'05 GT at the track
08-06-2004, 12:02 AM
#23
TECH Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DTYSON
I disagree. Atleast Ford makes an affordable rear drive sports car.
08-06-2004, 12:03 AM
#24
TECH Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ross87t
I bet most of the 5spds w/ good drivers will run sub 13.50 at 103+.
08-08-2004, 09:28 PM
#25
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (27)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas/Houston
Posts: 1,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ross87t
They will run faster than that. Wait until they are out. I bet most of the 5spds w/ good drivers will run sub 13.50 at 103+.
We don't know anything about that run. He could have missed 3rd, let out of it early, etc.
Ross
We don't know anything about that run. He could have missed 3rd, let out of it early, etc.
Ross
08-08-2004, 09:42 PM
#26
Administrator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by solid95z
Maybe you guys should consider all the factors before talking all that ****.
and some cant. 
08-12-2004, 10:30 AM
#29
Originally Posted by unit213
I could give a **** less about all the factors. I drove one. It's a turd.
08-12-2004, 09:05 PM
#30
TECH Resident
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cornelius, NC
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
video didn't work for me. my pal with a BONE stock mg lt1 ran better then that his first time at the track and that was 90+ degrees and near100% humidity. personally i think that the mustang has a little more in it, but damn 96mph is pathetic for a 300hp car. stock gt's with 260hp trap higher mph then that!
08-12-2004, 10:41 PM
#31
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't count on 13's ... i have had the opportunity to drive a few pre-production units with less than impressive results. Powertrain is weak and 300 HP is a generous rating .. RWHp is up only 10 from the previous 04 GT. Motor is overly complicated and geared toward comfort and not performance ... automatic tuned just right for your mom :/
08-13-2004, 05:56 AM
#32
Administrator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by ross87t
Didn't you drive an auto trans. "tester" car in the rain? Who knows what kind of programming that car had. It's only purpose on the road could have been to test real world wear and tear on the suspension, or on the interior pieces.
08-13-2004, 06:40 AM
#33
the thing is, Ford doesn't care to make them faster. they are simply content to put out the 300HP power rating for the people that just look at the HP rating instead of the overall package. the vast majority of people buying them don't realize that the weight of the car (among other things) greatly contribute to how fast the car is.
and from a purely business standpoint, i don't blame them. why would they want to increase horsepower on the mustangs by a large amount, causing an increase in price that will keep people from buying them? there is no incentive, because there is not really any major competitor in the price range for them to want/need to beat.
i'd say probably 85% - 90% of people buying the mustang are either older people that are reminded of the mustang they used to have (or wanted to have) when they were younger, women that just want one for the name recognition, or college kids who have them bought for them by their parents to go off to school in, with no intention of modifying it at all, or maybe just very lightly.
and from a purely business standpoint, i don't blame them. why would they want to increase horsepower on the mustangs by a large amount, causing an increase in price that will keep people from buying them? there is no incentive, because there is not really any major competitor in the price range for them to want/need to beat.
i'd say probably 85% - 90% of people buying the mustang are either older people that are reminded of the mustang they used to have (or wanted to have) when they were younger, women that just want one for the name recognition, or college kids who have them bought for them by their parents to go off to school in, with no intention of modifying it at all, or maybe just very lightly.
08-13-2004, 07:53 AM
#34
Originally Posted by unit213
It was a FEU2 build car for the VP of design. It wasn't setup for testing purposes. I had the car for about 15 minutes before it rained. It was an auto tranny. It doesn't make that much of a difference. It was a mid 14 second car at best.
I just don't get the 96mph trap speed. Something is wrong their. A stock 04 can probably run 100-101mph.
08-13-2004, 09:01 AM
#35
STF Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 3,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe that was an automatic car (at the track in the video).
I personally don't mind seeing Ford come out with a slow car. Makes my life easier.
I personally don't mind seeing Ford come out with a slow car. Makes my life easier.
Last edited by 99-LS1-SS; 08-13-2004 at 09:29 AM.
08-13-2004, 09:04 AM
#36
Administrator
Thread Starter
I posted about the '05 GT that I drove a few months ago. I'm telling you guys, it would barely break the tires look in the rain. Yes, it was an auto tranny...but look at the difference between an A4 LS1 and a M6 LS1. It's about 2 tenths at the track.
Am I (a 'stang owner) fighting LS1 owners about the power of a GT?
Am I (a 'stang owner) fighting LS1 owners about the power of a GT?
08-13-2004, 09:30 AM
#37
Originally Posted by unit213
I posted about the '05 GT that I drove a few months ago. I'm telling you guys, it would barely break the tires look in the rain. Yes, it was an auto tranny...but look at the difference between an A4 LS1 and a M6 LS1. It's about 2 tenths at the track.
Am I (a 'stang owner) fighting LS1 owners about the lack of power of a GT?
Am I (a 'stang owner) fighting LS1 owners about the lack of power of a GT?
Last edited by unit213; 08-13-2004 at 09:43 AM.
08-13-2004, 09:49 AM
#38
TECH Addict
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by unit213
I posted about the '05 GT that I drove a few months ago. I'm telling you guys, it would barely break the tires look in the rain. Yes, it was an auto tranny...but look at the difference between an A4 LS1 and a M6 LS1. It's about 2 tenths at the track.
Am I (a 'stang owner) fighting LS1 owners about the power of a GT?
Am I (a 'stang owner) fighting LS1 owners about the power of a GT?
I have to go with your interpretation. But, I hope that Ford dumps some more ponies in the new GT for next year. Anything like another Shelby or Boss with this new design? I do not recall reading anything.
In 2 years I will be considering another V8 and this Stang could be it for me...
Looks pretty good IMO as far as appearances, I saw one drive by yesterday and looks pretty good.
**** edit****
Nevermind. I found this in a Car and Driver earlier this year:
Martens also has an idea of where the next SVT Cobra is headed: “We have to have a Cobra that is world-class level. The old Fox platform couldn’t deliver that; this one can.” Expect a bigger, broader separation between Mustang GTs and SVT Cobras, he says. BMW’s M cars are serving as inspiration; hence, the next Cobra will have to have an independent rear suspension, he says.
“It has to. The expectation in this category is for a much more refined product.” Also likely: supercharging and a substantial increase from the current Cobra’s 390 horsepower. Ford has set no firm price ceiling, Martens says. “The only restriction is that you have to build it on the [Mustang] line, and the quality has to be there.” —AR
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=3
Last edited by ActionJack; 08-13-2004 at 10:01 AM.