|
optikalus posted:300+ miles out of a single tank? Not bad! My '07 has the Shaker 500 and I think it sounds awesome. I don't have lots of experience with car audio, though. My previous car ('99 forester) had the shittiest audio system on the planet. Also, Windveil Blue is the best mustang color.
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2010 22:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
PT6A posted:I imagine removing the top-speed limiter, like the rev-limiter, is a rather trivial operation if you want it done. Yeah my 2007 v6 came with ZR pirellis, but for every one like ours there are a dozen base models with shitbucket all-seasons. Also, the 7500rpm redline in the boss is a beautiful thing. The 5.0 must sound loving insane when revved that high.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2010 22:02
|
|
|
I've got a question about my '07 4.0. I'm getting a rubbing/vibrating noise when the car is in neutral with the clutch out, but it goes away completely when the clutch is in. It's quite noticeable when sitting at a traffic light, for instance. It's like opposite of a bad throwout bearing. There's also sometimes a bit of a rattle from the shifter when accelerating in 1st and 2nd gears. I took it to the dealer and they claim that it's normal transmission noise, but with some googling I found other people with the same issue who claim there's a tsb for this. Here, for example: http://www.mustangcollective.com/showthread.php?t=26281 and here: http://www.justanswer.com/questions/1coa0-my-wifes-2006-mustang-bought-new-has-what-sounds Is this really a normal noise? Or do I need to be more insistent with the dealer that it's a problem? Also, would this be covered under the bumper-to-bumper warranty (which is expired) or the powertrain warranty (which is still in effect)?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2010 15:10
|
|
|
Speaking of rear ends, I took my '07 in for another look at a different dealer and they decided that much of what I thought was tranny noise was really a bad bearing in the diff. So, a day and a half later and it has a freshly rebuilt rear end. It's much quieter on the highway now! Though, it is a 7.5" so only time will tell when it explodes again. Is it worthwhile to swap a 7.5" lsd into it, or is it a better idea to just swap in a whole 8.8 axle? Some people claim the 7.5 is made of glass, while others seem to think it's reliable up to like 300hp (more than my 4.0 will ever make).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 03:28
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:rear end stuff Awesome information, thanks. Yeah, mine's a manual with grippy tires so we'll see how it holds up. If it grenades in the future, is an 8.8 from a GT a direct swap or does the driveshaft need to be modified? edit: haha, and thanks to you too frozenphil. Once it's out of warranty I'll look into ditching the 7.5 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 04:06
|
|
|
Powershift posted:the 2.73 is standard on the value leader, the 3.31 is standard with the pony package. Yep, my 07 pony package has 3.31 (verified by the label on the diff).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2011 18:18
|
|
|
I've heard that strut tower braces don't do much on S197 anyway, is that true?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 21:17
|
|
|
OrganizedEntropy posted:What I enjoyed about that episode was how they dyno'd that particular GT500, found that it made less than 500 hp at the rear tires (no poo poo) and then spent the rest of the time making a big deal about how it 'wasn't actually' a GT500. The best part was when they put the '65 or '66 or whatever on the dyno and then whined about how it was "down on power" as well. Even setting aside the flywheel vs. tire horsepower difference, do they seriously not know the difference between gross and net horsepower? I'm sure someone will defend them and say they were just being silly for the sake of tv or something, but it came across as pure, unabashed ignorance. Edit: Also, I distinctly remember them saying that the GT500 didn't have an LSD. I find that pretty loving hard to believe, surely it had one. Every GT has had one since the mid-80's! lazer_chicken fucked around with this message at 04:45 on Mar 8, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2011 04:42
|
|
|
Make fun of the T5 all you want, but it's served us well for 30 years  Anyway, I have a question. My '07 has developed a chirping sound when the blower is on. It varies with blower speed; it's slow on 1, annoying on 2, and fast enough that it's not really noticeable on 3 and 4. If I rev the engine it will change a bit. I changed the cabin filter and although it was dirty as poo poo, it didn't fix the issue. So it's either the blower motor or the resistor. How do I tell which one? Because it varies with engine speed (and thus alternator output) I'm tempted to think it's just the resistor, but maybe that's wishful thinking because it's cheap.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 04:03
|
|
|
Do you have any solid numbers about the tune on your 4.0? I have an '07 v6 and I've been thinking about getting a tune, but I was unsure what kind of gains it would actually see. Did you actually gain any power or does it just remap the throttle more aggressively? I'm trying to decide if an intake, tune, exhaust, LSD, or solid driveshaft is the best thing for my otherwise-stock car. It's a pony package so I already have 235/55/17 tires and the rear sway bar.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2011 19:01
|
|
|
Some Random rear end in a top hat posted:Counterpoint: the 4.0 was a terrible motor in 2005, and in every year before that all the way back to its hideous, maligned birth somewhere in Satan's armpit. I disagree. When it debuted in 1997, other engines available were: 302: 210hp 4.6 mod: 215hp chevy 4.3: 180-200hp 3800 SII: 205hp Chrysler 318: 230hp Yes the engine was dated by the time 2010 rolled around but it's a stout engine with a good torque band. It also responds very well to FI.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2011 00:51
