1/4 mile vid of 05 Stang GT
- Thread starter posm6s
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Bigfoot 13
New Member
JimBowy
Member
I saw a 05 at our local track tonight (FME night at Milan, Mi) he was running high 14s... disappointing and of course it was driver.
Keep in mind its probably with the smaller stock street tires. Oh and I should note the 14.8s I was seeing today from the 05 the guy was taking off very light from the line.... it was like he didn't want to hurt the car.... can you believe that???
Keep in mind its probably with the smaller stock street tires. Oh and I should note the 14.8s I was seeing today from the 05 the guy was taking off very light from the line.... it was like he didn't want to hurt the car.... can you believe that???
93 teal terror
Founding Member
It will be interesting if Ford choose to make the 05 as stong as it could be with Dodge and Chevy coming out with products in 06/07 timeframe. Ford seems to hold something back and sandbag sometimes. The car that debates in 05 could be weak compare to the GT's 3 or 4 years down the road IMO. I've seen they've been testing a lot of configurations, some say that's the engine their getting in the 05 but I think some of the mod's are for the future....we'll see soon.
KronicRacer
New Member
93 teal terror
Founding Member
yeah but it only weighs 40 more pounds than a mach one, and a mach one is an easy mid 13 car, both of them having roughly the same hp
Mustangless
Member
KronicRacer
New Member
well its still day one numbers. time will tell. and no doubt if evan smith @ mm&ff tests it. the car should put up some serious numbers
You guys are pathetic!
You base your expected acceleration times off a single video of a single driver doing a single pass?
WAIT A SECOND. Isn't this the same place that rags on Car and Driver for posting slow numbers? They make multiple passes and can't get optimal numbers on some cars.
So, if it's C&D, you blame the magazine, but if you see a video of an anonymous unknown driver, you are blaming the car? I don't get it?
My first pass in a new Mustang will probably not beat a 14.2. Why? Because I haven't driven a V8 stick since 1991 when I sold my last GT. Since then I've had I6/sticks, I4/sticks, and V6/autos in various vehicles.
On top of that, guys doing 13 second passes in their Mach 1's are either
a) driving that same car all the time (so they really know how to launch it)
or
b) working for a car magazine that specializes in acceleration times (C&D doesn't speed shift, doesn't pre-heat tires, etc.)
and on top of THAT, we're looking at factory stock tires.
Get a grip everyone. You need more data. Which means wait for production cars to hit the street, wait for many drivers to start figuring out the best way to launch on this new rear suspension, wait for people to tell you if the video was shot at altitude or on a hot day, etc.
You base your expected acceleration times off a single video of a single driver doing a single pass?
WAIT A SECOND. Isn't this the same place that rags on Car and Driver for posting slow numbers? They make multiple passes and can't get optimal numbers on some cars.
So, if it's C&D, you blame the magazine, but if you see a video of an anonymous unknown driver, you are blaming the car? I don't get it?
My first pass in a new Mustang will probably not beat a 14.2. Why? Because I haven't driven a V8 stick since 1991 when I sold my last GT. Since then I've had I6/sticks, I4/sticks, and V6/autos in various vehicles.
On top of that, guys doing 13 second passes in their Mach 1's are either
a) driving that same car all the time (so they really know how to launch it)
or
b) working for a car magazine that specializes in acceleration times (C&D doesn't speed shift, doesn't pre-heat tires, etc.)
and on top of THAT, we're looking at factory stock tires.
Get a grip everyone. You need more data. Which means wait for production cars to hit the street, wait for many drivers to start figuring out the best way to launch on this new rear suspension, wait for people to tell you if the video was shot at altitude or on a hot day, etc.
robray89lx
Founding Member
to me it also looked like he didn't launch it at all. Like he just left a stoplight driving normal. 
I think time will tell. I think it was babied for that run.
I think time will tell. I think it was babied for that run.
QUICK91LX
Founding Member
M1Rifle said:You guys are pathetic!
You base your expected acceleration times off a single video of a single driver doing a single pass?
WAIT A SECOND. Isn't this the same place that rags on Car and Driver for posting slow numbers? They make multiple passes and can't get optimal numbers on some cars.
So, if it's C&D, you blame the magazine, but if you see a video of an anonymous unknown driver, you are blaming the car? I don't get it?
My first pass in a new Mustang will probably not beat a 14.2. Why? Because I haven't driven a V8 stick since 1991 when I sold my last GT. Since then I've had I6/sticks, I4/sticks, and V6/autos in various vehicles.
On top of that, guys doing 13 second passes in their Mach 1's are either
a) driving that same car all the time (so they really know how to launch it)
or
b) working for a car magazine that specializes in acceleration times (C&D doesn't speed shift, doesn't pre-heat tires, etc.)
and on top of THAT, we're looking at factory stock tires.
Get a grip everyone. You need more data. Which means wait for production cars to hit the street, wait for many drivers to start figuring out the best way to launch on this new rear suspension, wait for people to tell you if the video was shot at altitude or on a hot day, etc.
Amen brotha! you all need to relax and get more info before you can start determining if the car is fast or slow. a 14.2 for a guy who babied the car off the line like that and obviously didnt beat on the car to any extent is pretty impressive. he probably was a pretty good driver to pu$$y foot the car to a 14.2. wait till more stuff comes out with more good drivers really running the car for all its worth, and then i think you will be happy with the times
kirkyg
Founding Member
hahahahahah
14.2 @ 95 mph??????????????
hahahahahah
I'm not even gonna bother watching the vid because the new Gt is going to be QUITE A BIT faster than a 14.2. I'm not even planning on buying one for a while but i will say that this is a load of crap. I'm not one to say the 05 is god sent BUT it is and should be very closely compared to a mach 1. 13.5's should be coming in less than a month...just wait and see.
kirkyg
14.2 @ 95 mph??????????????
hahahahahah
I'm not even gonna bother watching the vid because the new Gt is going to be QUITE A BIT faster than a 14.2. I'm not even planning on buying one for a while but i will say that this is a load of crap. I'm not one to say the 05 is god sent BUT it is and should be very closely compared to a mach 1. 13.5's should be coming in less than a month...just wait and see.
kirkyg
You all have to remeber that these are not production Mustangs. Now, I'm not saying the pre-production Stangs are slow, what I am saying is look at from a logistics and PR standpoint. They ran the car there to get it in front of people, not to race. If they ran the hell out of it and anything went wrong, like blown motor, missed gear... anything, it would be a public relations nightmare. It would be on every forum that the Stang can't handle racing, it would be in magazines, newspapers, etc. I'm sure they intentionally went easy on it. Ford is well aware that in order to keep its current customer base and attract a new one, that the performance aspects of the Stang have to be at least in line with the previous models.
Similar threads
