Hm, I need to hear it, then. It sounds good on my mom's 350Z convertible...

 

Except an 87 Corlla GTS couldn't go neck and neck with an 87 5.0, unlike the 370Z now vs. a 2010 Stang. I for one will give props to Nissan.

Dave

 

It's a little to "Tokyo by night " for me but it looks to be like a performance bargain. I would have preferred a little more simplistic interior and toned down the exterior a bit, it's trying to hard. It does have the hardware though, the aftermarket will be all over that car. Since it's only making 332hp out of 3.7L tells me there is an easy 20+hp there for the aftermarket to find and I was shocked when I read the 370Z will start at just under $30k.

The new Stang though looks much better, just a drop and some serious rubber and that's all she wrote.

Dave

 

I understand your point and can appreciate it. However, I was talking about the differences between the Z and the Mustang. One is a pony car (long hood, short rear deck, 4 seats, nose heavy, more of a cruiser) and the other is a sports car (hatchback/fastback look, independent rear, 2 seats, more emphasis on track performance). That isn't to say that the mustang can't turn a good lap or the Z doesn't cruise comfortably. The great thing about modern technology is that we can sort of have our cake and eat it too, within limitations. But these two cars are not the same, even though some people may cross-shop them. And Motor trend knows how to sell magazines in a competitive culture.

 

Agreed...

 

BTW guys..you know MM&FF ran a 13.29 @105+mph in a 08 Bullitt. They don't bother with 0-60 as they believe as do I that it's a worthless performance measure. ET and trapspeed...

Dave

 

Why do you think 0-60 is a worthless test? Most street encounters are over by 60mph and if not you are really getting into dangerous territory. Most GTs will not see the drag strip so I would think the 1/4 mile is the more worthless of the two in the real world IMHO.

 

it may be quick, but it's ugly as hell, looks like a crosseyed shark, that got smushed in a vice from the front

 

Because it has more to do with traction and gearing than how much power a car makes. A Shelby GT500 never shows a good 0-60 time because you can't get the thing to hook up on a hard launch, but it's capable of 115mph in a quarter mile. While you look at the 997S, Road and Track did 0-60 in 3.9 sec, but the car ran less mph and somewhat slower in the quarter mile. The 997S with it's rear engine, huge gumball 295 tires on a 11" wide rim just launches like a banshee. Yet, in no way is it as near as powerful as a Shelby GT500.

Most street races I've been in..don't do it anymore, didn't end at 60 mph.

Dave

 

Personnaly, I'd rather have the car that is faster 0-60 than that is faster in the quarter mile. Much more practical since most driving is done below 60.

 

But they look better on the Maxima, I actually like it. but THIS, this is

 

Can the 2010 Mustang beat this?

4.9 seconds to 60... 0.97 lateral G's... 13.5 second quarter mile...
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/..._test/(page)/1

 

I feel the 2010 Mustang will come close to those numbers, especially with the summer tires and not the bs all season tires they come with regularly. Also, the Mustang with a set of 275 tires on all 4 corners will do wonders for the handling of this car. It's front end heavy and to have only a 245 tire on this car is ridiculous.

Dave

 

I can't remember which rag it was (I think it was Road and Track), but I read the other day that the 2010 Mustang GT, with its Bullitt suspension upgrades, will be able to achieve 0.97g's.

 

The GT will probably come close in acceleration to the 370Z, but will lose in handling and braking.

 

Just out of curiosity, is there a test that accurately quantifies a car's handling prowess? If the amount of G's a car can achieve is any indication, again, according to Road and Track, the 2010 Mustang should be able to match the 370Z at 0.97G's. Of course, this is all conjecture until an actual test is performed.

Anyone know how many G's a Bullitt Mustang is capable of?

 

There's no one test that quantifies handling, especially when you're talking about IRS vs SRA. There are a lot of things like steering feedback, turn-in characteristics, reactions to upsets (i.e. bumps), road grip that you really have to drive a car to be able to tell the difference.

 

The best indicators are lap times and slalom. Skidpad is more a function of the tire compound.

Then you have personal preferences such as sterring feel, composure, etc.

 

Ah, I see. Thank you, guys!

 

That may be true, but the problem with using those numbers as a comparison is that MM&FF tests their cars the way most of us would drive them at the drag strip to produce the best possible times. In other words, they basically powershift the hell out of them. Regular car mags like Car and Driver, Road & Track, etc.. all use lift-throttle shifting to get their performance figures. So it's an apples-oranges comparison.

I'm as much of a Mustang fan as anyone, but I don't think any Mustang GT will quite be able to keep up with the new Z car in acceleration, handling, or braking. The new Z is lighter, has more power, and its suspension is set up better for handling.