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Hey, he included the 302, 4.6, and Chrysler 318 to try and show how 'comparable' the 4.0 was back then. Not every engine in 1997 was an anemic turd. I included small v8's just to give some perspective for what slightly bigger engines got you in 1997 compared to the v6s. No poo poo an LS1/LT1 is better, that's an entirely different league of engine. And the 255hp vortec really isn't that impressive considering it has a 1.7L advantage and only makes an extra 45hp.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2011 17:51
|
|
|
coolskillrex remix posted:(which even with this clubgp poo poo is just the same price as everyone else on the internet..) This is what I saw too. A flowmaster american thunder axleback for a 05-08 v6 came up as 291 "retail" and like 170 with the clubgp coupon. That same muffler on americanmuscle is 189.99. So it's a little bit cheaper but not very much.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2011 19:24
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:Or get a Watt's linkage setup. What is the preferred watt's link for s197's?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2011 23:48
|
|
|
No, you don't need royal purple gear oil. But do make sure they use the right weight. Ford calls for 75w-140 synthetic in their recent rears, which is heavier than what most rear ends use.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2011 16:17
|
|
|
Number_6 posted:It feels like the stock tune or whatever is holding a ton of power back. In 2nd and 3rd it pulls hard though. It is held back. Drive-by-wire throttle allows for all sorts of tricks like this. Many high-power cars limit torque in 1st and sometimes 2nd gear (the MS3 does this too, for example). It's so idiot drivers don't swing the rear end out and crash every time they mash the gas and pull out of a parking lot or something. Or, in the MS3, it's to reduce the torque steer from "herculean" to "bad." It probably also saves many transmissions from being blown up by these same idiot drivers.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2012 23:07
|
|
|
On the other side of that coin, my '07 has 80k miles on it 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
I have the shaker 500 in my '07 and I think it sounds pretty good, but I am not an audiophile by any stretch. It sounds much better than the stipper-spec system in my old subaru and our jetta, but that's not saying much. It sounds good enough that I won't put money into it unless something breaks. On a side note, I had to put foam tape at several places in the door panels because the door-mounted subs would make things rattle. The '10+ models should have better interior build quality so maybe it's not an issue now.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2012 15:32
|
|
|
Slow is Fast posted:Anyone? Apparently the car has a 4.0 v6. Rock auto doesn't have any obvious tps switches or sensors that stand out on me. I'll have to troll the mustang sewers of the net to see what I can dredge up. Yeah it's the 4.0 sohc, same engine as is found in the explorer and ranger. It's drive-by-wire in this application so I'm guessing the P2135 is referring to the sensor on the pedal itself. I believe that would be the "Accelerator Pedal Position Sensor" on rockauto under "Body-Interior." P2106 is probably a symptom of P2135. I'm not sure though--I've never seen that particular code before. I've never seen a problem with any DBW system before, actually. I would seek a second opinion before throwing a $100 part at it. You may want to try taking the pedal assembly part, cleaning it all, and putting it back together.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2012 23:38
|
|
|
shodanjr_gr posted:Quality Ford Engineering...any of you 2011+ owners have noticed their passenger side door not sitting flush with the rear panel? Mine is about 1mm off...Apparently it's a "thing" with the S197s? I don't know about 2011+ but the panel gaps in my 2007 are hilariously bad.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2012 14:41
|
|
|
Lowclock posted:Probably neither. Cars don't have perfect weight distribution. It's pretty normal. It will be especially noticable on a car with a live axle because if one tire is up on a bump or something it also moves the other tire. My parking lot at work is a very uneven gravel lot and sometimes the gap between the rear wheels and the wheel wells are hilariously uneven. EDIT: also, it has nothing to do with "masterful american engineering" it has to do with the fact that the car sits on springs.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2012 14:45
|
|
|
Can someone give me the rundown on s197 balljoints? My 2007 is getting a pop/clunk from the front end during low speed turning. I assume this is the balljoints. From what I can tell, I need to replace the entire LCA, right? And I can get the GT500 LCAs and they are a direct-fit upgrade, right? How hard are they to change? Does anything need to be press-fit? I assume not because it's all one piece. Basically I'm trying to figure out if I can do it with hand tools and jackstands in my garage. I've had a hard time finding any pictures of the process.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:
My old forester had a slide-out cupholder on the dashboard right below the a/c vents and it was great in the sense that it didn't interfere with the shifter, but then it had the downside that any condensation or spills fell right onto the a/c controls and the stereo headunit. I think the center console (like s197s currently have) is probably the best spot overall but they're all a compromise.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2012 02:43
|
|
|
Taaaaaaarb! posted:
