2005 GT vs 03/04 Mach 1

Discussion in '2005 - 2009 Specific Tech' started by Mach428, Dec 8, 2003.


  1. SadbutTrue

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    2,351
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    49
    Location:
    Granada Hills, California
    Well, I doubt the GT will be underrated that much, as much as the Mach anyway. The new GT is a bit heavier. The new GT also doesn't look as aerodynamic as the current stangs. Stock rubber is slightly larger on the current ones (unless you get the 18 inchers, but those are too big for me). I'm sure you'll find examples of each beating the other, but I think the Mach will end up as the slightly faster car.

    Just for comparisons... a stock Mach 1 ran a 12.88@106 about a month ago. I can't see the new GT doing that.
     
    #21
  2. fly2low

    fly2low New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    238
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marina del Rey, CA
    It comes back again to the suspension problem. I don't think Mustang problem has been the engine; it is how to put the power down to the ground. That's why there are panhardrod aftermarket kits. So, just cross your fingers and hope they do the suspensions right this time (see the whole IRS thread).
     
    #22
  3. FireChickenRacn

    FireChickenRacn New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NAF Atsugi

    thats awesome where can i find the artical where it ran that? for the most part i see them in the mid to low 13's and there is about 75 lb difference between the mach and the 05 but the 05 has a ton more torque at 2000 rpm from the vvt i think that will prove a big advantage when draging :rolleyes:
     
    #23
  4. Omegalock

    Omegalock New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I read on here way earlier last year that people were saying the 3v 4.6 was dynoing like 270 at the wheels in the prototype versions Ford loaned out to the aftermarket. No idea on how valid those rumors where as it was during the same time people were making claims the Stang would weigh 3800 lbs and other wild ass things.
    But if it's true and you allow 17% drivetrain loss the engine might be putting out more like 325 at the crank. If that's true a lighter GT with better distribution(and hopefully better suspension) than the current generation of Stangs it should be even with the Mach at the very least. Which would put the 05 GT as the LS1 fighter they were aiming for , and it would eliminate yet potential excuse for people not to buy it.
     
    #24
  5. ttown

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    819
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Oklahoma

    First my guess is they'll be closer to the 96-98 305HP cobra's. They will put done 255-260rwhp which is right around 300/305hp.

    MY Mach putting down around 330hp/350tq stock(with a more realistic drive train loss of 15%) so they are just a tad underrated :D

    Go back in time Ford never put's everything into a first year old car. They'll establish the new platform with a conservetive appoach and in 2 or 3 years do like they did in 86/87 or 96/99 IMO.
     
    #25
  6. 2002boss

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2001
    Messages:
    1,163
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hurricane,WV

    I have dyno my 03 Mach1 auto. Ford is unrated the hp in the 03-04 Mach1s auto. my came to be on dyno at 325hp. If Ford saying 300hp in the 05 Mustang GT see the real hp be 315 or 320hp. :nice: :lol: :jaw:
     
    #26
  7. kirkyg

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,573
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Location:
    Beaumont, TX
    I can believe a 13.1-13.2. Not saying your bs'ing or anything but 12.88? No weight reduction or modifications? I would guess there were some modifications like traction for one. The 3-valve is going to put out about as much power as the 4 valve. Because its going to breath almost as much as the 4 valve heads + it has VCT and it has a higher compression ratio. Again i believe that it may possibly outrun a mach 1. granted stock for stock and equal drivers. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I think ford is putting together a fairly aggressive package for the new stang and im impressed so far. (btw i love the mach 1's i wish i would have waited to get my stang and ended up getting amach for only another 1-2k :().

    kirkyg
     
    #27
  8. Omegalock

    Omegalock New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think the specs on the 05 GT has it with a slightly lower compression ratio.
     
    #28
  9. SadbutTrue

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    2,351
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    49
    Location:
    Granada Hills, California
    12.88 on stock rubber, h emight have had a pro 5.0 shifter but thats it. The LS1 guys were up in arms about it.
     
    #29
  10. 351CJ

    351CJ New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Don't forget that the 4.6, 3V engine has VVT which should significantly broaden the torque curve.

    Det. News ran an article about their test drive of a 2005 Mustang GT. They said that it was real easy to spin the tires shifting into 2nd gear. :nice:
     
    #30
  11. Omegalock

    Omegalock New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ssweeet.
     
    #31
  12. 02gtred

    02gtred New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    I think performance numbers will be comparable to the present day GT's. I am just waiting for the big dog's to roll off the line in 06...fun fun fun
     
    #32
  13. Omegalock

    Omegalock New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In all honesty it shouldn't be. With 40 more horses more torque,better weight distribution and not too much heavier than the GT it should by all rights beat it handily.
     
    #33
  14. 351CJ

    351CJ New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Add to what Omega said: broader torque curve and 3.55 rear end.

    The 05 GT will be significantly faster than the 99-04. In the Det News test of the 05, there was a 04 GT for comparison. Det News said there was no comparison, the 05 was better in every way. I'll try to find the article again, but one of the things I rember them saying was " The '04 took a bit of work to get a good chirp out of the rear tires when shifting into 2nd gear. With the '05 we could effortlessly spin the tires when shifting into 2nd."
     
    #34
  15. kirkyg

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,573
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Location:
    Beaumont, TX
    9.8:1 compression??? Thats what the 05 GT is.

    kirkyg
     
    #35
  16. Omegalock

    Omegalock New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Mach has a compression ration of 10.05 or 10.10:1 from what I recall reading about a couple months back.
     
    #36
  17. SVOKING

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2001
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Faster than an 01 Slowbra?? Of course!!!
    Faster than a 03 Mach 1?? Not likely!!
     
    #37
  18. Omegalock

    Omegalock New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Let's say for arguements sake that Ford underrated the 05 it very well could be faster. I'd hold off on making that statement until we see some solid dyno numbers on the new engine.
     
    #38
  19. CatmanJJ

    CatmanJJ Captain Tangnet

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Messages:
    4,570
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    Maryland
    I agree, seems to close to call at this point.
     
    #39
  20. david97gt46

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2001
    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    orange park, fl
    dyno numbers dont win races.....drivers do.
     
    #40

Share This Page