is part of the reason (see my post above for another explanation).
6/13/10, 03:19 PM
#50
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 6-Speed has a very nice feel. The 6-Speed is narrow across the gates and the spring centers it on 3rd. You simply pushed it over to 5th.
The joint venture Getrag/Ford Plant is located in China but we have known that the MT82 was built their for years. Why is this news? Its no more news than the fact that the TR6060 is built in Mexico.
My 2007 ran high 12's on factory tires... My 2011 is easily a half second faster. 2nd gear is very short lived even with 3.55. For strictly street use I would have went 3.31. The 3.31 has already proven to be good for 12.5 @ 112 in factory trim.
The joint venture Getrag/Ford Plant is located in China but we have known that the MT82 was built their for years. Why is this news? Its no more news than the fact that the TR6060 is built in Mexico.
My 2007 ran high 12's on factory tires... My 2011 is easily a half second faster. 2nd gear is very short lived even with 3.55. For strictly street use I would have went 3.31. The 3.31 has already proven to be good for 12.5 @ 112 in factory trim.
Last edited by Gene K; 6/13/10 at 03:21 PM.
6/13/10, 04:08 PM
#51
GT Member
Join Date: March 29, 2010
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice explanation
I have the same experience. I remember getting my new 1979 Mustang 5.0 with manual transmission (it was really a 3-speed with overdrive). The '79 5.0 only had 140 horsepower but had good torque (don't remember what it was) and when launching, it would come on very early and strong but by 3,000 RPM there wasn't much horsepower to keep the acceleration going.
My high school friend bought a used 1972 Chevy Monte Carlo with the 350 ci. We modded his engine with high-compression pistons, cams, headers, new carb, mallory ignition, etc and found a safe place to compare my 5.0 Mustang to his Monte Carlo. From the launch, I could easily get 5 car lengths in front of him, but by the end of the race, he beat me easily. I think this is where the "feel" comes in ...the off-the-line launch of a high-torque (early in the RPM range)/low-HP engine (in this case, my '79 5.0 140HP Mustang) -- it does feel strong ...but it's not sustained.
The 2010 Mustang GT that I owned was also interesting. Unlike the 2005-2009 GT 4.6's, the 2010 had the "Bullitt" 4.6 that boosted HP from 300 to 315. The 315HP in the 2010 Mustang 5-speed manual didn't feel nearly as strong to me as my 2005/2006 Mustangs' 300HP. The 2010's engine loved to rev more as though the torque/HP numbers might've been pushed farther up the RPM curve. But with only 15 more HP than the 2005-2009 GT's, it really wasn't worth the wait, IMO.
Back in the day, we used to call it "gettin' on the cam". That's the nice thing about RPM's ...they're worth the wait when there is horsepower up there. The 2011 GT 5.0 definitely has the HP and you won't have to wait long for it as evidenced by its track times.
My high school friend bought a used 1972 Chevy Monte Carlo with the 350 ci. We modded his engine with high-compression pistons, cams, headers, new carb, mallory ignition, etc and found a safe place to compare my 5.0 Mustang to his Monte Carlo. From the launch, I could easily get 5 car lengths in front of him, but by the end of the race, he beat me easily. I think this is where the "feel" comes in ...the off-the-line launch of a high-torque (early in the RPM range)/low-HP engine (in this case, my '79 5.0 140HP Mustang) -- it does feel strong ...but it's not sustained.
The 2010 Mustang GT that I owned was also interesting. Unlike the 2005-2009 GT 4.6's, the 2010 had the "Bullitt" 4.6 that boosted HP from 300 to 315. The 315HP in the 2010 Mustang 5-speed manual didn't feel nearly as strong to me as my 2005/2006 Mustangs' 300HP. The 2010's engine loved to rev more as though the torque/HP numbers might've been pushed farther up the RPM curve. But with only 15 more HP than the 2005-2009 GT's, it really wasn't worth the wait, IMO.
Back in the day, we used to call it "gettin' on the cam". That's the nice thing about RPM's ...they're worth the wait when there is horsepower up there. The 2011 GT 5.0 definitely has the HP and you won't have to wait long for it as evidenced by its track times.
6/13/10, 04:14 PM
#52
Bullitt Member
How can you not like it??? The 2011 Mustang GT is the badest Mustang ever!!!.....Period!.........Well this year at least......I'm sure next years will be a little bit better.
6/13/10, 04:56 PM
#53
Post *****
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 20,005
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
My '74 Jensen-Healey's 2.0L Lotus 4 banger (16V DOHC) put out 130HP, 140#' Tq on a 2000# roadster. Its power band was similar to Bullitt where it comes on mid 3's, 4k is really starting to pull and would slam all the way to 7k redline.
Can't believe the old 5.0 V8's numbers were so soft.
Bullitt stats are 315HP @ 6000 (redline 6500), 325#' (87 octane, +10#' w/91) @ 4250.
Last edited by cdynaco; 6/13/10 at 04:58 PM.
6/13/10, 05:25 PM
#54
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Thread Starter
I don't know. It just didn't "feel" fast. Maybe I just didn't know how to drive it. I didn't wind it out enough maybe?
