WATs the true STOCK 1/4 ET??

[irvgotti]

i have a infinity 2005 g35 sedan.. i like it alot and its prettty quick i ran 14.4 100 MPH.. im thinking of trading it in for 2010 mustang soon but only if its significantly faster.. i want to know what these cars really put up Complete STOCK before i concider... M/T says 13.5 edmunds 13.7 R/T ,13.6 its hard for me to believe when i see at track ppl pulling 14.00. whats the real deal ? what can i real world expect from these cars HONESTLY?? ThanX

 

[NotQuik]

depends on the driver, weather, track prep, tires. People have gone as quick as mid to low 13's on dr's and everything else stock. My car trapped 104 with just an axleback and went 13.3. I have the mods listed in my sig which isn't much and exhaust is just for sound as the stock exhaust flows just fine and went [email protected] w/ 1.92 60' given on dr's an not such good track prep. IMO, i don't think it's a great idea to buy a car because one is quicker than the other in stock form. Get what YOU like, that's what aftermarket parts are for.... if you want to go even quicker.

 

[irvgotti]

well to me it means something cause it would be the only reason for me to ditch the g35.. cause the g35 is well rounded inside and out.. so speed is the game im looking out

 

[Five Oh Brian]

well to me it means something cause it would be the only reason for me to ditch the g35.. cause the g35 is well rounded inside and out.. so speed is the game im looking out

There are so many variables, that it is impossible for every GT to run the exact same 1/4 mile time. Same is true for G35's.

However, it is a safe assumption that an all-stock 05-09 GT with manual transmission and a decent driver, decent traction, and running near sea level in decent weather can run 13.40's to 13.60's at 102 to 105 mph in the 1/4 mile. Same circumstances, but an automatic transmission should yield 13.60's to 13.80's at 99 to 102 mph in the 1/4 mile.

So, if a typical G35 runs low 14's @ 100, and a typical 05-09 GT manual runs mid 13's at a few more mph than a G35, then I'd say that the Mustang is quicker than a G35, on average. However, a good driver in a G35 could beat a bad driver in a GT. But, taking the driver out of the equation, the Mustang should win much more often than the G35.

 

[o0Dan0o]

You may be disappointed by the mustangs suspension, coming from a G35. I drove my friends 350z, I don't know what the differences between it and the G35 but it made my mustang feel like an F-150. Just something to think about, you'd have to drop a few grand on the mustang to make it drive like a G35.
Dan

 

[NastyStang113]

I've seen a factory GT run 13.3 at Orlando Speed World.

 

[autumn_again]

it varies driver and track conditions. i need more track experience, but with 4.10s and a cold air intake i pulled off a 13.5 at 104 my first time ever to the track.

yesterday there was a modified GT at the track with a 14.0 dial in, didn't see what he was running just saw the time on his window.

but with more seat time i think i can pull off a 12.9 or better. i plan on going to different tracks where i can get more runs in and mess around with different launching techniques and etc.

 

[xtweakerx]

Yes everyone knows their are a couple freak stock mustangs that run good 1/4 mile times.

But in all honesty, BONE STOCK MUSTANGS on the average run 13.80-14.00 in the 1/4 mile at least down south they do.

Average as in 70% of mustangs on the road, yes you will have a few freak 30% mustangs that run quicker than 13.8 but not many honestly and most people will have HECK OF A TIME trying to hook on the stock tires..

 

[TBrad]

True stock 1/4 ET = Slow

 

[GreyDiesel]

I dont think it is a good idea to buy an entire new car just to shave a half second from your time. Instead, invest in some mods for the G35. I am sure they have some nice turbochargers that would rock your world more than a stock mustang. Modding is always more fun than anything stock. You have to keep in mind, when the engineers are designing and "perfecting" these cars, they have to make them drivable for any soccer mom who might accidentally buy them.

 

[maxima]

i ran a 13.6 at 100 in my stock 06 auto , with intake tune and 410s 12.9 at 106

 

[DiMora]

You may be disappointed by the mustangs suspension, coming from a G35. I drove my friends 350z, I don't know what the differences between it and the G35 but it made my mustang feel like an F-150. Just something to think about, you'd have to drop a few grand on the mustang to make it drive like a G35.
Dan

I dont think it is a good idea to buy an entire new car just to shave a half second from your time. Instead, invest in some mods for the G35. I am sure they have some nice turbochargers that would rock your world more than a stock mustang. Modding is always more fun than anything stock. You have to keep in mind, when the engineers are designing and "perfecting" these cars, they have to make them drivable for any soccer mom who might accidentally buy them.

You guys hit the nail on the head. The majority of Mustang sold are V6's with automatics. It is like 2/3 or 3/4 - I can't recall the exact stat. That makes GT's with V8's the exception and not the rule. Therefore we get rattly plastic interiors and a solid rear axle suspension that makes the car handle like a bloated F-150.

The G35 is balanced and refined, and was designed to be well rounded and not make an entry level price-point.

Me? I'll take the 'Stang because of its style and the aftermarket is strong. You can bolt on gobs of power and a serious suspension and end up with a car that can deliver a reckoning to would-be challengers.


The good news is the aftermarket is strong.

 

[erzats]

Autumn again, you went to e-town saturday? you Race or not?I was in PA at Tillman speed shop and detailed the car when i got home.Had i known i would have come down only a mile for me.

 

[metroplex]

The G37 Coupe and 370Z are very nice cars. Comparing them to the Mustang is like comparing a BMW 5 series to a Pontiac G8. I like the Mustang because it is affordable performance, but the 2010 Mustangs are like $2000 more than the 2005-2009 Mustangs.

 

[TheVat]

Stock for stock they are pretty close as the above posters stated. The seat of the pants meter might register a little more grunt from a GT because you've got a bellowing V8 in front of you versus a whining V6 (no offense to the 3.5 in your G35), and a less refined live axel versus and ind rear. The GT makes good low end torque versus your V6 that needs a little more revs to pull hard. The guys on these forums are above average drivers that can and do post times that the car is capable of. But most owners are not as good and will end up running 14+ in the quarter. If you're looking for the all arounder, the GT probably isn't for you. We like these cars because they are excellent rear drive musclecars that can take a lot of punishment through the drivetrain and are easy and realitively (sp?) inexpensive to modify. We consider it's platform not to be crude, but rather simple. Sorry to go off topic, so expect 13.8-14.0 / 100-102. However, spend about $1000.00 in basic bolt on's expect to put about 3-4 car lengths on the stock versions.

 

[metroplex]

I would recommend upgrading to a 370Z. The Synchro-Rev gearbox is pretty darn neat and the V6 makes more power than the V8 in the Mustang GT (330+). For the money, I'd look at a 370Z or G37 Coupe versus the Mustang GT Premium. They're all nearly $40,000 cars once you load up the Mustang GT with decent options.

If you can wait, see if Ford offers a real engine upgrade for MY2011. There's a chance the EcoBoost or Coyote V8 will make its way into the S197.

The modular V8 is on its way out, it's too antiquated (first released in 1991) and based on 80s engineering. The VCT was a good improvement but it cannot compete with direct injection, VCT, and VVT that more modern engines are offering.