ThisBlood147

Nice little chop here. This is what Ford needs to build.........a new Mach 1. Just drop in the new DOHC 5.0 making 400+hp. Don't let the new Camaro have all the street cred.

(Maybe trim down on the chin spoiler a wee bit...)

Johnnystock

iTrader: (6)

Older looks better than this^

Mystic 98 TA

iTrader: (4)

For What It's Worth:

I saw two 2010 Mustangs at the SF Auto Show on Friday A V6 coupe and a GT Convertible. It looks a LOT better in person. It made me want my old 69 POS Coupe back from my step-dad.

MY Observations: (biased obviously because they're MINE)

-The ***-end of the car actually looks smaller than the current GT in person. The Pictures i've seen do it no justice.

-The front end looks very nice. All of the lines are distinctive. It looks a little smaller than the 2010 Camaro (prototype) that was at the show. Headlights look good compared to the 05's. The chin looks good from the front, and a little iffy from the side.

-The 2010 Mustang looks almost sinister compared to the the 05+ Ponys. The 05-09's look a little bit like they have down syndrome to me. I got the same evocative feeling from the 2010 that I get when I see a TA. Like the car actually has a soul.

Conclusion: I like the new looks. I still like the looks of the Camaro a little more. If the 2010 Mustang comes out with a 400hp version at a reasonable/comparable price to the Camaro... I'll have to consider one. I'll need to compare looks, price, out-of-the-box performance, and the cost-effectiveness of modifying one when the car is actually released, but I'd consider one if it had 400+ hp

Boostedmaro08

Thank you whitew01ws6 I was waiting for someone to say it looked like the new accord rear maby there helping honda and hondas helping them lol hey when struggling pull together but hey pull the big 3 together not the doing fine..

kennyxg

iTrader: (1)

Wow that looks nice! they need to make a Mach1. I would hate to see how much $ Ford would ask .

Slp2002Z28

yes pretty funny! but I still take my new 07 gt over my old 2002 z28 any day!!

caseypayne69

jeremy02
"Hahahaha...Ford's top of the line V8 pony car is in competition with GMs base 6 cylinder pony car."

We all know that the camaro V6 with 300 hp probably won't even hang with a stock 99-04 Gt 260 hp. Its torq and hp curve probably suck and look at 300 hp 350Z's that hang dead even with th 99-04 GT.

sway99bird

iTrader: (22)

nope i think i'm gonna have to pass

JD_AMG

Looks pretty flat to me...
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en..._LLT_CTS_n.pdf
Its supposed to run mid 14s, which is enough to hang with those GTs.

caseypayne69

Good thing 99-04 GT's rund high 13's to low 14's. And 05 GT's are low 13's cars. Man they better watch out for the v6 Camaro.

The v6 camaro's competition is the 350Z which will probably out handle it. The new Mustang with 210 hp runs mid 14's so shouldn't GM feel ashamed that 300 hp v6 runs the same?

flyinmedic

iTrader: (1)

I'll stick with my vette

ThisBlood147

The V6 Camaro isn't meant to compete with the 350Z......that's a total apples to oranges comparison. A 2 seater sportscar vs a base motor 4 seater ponycar. And I think you're being a little optimistic with the times on the 4.0 Stangs........they're more like mid to low 15 sec cars stock.

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

caseypayne

I love your logic. Posting the absolute fastest times achieved by 05+ gts and quoting gms estimate for the v6 camaro....how priceless.

05 gt's are 250-260rwhp stock and weigh as much or more than an ls1 f-bod. Hardly a consistent low 13 second car...cmon now. I see most mid to high 13's all the time...rarely are they low 13's.

I agree an 05+ gt should beat a new v6 camaro for sure. But the v6 camaro will surely spank the v6 mustang...which is what matters. Will you try and argue that 90hp cant make up for 300 pounds with plenty to spare?....good luck with that.

so with your logic if the 210 hp v6 mustangs are getting mid 14's then a v6 camaro should be able to get 13's all day long with good driving. Which i dont doubt

JD_AMG

Maybe brand new, on a perfect day with a perfect driver. Most of the ones I see run high 14s/low 15s...
Never mentioned the 05s or newer.

The V6 Camaro comes in at a base price of $22,000, a base 350Z is right at $30,000, with the new 370Z being a touch over $30,000. Thats Camaro SS territory.

