|
frozenphil posted:There aren't many cars out there that I know of that will make 851rwhp for under $8k in mods. Could the Coyote be the new 2JZ-GTE? The vanilla GT being able to make nearly 600 on the stock block was pretty impressive, but 850 HP on an otherwise stock engine is absolute insanity, even for a V8. I'm sure being able to spin an extra thousand RPMs is what makes the BOSS variant so much more powerful though. kronix posted:Could you daily drive it? I've never driven a car with anywhere near that much power, but from the videos I've seen of super-high powered cars: no, not really. Skip shift will bring you into fourth gear at 20MPH, but even in such a high gear, I suspect that you could very easily annihilate a set of street tires. I can't find the video, but I remember seeing one of a 6-700HP Corvette (I think formally owned by someone here) that would easily spin the tires in just about any gear under 100 MPH.
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2011 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
BDawg posted:I did a bad, bad thing. drat right you did. You were supposed to order Grabber Blue. Don't worry, there's still time to change it  .
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2011 01:40
|
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised if it is torque limited in the first two gears. Maybe it will have a POWA-BOOST button that temporarily removes the limit for drag racing and the like.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2011 16:14
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:So, where's the dyno sheet? Bits of rubber clogged the printer at the shop.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2011 05:02
|
|
|
Can you explain how that shifter works? Is he just moving it back and forth to shift gears? What does the button on the top do?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2011 04:55
|
|
|
I can't see any reason for them to go with a tire smaller than a 335. There are enough cars out there that run larger tires than that stock. The selection and price of tires that size isn't too bad, all things considered. Tire Rack has 345/30/19s starting at $379 a tire with Michelin Pilot Sports coming in at under $500/tire. Those prices aren't far off from the 255/285s on the current Shelby, so I don't see cost being the issue.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2011 07:24
|
|
|
kronix posted:
That's all well-and-good, but the truth is that AWD is becoming ubiquitous. There are so many vehicles now that offer AWD as an option, and a lot of people are opting for it. I can foresee manufactures starting to look at bringing AWD options down from their higher-end offerings to their small cars. Just about every crossover offers it, half of Ford sedans offer it, three-out-of-four Lexus sedans offer it, Infiniti offers it throughout their lineup, and the list goes on.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2011 03:08
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I look forward to 1->5 skip shifts. Seven cylinder deactivation.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2011 01:40
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:YAY! The poo poo talking between Ford and GM muscle car bosses is back! Holy poo poo, 251 comments while it is still on the first page! That has to be an autoblog record right there.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2011 06:12
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:mustangforumposter.txt poo poo like this pisses me off. Larger passenger cars are the most adversely effected by this bill. So, this bill will essentially punish people for preferring cars over light trucks. It looks like I'm going to have to jump on the SUV bandwagon along with everybody else. This almost make me hope that gas prices hit $20/gallon in 2020. It seems like the domestic manufactures are doing nothing to change the way they operate, so I guess we're going to have the rely on the INVISIBLE HAND to completely gently caress them over. (Are crossovers considered cars or light trucks?)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2011 22:47
|
|
|
Just curious, why are you choosing a turbocharger for only 100HP? That seems like so much more work than a supercharger for power levels that are relatively modest. It looks like the prices for each are pretty comparable.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2011 01:21
|
|
|
That jacket makes me 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2011 21:36
|
|
|
hayden. posted:New or used? The lowest used one around here was a 2011 GT with like 50,000 miles for that same price. New; there are quite a few links a few pages back of brand new GTs going for well under $30k. I think the cheapest in my area was in the $25k range. Recently released used cars are almost universally a rip off.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2012 07:21
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:Why? What would be wrong with a used 2011? They are more expensive than a new 2012 in many cases (or close enough that a new car wins out).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2012 03:22
|
|
|
This is a cross-post from the new cars thread, but it looks like a turbo Mustang has been confirmed. http://blog.caranddriver.com/ford-c...r+and+Driver%29
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2012 20:54
|
|
|
You Am I posted:I don't know how heavy the Mustang V6 is, but Ford reports that the Ecoboost is 60kg lighter than the standard alloy head/cast iron block straight six in the Falcon With the Genesis Coupe, the difference is right around 100 lbs between the V6 and I4t. Judging from these two cars, I suspect that a 50-60kg in the Mustang is close enough to bank on. What's that make the Mustang, around 3300lbs, give or take? That's about the weight of an STI, which moves along just fine with 305HP. kronix posted:Yeah it's getting 420 horsepower. Don't forget pricing as well. Adding the TTV6 would likely result in the GT moving up in price to around 33-35k starting. That would give the sixxer some breathing room at the GT entry price of 29k. Of course, they could just call the TTV6 an SVO and offer it only with the track pack and Recaros for $35k and not offer the premium pack, much like they do with the BOSS vs. GT500. I'm sure that the sixxer probably appeals more to the younger, core motoring crowd than it does the traditional GT buyer, since people like my father would never own a V6 Mustang if there was the option for a V8. Edit: I don't remember where I read this, but I do remember some market research saying that a V8 appealed more to the 35+ crowd and a six appealing more to the under 30 crowd. oRenj9 fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Jan 12, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2012 02:23
