regular or premium?
2/24/13, 08:47 PM
#41
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 16, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Believe me, this little '13 isn't the fastest or the coolest car I've had.
My lightly modded '88 T/A that was my "beater/daily driver" to my 410+RWHP '05 GTO (best of 12.4@119 on DRs and a terrible 60') kept up with the 2 Valve 4.6 cars. It was a low 14 second car, like that era Mustang.
My prior car, the grocery getter family car GTP also was jokingly called "Faster than a Speeding Bullitt" after my dragstrip day. Then again it scraped the bottom of the 12's before I sold it and then the new owner swapped the blower for a turbo and went for 11's.
I was just joking that they aren't exactly a platform that has the best starting point.
Will it inflate your ego that my first car was a lowly Black '66 Impala Hardtop with a 283? Hardly a fast car, but it had cool in spades.
Or how about my *other car* before I sold the GTO for the Mustang? a 2004 New Beetle Convertible. 125hp of awesome. Sold both of those for this car.
Trust me, I had a view that a car that was slower than a 13.5 really isn't all that fast of a car for a long time.
2/24/13, 08:52 PM
#44
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Believe me, this little '13 isn't the fastest or the coolest car I've had.
My lightly modded '88 T/A that was my "beater/daily driver" to my 410+RWHP '05 GTO (best of 12.4@119 on DRs and a terrible 60') kept up with the 2 Valve 4.6 cars. It was a low 14 second car, like that era Mustang.
My prior car, the grocery getter family car GTP also was jokingly called "Faster than a Speeding Bullitt" after my dragstrip day. Then again it scraped the bottom of the 12's before I sold it and then the new owner swapped the blower for a turbo and went for 11's.
I was just joking that they aren't exactly a platform that has the best starting point.
Will it inflate your ego that my first car was a lowly Black '66 Impala Hardtop with a 283? Hardly a fast car, but it had cool in spades.
Or how about my *other car* before I sold the GTO for the Mustang? a 2004 New Beetle Convertible. 125hp of awesome. Sold both of those for this car.
Trust me, I had a view that a car that was slower than a 13.5 really isn't all that fast of a car for a long time.
More expensive than a new edge GT. With the difference in price plus the
Money you spent on mods you could easily do more than just bridge the gap. I really don't see your point in comparing these cars stock for stock when they aren't even in the same price range. That's like comparing our mustangs to a Mercedes AMG. Reality is it doesn't matter what these or any car gets stock. To say nothing helps the new edge isn't true. There's a lot that help them. Like I said in previous posts just forge the internals and put twin turbo on it and I can say it will run in the 10-11 seconds with the right suspension and tires.
2/24/13, 08:54 PM
#45
Banned
Join Date: July 4, 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again all these cars your mentioning are a lot
More expensive than a new edge GT. With the difference in price plus the
Money you spent on mods you could easily do more than just bridge the gap. I really don't see your point in comparing these cars stock for stock when they aren't even in the same price range. That's like comparing our mustangs to a Mercedes AMG. Reality is it doesn't matter what these or any car gets stock. To say nothing helps the new edge isn't true. There's a lot that help them. Like I said in previous posts just forge the internals and put twin turbo on it and I can say it will run in the 10-11 seconds with the right suspension and tires.
More expensive than a new edge GT. With the difference in price plus the
Money you spent on mods you could easily do more than just bridge the gap. I really don't see your point in comparing these cars stock for stock when they aren't even in the same price range. That's like comparing our mustangs to a Mercedes AMG. Reality is it doesn't matter what these or any car gets stock. To say nothing helps the new edge isn't true. There's a lot that help them. Like I said in previous posts just forge the internals and put twin turbo on it and I can say it will run in the 10-11 seconds with the right suspension and tires.
I know it has been always camaro vs mustang, but in those years it was hardly a comparison. 20k pony car vs 30k "corvette motor and tranny". I'm sure using whatever their price difference was for mods would lessen the gap.
And I agree the 2v's weren't the best, but they were also cheap. You get what you pay for.
And I agree the 2v's weren't the best, but they were also cheap. You get what you pay for.
I totally agree, but it was also widely known that a 1LE Z/28 or even base Z28 was thousands cheaper than a SS and just as powerful. the SS just had a different catback and CAI lid. It wasn't worth the difference. The advertised 305 HP of the Camaro was also known as BS. Same engine in the 2004 GTO was advertised as 350hp.
