99camarosupersport

iTrader: (6)

A couple weeks ago a guy in a brand new 05' yellow GT passed on me on the highway, lookin over and snickering as he drove past. so i had to show him he just wasted a **** load of money on a gay *** car. pop down to 3rd, pull up beside him, for whatever reason he decides he wants to start goin like 40 mph. so i slam 'er down to 2nd no horns were honked, i waited til he got on it, then as soon as i heard that terd suckin for power i nailed it, and started pulling immediately pulled 2 car lengths on him and then he wanted more, same thing happened. my car is a 1999 with high miles, and a brand new 05'Ford Mustang GT can't keep up. go chevy.

ls1wannabe

iTrader: (2)

Yeah for most modded ls1's they aren't anything to worry about.

aaron653

iTrader: (1)

stock dude stock

BLKWS.6

Stock the GT pulls low 13's in capable hands with 13.15 being the best time so recorded by Race Pages Magazine in a recent issue. With LT's and a CAI I bet it would be in the 12's. Thats pretty laughable though, eh? I mean, its a joke aint it?

99camarosupersport

iTrader: (6)

what was laughable was him catching the rear end of my car. i think that really speaks for itself.

BLKWS.6

Wait till the car is broken in and he learns to drive it, from a roll you will still kill him, but from a dig he should be a challenge if he can drive. They perform about like the Mach 1's from a dig.

TRMach1

For a very short distance. I've raced several 05/06 GT's, and the scenario is almost exactly the same every time. Through 1st gear, they hang with me, 2nd gear, they start to lose a little ground, 3rd gear, I pull away by multiple car lengths, and in 4th, they start to look like they put on the brakes! They seem to have a very weak mid-range and top-end compared to the Mach 1.

BLKWS.6

Their weak top end comes from the fact that after 5K rpm in certain gears the ECU no-longer adjusts the timing and it falls on its face. With a tune, they pull strongly up to the top, i know, not stuck but...they really should fix that issue.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

Huh? Paper numbers I've seen are 13.9 @ 104 MPH. Generally, that means that Joe Shmoe can run 14.5 @ 97 MPH. We're talking about a car that weighs 3,425# plus the driver with 300bhb (approx. 250 RWHP). Sorry dude, I'm with 99 CamaroSS, it's pretty laughable.

99camarosupersport

iTrader: (6)

i'll admit he did hang for a couple seconds until i hit 3rd then i was really pulling hard on him. just not impressed being as how old my car is and the high miles.
EDIT: yes the numbers ls1-450 had are also what i've seen.

BLKWS.6

the car makes around 280rwhp with a 5-speed and weighs about 3500. It pulled a 1.8 60' stock and ran 13.15 @99.9X mph as tested by Race Pages and they slipped the clutch from 4K and powershifted the 1-2 shift to achieve these results. Bone stock down to the paper air filter. Top end in the car is not great, but the suspension helps a lot on launch and they turn good 1/4 mile times with a good driver. One was also tested by another magazine at 4.9 0-60 and most magazines agree on 5.2-5.4 0-60.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

That's great. My point was that an average driver is not gonna run those kind of numbers. They must have very little drive train loss to be making 280RWHP. Either way, 250 or 280, it's no match. I have no idea why Ford strayed from the blown engines in the 03/04 models. IMO, it was a mistake.

99camarosupersport

iTrader: (6)

agreeing. even in all past mustang vs. camaro's in their respective years, the camaro has always had the edge. true if a camaro driver was average and the mustang driver was good it the stang' would probably have enough to win. i just think Ford and even GM could have both been a little more aggressive in their engines. although i guess thats what keeps the price down and lets average joes like us have bad *** cars.

BLKWS.6

87-92 the mustang trumped the F-bods. Also, the mustang is underrated. Actual numbers are close to 320/350 at the flywheel. And yeah, your average driver is going to pull mid/high 13's. Just like your average F-bod will pull low-mid 13's.

300bhp/ton

NO way are the new Mustangs overatted, at least no one I have ever seen claims so. Also 280rwhp is WAY too high unless you've got LTs, cat back and CAI and a tune.

Remember a Dynojet will show an easy 20+rwhp too high and should not be taken literally, so if it realy did make 280rwhp on a dynojet that'd be nearer 260rwhp on a Mustang dyno, which would put it smack back at the 300BHP level.

Also where you at with the 87-92 comparison?? Yes the 5.0 maybe mod friendly but low 15's to high 14's are all you're talking about stock. The 350 Fbody's back then where right in the same ball park statistically speaking.

unit213

What's really laughable is that you think all '05 GT's are slow because
you beat one that was most likely stock.

Here's one that belongs to a friend that recently went 12.13 @ 117mph.
It looks a hell of a lot better than your car...and it's faster.



You beat one car. For that I say good kill. However, you need to open
your eyes and understand that your car, which probably makes 330rwhp, is
nothing on the street...literally.

300bhp/ton

the new s197 Mustang's look fantastic, best looking new car in the past 10 years IMO.

Add a few mods:
Lt's
Cat back
CAI
CMP
4.10's
DR's or ET's
and a tune.

Should be making pretty decent power and be a solid mid/mid high 12 second car if driven correctly.

ScreaminRedZ

iTrader: (3)

Good kill. Personally I like the looks of the 05 GT except for the tail lights. They should have thinned them out a bit. However, I'd buy a Mach 1 any day over an 05 GT.

Ouchburns

Is that the one on 20's that I saw at Grand Bend Motorplex about 2 months ago that came in on a trailer? I thought I saw him do an 11.99, if it was him.

01ls1lover

iTrader: (18)

Ya i test drove a 2005 mustang GT convertable drove the **** out of it.. POS!!!!!! especially for 39k!!!!!!!!!!!