Posts: 11876
Joined: 12/22/2004 From: Ludlow, Mass Status: offline
the GT is already 7k more, two people get 25k to spend, one guy buys a GT, the other buys a V-6 and has 5k for mods, hmm 11 psi procharger internally stock with some gears and a tune, thats still a bit cheaper then a Gt that is probably running 12s with a good driver, oh and im not sure aboot 18 psi from a blower, i could see it possibly on a turbo which doesnt give constant boost, but on a stock motor, i wouldnt go more then 15 psi
waxyourboard, they can make a 400 hp engine with the same gas mileage. its not hard. all they have to do is punch in the adjustments in the ecu. it can alter the engine efficiency. the comp i have for my stang can get me up to 36 mpg city but that would take away all my get up and go. there's a thing called running to lean or too rich.
Makes me think of the hemi's that now run as 4 cyl cars till you get on it
_____________________________
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: LegallyTorchRED "Condomless Sex".... is like speeding without a radar detector........ "sooner or later, you're gonna get caught"
actually i do know my ****, but you obviously dont get my point, buying a v6 mustang is like buying a muscle car with know muscle, yeah you can make them fast but they still dont have the torque of a v8 thats all im saying, im not putting down people that own v6 mustangs there just not muscle cars
Posts: 7155
Joined: 4/27/2004 From: I live in Canada, eh Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: bennihill
plain and simple, the v-6 mustang has the most bang for the buck. the gt has 300 hp yeah, but the sticker price is also $7,000 higher. for what? 90 hp, a spoiler, some foglights, rims that cost the factory almost nothing more, bigger rotors and a different axle ratio? come on! i can spend 4600 on a vortech supercharger kit and run it at 18 psi. in the end i will run around 450 hp and 470 sq. lbs p/ inch in torque. it is still 2400 cheaper in base price gt. take that 2400 and get the slotted rotors, and all that other useless crap that come with the gt. then when you smoke the sh*t out of a gt tell them its a v-6 that costs the same price. they'll look stupid as hell. you gotta know your sh*t before you run your mouth. and the maximas are nice cars no doubt. but what your paying the 5 or 6 grand for is the status, class, and luxury coupled with the power. they are two different types of cars. and that guy is right, for people who don't care about power, the v-6 is marketed towards different clients. knowledge is the reward for taking the time to gain the knowledge. - racing with love
ha ha ha ha - there is a little more to GT than that dude. For example, you're guna have trouble beating him with all that HP and only one wheel driving
Posts: 11876
Joined: 12/22/2004 From: Ludlow, Mass Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: ncksnapper
actually i do know my ****, but you obviously dont get my point, buying a v6 mustang is like buying a muscle car with know muscle, yeah you can make them fast but they still dont have the torque of a v8 thats all im saying, im not putting down people that own v6 mustangs there just not muscle cars
if you want to get really technical, niether is the GT
waxyourboard, they can make a 400 hp engine with the same gas mileage. its not hard. all they have to do is punch in the adjustments in the ecu. it can alter the engine efficiency. the comp i have for my stang can get me up to 36 mpg city but that would take away all my get up and go. there's a thing called running to lean or too rich.
So with an intake and heads that flow enough for 400hp, you would need to flow about 670 CFM of air(just a quick guess from http://www.ondoperformance.com/tech.html)
Lets see... quick estimate... Yeah. No matter how i look at it, if you're flowing 670 CFM of air, you need to keep the Air-to-Fuel ratio the same (aka.. not running too lean or too rich)
Even if you shift at 3k rpm (a little high i know, but stick with me) you're still going to be using 380 cfm of air making about 230 horsepower. Check the a/f ratio... Yeah.
If V-8s can be so fuel efficient, why do they make those tiny little four cylinders so inefficient? A toyota corolla has a 1.8 liter engine that only makes 130 horsepower, and it still only gets 32 mpg in the city!
They must be working for the oil companies.
_____________________________
1994 GT Vert
For Sale or Trade: 390 Long Block w/ forged pistons and rods unassembled. PM me if interested, $350obo, or looking to trade for perf. parts (intake, heads, exhaust) or wheels (mach 1, cobra)
32 mpg for city versus 19 mph for city is a big difference. just hope you realized that. there's a reason it's a 1.8 liter. for 7 grand they didn't change enough to make up the difference for the gt. for example, i also own a 04 f-250. now why would the fx-4 version cost two grand more when it's only 500$ worth of suspension mods for towing? to make money off stupid people that are willing to pay it because they don't take the time to educate themselves on it. and it doesn't matter about the air/fuel ratios because your car can inject as much fuel as the computer tells it to. you find the best way for your car to inhale as much air as possible. thats it. me personally i have a german front mount intake on mine for the air running into it. and this is 2006, not 1996. they have psi regulators for s/c's as well as turbos and they are both adjustable to 24-26 psi. true it's not safe for your engine to be under that kind of stress but you have to sacrifice if you want that much power. the only difference is one pushes and the other pulls. plus a supercharger is direct power off the line unlike a turbo where you have that lag factor. that factor is because turbos work off exhaust pressure. plus u can put a blow off valve on a s/c and it's totally legal because it vents pure oxygen back into the air. on turbos it's illegal due to emissions. and the point was that the v-6 is a much better bang for the buck. any way you look at it. i had the money for a gt but i chose the v-6 so i could pinch every penny and the maximum power for my dollar because i don't see the point of wasting money. now if your leaving both cars stock it's a different story. but thats like an idiot saying factory tail lights are safer to buy. aftermarket meet the same specs, look better, and are a quarter of the price. thats old gen thinking man. we have technology these days.
Printable Version
RE: v6 maxima has 222 HP vs. v6 Stang 190? - 
