one2gamble
Founding Member
if your talking at times the 260hp current 4.6 will smoke both those cars. 300hp is nothing to sneeze at considering you can get it for the low 20's
Not enough power... In 2005
- Thread starter CarrollShelby
- Start date
- Status
-
Sponsors (?)
one2gamble said:
Come on (one2gamble)... A S2000(240hp) and RX8(238hp) 04" are two little rocket compare to a Mustang GT(260hp) 04" in a 1/4 mile! Try it...
one2gamble
Founding Member
your dreaming, the rx-8 barely runs in the 14's while the s2000 is usually a mid 14 second car. The GT is a low 14 second car that touches the high 13's on occasion. The 05 will be in the 13's while being thousands cheaper than either of those cars.
SVTdriver
Founding Member
Wow someone is starting to sound more like a troll than a contributing member.
Or maybe someone has seen 2fast 2furious 2 many times. And is now believeing it's a documentary not a movie.
Let's bring up some real facts.
The S2000 starts at $32800. Has 60hp less and just barely more than half the torque. And as for 1/4 mile drives. There was an S2000 owner on here a while back. Who admitted that to get the kind of lauch needed for a good time. You needed to rev the hell out of it and drop the clutch. Which was very bad on the tranny.
The RX-8 is nearly the same price. But is still over 60 hp under and again almost 1/2 the torque. I'm not seeing the threat on the drag strip.
Mind you I am not saying either of these cars are junk. But neither of them was designed or built for drag racing. Drag racing is more of an american style of racing. And I don't think many if any japanese car builders even care about who's the fastest at the 1/4 mile.
Or maybe someone has seen 2fast 2furious 2 many times. And is now believeing it's a documentary not a movie.
Let's bring up some real facts.
The S2000 starts at $32800. Has 60hp less and just barely more than half the torque. And as for 1/4 mile drives. There was an S2000 owner on here a while back. Who admitted that to get the kind of lauch needed for a good time. You needed to rev the hell out of it and drop the clutch. Which was very bad on the tranny.
The RX-8 is nearly the same price. But is still over 60 hp under and again almost 1/2 the torque. I'm not seeing the threat on the drag strip.
Mind you I am not saying either of these cars are junk. But neither of them was designed or built for drag racing. Drag racing is more of an american style of racing. And I don't think many if any japanese car builders even care about who's the fastest at the 1/4 mile.
This thread is getting annoying. 1st off, I've driven several AWD cars, most impressive being a 2002 Carrera 4, and the AWD does indeed inspire a ton of confidence at the edge of grip in a corner when you're on the gas. It helps us every-day-Joe drivers drive faster easier. You've heard of traction control, and yaw control, think of AWD as f***-up control. It makes driving fast easier and more accessible, but it doesn't mean that the car is going to BE much faster when pushed at its limits by a driver who knows how to manage the limits with 2 wheels providing the power. For example, note that the Porsche 911 Turbo is AWD, HOWEVER, you can't ignore that for the two race-prepped and light-weight variants of that chassis the GT2 and GT3, Porsche REMOVES the AWD in favor or RWD, and that's what they race with. AWD makes Dr. Snooty Snoot feel like a pro on the way to his tee time without pitching the car into the weeds, but RWD is what they go with for the race cars. The Ferrari Enzo is RWD, the Porsche GT is RWD, Mercedes SLR, etc.etc... If you want AWD, the EVO is an excellent choice, but I'm not seeing any market for an AWD Mustang. Also, my latest Motor Trend tested the new hottest EVO, and ran an impressive 13.3, at a very UNIMPRESSIVE 102.2 mph through the traps. Conclusion? With AWD you can scream off the line with traction. But after the 0-60 sprint, you get sucked up and spit out by Mach 1's and Cobras like you're dragging a parachute, which you practically are, driving 4 wheels and with all that air-damming to feed the intercoolers on those alien-looking Mitsu's. I'm done now talking about these 4-door rally-wannabe cars, as it's plain stoopid to compare them to the Mustang as the Mustang target-market could give a rat's patooty about how well you can drift on a dirt road (everybody breathes a sigh of relief). And this whining about 300 h.p. not being enough for the GT. Enough already. The '04 Mach 1's have "only" 305 h.p. (factory published), and run low 13's @ 105-106 mph stock. Obviously, Ford is underrating the h.p. figures. None of these high hp/cc cars like the S2000 or RX-8 come within more than a second of the Mach's performance. People want a torquey american V8 in their Mustang, not a high-winding no-bottom end hornet's nest. Besides, comparing a conventional piston motor to a Rotary is retarded, you may as well compare nuclear power to coal. Do you want a rotary in your Mustang?? The new GT is just what it needs to be. It'll be alot of performance and style for the money, which has traditionally been the successful recipe for the Mustang. You add more power, then you need a stronger tranny and rear end and clutch, and you can expect more warranty expense from driveline abuse. $$$. For most people, for the masses of people that