Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55

05+ Mustang GT Vs. 98 T/A

This is a discussion on 05+ Mustang GT Vs. 98 T/A within the Kill Stories forums, part of the Racing Forums category; Yea, if you drive the car like a normal person, you get decent gas. But with our cars, its fun ...

  1. #21
    What I do? SHines-IT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    FL, USA
    Age
    27
    Posts
    1,545
    2011 Prius

    Yea, if you drive the car like a normal person, you get decent gas. But with our cars, its fun to get a little playful...

  2. #22
    Lost to a stock convertible Mustang? Most of those run around a 14.0 from the factory.

    I'm guessing having the A/C on killed you.

  3. #23
    SS#430 1 of 74 7camaro7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,754

    Pewter
    02SS6spd VERT!

    Quote Originally Posted by fox1x View Post
    Ya know, it's unbelievable to try and talk to someone about sports cars gas mileage. It always turns into a bullshit arguement. I know several people with newer vettes and camaros getting good MPG's. Even my brothers stang would get 28+ MPG (2006 MGT)on the highway. The mindset is these V8's are gas guzzlers. I'm impressed how well they do. But when someone asks and you tell them you get the "yeah right" look .. or the , you must be figuring it wrong comment. Whatever... let them think what they want
    exactly
    Quote Originally Posted by Superluminal View Post
    Lost to a stock convertible Mustang? Most of those run around a 14.0 from the factory.

    I'm guessing having the A/C on killed you.
    a trunk full of A/Cs and bricks and towing a dump truck at the same time maybe

  4. #24
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Superluminal View Post
    Lost to a stock convertible Mustang? Most of those run around a 14.0 from the factory.

    I'm guessing having the A/C on killed you.

    Na,,,,the A/C shuts down at anything over 4,000 rpm or more than 90% throttle angle.
    That's how it is in the stock programming if memory serves, because I have since changed mine to shut down sooner.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Na,,,,the A/C shuts down at anything over 4,000 rpm or more than 90% throttle angle.
    That's how it is in the stock programming if memory serves, because I have since changed mine to shut down sooner.
    Then, ouch.

  6. #26
    KACHME 001CamaroSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Glendale AZ
    Age
    30
    Posts
    180

    Silvaa
    2007 Corvette

    well an 05 shouldnt be a problem, but be warned the '10's are quick, for the first time in my life I'm a bit impressed with Ford...still fairly low hp numbers, but quick. Attributed to light weight and gear ratios stock for stock theyve finally built a mustang that can beat the 02 camaro. Problem is the new camaro is the same price as that mustang with 425hp, and it's yet again a no brainer. Or I'd just buy a used vette and really beat the stang. Anyways, back on topic, 05 stang should lose to you all day, especially the heavier vert

  7. #27
    Senior Member karpetcm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Tujunga, CA
    Posts
    1,646

    White
    01 Camaro 6speed

    05 Stangs consistantly pull about 260-265 rwhp, yes sometimes a bit higher but thats what ive mostly seen. I can see if they go up against a 98-00 A4 Z28 thats stock it might keep up for a bit and given if there is traffic it would look dead even or whoever hits the gas first might win in a short race. The 260-265 rwhp is still shy of the 98-00 models and i think they will usually pull about 280 rwhp atleast from a A4 tranny, ofcourse ive seen higher numbers as well. So going up against a manual tranny stang sure its somewhat close.

    The newer stangs 2010 probably have about 10-15 more RWHP with the option to get the better gearing or comes with better gearing it makes a nice difference. As said above, its no comparison in power to the new camaro and even if we compare it to the 01-02 LS1's there still short on the RWHP and RWTQ and they've had several years already on the LS1's. The new stangs dont look too bad, i just cant get over that big plastic piece at the bottom of the rear bumper. It sticks out way too much, i mean i know our cars are mostly plastic but damn that thing is in your face ugly.

  8. #28
    Senior Member mrr23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    orlando, fl
    Posts
    7,134

    dark bowling green
    2000 corvette

    Quote Originally Posted by shady milkman View Post
    well that is probbally why..your damn near backwards on your mods...gotta get air in..before you get air out..but why a fast ? with the mods you have..the fast isn't needed..get your self a good lid, and a ls6 and a tune and watch how the car will wake up.
    not really. if you can't get it out, how can you get it in?

  9. #29
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by mrr23 View Post
    not really. if you can't get it out, how can you get it in?
    damn it rob!

  10. #30
    Senior Member mrr23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    orlando, fl
    Posts
    7,134

    dark bowling green
    2000 corvette

    Quote Originally Posted by shady milkman View Post
    damn it rob!
    kinda like eating, if you can't take a crap, you can only eat so much.

  11. #31
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by mrr23 View Post
    kinda like eating, if you can't take a crap, you can only eat so much.
    i would say our intake tract(airbox) is more of a restriction then our exhaust..but yes you're right

  12. #32
    Member Camarofan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    316

    Black
    05 mustang GT modded

    Quote Originally Posted by SHines-IT View Post
    But not impressed it took all these years for Ford to catch up.
    I wouldn't put it that way necessarily. They just never had a need to catch up in power due to sales. The 5.0 coming out with 400hp/400tq shows they could've anytime they wanted to, actually.

