Killed A 2011 Mustang 5.0
04-30-2011, 08:37 PM
#41
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chas. West Virginia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Posts All posts are appreciated, please do not hold back. Can I just run a straight out slicks. Which is the best and safe way to do a "Burnout". The stupid question is the one not asked, when you have people working the strip and you let a 2 ton machine get out of control. Also do cutouts work best after the cats or in front. 1 cutout or 2. I am really learning, and trying to come down. This experience is second only to getting laid.
04-30-2011, 09:01 PM
#42
Slicks do not last long at all on the street for any daily use, but the MT drag radials aren't as bad, but nittos last allot longer, then the flip side is nittos do not do so well at the track. With a manual, I roll through the water box and clutch out with a blip of the throttle to get the tires wet, then stop and rev to 4000 and come off the clutch to the breaks in 2nd gear, once I hear the tires start grippping I roll out and lay into the throttle for a second, then I am sully ready to stage.
05-01-2011, 09:01 AM
#43
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slicks do not last long at all on the street for any daily use, but the MT drag radials aren't as bad, but nittos last allot longer, then the flip side is nittos do not do so well at the track. With a manual, I roll through the water box and clutch out with a blip of the throttle to get the tires wet, then stop and rev to 4000 and come off the clutch to the breaks in 2nd gear, once I hear the tires start grippping I roll out and lay into the throttle for a second, then I am sully ready to stage.
05-01-2011, 01:25 PM
#45
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OP... Get some seat time. That one can HAUL! 
Think what it would've been like, if you had that build to boot! 
Indeed...
You're right, 12:1 CR, 57cc LS6 heads, pretty decent sized cam, and ported FAST with matching throttle body is basically just cam only. 
Sorry man, that's what you call a H/C/I setup. He got the win in the end, so all else doesn't really matter.
Sorry man, that's what you call a H/C/I setup. He got the win in the end, so all else doesn't really matter.
Indeed...
05-01-2011, 04:01 PM
#46
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dude..I think you should check you car's weight again... That is a really low weight for your 5.0. My MACH 1 is that weight. The new SN197 beginning in 05 weighed in more than SN95s. I know my MACH weighs less than your 5.0 by a good 150 to 200 lbs.
05-01-2011, 05:14 PM
#48
My shipping weight from ford was 3460ish... I know the fully loaded ones weigh a little more. Friends auto fully loaded weighed 38XX with him not in it. He weighs about 190lbs.
Last edited by ohioborn80; 05-01-2011 at 05:50 PM.
05-01-2011, 05:22 PM
#49
Just weighed my 2011 Mustang GT Base (300A) w/ Manual 6-Speed.
Only Option is 3.55 Gears. This is not a Spoiler Delete Car.
Dry Shipping Weight (MSO): 3461 lb
Curb Weight - Light (3 gal of Fuel): 3520 lb
Weight Distr: 1920 lb (54.5%) F / 1600 lb (45.5%) R
Curb Weight - Full (16 gal of Fuel): 3600 lb
Weight Distr: 1940 lb (53.9%) F / 1660 lb (46.1%) R
That was on a Certified Scale that weighs individual axles and total seperately.
Should be accurate +/- 10 lb.
Take away the heavy rims which i did, some suspension upgrades that dropped weight, the 40lbs for spare tire and jack...Really easy get down to 3640 with me in it. I know when weighed it rims i had on was about 13lbs lighter each as well. Thats was not even with skinnies up front...White one i posted video of has his down to 35XX with cage.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...tweight-92169/
http://forums.themustangsource.com/f...weight-483644/
Only Option is 3.55 Gears. This is not a Spoiler Delete Car.
Dry Shipping Weight (MSO): 3461 lb
Curb Weight - Light (3 gal of Fuel): 3520 lb
Weight Distr: 1920 lb (54.5%) F / 1600 lb (45.5%) R
Curb Weight - Full (16 gal of Fuel): 3600 lb
Weight Distr: 1940 lb (53.9%) F / 1660 lb (46.1%) R
That was on a Certified Scale that weighs individual axles and total seperately.
Should be accurate +/- 10 lb.
