Hey guys, I just read the newest version of Motor Trend and this is the performance data that they got for the new GT:
1/4 mile: 13.6 sec. @ 99.9 mph 0-60 mph in 5.1 seconds Automatic transmission
What can I say? WOW! That's fast. It was done with the auto tranny power braked to about 2000 rpm. They estimated the stick shift to be a few tenth quicker with a 0-60 time of 4.7 to 4.8 sec. That's some good performance for a 4.6 motor.
Now I know the f-body guys will say that they did it back in 1998 (only the 1/4 mile that is, not the 0-60). Yeah, but stock, the f-bodies were only good for straight line performance, and nothing else. The new Stang does the same with much higher quality craftsmanship, and it's handling is also superior to the f-bodies. And the looks is something you just can't get otherwise.
Now I don't even own a stang right now, but this one is definitely on my check list. Good job Ford!
I hate to tell ya but the camaro handle very well......ford has loss touch in the all show no go theory....it's gooten so bad as family sadens have 300hp or more on tap and running sub 14's.. and I hate to say this but the 05 evo is running sub 4.5's in the 60 ft and 13.4's for less money...don't get me wrong I do like the looks as I'm an ole fart but ford is rely'in on the past for sale..me I'm old school to a point but I don't need a new car looking from the past....japan is whooping our ass in new wave thinking...american cars are over price because we are compelled to pay someone 30-35 hr to put on lincese plate brackets.....
_____________________________
IF YOU CAN'T BEAT'EM WHOOP THEIR ASS! '89 lx 5.0 5spd 4 sale 3800 '90 lx 306 s/c '90 lx 5.0 auto hockey sux mopar..I like midgets they hang nice from my x-mas tree
Posts: 8826
Joined: 9/2/2003 From: United States Status: offline
Seen that too, its BS... much like Ford had a magazine article in Muscle Mustangs I think it was back in 1999 that said a stock GT ran 13.6 also.. we all know that its more like 14.1 - 14.2 on a good day
Team MF Member #2046 Posts: 12516
Joined: 1/22/2004 From: United States Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: mdvaldosta
Seen that too, its BS... much like Ford had a magazine article in Muscle Mustangs I think it was back in 1999 that said a stock GT ran 13.6 also.. we all know that its more like 14.1 - 14.2 on a good day
We shall soon see I think.
What is the problem with everyone believing this?? You can beileve a 325 HP heavyer Fbody can run a 13.0 flat with 325 HP, but a lighter car with newer suspension and frame running 300 Hp can't break a 14?????
The new 05 is 103 pounds heavyer than a 04, has 40 more horsepower, and a newer/better suspension.
Let me ask you this. Would you expect a fox body GT to outrun a 99+ GT if the 99+ had a passenger and the fox didnt??? I didnt think so.
< Message edited by 2000GT4.6 -- 10/9/2004 1:29:04 PM >
Posts: 8826
Joined: 9/2/2003 From: United States Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
What is the problem with everyone believing this?? You can beileve a 325 HP heavyer Fbody can run a 13.0 flat with 325 HP, but a lighter car with newer suspension and frame running 300 Hp can't break a 14?????
And no Fbody with 325hp is gonna run a 13.0 on stock tires either, talkin about slicks is a whole nother story - were talkin about street tires here
I hate to tell ya but the camaro handle very well......ford has loss touch in the all show no go theory....it's gooten so bad as family sadens have 300hp or more on tap and running sub 14's.. and I hate to say this but the 05 evo is running sub 4.5's in the 60 ft and 13.4's for less money...
Yes, I do realize that most f-body handles reasonably. I guess I didn't mean it handled badly, just that's it feels clumsy. I'm not biased either as I own neither a Stang nor Camaro. I own a mopar right now and I believe the family sedan you're refeering to is the LX body Chryslers (300C, Magnum and Charger) ?
The Evolution is a different story. It only runs that high because of the awd launch advantage. And STi for example, can dial a 1.8s 60' time straight from the factory, which helps a lot in 1/4 and 0-60 runs, but in no way represent the actual power of the car.
I do believe though, that the 05 Mustangs will be ultimately cheaper than an Evo. It may sticker higher, but give a few months and the rebate/discount trend of American cars will show.
I was just surprised than an auto 05 can run that fast, as it wasn't long ago that people were saying they are only running 14.2s with a stick shift.
well the mopar for starters.. honda has several cars running over 260 from a v6...don't get me wrong I'm not a forgein car fan..but the car makers here just don't want to change their ways.....but for the evo..who cares about hp if your first right? look at the ole lil rotary engine that the rx7 had and were spanking 50k vettes.....it's not to hard to make a turbo v6 or v8 run and sit in the engine bay of a stang and make it affordable 30k isn't affordable to most young guys out there or us 40 year old putting kids thru college.....need a bare bones lx model for us go fast junkies..first one who does it will hit it big..it's the old theory sell a few car and make a ton of money instead sell alot of cars,cust is happy and they make alot of money!
_____________________________
IF YOU CAN'T BEAT'EM WHOOP THEIR ASS! '89 lx 5.0 5spd 4 sale 3800 '90 lx 306 s/c '90 lx 5.0 auto hockey sux mopar..I like midgets they hang nice from my x-mas tree
Posts: 65
Joined: 11/16/2003 From: United States Status: offline
All I know is that the 05 Mustang looks way better than the competition.Not only does it look better,it backs it up with power.Unlike most cars where the displacement is just increased,Ford chose to overhaul the 4.6 modular V8 engine to increase the horsepower.I believe that 70% of the 4.6 is all new. The evo is a very nice car in its own right but its small,its looks are not for the American mainstream,has a "wimpy" sounding exhaust note(although the turbo whine greatly makes up for that) and its base car costs $4000 more than a base Mustang GT.Performancewise,the Evo is heaven on wheels from what I have read.I dont believe the Mustang to be a technological marvel as it is not.But kudos are due to the entire Mustang team for improving almost every aspect of this car.300hp is damn good for a $26,000 car.Thats $6000 cheaper than a 2004 GTO.The 350hp 2004 GTO was rated for 0-60 @ 5.4 sec.The 2005 GTO will have the C6's 400hp LS2 strapped to it.That'll be nice,but prolly at more of a cost.And the best part about the newest edition of the Mustang is that its designed and made in the good ol' USA unlike the Evo and the GTO/Monaro.Flame on.
Seen that too, its BS... much like Ford had a magazine article in Muscle Mustangs I think it was back in 1999 that said a stock GT ran 13.6 also.. we all know that its more like 14.1 - 14.2 on a good day
What is the problem with everyone believing this?? You can beileve a 325 HP heavyer Fbody can run a 13.0 flat with 325 HP, but a lighter car with newer suspension and frame running 300 Hp can't break a 14?????
That's like saying the new Cobra has 390hp....we all know how underrated they were. The f-body's weighed in at 3400'ish lbs, how much is this new GT gonna weigh?
quote:
The new 05 is 103 pounds heavyer than a 04, has 40 more horsepower, and a newer/better suspension.
I expect it to go 13's with an exceptional driver. Much like the current GT, which I've never been a witness to a 13 second run, but I know it's possible.
< Message edited by 98LS1 -- 10/18/2004 4:39:23 PM >
Printable Version
Motor Trend: 13.6 @ 99.9, 5.1 0-60, AUTOMATIC!!! - 