will be buying GT's, what they are getting is more than enough to get their dollars. And Ford will cook up some hotter (and more expensive, speed isn't free) models for us minority power-junkies who want it. Think about the 2004 Cobra. It runs mid-12's, and is easily modified to run 11's, HUGE numbers, incredible power. And dealers had to literally BEG and PLEAD to sell off their remaining inventories this summer, with some dealers letting them go for $28K and some change, on a limited-production vehicle. Wake up people, huge horsepower doesn't necessarily sell cars. We power-nuts are not a large market. So pull your head out of the sand and use some business sense. Ford's really hit the bulls-eye IMHO with the '05 GT. Besides, nobody's even seen a road test yet!! In any event the standard GT will most likely run high 13's, which is on-par with a stock 1969 428 Cobra Jet Mach 1!!!! Are we getting spoiled in this latest horsepower war, or what? If you're so admiring of the Japanese engines, go and test drive some of those cars. You'll see that you're comparing apples to oranges in a big way. The 350Z is Japan's closest attempt to building a torquey Mustang-like car, and it's a fairly tame ride. Look at Nissan and Toyota's attempts to build V8's for their trucks that compete with the U.S.. Toyota flat-out isn't in the game, and Nissan's 5.4 is no more powerful than Chrysler's 5.7 or Chevy's 5.7, in fact it's less, and is only marginally more powerful than Ford's 5.4. Tell the Japanese to make torque, and all of a sudden the whole h.p. per liter thing that they embrace falls apart, and they find themselves facing the same challenges that Ford/GM/DC does...
jadesville said:
Dude, I am not going to sit here and look up all the info on it just to prove a point to you. Why dont you go to "Google" and type in "Mitsubishi lancer evolution" for yourself and you will find plenty of articles from magazines with Evos dusting off exotics in road tests. Porche, Ferrari, BMW etc...go look it up before you talk trash because the Evo is one of the 10 fastest STOCK track cars you can buy. I am not talking about the MODIFIED race cars people keep bringing up in here.
[QUOTE='03 6-Speed]you don't see any Evo's on the high end road course circuits do you? it is only corvettes, porsche's, msutangs and those sorts, so apparently they can't keep up somehow.[/QUOTE]
You are right but...you are talking about MODIFIED race cars. You really think those Vettes, Porche's and Stangs are STOCK? LOL Everything from the engine to the suspensions are all modded out on those track cars. Of course an Evo couldnt hang with those, you are an idiot if you expect it to. Put it on a road course against any of those cars STOCK, and it will more than hold its own.
You are right but...you are talking about MODIFIED race cars. You really think those Vettes, Porche's and Stangs are STOCK? LOL Everything from the engine to the suspensions are all modded out on those track cars. Of course an Evo couldnt hang with those, you are an idiot if you expect it to. Put it on a road course against any of those cars STOCK, and it will more than hold its own.
Waouch... The point I try said is a stock GT 04" with 260hp dont go below 14.2 in 1/4 mile??? So a little rocket like S2000 (13.92 sec.) or even better the SRT-4 Neon Turbo 230hp have a better time in 1/4 mile (13.76 sec./Road and track magazine) for less money... It's a $18,000 car!
The new Stang 05" 300hp clock arround 13.9@1/4 mile? Wow... Big number! Hahaha... It's a big joke!
Like I said... Not enough power!!!
The new Stang 05" 300hp clock arround 13.9@1/4 mile? Wow... Big number! Hahaha... It's a big joke!
Like I said... Not enough power!!!
CarrollShelby said:
Please provide your source for that 1/4 mile time. Otherwise I call
Everything we've heard is that the '05 will have Mach 1 performance which is in the 13.3-13.5 range. As for the 14.2 for the '04 GT, if you'd even bother to check out the timeslip database on Stangnet, you'd see plenty of unmodified '01-'04 GTs running sub 14 second 1/4s.
CarrollShelby said:
Before you make your un-informed claims, why don't you read some of the other posts. There is a topic that has a link to 5.0 Magazine where they do air flow tests on the heads. The new 3V heads flow over 30% more air than the old 2V heads and they flow within 5% of the 4V heads. The 3V also has VVT and a more sophisticated intake manifold. Due to thsi, the 3V has better low end torque than the 4V engine. Several Ford people (at the various Mustang events) have said the 05 GT will be a good 1/2 second faster than the 04 GT.
SVTdriver
Founding Member
CarrollShelby said:
How about these serious numbers. Ford rates the Mach1 at 305 hp and 320 tq.
The 05 gt is rated by Ford at 300 hp and 320 tq. So the 05 gt is within 5 hp and has the same tq. They are rated very close in weight. And the 05 is going to have better gearing in the rear. And you don't think they are going to produce nearly the same #'s? Please YOU be serious.
GinoGT said:I have come to the conclusion that you are an idiot.
On top of that, posting such nonsense
I'll second that. He posts wild claims without any facts to back them up and then claims I'm not serious about my facts. A total waste of human skin...
SVTdriver
Founding Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