MuffinMan, since we are talking about prices/MSRP
1999 Mustang GT base MSRP: $21,395
1999 Camaro Z/28 base MSRP: $21,405
1999 Grand Prix GTP base MSRP: $23,905
I'm just **** glad that Ford stepped up the game and has a better and faster car than the Chevys now.
I remember back in 2005 it was do I get the 400hp GTO for 31k or get the similarly priced (30k if i recall) 300hp 2005 Mustang GT with the additional 10-15k ADM on top of it. Similar price, but we all know the GTOs looks were... subject to heavy criticism. The 12.9@108 bone stock with 500 on the odometer lessened that pain. If there wasn't an ADM at the time, I would have found myself in a Mustang, no doubt. Superchargers do wonders.
Last edited by TheDivaDanielle; 2/24/13 at 09:05 PM.
2/24/13, 09:00 PM
#46
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree, but it was also widely known that a 1LE Z/28 or even base Z28 was thousands cheaper than a SS and just as powerful. the SS just had a different catback and CAI lid. It wasn't worth the difference. The advertised 305 HP of the Camaro was also known as BS. Same engine in the 2004 GTO was advertised as 350hp.
1999 Mustang GT base MSRP:$21,395
1999 Camaro Z/28 base MSRP: $21,405
Last edited by TheMuffinMan; 2/24/13 at 09:02 PM.
2/24/13, 09:02 PM
#47
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 16, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2/24/13, 09:05 PM
#49
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 16, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2/24/13, 09:07 PM
#50
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because the mustangs looked nicer but that's besides the point. We are car people it doesn't matter what HP you get stock or how fast it is stock. Also the z28 had a different suspension than the SS and some of the SS models came with a 6 speed not the 5 speed so there were differences. In the end you saying a 4.6 2v gains less than a 5.7 2v corvette engine is a no brainer. Don't say the 2v's can't be helped when all they did was put a nice engine in a pile of crap just to go fast and keep the cost lower in the camaros. It's pretty much a vette with a crapy chassis and over weight with a worse suspension.
Last edited by TheMuffinMan; 2/24/13 at 09:09 PM.
2/24/13, 09:09 PM
#51
Banned
Join Date: July 4, 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also forgetting the SS had a better suspension as well and other possible things that might have affected price. Though this wasnt a argument about what was fast stock for stock. Your whole "nothing can help these cars" is false. Stock they might run low 14 so what that's stock. Saying a car starts out with more power stock is stupid, since that's why you mod your car to make it faster. If you want ***** to the wall 1/4 mile time then forge the internals and twin turbo it and you'll be faster than a supercharged new 5.0. It's all about your wallet. If you want a fast car but can't afford to build it then buy one that's already fast. The 99-04 do make noticeable gains per mod compared to most other cars on the road. Hell if we are going to play the stock vs stock game just get a Nissan GTR much better stock huh? You seem like the kind of person who buys a the fastest car stock instead of building the power otherwise you'd know what the 2v's could do.
Stop being mad. I was joking that nothing could help the new edge cars, because..... well.... they got slower when they took the 5.0 away.
2/24/13, 09:11 PM
#52
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 16, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty sure I built my GTP from a 14 second car to a low 12 second car, and then my GTO from a high 12 second car to a 11 second capable car.
Stop being mad. I was joking that nothing could help the new edge cars, because..... well.... they got slower when they took the 5.0 away.
2/24/13, 09:13 PM
#53
Banned
Join Date: July 4, 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2/24/13, 09:13 PM
#54
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty sure I built my GTP from a 14 second car to a low 12 second car, and then my GTO from a high 12 second car to a 11 second capable car.
Stop being mad. I was joking that nothing could help the new edge cars, because..... well.... they got slower when they took the 5.0 away.
2/24/13, 09:15 PM
#55
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: December 31, 2012
Posts: 1,104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you stupid? The new edge mustang raped the old 5.0. The old 5.0 had all of 220hp. Not to mention the 4.6 modular engines are just plain better. For instance the 4.6 cobras were better than the old 5.0 cobras by a lot. In 03-04 forget about it that car ****s on any old 5.0 mustang and with few mods are faster than the new 5.0. The only reason people use the old 5.0 is that the parts are dirt cheap.
2/24/13, 09:16 PM
#56
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 16, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well no wonder, would have likely gave an LT1 a good run.
Last edited by steven46746; 2/24/13 at 09:17 PM.
2/24/13, 09:17 PM
#58
Banned
Join Date: July 4, 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree. I loved (and still love) the look of the New Edge cars (the Bullitt, I lusted after that SOB for the longest time) Engines made me sad though. But anything can be built up, blah blah blah.