6/13/10, 05:27 PM
#55
Shelby GT350 Member
If you do not care about the other refinements in the car and just want the feel of speed why not just throw a SC on your car and call it a day. a nice V3 or Paxton will do the trick. Put you in the mid to lower 12's.
6/13/10, 05:33 PM
#56
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Thread Starter
Well, I thought about just keeping my 08 GT, but I think I will at least go for another test drive on the 2011 GT. I don't know which one I will be able to try since there's not that many of them out there right now.....
6/13/10, 06:40 PM
#57
Cobra R Member
Join Date: June 3, 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6/13/10, 06:57 PM
#58
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 9, 2009
Location: Miami
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I know my 08 is faster....lol its modded !
Saying that, after I drove a 11 GT with the sport mode on, I could feel its power. It was very refined...but I looked down at the tac, and I was @ 6k rpm's like it was nothing...I could barely tell..........I was running a car with 3:31 gears as well.
The new 11 may not seem fast, but it is. Its a very refined feel, and I think that nullifies the butt dyno feeling.
Saying that, after I drove a 11 GT with the sport mode on, I could feel its power. It was very refined...but I looked down at the tac, and I was @ 6k rpm's like it was nothing...I could barely tell..........I was running a car with 3:31 gears as well.
The new 11 may not seem fast, but it is. Its a very refined feel, and I think that nullifies the butt dyno feeling.
6/13/10, 06:59 PM
#59
Swamp Donkey Aficionado
Join Date: November 23, 2006
Posts: 1,863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I know my 08 is faster....lol its modded !
Saying that, after I drove a 11 GT with the sport mode on, I could feel its power. It was very refined...but I looked down at the tac, and I was @ 6k rpm's like it was nothing...I could barely tell..........I was running a car with 3:31 gears as well.
The new 11 may not seem fast, but it is. Its a very refined feel, and I think that nullifies the butt dyno feeling.
Saying that, after I drove a 11 GT with the sport mode on, I could feel its power. It was very refined...but I looked down at the tac, and I was @ 6k rpm's like it was nothing...I could barely tell..........I was running a car with 3:31 gears as well.
The new 11 may not seem fast, but it is. Its a very refined feel, and I think that nullifies the butt dyno feeling.
6/13/10, 07:29 PM
#60
GT Member
Join Date: May 7, 2010
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That number stuns me. How on earth the 5.0 got such a following is beyond me.
My '74 Jensen-Healey's 2.0L Lotus 4 banger (16V DOHC) put out 130HP, 140#' Tq on a 2000# roadster. Its power band was similar to Bullitt where it comes on mid 3's, 4k is really starting to pull and would slam all the way to 7k redline.
Can't believe the old 5.0 V8's numbers were so soft.
I don't believe the 10 had the FRPP CAI or the Bullitt tune did it? Did you have the 3.73's?
Bullitt stats are 315HP @ 6000 (redline 6500), 325#' (87 octane, +10#' w/91) @ 4250.
My '74 Jensen-Healey's 2.0L Lotus 4 banger (16V DOHC) put out 130HP, 140#' Tq on a 2000# roadster. Its power band was similar to Bullitt where it comes on mid 3's, 4k is really starting to pull and would slam all the way to 7k redline.
Can't believe the old 5.0 V8's numbers were so soft.
I don't believe the 10 had the FRPP CAI or the Bullitt tune did it? Did you have the 3.73's?
Bullitt stats are 315HP @ 6000 (redline 6500), 325#' (87 octane, +10#' w/91) @ 4250.
The "5.0" designation really became popular, IMO, beginning with the 1982 157HP 5.0 "Boss is Back" Mustang GT (I had one) (the 5.0 went on hiatus in 1980 and '81 for fuel economy reasons, replaced with a 115HP 4.2L V8). The Fox body (esp the coupe) with the 5.0 was an amazingly fast combo back then. Almost every year in the 1980's, Ford bumped up HP, first with good ol' fashioned hot rodding (Holley carb, headers, roller lifter cam) and later with 225HP SEFI in 1987.
Ford really promoted the 5.0 V8 beginning around 1982 as well and supported the aftermarket parts business like never before. All of this helped create the Fox/5.0 culture that many folks remember fondly today, even though it's been about 15 years since a "5.0" engine designation has been available in a Mustang.
As for the 2010 4.6L stats, here's what Edmunds/InsideLine wrote about the then-new 2010 Mustang GT:
Making that power is essentially the same engine package that powered the 2009 Ford Mustang Bullitt. To the same old 4.6-liter DOHC V8, Ford has added a cold-air intake plus a reprogrammed ECU that bumps the redline to 6,500 rpm. That same computer also has two different fuel programs: for regular and premium gas. Peak output is 315 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 325 pound-feet of torque at 4,250 rpm, just like the Bullitt.
I don't know if the 2010 4.6L has 100% of the Bullitt engine features, but at a minimum it received most of them and the HP/torque numbers are the same as the 2009 Bullitt. There are other magazine articles that similarly describe the Bullitt features that went into the 2010 Mustang GT 4.6L but the Edmunds' article was the most concise. My 2010, to answer your question, had the 3:31 axle ratio, same as my 2005 and 2006 300HP Mustangs.
Last edited by guest01; 6/13/10 at 07:36 PM.