Top speed of a bone stock 2005-07 Mustang GT

[Svtpilot]

Neither C&D or MT was able to validate 200, even stacking the deck by using a banked oval and high ele. On a banked oval, which erases some of the aero problems, C&D got about 189 average of 2 directions, out of an uncorked one, MT a little better by using a declined road and tailwind to push up the average. Here's the problem: It took a REALLY long run to work up to that and every mph gained, the faster you go, requires 3X the power of the previous one, when you add in all the various forms of drag. 8 mph will need A LOT more power at that speed.

It's more than power, too, suspension, aero, driving skill, all factor very heavily in whether you can hit a number. Ask people who do mile events how long it took them to make their best runs.

Motortrend with Randy Probst driving was able to hit 196.06 mph on a very hot day on a track that is at high elevation. Probst says that the car is a 200 mph car if it was a cooler day, or on a track with a longer straight or lower elevation:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRuE38Bl5Mo

Regardless of whether its 200, 189, or 196.06mph the point is it gets close to 200mph and it doesn't have anything near 1000hp

 

[TT5.0ca]

Well, that's a heck of a "regardless". As I said, every mph gained is cubed in power needed over the previous one. It's not exact but, a pretty good guideline. The curse of elevation is the same for aircraft. Non-jet aircraft make more power at lower altitudes but the high air density induces more drag and slows their airspeed. Higher altitudes produce less engine power but the air is thinner and the aircraft can theoretically go faster but, it doesn't have the power. Now the 2000' difference at ground level isn't that significant, to be honest.

Can 200 be done in a Mustang chassis? Sure, there are fully built and set up S197s doing this in a mile out there. Now those cars definitely need close to 1000 to do it in that distance.

 

[Svtpilot]

Well, that's a heck of a "regardless".....

Not really, I think its fair to say that 196 mph is close to 200mph.

Now the 2000' difference at ground level isn't that significant, to be honest.

I wouldn't have thought that a 2000 foot elevation would have any affect at all. Apparently Probst and MT thinks it does

Can 200 be done in a Mustang chassis? Sure, there are fully built and set up S197s doing this in a mile out there. Now those cars definitely need close to 1000 to do it in that distance.

Well, you never said anything about reaching 200mph in specified distance let alone a mile, but if you want to qualify your statement after the fact, fair enough. If you mean accelerating from a standing start for a mile ,as in the Texas Mile for example, I'll concede that point (even though a 1000hp '13 GT500 hit 217mph in that event). But the '13-'14 GT500 does prove when not limited to a mile, speeds approaching 200mph are possible in an s197 with much less then 1000hp.

 

[TT5.0ca]

Well....if we are talking about shading meaning and qualifying statements, the GT500 ain't made 200 mph yet in a test either. "approaching" ain't quite "doing". From my skim of the article, 196 unaveraged, downhill, with a tailwind is even less like "doing", in my view.

Fastest I've gone, corrected/verified speed, 4 wheels or 2? 186 mph. Believe me, that will get your attention. It's otherworldly and I won't be repeating those experiments any time soon, certainly not outside a closed course.

I think we might have lost the plot here a little....

 

[Svtpilot]

Well Ford claims it made 202 on the Nardo Ring in Italy, but as far as I know it has not been run there by any of the automotive press.I agree "approaching" certainly is not the same as "doing" but it is the same as "getting close to." which are you words. The article you skimmed must have been a different test then the one posted the link to. The one I linked was done at the 5 mile oval at Chrysler's Proving Ground in AZ. They were not going down hill and they said nothing about a tailwind.However it is banked which allowed them to exit the corners at 190mph for the top speed runs. Correct, it was not averaged , the 196.06 mph was the best result of 3 attempts. You should watch it, I found it interesting and enjoyable
I guess we lost the plot a little, but there is nothing wrong with a friendly discussion about the top speed of our favorite cars, most threads here "evolve" as they go along.

 

[TT5.0ca]

I took another look. The decline ref's in the MT article, here:

"After strapping on GPS antennas, VBOXes, and GoPro cameras, it’s go time under ideal conditions: 64 degrees F and 15-percent humidity. The only issue is a slight headwind. It gives Pobst another thought — flip the Shelby around and run in the opposite direction to take advantage of the track’s slight decline. As with the tires, we don’t see any issue with his strategy, so we send him out."

