2005 Mustang GT vs. 2001 Trans Am (comparsion)
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 Mustang GT vs. 2001 Trans Am (comparsion)
I went over the my Grandfather's house last Sunday. Two weeks ago he just had his '05 GT arrive at the local dealership, he ordered in Dec. of '04. Anyway, he let me take it out by myself. It was impressive performance wise being an automatic. It had a nice powerband, like the LS1's, but lacking the extra horses. I personally think my '01 Trans Am would take it. Has anyone had any racing experiences versus a stock '05 GT?
#5
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grandview Missouri
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've slaughtered every 05 i've come across, before and after my header install. Havnt come across anything but minor bolt-on 05s though. There are a couple of procharged ones around here but i havnt tracked them down yet.
#7
10 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
Originally Posted by greatskiiiier
i think they are suppose to run 13.9 from the factory, only one way to find out
Trending Topics
#10
Administrator
Originally Posted by BriancWS6
LOL, that is far from my 12.99 lid/filter times. I think it's funny how Ford STILL hasn't built a car with a NA engine that can beat the 1997 GM technology but I like it
...and Ford doesn't NEED to considering Mustangs buried the f-bodies in sales. That's what it's all about.
#11
TECH Resident
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BriancWS6
LOL, that is far from my 12.99 lid/filter times. I think it's funny how Ford STILL hasn't built a car with a NA engine that can beat the 1997 GM technology but I like it
EDIT:
Originally Posted by unit213
Mach 1
...and Ford doesn't NEED to considering Mustangs buried the f-bodies in sales. That's what it's all about.
...and Ford doesn't NEED to considering Mustangs buried the f-bodies in sales. That's what it's all about.
EDIT: wow, i was just lookin at motor trend going back to my home page and i saw the 2005 Saleen S281 Mustang, so i figured what the heck, it only pulls a 13.5 1/4 with a price tag of 40K, sorry for being a dick unit, you were right, saleen is suppose to be fast, not as much as sales, wow
Last edited by greatskiiiier; 07-27-2005 at 10:25 AM.
#12
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (22)
Originally Posted by unit213
Mach 1
...and Ford doesn't NEED to considering Mustangs buried the f-bodies in sales. That's what it's all about.
...and Ford doesn't NEED to considering Mustangs buried the f-bodies in sales. That's what it's all about.
Which one? In 04 the Mach 1 was putting out 305hp/320ftlbs and weighed about 3460-3470... I could be wrong though, I'm kinda rusty on my Stangs But he's right about sales, Ford (still) kicks GM's *** in sales across the board, whether we have the fastest car or not
#13
STF veteran / 10 second club
iTrader: (14)
.
Haha ... okay, you guys be content with the slower cars that are everywhere (stangs) ... I'll be happy with my now rare, faster car.
P.S. Saleen S-281 is a GT with a body kit, no faster. The Saleen only gets fast with the SUPERCHARGED version. The Mach 1 is slightly slower or equal to an LS1, definately not faster. 05 GT is slower then the Mach from the 2-3 I have seen. Therefore, Ford has most certainly not produced a faster N/A car ... especially now that the 400hp N/A Vette/GTO's are out (For about the same price as the slow Saleens as well).
Haha ... okay, you guys be content with the slower cars that are everywhere (stangs) ... I'll be happy with my now rare, faster car.
P.S. Saleen S-281 is a GT with a body kit, no faster. The Saleen only gets fast with the SUPERCHARGED version. The Mach 1 is slightly slower or equal to an LS1, definately not faster. 05 GT is slower then the Mach from the 2-3 I have seen. Therefore, Ford has most certainly not produced a faster N/A car ... especially now that the 400hp N/A Vette/GTO's are out (For about the same price as the slow Saleens as well).
#14
I cant wait to see the test number on the 07 shelby GT500 Cobra. I love my T/A but that car is gonna be sick. The nostalgia is cool and the kickin your *** factor is pretty high also
#16
TECH Resident
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by A Str8 Up G
Oops, my bad.... the Mach 1 CAN beat 1997 technology... I was thinking about LS1's for some reason The LT's had 285hp/320ftlbs and were about the same weight I think. My mistake
#17
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by A Str8 Up G
Oops, my bad.... the Mach 1 CAN beat 1997 technology... I was thinking about LS1's for some reason The LT's had 285hp/320ftlbs and were about the same weight I think. My mistake
#18
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Mach 1 does not outperform the LS1 stock for stock. And when a Mustang gets beat by an f-body, he pulles over and says "Oh I don't care that I lost because Ford had higher mustang sales that GM's f-bodies..."?? The only people who care about that are the employees, owners, and stockholders of each company, so I don't know why that's what it's all about to unit.
#19
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grandview Missouri
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally if i had the money i'd drive a ford. The DOHC 5.4 litre with a factory twin screw variety, but its still a ford. I'm a fast car enthusiast, not a gm/ford guy. Although i am anxiously awaiting what chevy releases in the near future.
#20
i beat a 05 GT with my 98 Z28 M6 by about a car an a half. I had my Ttops down.... but he had 20s on. He had exhaust, and i had my whisper lid. Other than that we were both stock. Good race, but its still a little slower IMO.