[ds968]

Too funny : from a recent Forbes article, and featured on Yahoo's headlines : " Ford's Mustang GT500 packs a supercharged 5.4-liter V8 engine with 305 horsepower and 208 pound feet of torque " [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/huh.gif[/img]

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_cont...rs-under-50000/

Uhh, I don't think so.. although for a second my heart started beating faster and I was ready to run out to the highway with the 968 just waiting for a GT 500 "victim" to come along [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img]

I'm sure they misp[rinted the figures from the new "regular" Mustang.. but even for that one, only 208 ft/lbs of torque - less than a stock 968 ?!

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[jfrahm]

305hp/280tq for the Mustang V6, that'd probably whip a 968 handily. The V8 is a little more stout.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rhudeboye]

I raced a V6 mustang in my wife's V6 Camry. You wouldn't believe how bad I smoked him. We lined up at the next light. He sat beside me grinning. At green, he got a little chirp on his tires and sped off. He got the jump because I didn't think he wanted to run again after what just happen. I floored it and easily ran past him. EASILY! I'm guessing I passed him at 65 while he was approaching 50.

The V6 stang is slower then most 4 cylinders. I've mopped the floor with at least 3 of them. Now the GT500. Thats a different story. It's no vette but I wouldnt try an run with one... until I get my SC.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[jfrahm]

The new V6 is much more powerful than previous V6 mustang motors, it's an evolution of the 265 HP 3.7L motor from the MKS. Even if it's 500lb heavier than a 968 it will probably move a bit faster.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rxter]

Yep. The previous V6 was a real dog. 4.0L - same engine I had in my 97 Ranger. Chevy finally knocked some sense into Ford with the Camaro V6, and this is the response. Fast car, and cheap. I'll stick with the 968 though, thanks.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

last i read, the mustang was about 4000lbs - that's going to have a pretty large effect on how it drives - i miss the 2700lb mustangs

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[jfrahm]

Have they porked a Mustang up to 4000 lbs? I thought they were generally 3500-3700. A quick look shows the current 4.6L GT Convertible listed as 3601 lbs (without the driver and his bowling bag.) Hardtops are a bit lighter and 3400 for the V6 hardtop. Not too bad.

The claim is 3500 for the new V6 model. A 2011 V6 Mustang vs 968 would be a hell of a race.

I might go check these out, although the Mustang is too commonplace for me and a new car is a spectacular waste of money. Yeas ago I had a couple 80's mustangs, a turbo 4 and 5.0V8 and they were pretty good. Nowhere near as refined as a Porsche but decent.

-Joel.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Pauli]

http://www.zeroto60times.com/

There are not too many cars out there that can run w/ these Mustangs - They are running 4.4 0-60's, w/ 12.7 1/4 miles right off the showroom floor. You can add as little as a chip as my friend did, and shave off another .35 on 0-60. I posted the above site on another thread, but it's interesting to follow the history of some of the performance data. - The great Mach 1's w/ the solid 390 & the monster 427 Cobras, even the 289 Hi-Pro's and the 302 Boss were impressive for their time. Then the Shelby's ........ooohhhh the Shelby's.........

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Fox944]

Joel, Those Mustang SVO turbo's were pretty neat cars. It would be nice if they brought back a light weight stang with a Turbo 4.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rhudeboye]

What <b><i>new V6</i></b> are you guys talking about?
They seem to have the same issues in 2010 according to these 2 articles.

http://www.edmunds.com/ford/mustang/2010/review.html

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/09..._take_road_test

quote-
Although 210 hp isn’t much, neither is the V-6 Mustang’s 3421-pound curb weight. Acceleration is decent, at 6.6 seconds to 60 mph and the quarter-mile in 15.3 at 93 mph, but in a recent comparison test of the V-6 Hyundai Genesis and Chevrolet Camaro, both beat the Mustang through the quarter by about a second. And the Genesis’s base turbocharged inline-four matches the horsepower number of the Mustang’s six.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[jfrahm]

The 2011 Mustangs due out this fall. New motors. 305 HP V6 and 412 HP 5.0.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/mustang/

You know it's time to buy a supercharger when a base Mustang can put you on the trailer.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[firefish]

Having driven both the newish Corvette and the GT500 (together with 6,1L Challenger and the Camaro) both on the street and on the track it is clear to me that while the 968 lacks the power in a straight run all of the latter three are fat dogs in comparison. The 'vette however is a different story.
Heavy cars can feel nimble and light just cruising along but once you start pushing them, well, the pounds inevitably starts to show.
Guess I'm with Chapman on this one, skinny ladies are more fun.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[jfrahm]

Oh yeah I am not saying the hairdresser version of the new Mustang is going to be better than the 968 or more fun to drive, or better on the track. Scary though that it's almost certainly faster in a straight line and might even be faster on a track, depending on the track. Maybe not, even. If it makes it's way into a rental fleet I might have to autox one.

-Joel.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rhudeboye]

Oh, its not out yet.

Its pretty pathetic when you think about it. To put a V6 in a so called sports car and the most you pull out of it is 210HP. Its not even good on gas (21mpg). The Camry produces 270HP and we avg 30mpg and its not classified as a sports car.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.