  13. #33
    Member Camarofan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    316

    Black
    05 mustang GT modded



    Interesting, trust me. Times @ 5880ft above sea level

  14. #34
    Member NoscamaroSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Durant, Okla
    Posts
    737

    NBM
    2002 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by Camarofan View Post
    The 5.0 coming out with 400hp/400tq shows they could've anytime they wanted to, actually.
    No, not really, there have been many developments in technology and engines since the first 4.6's rolled off of the line. Thats like saying that since GM released a 638 hp LS9 that they couldve released it 10 years ago.
    02 Camaro
    PRC Stg 2.5 5.3's, Futral F14, PP Typhoon intake, True duals, Performabuilt tranny, & 3500 convertor, HSW plate kit.
    *Old Time* 10.90@ 125mph

  15. #35
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    especially in head development and valve train

  16. #36
    Member Camarofan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    316

    Black
    05 mustang GT modded

    Quote Originally Posted by NoscamaroSS View Post
    No, not really, there have been many developments in technology and engines since the first 4.6's rolled off of the line. Thats like saying that since GM released a 638 hp LS9 that they couldve released it 10 years ago.
    Well, take the 4.6 pre s197's for example. Ford put a 4valve in there, and it was nice. The Mach's give you guys a very good run. LS1 displacement is going to win out, but it's a good match for you. What do alot of us do when we want more Power? We find a way to get more air and fuel in the engine. Raising displacement is one way of doing that. Ford bumps up the 4.6's to 5.7's, and we've got a debate. They still don't have the displacement as the new Camaro, yet 400hp and 400tq. If anything, the LS2's should be more with today's technology. Having said all that, any car manufacturer can do what they want with displacement, etc.... Ford tries to give you a muscle car AND a fuel effiecient car. GM gives you displacement and power, they don't give a shit.
    Last edited by Camarofan; 08-27-2009 at 10:04 PM.

  17. #37
    Member c5z28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    8,120

    On your ass flashing
    my highbeams

    Quote Originally Posted by Camarofan View Post
    Well, take the 4.6 pre s197's for example. Ford put a 4valve in there, and it was nice. The Mach's give you guys a very good run. LS1 displacement is going to win out, but it's a good match for you. What do alot of us do when we want more Power? We find a way to get more air and fuel in the engine. Raising displacement is one way of doing that. Ford bumps up the 4.6's to 5.7's, and we've got a debate. They still don't have the displacement as the new Camaro, yet 400hp and 400tq. If anything, the LS2's should be more with today's technology. Having said all that, any car manufacturer can do what they want with displacement, etc.... Ford tries to give you a muscle car AND a fuel effiecient car. GM gives you displacement and power, they don't give a shit.
    Wait fords get good mpg's I kid I kid I know they don't.

  18. #38
    Member Camarofan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    316

    Black
    05 mustang GT modded

    Quote Originally Posted by c5z28 View Post
    Wait fords get good mpg's I kid I kid I know they don't.
    A 4.6 will get alot better MPG's than a 6.2. You didn't know that????

    Ford is looking at different things when they build their Mustang, that's all I'm saying. They do well enough with the 4.6. If they put a 6 liter in their GT's, you'd be silly to think you would have the same advantage as you always have had.

  19. #39
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    Quote Originally Posted by Camarofan View Post
    Well, take the 4.6 pre s197's for example. Ford put a 4valve in there, and it was nice. The Mach's give you guys a very good run. LS1 displacement is going to win out, but it's a good match for you. What do alot of us do when we want more Power? We find a way to get more air and fuel in the engine. Raising displacement is one way of doing that. Ford bumps up the 4.6's to 5.7's, and we've got a debate. They still don't have the displacement as the new Camaro, yet 400hp and 400tq. If anything, the LS2's should be more with today's technology. Having said all that, any car manufacturer can do what they want with displacement, etc.... Ford tries to give you a muscle car AND a fuel effiecient car. GM gives you displacement and power, they don't give a shit.
    i'd say fords new 5.0 is going to suffer from bad drivetrain loss, and have 325 RWHP

    if ford was trying to give you a muscle car and be fuel efficient they should have just put an Lsx in the mustang--- the 4.6's are really no better on fuel anyway.

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    3,261

    Arctic White, red/gray
    1997 Corvette, 92 Typhoon

    Quote Originally Posted by Camarofan View Post
    A 4.6 will get alot better MPG's than a 6.2. You didn't know that????

    Ford is looking at different things when they build their Mustang, that's all I'm saying. They do well enough with the 4.6. If they put a 6 liter in their GT's, you'd be silly to think you would have the same advantage as you always have had.
    Will it? 06 mustang GT MPG rating 17/25 with a 4.6 liter. 2010 camaro 6.2 liter 17/26mpg. The Camaro weighs 400lbs more and makes 125more hp. I really would like to see what ford new 5.0 can do. Since the last gen of 5.0s were limited in making power N/A and with boost because of the thin lifter galley.
    Last edited by Zinergy; 08-28-2009 at 06:58 AM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Mustang gt's??
    By Transamws6 in forum Domestics and Foreigns
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 01-16-2010, 06:28 AM
  2. 05 Red Mustang GT
    By Z06-Goose in forum Showcar and Detailing
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-30-2009, 09:39 PM
  3. ls1 vs mustang gt
    By midnightnavyz28 in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-05-2009, 05:56 PM
  4. here's my mustang...
    By sit_back in forum Member's Rides
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 08-07-2006, 08:42 PM
  5. 06 Mustang GT vs. 99 z28
    By raybroussard in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-10-2006, 01:51 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •