Some 2010 love!
12/21/13, 01:09 PM
#101
V6 Member
Join Date: July 23, 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12/21/13, 07:27 PM
#102
I Have No Life
12/22/13, 11:18 PM
#103
The 4.6 three valve v8 sounded amazing though. The 5.0 doesnt even come close to that in terms of sound. Then again, performance is pretty important too, and a v8 that made 320hp in 2010 is very disappointing.
12/24/13, 08:12 AM
#106
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: January 12, 2012
Location: Suburbs of Dallas
Posts: 1,041
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
13 Posts
Which is why a 2011 V6 is so close to the 2010 V8 in performance. The difference is in torque and gearing. Have you ever had a chance to race the two side by side? It's very interesting.
The V8 will leap out to about a half car length lead right off the line. The extra torque combined with the 5 speed really makes it jump in that 0-30mph range.
But from about 30mph all the way to the rev limiter the V6 is just a hair faster. Not enough to catch back up to the V8 entirely, but it will be pulling up beside it all the way to the rev limiter.
With the higher RPM of the V6 combined with the 6 speed transmission and nearly identical horsepower it would not surprise me if the 2010 V6 would ultimately pull ahead of the 2010 V8 if the rev limiter were removed from both (And drive shaft replaced in the V6), and I'm certain the V6 would have the higher top end.
Last edited by Moustang; 12/24/13 at 08:14 AM.
12/24/13, 01:07 PM
#107
Which is why a 2011 V6 is so close to the 2010 V8 in performance. The difference is in torque and gearing. Have you ever had a chance to race the two side by side? It's very interesting.
The V8 will leap out to about a half car length lead right off the line. The extra torque combined with the 5 speed really makes it jump in that 0-30mph range.
But from about 30mph all the way to the rev limiter the V6 is just a hair faster. Not enough to catch back up to the V8 entirely, but it will be pulling up beside it all the way to the rev limiter.
With the higher RPM of the V6 combined with the 6 speed transmission and nearly identical horsepower it would not surprise me if the 2010 V6 would ultimately pull ahead of the 2010 V8 if the rev limiter were removed from both (And drive shaft replaced in the V6), and I'm certain the V6 would have the higher top end.
Last edited by 2011 Kona Blue; 12/24/13 at 01:09 PM.
12/24/13, 01:19 PM
#108
Post *****
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 20,005
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
With the higher RPM of the V6 combined with the 6 speed transmission and nearly identical horsepower it would not surprise me if the 2010 V6 would ultimately pull ahead of the 2010 V8 if the rev limiter were removed from both (And drive shaft replaced in the V6), and I'm certain the V6 would have the higher top end.
12/24/13, 04:16 PM
#109
Bullitt Member
I have two 2010 Mustang GT's. I wouldn't trade either for a V-6 2011. In everyday traffic low rpm's are what you have unless you want to play race car driver all the time. My former EB F150 ran great once it had a little speed and the turbos cut in. My 5.0 F150 runs great from the start which is most of my driving. Also, the higher rpm's will lower the gas mileage for those who care. My EB F150 got 1 mpg less than the 5.0L F150 even through it is EPA rated 1 mpg greater. Plus a V6, turbos or not, sounds like a V6.
12/24/13, 04:22 PM
#110
I Have No Life
I have two 2010 Mustang GT's. I wouldn't trade either for a V-6 2011. In everyday traffic low rpm's are what you have unless you want to play race car driver all the time. My former EB F150 ran great once it had a little speed and the turbos cut in. My 5.0 F150 runs great from the start which is most of my driving. Also, the higher rpm's will lower the gas mileage for those who care. My EB F150 got 1 mpg less than the 5.0L F150 even through it is EPA rated 1 mpg greater. Plus a V6, turbos or not, sounds like a V6.
12/24/13, 07:28 PM
#111
GT Member
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: NJ
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a pic of my 10 GT before someone in a Wrangler decided to rearend me and total it. Was a fun car and a huge leap forward from my 94 GT vert.
Very impressed with how well they're built, walked away without a scratch. Would have been a totally different story if I was in my 94.
Very impressed with how well they're built, walked away without a scratch. Would have been a totally different story if I was in my 94.
Last edited by 2010GBGT; 12/24/13 at 07:40 PM.
12/24/13, 10:13 PM
#112
Here's a pic of my 10 GT before someone in a Wrangler decided to rearend me and total it. Was a fun car and a huge leap forward from my 94 GT vert.
Very impressed with how well they're built, walked away without a scratch. Would have been a totally different story if I was in my 94.
Very impressed with how well they're built, walked away without a scratch. Would have been a totally different story if I was in my 94.
12/24/13, 10:53 PM
#113
GT Member
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: NJ
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drove almost 3 hours one way to pick her up but it was worth the ride. Zero out of pocket and paying $20 more per month, Tom Masano Ford really helped me out getting where I needed to be on the price. Certified preowned with 21K on the clock. Grabber blue again...
12/25/13, 07:22 AM
#114
Nah, adjuster walked up to it and didn't get far before he told me he was totaling it. The process went pretty smoothly and I was able to get into an 11 GT
Drove almost 3 hours one way to pick her up but it was worth the ride. Zero out of pocket and paying $20 more per month, Tom Masano Ford really helped me out getting where I needed to be on the price. Certified preowned with 21K on the clock. Grabber blue again...
12/25/13, 08:22 AM
#115
Legacy TMS Member
This is precisely why I've enjoyed my 2010 GT so much. Around town, it's a pleasure to feel the torque and hear the sound.
12/25/13, 08:34 AM
#116
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
12/25/13, 08:37 AM
#117
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: January 12, 2012
Location: Suburbs of Dallas
Posts: 1,041
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
13 Posts
Remove the rev limiter from both and both will run over 160.
The theoretical limit of the 2011 V6 based off engine RPM and gearing (using stock 2.73 gears) is right about 175 mph. I suspect it's aerodynamically limited to just under 170. I doubt the 2010 GT can break 160 with stock gearing. Between the added weight, lower engine RPM, and 5 speed transmission it doesn't have the theoretical top end that the V6 has.
Also, at high RPM, the V6 actually produces a little more horsepower than the V8. The V8 reaches max horsepower somewhere around 5,000 RPM, but the V6 doesn't reach peak horsepower until 6,000 RPM. At top speed the V8 horsepower drops off more than the V6 does. The V6 lacks the low end torque, but makes up for it with high end power.
The theoretical limit of the 2011 V6 based off engine RPM and gearing (using stock 2.73 gears) is right about 175 mph. I suspect it's aerodynamically limited to just under 170. I doubt the 2010 GT can break 160 with stock gearing. Between the added weight, lower engine RPM, and 5 speed transmission it doesn't have the theoretical top end that the V6 has.
Also, at high RPM, the V6 actually produces a little more horsepower than the V8. The V8 reaches max horsepower somewhere around 5,000 RPM, but the V6 doesn't reach peak horsepower until 6,000 RPM. At top speed the V8 horsepower drops off more than the V6 does. The V6 lacks the low end torque, but makes up for it with high end power.
Last edited by Moustang; 12/25/13 at 08:46 AM.
12/25/13, 08:40 AM
#118
Fixing the torque issue on the 2011 v6 was easy. Install a set of 3:73 or 4:10 gears and transform into a different pony. Sound, can't get that v8 rumble but can sound agressive with a full exhaust set up.