The 05+ Mustang V6 run 15s:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...cs+page-2.html
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ng_v_6_feature

BLUE OVAL TURBO

REMEMBER MAGAZINE TESTERS CAN'T DRIVE .

caseypayne69

Motortrend pulled a 13.1 with an auto 2005 GT. Their first test of one. Yea I was wrong on the v6 210 hp stang its I suppose a 15's car. I'm going on based on published stats not what joe the plumber did at such and such dragstrip. And going by PUBLISHED numbers the 99-04 GT has nothing to fear of the mighty Allah v6 GM Camaro coming in 2010.

UltraZLS1, the New GT still weighs less then the 4th Gen F-body what are you smokin. Mustangs have always been lighter since at least the foxbody era. My "weak" GT with ME in it is 3450 lbs and mines fully loaded minus no convertible top or automatic and yet probably weighs less then your car. GM makes good engines, but as can see Ford has been doing better, better as in lighter, at building the frames the engines drop in.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
Convertible at 3690

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
2005 Saleen with extra weight added to the car. 3574 So it would be safe to the 05-09 GT is 3500 give or take options.


http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...omparison.html
1999 Pontiac Firehawk SLP 3470 (est.) I'm willing to bet it weighed more but who knows.
"When it came to the SLP Firehawk, something went wrong with our cubic-inches-are-king analogy. The LS1 measures right under 350 cubic inches, just enough to qualify it for duty in the mid-pack Formula 350 model back in '69 or '71. But bedecked with the latest engine-management technology, backed by a Borg-Warner T-56 six-speed manual transmission, and working through an architecturally similar (though obviously 25 years more modern) suspension, the LS1 proved to be the Little Engine That Could. Zero to 60 came up in a flamethrowing 5.1 seconds, with a best quarter-mile run of 13.6 seconds at 104.5 mph. With the production Ram Air system in place, the 'Hawk would probably nip into the fours on a 0-60 mph and knock another tenth or two off the quarter mile."

13.6 qtr, yes I know they probably can run a hell of alot faster. I'm sure they are high 12's cars. But my point is MT pulled a 13.1 with the 05 GT auto. Sure different weather, track etc. Just stop treating ur overall car like GOD just cause the engines lightier and smaller is diameter.

Thats right blue oval mag test can't drive Cause here' proof with the 99 325 hp Firehawk pulling a mid 13 while a 300 hp and 25 less torq 05 GT that weighs maybe 50 lbs more pulled a 13.1. GM better engine yea, Ford better everything else? Yes.

Don't get me wrong JD AMG i'd trade cars with u in a heart beat, manly cause i've owned a firebird and I love the color of yours.

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

My car weighed 3297. I didnt know the new gts were lighter than a 4th gen.

Even so...im sure it isnt a difference worth mentioning.

I never said they hadnt hit low 13's I said it isnt common. And it is not.

They still havent caught up to a 1998 camaro.

Learn to live with it.

Is your only goal on this site to convince yourself of your mustang ownership?

All I ever see from you is an attempt to go from post to post and try to make everyone think the mustang is fast. how old are you?

You got a link to that test?...all I could find was this blistering 13.6 at a trap slower than an lt1.(99 LOL!) Motortrend pulled a 13.5 with the manual in another article at an amazing 103...now we are catching lt1s
Are you just pulling stuff out of your ***?

http://www.mustangforums.com/forum/2...automatic.html

BLUE OVAL TURBO

They still havent caught up to a 1998 camaro . Caught up in terms of what???

caseypayne69

Well, I can tell you Camaro's haven't beat Mustangs in general daily ride quality, rear visibility, interior quality or components, quietness of ride. But yea the 4th gens out handle and out run most any GT, notice I said GT. In 99-01 I'd perfer the Cobra IRS over the Camaro and well I'd perfer the 03/04 Mach 1 or Cobra over any Camaro. But 4th Gens are cheap now, and man I can't help to search for used ones. I'd really like a T/A.

Things I wish the Mustang had that the F-body does:
T-tops, affordable aftermarket parts, cleaner engine bay to work in though I hear the back two spark plugs are a pain. I'd really like a midnight blue TA right now. I wanted a Vette for so long, but since I have a daughter now I'd rather have a nice four seater with a nice V8.

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

Blue oval

We were talking 1/4 mile performance...and the 2010 gt still wont take an ls1 f-bod stock for stock. Interior, visibility, comfort whatever is all an opinion...and it isnt personally what I look for in a sports car.

I like a car that is fast off the showroom and cheap/easy to modify that responds well to mods. therefore IMO the ls1 f-bod is the best thing since the mustang 5.0.


BTW is that your car in your sig by your SN? Looks good. A nice clean fox body is always nice. I really like the 93 cobra spoiler on them.