SuperStang83
Founding Member
351CJ said:The best test that I have seen of a BONE STOCK Mustang GT was in 5.0 Mag.
They took a good driver and ran multiple passes with a truely BONE STOCK 2002 GT Coupe. The times they got were:
14.986 @ 94.47
14.557 @ 97.09
14.684 @ 96.42
14.450 @ 97.82
14.218 @ 98.06
Then they started modding the car: They disconnected the front sway bar, removed the spare tire & jack, removed the air intake filter housing (& silencer), pumped the front tires up to 46 PSI and iced the intake manifold:
13.960 @ 99.02
13.721 @ 101.8
So you are not going to see 13's on a bone stock 99 - 04 unless you have a big tail wind.
kirkyg said:I ran a 14.0 @ 99.5 with 0 track experience first time out with my bone stock car. You can say whatever you want but my car was easily capable of a 13.95 or 13.9 + the weather was humid and not very cool.
kirkyg
351CJ said:The best test that I have seen of a BONE STOCK Mustang GT was in 5.0 Mag.
They took a good driver and ran multiple passes with a truely BONE STOCK 2002 GT Coupe. The times they got were:
14.986 @ 94.47
14.557 @ 97.09
14.684 @ 96.42
14.450 @ 97.82
14.218 @ 98.06
Then they started modding the car: They disconnected the front sway bar, removed the spare tire & jack, removed the air intake filter housing (& silencer), pumped the front tires up to 46 PSI and iced the intake manifold:
13.960 @ 99.02
13.721 @ 101.8
So you are not going to see 13's on a bone stock 99 - 04 unless you have a big tail wind.
shane3232 said:I am about as big of a mustang supporter as there is, and as much as i want to believe that the 99-04 gts run a 13.9 or better 1/4 mile, i just dont think its true, not for a bone stock gt anyway. I have heard rumors of this, but ive never seen any proof of it. But if u have some real #'s i'd love to see them being i have 01 gt vert. Also the Mach's with the same gear ratios and nearly the same hp/tq as the 05's only run 13.4 stock and i have a feeling that their hp/tp curve is much more level than the 05's will be so i dont think that the 05's can match that.
ttown said:A lot of the mustangs I've seen run sub 14's are near sea level. You'll have a hard time running sub 14's in many areas in the US, even with great weather.
StngStr said:No kidding Sherlock. When comparing times from different parts of the country, it's more accurate to use corrected times. Fortunatly, the track I go to is at 66 ft and the DA lately has been pretty close to that.
GelatiCruiser said:Not calling here or anything....just a legitimate question. If you ran a 14.0 @ 99.5, then why is your time in your sig listed as 14.2? Do you not have the slip from the 14.0 run or something?
StngStr said:No kidding Sherlock. When comparing times from different parts of the country, it's more accurate to use corrected times. Fortunatly, the track I go to is at 66 ft and the DA lately has been pretty close to that.
ttown said:Well come to my world friend and you won't have those cherry time. Many on this board don't consider what location a Mag or person is in when they report times. Just temp and hum.
Sound like your just being a smart A$$
blkgt714 said:Me personally, I don't really put much weight on corrected times.. Course thats coming from someone thats near sea level.. Heh..
In all the 99+ GT's I've seen run, and that has been many.. Perhaps 10-15% run get that sub 14 time stock or mildly modded. It can be done, but its no where near the norm at all.
kirkyg said:The time in my sig is 1 4 . 0 2
not 1 4 . 2 0
p.s. and if you need proof of course i'll scan the slip when i get home if you dont believe me.