To expand upon what Lord Gaga said, the T5 came behind the 302 from 83-95. The T45 was introduced along with the 4.6 in 1996, and the TR3650 came in 2001 and ran until the MT-82 in 2011. It's confusing because all of these transmission changes occurred mid-generation. It also makes SN-95 cars annoying because the 302 is a better engine than the non-PI 4.6, but the 302 is stuck with the weaker T5.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
Just wanted to mention that new edge mustangs are among the ugliest cars ever created. Goddamn that front end is awful. This includes terminators. Sure the 390hp/T56 is great but it's still ugly as poo poo. That mustang/ranger combo thing is an improvement over a regular new edge. When I got my 2007 I considered getting a 2004 mach 1 instead but I just couldn't get over how ugly it was.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
Unless you're going for big power (turbos) the 302 is superior to the 2-valve modular in just about every way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2012 18:18
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:Okay, so my 06 gt w/146k miles is running rough once it gets up to operating temp. I took it to a place to get some diagnostics run, and they said that they didn't pull any codes, but they think a tune up is probably in order. That seems reasonable, but the pricetag for that is 750 bucks. Changing the spark plugs is hilariously awful on the 3-valve modular. It uses really long spark plugs that like to break off in the head, which then takes a special (expensive) tool to remove the broken plug. Most shops are going to charge a lot to do it because they know that most likely at least one plug is going to break. A shop near me charges $500 labor (plus parts) for plugs on the 3-valve. Have the spark plugs ever been changed? If not then that's a good place to start. 146k is a lot for original plugs. You can do it yourself, changing plugs is not hard in and of itself, but make sure you are 110% prepared to deal with it if one breaks.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
I would rather do a 4th gen because at least the plugs aren't going to break off in the head and leave you hosed. It's a pain in the rear end, that's for sure, but at least you can trudge your way through to success and you aren't at random luck's mercy as to whether the plugs will break.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 22:10
|
|
|
Oh you've got lots of experience then. If it were me, I would do the plugs myself and pray they came out fine, and then have it towed to a shop just for removal of the broken ones if any of them broke. I bet that would end up being cheaper than paying a shop to do it all, even if a couple broke. But certainly get some quotes and see. If you're curious, here is the TSB from ford for how to change the plugs. This is technically for the F150 but it's the same on the Mustang. http://www.f150forum.com/f12/must-read-before-you-try-change-your-plugs-5-4l-3-valve-engine-198/ Basically, the idea is to back the plug out 1/4 turn, douse in penetrating oil, tighten and loosen 1/4 turn a bunch of times, and hope the bottom half of the plug has come unstuck by the time you start backing the plug out all the way.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2012 16:18
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:I loving hate engineers that never work on the poo poo they design. The 100k spark plug change interval is longer than the powertrain warranty so they give no fucks. On the plus side, there are improved 1-piece spark plugs now which should help next time around.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
It sounds like you are planning on replacing the coils? That's unnecessary. Just do the plugs. The coils are most likely fine. The misfire in the coil is really just the plug. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you wrote. Anyway, if you need to replace coils later then they are super easy to do, so save the money now.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 04:44
|
|
|
It's a bit of a stretch, but does anyone know anything about the factory AC units in early Mustangs? I'm looking at a '66 that comes with a broken factory AC unit. The seller claims it "needs a new compressor." I've never really messed with AC before, and I especially have no idea how the separate units like this work. I'm going on the assumption that it's totally hosed and would need to be completely rebuilt. Any ideas what that would cost? I know there are tons of aftermarket drop-in ac systems for these but I'd prefer to use the original.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
Locobono posted:I've heard this too. But, if you drop a "race" labeled CAI in without a tune, the car will run rough... so they must do something? They change the airflow properties around the MAF (by having a bigger diameter or a different number of bends or whatever) which causes the engine to run poorly, but that doesn't mean it's actually any better. Just different.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:maintenance milestone: The original battery in my 06 mustang died today. The original battery in my 07 was still going strong when I sold it a month ago. Motorcraft batteries are the best.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:I don't think you can buy a manual F150 any more. Nope, you sure can't. It got killed in the 2009 refresh. And even before then, you could only get it on stripper models with the 4.2 V6. It was the Mazda M5OD, same transmission as the Explorer and Ranger. Last time you could get a manual V8 was 2003 and only with the 4.6, never with the 5.4.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
gwarm01 posted:Second question: am I a bad person for considering the ecoboost model? Considering this would just be a stylish daily commuter, and my current car only puts out around 160HP, it still sounds like it would be a lot of fun for me. Absolutely not, it's like a new-age SVO. And SVOs are awesome. If anyone doesn't like Mustangs with 2.3L turbo fours in them, then they are objectively wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2013 18:25
|
|