For now

 

So true . . . once you make the jump, the addiction builds quick . . . I came out of a Camry and 315/325 is definitely a blast . . . but I'm already starting to research tunes, blowers, etc.

 

You must have gotten a factory freak then, cause i don't get that sensation at all when driving my car.

And i am using the other cars around me to judge not seat of pants.

In fact i can't pull for anything under 2 grand in 6th on mine.

 

While times don't lie, they don't always tell the whole story. A 4 cylinder ricer may run a similar quarter mile time with some boost, but that doesn't mean it would be a fun all around car. That said, I do think the 2011 GT is a fun all around car. It's a great car and I want it, but I think I might be able to wait a little while now.

 

All I can say is I test drove an Auto and was like
Then I test drove a Manual and was like

 

Im sure with some tuning the auto will do just fine just like it helped the 05-10. We just have to wait and see. Can not wait to see more track times for the auto as the dyno only tells part of the story.

 

If performance under 2000 rpm is what you are after, then I would suggest that the new 5.0 is a poor choice. A better choice might be the SRT-8 or even an SS. Both make more power below 2000 rpm, and would probably "feel better" to you.

An even better option might be a Turbo-Diesel truck from any of the big 3, though the "fun to drive" factor might be lower for some.

 

I think I might have started something when I made the comment that I was expecting more low end torque in the under 4500 rpm range. Why is this such an unreasonable expectation? I'm just not used to a motor that comes on this late in the RPM's. This link shows a "torquier" non-modular motor with similar HP that comes on sooner. This motor is going to have a different "seat of the pants" feel than that of a 2011 GT motor. It doesn't rap out as high. Modular motors come on later I guess. I had a lot of fun with motors that made torque down low. It's just my preference. It doesn't make me wrong. After some driving time with the 2011 GT, I might feel the opposite.

Crate Motor Dyno




2011 GT Dyno

 

thanks for the recommendations

 

Where you wish to have your torque peak is absolutely personal preference, and doesn't make one wrong or another right. However, small displacement 4Vs simply are not going to make the same kind of power in the low rpm range as significantly larger displacement OHV motors, such as the LS3. This is especially true for an engine designed to make peak power at 6600 rpm. No amount of variable cam timing will make up for the difference of that many cubes. And once again, if that is your preference, I suggest the 5.0 may not be the car for you. Same thing likely applies to "feel" or "seat of the pants".

As for the motor you linked....I'm sure I'm missing the point, but that's a carburated 351W that makes less power (or torque if you prefer, one is a mathematical derivative of the other) almost EVERYWHERE than the 5.0. Those are engine dyno numbers listing gross power with headers, likely no accessories, and certainly no emissions equipment. The 370 lb/ft at 3000 rpm would probably translate to <280 RWTQ in a vehicle with all accessories, emissions, etc.

To each their own.

Bigjohns....you are most certainly welcome.

 

This is really becoming a "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" issue. I like my American (US) muscle down low in the RPM range, I do. I have had quite a shift in paradigm for the DOHC engines and really enjoy the performance and how much more refined they are. Just how I feel, I respect both. Some day when I really want that Torque down low I can either build a 6.2L pushrod V8 to put in a 62 Vette or I can pick up a Buell or any V-Twin performance bike. I just like the Mustang this time around. I hope no one gets down in the dumps about the way the car performs, it's just different. In a year or two, the car can probably be traded in or maybe even stroked for more big litre performance.

Something to note, the M3 is used practically as a reference to almost all performance cars, with the number war at hand, I present:

2010 BMW M3 Performance & Efficiency Standard Features

- 3,999 cc 4.0 liters V 8 front engine with 92.0 mm bore, 75.2 mm stroke, 12.0 compression ratio, double overhead cam, variable valve timing/camshaft and four valves per cylinder S65
- Premium unleaded fuel 91 and petrol
- Multi-point injection fuel system
- 16.6 gallon main premium unleaded fuel tank 13.8
- Power: 309 kW , 414 HP SAE @ 8,300 rpm; 295 ft lb , 400 Nm @ 3,900 rpm

2011 Ford Mustang Performance & Efficiency Standard Features

- Engine: 5.0L V 8 double overhead cam with VVT ( 11.0 :1 compression ratio ; four valves per cylinder)
- Fuel: premium unleaded ( 91 octane)
- Multi-point injection fuel system
- 16.0 gallon main premium unleaded fuel tank 13.3
- Power: 412 HP ( 307 kW) @ 6,500 rpm; 390 ft lb of torque ( 529 Nm) @ 4,250 rpm

2010 Aston Martin V8 Vantage Base Coupe Performance & Efficiency Standard Features
- Engine: 4.7L V 8 double overhead cam with VVT ( 11.3 :1 compression ratio ; four valves per cylinder)
- Fuel: premium unleaded ( 91 octane)
- Multi-point injection fuel system
- 21.1 gallon main premium unleaded fuel tank 17.6
- Power: 420 HP ( 313 kW) @ 7,300 rpm; 346 ft lb of torque ( 469 Nm) @ 5,000 rpm

2010 Chevrolet Camaro Performance & Efficiency Standard Features

- 6,162 cc 6.2 liters V 8 front engine with 103.3 mm bore, 92.0 mm stroke, 10.7 compression ratio, overhead valve and two valves per cylinder LS3
- Premium unleaded fuel 91
- Multi-point injection fuel system
- 19.0 gallon main premium unleaded fuel tank 15.8
- Power: 318 kW , 426 HP SAE @ 5,900 rpm; 420 ft lb , 569 Nm @ 4,600 rpm

2010 Lamborghini Gallardo Performance & Efficiency Standard Features

- 5,204 cc 5.2 liters V 10 mid engine with 84.5 mm bore, 92.8 mm stroke, 12.5 compression ratio, double overhead cam, variable valve timing/camshaft and four valves per cylinder
- Premium unleaded fuel 91 and petrol
- Multi-point injection fuel system
- 23.8 gallon main premium unleaded fuel tank 19.8
- Power: 418 kW , 560 HP SAE @ 8,000 rpm; 398 ft lb , 540 Nm @ 6,500 rpm

I guess that's just the way of the world these days. It sucks that it is a disappointment for Mustang buyers.

Yeah, I threw a Lamborghini in there. It has a 5L...

 

LOL....hard to imagine powershifting the M3 or Lambo at 8500+ with a street tranny....

 

Reminds me of a rotary engine.

 

This car is just the complete car.
It can be called the Jekyll and Hyde car.
Anyone can cruise around being the low end torque is on the lower side and have no worries just accelerating from a stop. Exhaust and cabin quite. But the power is on tap when you need it. Hit the gas and the tires scream the exhaust comes to life and you your take off like a rocket.
The way the aftermarket is shaping up with just a few tests being done this car should be pushing over 400 rwhp with just bolt ons.
What else could you want in a street car?

 

Its going to be a sequential most likely anyway.

The new Lexus 4.8L V-10 with 552 bhp isnt bad either but for $375,000 it better be.

 

All Lambo's are automatic from here on out.

Yeah, for $375K it shouldn't say Lexus.