05' Mustangs a Joke
05' Mustangs a Joke 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. 
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. 
Banned
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,636
Likes: 2
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?
Teching In
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
From: Delaware
Originally Posted by Stanger88
They perform about like the Mach 1's from a dig.
Trending Topics
Banned
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,636
Likes: 2
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 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Five Reasons the Camaro Was the Most Pivotal Player in the Pony Car Wars 2.0
Brett Foote
Originally Posted by Stanger88
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?
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.
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.
EDIT: yes the numbers ls1-450 had are also what i've seen.
Banned
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,636
Likes: 2
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.
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.
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.
Banned
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,636
Likes: 2
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.
TECH Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,660
Likes: 14
From: England
Originally Posted by Stanger88
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.
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.
Last edited by 300bhp/ton; Nov 3, 2005 at 05:25 AM.
Administrator
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 45,841
Likes: 5
From: Earth
Originally Posted by 99camarosupersport
what was laughable was him catching the rear end of my car. i think that really speaks for itself.
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.
TECH Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,660
Likes: 14
From: England
Originally Posted by unit213
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.
It looks a hell of a lot better than your car...and it's faster.
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.
12 Second Club
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