Take away the heavy rims which i did, some suspension upgrades that dropped weight, the 40lbs for spare tire and jack...Really easy get down to 3640 with me in it. I know when weighed it rims i had on was about 13lbs lighter each as well. Thats was not even with skinnies up front...White one i posted video of has his down to 35XX with cage.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...tweight-92169/
http://forums.themustangsource.com/f...weight-483644/
05-01-2011, 05:41 PM
#51
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see a difference with weight removal, but that ain't gonna bring another GT's weight UP unless you put your stuff in that car.
05-01-2011, 05:48 PM
#52
Lemme get this straight... Your 2011 GT weighs 3460...minus some since you've scaled it at 3640 with you in it... minus 215 brings that down to 3425, but your friend has one that weighs some 500 lb more, tipping the scales at 3900+ sans driver... I can't see it. Even the info on the last linked page shows less than 200 lb difference between manual and automatic.
I can see a difference with weight removal, but that ain't gonna bring another GT's weight UP unless you put your stuff in that car.
I can see a difference with weight removal, but that ain't gonna bring another GT's weight UP unless you put your stuff in that car.
Also that page shows less then 200lb difference of base models not loaded models.
His was loaded. Nav, all fancy lights every where, the shaker 1000 system, glass roof, which does weigh more the regular roof. He had a bigger wing, side scoops, hood scope. Leather, power seats, etc etc.
And my bad his was 38XX not 39XX..His was with full tank gas also.
05-01-2011, 05:58 PM
#53
His was closer to 3900 then a flat 3800 though..Once start adding power everything, amp, subs, and all that crap it adds up fats over a base model.
If look a base model with full tank gas weighs 3600. That still pretty light when comparing to competition. Camaro and then the tank Chally.
My goal is get my car down to 3400ish with me in it. Shouldnt be to hard. I will be switching seats, k member, radiator support bar, front sway bar delete. Drive shaft. And few other things.
If look a base model with full tank gas weighs 3600. That still pretty light when comparing to competition. Camaro and then the tank Chally.
My goal is get my car down to 3400ish with me in it. Shouldnt be to hard. I will be switching seats, k member, radiator support bar, front sway bar delete. Drive shaft. And few other things.
05-01-2011, 06:46 PM
#56
10 Second Club
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Royal Palm Beach FL.
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you know what I found the most surprising when I go to the track and see these new 5.0's running great times? It's not the look on the camaro clubs faces when they see a basic bolton naturally aspirated pony car running stout times: it's the worried look on all the mustang owners faces. Especially the supercharged crowd that is running near or at the same times as a bolton/tune 5.0 does. I **** you not, every one of the guys that has dropped serious coin on mods on there older stangs get that worried "oh **** I bettter mod up more" look. The stock to basic mods mustang guys, to a man, talk about trading there cars in on one. lol
05-01-2011, 07:18 PM
#57
Teching In
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Indy
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honestly I have yet to loose to a bolt on 5.0, and there is alot more potential in my set up, and the sky is the limit with my new motor. I always feel a little better if I get beat by a Ford then beat by any other brand anyhow. Older 4V motors once built can easily run with the new 5.0's. I do agree S/C stock 5.0 vs S/C stock 4.6 4V is an easy win for the 5.0 but once you are over 600RWHP both motors have to be built, and it evens out.
05-01-2011, 09:05 PM
#58
Honestly I have yet to loose to a bolt on 5.0, and there is alot more potential in my set up, and the sky is the limit with my new motor. I always feel a little better if I get beat by a Ford then beat by any other brand anyhow. Older 4V motors once built can easily run with the new 5.0's. I do agree S/C stock 5.0 vs S/C stock 4.6 4V is an easy win for the 5.0 but once you are over 600RWHP both motors have to be built, and it evens out.
05-01-2011, 10:17 PM
#59
10 Second Club
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Royal Palm Beach FL.
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They haven't been around long enough to have their reliability in question. They have cast pistons and 11+to1 compression which is not a good recipe for boost. Anything over 650 RWHP on a stock 5.0 is a time bomb, just my opinion.
Last edited by Newskool Mach; 05-01-2011 at 10:23 PM.
05-01-2011, 11:45 PM
#60
But this also why they make the boss engine..Already forged internals. And can be bought from Ford already..Know a guy has one putting in the auto 5.0...Guy with white one in video matter fact...He waiting on a big stall to drop the motor in..