Pretty cool that the Mustang has more power than a Tundra again....
Pretty cool that the Mustang has more power than a Tundra again....
DirtyBird222 wrote: Funny how the Camaro V6 had more horsepower than the Stang V8...hence why the Mustang got a new engine with more power. Why spend $28k on a Mustang when a $23k base V6 Camaro has just as much HP?
Because horsepower is not the be-all and end-all of performance. 
fornetti14 wrote: Funny how the new V6's have more power than the old V8's from the late '80's. Gotta love technology!
The new V6 has as much power as my '98 Cobra, 1 more forward gear, significantly better suspension, weighs only about 100 lbs more, gets another 5-10mpg, and all with only a 20 ft-lb deficit of torque.
It's pushing 80+ hp more than a 5.0 GT, 60 more than a 5.0 Cobra.
DirtyBird222 wrote: Funny how the Camaro V6 had more horsepower than the Stang V8...hence why the Mustang got a new engine with more power. Why spend $28k on a Mustang when a $23k base V6 Camaro has just as much HP?
Really? A direct injected, DOHC, 11.4:1 CR engine, that originally entered production 12 years after the original 4.6l mod motor came out makes more HP?
Damn, who would have ever guessed it.
The 5.0 wasn't a stop gap against the V6 Camaro, it's been in the works for a long time.
DirtyBird222 wrote: Funny how the Camaro V6 had more horsepower than the Stang V8...hence why the Mustang got a new engine with more power. Why spend $28k on a Mustang when a $23k base V6 Camaro has just as much HP?
Funny how many Camaros sold over the past decade, compared to Mustangs? 
I think it's somehere over 500k vs. zero.
E-
NVHEngr wrote: it is an all new motor. Ford was going to borrow a jaguar engine but couldn't do that since they wete sold
Your joking right, you really belive that?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Should they stop selling the Euro Focus as the C1 pltform is shared with Mazda and Volvo, and they better stop selling the Focus ST and RS as that uses the 5cyl Volvo engine!!!! Or many many more examples of platform and engine sharing. Also don't forget they sold Jag in 06, quite a lot of work has been done since then. Manufacturers share engines and technology all the time with much less links than Jag and Ford STILL have.
I don't believe Ford would ever borrow a Jaguar engine for the Mustang, at least not for any of the V8 cars.
Not that they'd ever admit to, at least 
Adrian_Thompson wrote:NVHEngr wrote: it is an all new motor. Ford was going to borrow a jaguar engine but couldn't do that since they wete soldYour joking right, you really belive that?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Should they stop selling the Euro Focus as the C1 pltform is shared with Mazda and Volvo, and they better stop selling the Focus ST and RS as that uses the 5cyl Volvo engine!!!! Or many many more examples of platform and engine sharing. Also don't forget they sold Jag in 06, quite a lot of work has been done since then. Manufacturers share engines and technology all the time with much less links than Jag and Ford STILL have.
Well, I do believe it since one of the engineers on the project told me this. I guess I shouldn't have used the word "borrow." It wasn't going to be the exact engine, but a derivative of a jag engine.
Believe what you will, but I'm just passing on information that was given to me.
If Ford would have put that ecoboost engine from the Taurus SHO in the new V6 mustang I would be all over it!
DirtyBird222 wrote: Funny how the Camaro V6 had more horsepower than the Stang V8...hence why the Mustang got a new engine with more power. Why spend $28k on a Mustang when a $23k base V6 Camaro has just as much HP?
Let's see, the Mustang weighs less, looks and sounds better, and will probably have a greater resale value (I know, chuckle) than the Camaro.
And of course, that's not even considering the aftermarket possibilities.
Pricing is out for the 2011 Mustang, the base GT is $29,645 with the new 5.0 motor, new 6-speed manual and the track pac is now standard; add the Brembo brake package, which comes with 19x9 wheels and the latest Pirelli PZero tires for $1695, 3:73 rear-end gears for $395 and a few aftermarket goodies like lowering springs, C/C plates and a good seat & harness and you'll be able to give M3 drivers fits on the track for under $40K.
You can view the 2011 price sheet in a pdf file here http://forums.themustangsource.com/showthread.php?t=479855
The Brembo package wheels look a lot like the Porsche GT3 wheels IMO. Here's the 2011 at the Detriot Auto Show last week, this one has the Brembo brake package
In reply to GR40RACER:
Now to have a better job in order to afford a $30k next year. Or wait 2 or 3 years and find them used for 15-20K
neon4891 wrote: In reply to GR40RACER: Now to have a better job in order to afford a $30k next year. Or wait 2 or 3 years and find them used for 15-20K
You're not the only one thinking 2-3 years down the road.
BTW, for you BMW guys that will squawk at my above statement, combined with Ford’s latest track pack, which is now standard equipment, the 2011 Mustang GT reportedly lapped Michigan’s GingerMan Raceway dead-even with the current BMW M3 — despite a 200 pound weight disadvantage 
Is Ford still using a MacPherson strut setup on the mustangs?
BMW still uses it on the M3...and it seems to work just fine there if that's where you're going.
Nope, just wondering.
The Mustang still uses a solid rear axle, for the time being at least...
Anyone, beside me, know how easy it is to take 200 pounds off a new Mustang in one afternoon? Yes, you get to keep your A/C 
I can think of a couple ways, but most involve having less interior than I would prefer
ultraclyde wrote: I can think of a couple ways, but most involve having less interior than I would prefer
Well, pulling the rear seat only save apx. 20 lbs. if you aren't willing to remove the belts and hardware, you can also have two front seats, they just won't be the heavy factory seats; that's all I was willing to sacrifice from the interior, but I did take out my A/C and I haven't missed it yet
Most significant weight reductions in the S197 Mustang don't involve the interior.
GR40RACER wrote: The Mustang still uses a solid rear axle, for the time being at least... Anyone, beside me, know how easy it is to take 200 pounds off a new Mustang in one afternoon? Yes, you get to keep your A/C
Grigg's SLA conversion and rear suspension package.
Too bad that also runs you another $9k.
Oh and the E92 M3 is 100lbs heavier than the new GT.
Well, sure, we'd all love to get the big kit from Griggs, but I haven't scratched off the right lotto ticket yet...
So, what's your magic? Do tell...
z31maniac wrote:GR40RACER wrote: The Mustang still uses a solid rear axle, for the time being at least... Anyone, beside me, know how easy it is to take 200 pounds off a new Mustang in one afternoon? Yes, you get to keep your A/CGrigg's SLA conversion and rear suspension package. Too bad that also runs you another $9k. Oh and the E92 M3 is 100lbs heavier than the new GT.
Actually, you can get the Griggs GR40SS package for the 2011 Mustang, which includes their torque arm and adjustable Koni coilover struts and shocks for $3,600, plus install if you can't do it yourself. This package, coupled with the Mustang's track pack, will help the 2011 handle exceptionally well, even w/o the SLA.
Looking on the Web, I see at least a 200lbs. diference between the two... The 2011 Mustang should weight apx. 3560lbs for the Base GT, adding the Brembo brake option will get it close to 3600lbs.; how much does the 2010 E92 M3 weigh?
Haven't been down a drag strip in ages, but had one run in an auto 5.0L convertible yesterday. 8.804 @ 85.97 over 1/8th.
Looks like a great motor and pretty compact for a DOHC V-type engine. I think they should've gone for the direct injection, though. It's "free" horsepower. A bucket tappet would still be better as well by lessening valvetrain friction and weight. Other than that, good job.
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/03/inside-line-dyno-tests-the-2011-ford-mustang-gt-50.html
You'll need to log in to post.