The ref to tailwind actually comes from the C&D test of the same type:

"With a slight northwesterly breeze at our backs, the Shelby exited Chelsea’s north banking at 185 mph with more than a mile of wide-open straightaway to eat up the final 15 mph. Our VBox’s digital speedo crawled up: 186, 187, 188, 188.1 . . .

It went for another 2 mph, and that’s all there was. We entered the south banking at just below 191 mph, our knuckles as white as Himalayan peaks. The top speed: 189 mph, an average of both directions."

We talked about circumstances around the mile but, there are circumstances here that advantage the car and make a straightline shot at 200 on a flat road less likely, regardless of distance. These tests, and probably the supposed 200+ at Nardo take advantage of the old NASCAR run downhill from the corner trick and low friction surfaces to leverage the car's speed higher than it could manage on flat, street pavement.

It's still a worthy achievement but, people don't really get how hard it actually is to go truly straight line fast. People at Bonneville spend themselves into the poorhouse chasing a single mph on the flat.

 

[Svtpilot]

I guess we are talking about 2 completely different tests, and I guess you have no interest in watching the link I posted . They clearly state that the temps are over 100 degrees,not 64F in fact it is so hot they have to stop testing and try the following morning when it is cooler. There is no mention at all about wind direction or changing direction to take advantage of a decline. The Nardo Ring is exactly what the name says it is a ring, there are no corners to run downhill from since it is 1 giant 7.8 mile 4 lane banked 360 degree circle.
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_1084.html

 

[TT5.0ca]

Respectfully, I watched the vid but you brought up the mt test in your comments so I looked at that too. And the CD as well.

I think it matters that two internationally recognized mags couldn't confirm 200 with tests they designed to be as advantageous as possible. I'm definitely not as convinced a YouTube channel uses the rigour in testing.

 

[Svtpilot]

The video I brought up is from the MotorTrend Channel

 

[TT5.0ca]

Then what's the issue? I quoted from the full text of the mt article associated with this. I must be misunderstanding you, I'm sorry.

 

[Svtpilot]

No issue.No misunderstanding We were discussing the top speed of the s197 Mustang and you said to "to get close to 200mph in these cars you need close to 1000hp, they are that bad aerodynamically". I pointed out that the 13-14 GT500 is a 200mph car and doesn't have close to 1000hp, you told me I was wrong, I pulled a video off of the MT channel and linked it,that clearly shows a 2013 GT500 getting close to 200mph under less then ideal condition, (high temps and elevation) with a professional race car driver saying that under better conditions its a 200mph car, and I'm still wrong. Then you questioned the accuracy of the video I posted since it came from a Youtube channel. I pointed out that it is from MT's Youtube Channel . Its all good, not really important, I don't own a GT500, and my Boss can't go that fast.

 

[TT5.0ca]

It was a good discussion anyway and I was stretching a little too. one can do a lot in the right circumstances.

I don't think my '14 Gt has much above 160 in it either, uncorked. Maybe there is a "racetrack in Mexico" where I'll try it one day. Kinda feeling the need to watch my six after rolling my last Mustang in Sept.

 

[Svtpilot]

It is a good discussion. My hood starts shaking and looking like its gonna lift off at around 120-130. Maybe I'll get some hood pins and take a ride with you to that "racetrack" in Mexico

 

[TT5.0ca]

It is a good discussion. My hood starts shaking and looking like its gonna lift off at around 120-130. Maybe I'll get some hood pins and take a ride with you to that "racetrack" in Mexico

Hmm, so you get hood lift on your Boss? Is it a 12 or 13? I did on my 12 as well. I suggest the hood vents on the 13+ were possibly not for cooling but for stability. My 14 is more solid at high speed, though I haven't tested it fully.

 

[Svtpilot]

My car is a '12. The hood shakes at high speeds. I'm sure its not going to fly up or off but it is disconcerting.

 

[TT5.0ca]

You might be able to tame that by turning up the hood bumpers a little. Mine did this a bit but, the more disconcerting thing was the front end getting a little light and the decrease in steering authority. It certainly wasn't like the old basking-shark-mouth '68 coupe I had back in the day but, the symptom was there, had detectable effects and doesn't seem to be an issue with the '14.

 

[Svtpilot]

Thanks , ill try that.