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:It's almost assuredly winter mix fuel causing it. Drop the tune down to the 87 tune and you should be good. This would be a good place to start. If this fixes the issue, then he should really start looking at using a different 93 octane map. If he really is leaning out, I'm guessing the intake is aggravating matters. What tune and tuner are you using shodanjr_gr? Are you able to load new maps onto the programmer? Are you using one of their tunes made for cars with CAI? Do you have anymore custom tunes available to you from Bama? If you do, I would have them tweak the map a bit for you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2012 23:51
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:FYI: BAMA was the shop popping '11+ 5.0 engines awhile back. poo poo, can you create your own tunes with their flasher, or do you need expensive software to do them?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
shodanjr_gr posted:Another interesting tidbit about the 2013s is that Ford FINALLY added manual mode on the autotragics! They've been putting these into cars since the 90s, I'm not sure why it took Ford so long to adopt them. If it throttle blips on downshifts, holds gears while bouncing off the rev limiter, and shifts instantaneously when prompted, then I'll strongly consider one.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2012 23:29
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:So I should have bought the car I looked at for more than KBB? Sounds like it was a POS and you made the right call passing on it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2012 17:25
|
|
|
That is a pretty good deal on the car. I'd definitely pull the trigger on that. As for the trade-in, I bet you could sell yours on Autotrader by the end of next week for $13k. That's what I would do.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
shodanjr_gr posted:Base with performance. Oh drat, I thought that price was for a premium + performance. You shouldn't have much trouble getting 2-3000 of of MSRP.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2012 05:05
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Oh hey how's that '70 Mustang?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
shodanjr_gr posted:To anyone who has driven both a circa 2008 and a 2012 v6, should the 2012 brake pedal be much harder? I feel like I have to put more effort to get them to bite. That's a good thing. You get better brake feedback and you can heel and toe without putting your passenger's face into the dashboard. quote:And here it is (crappy cell phone pic).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2012 00:26
|
|
|
shodanjr_gr posted:
Make the head lights twice as tall, shrink the height of the grill a bit, add a small bumper, remove the Ford emblem and replace it with a pony on the grill. I suck at Photoshop, but I think those small changes could easily make the car look very much like a modern Mustang. Elephanthead posted:So are there any rear wheel drive platforms that Lincoln is using? I bet we will get a EUCD platform mustang. RIP 650 hp mustang, you will be missed. Buy them up while you can. You think we will get the next Mustang on a FWD sedan/minivan platform? I was under the impression that the Mustang is getting a brand new platform, it just will not be unique to the Mustang any longer. oRenj9 fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Apr 16, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
kronix posted:I'm too young to remember the Ford Probe poo poo fit. Ford probably dodged a bullet because everyone I knew who owned a probe considered it a giant piece of poo poo from the day it rolled out of the showroom. Really, I would think the opposite because they make hundreds of thousands of those V8s for the F-series compared with maybe half as many V6s. I'd think the costs to produce either would be pretty drat close, especially considering how close the V6 premium and base GT are after incentives. Interesting about the Probe though, I've only known two people that owned them, but one was a die-hard enthusiast and owned several of them. The v6 GT had decent power from such a small engine and handled really well, I'm not sure about the four cylinder model though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
Number_6 posted:Can you get the new GT500 or whatever the nearest Camaro equivalent is ... The ZL-1 had its Nurburgring time set with the automatic version.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2012 07:12
|
|
|
Bumming Your Scene posted:Grabber Blue premium 5.0 manual with track package, That's the exact car that I want! Congrats on having great tastes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:At least they made the platform solid axle first so it will be easy to swap that poo poo out. Congrats, Ford. You finally did what people who will never buy a Mustang anyway always wanted you to do. Maybe Ford is going to do some laps around VIR and finally put to rest, once and for all, the idea that IRS would make the Mustang faster.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2012 02:37
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:Full disclosure: I haven't read the article because it's almost 6AM and I haven't slept yet, but I just cannot believe anyone could write those summaries unless GM threw a giant sack of cash at them. I'm not even so much upset because I'm something of a Mustang fanboy (I am), but because, from all the literature I've read, the Zeta chassis is a fat piece of poo poo. A heavier car Camaro managed to effortlessly outrun the GT500 despite having substantially less horsepower. How is that not a clear victory for the Camaro? They even reiterated at some point in the article that the GT is still their pick over the SS, but whatever Chevy did to the ZL1 was an amazing feat. If you haven't seen the video of the ZL1 lapping Nueburgring, definitely check it out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWFP6LM-_q8
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:But hey, don't let details like that get in the way of making SICK BURNS, right brah? I wouldn't take it personally, that poo poo seems to be happening all over A.I. lately.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2012 01:23
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Honestly, I wonder how viable it would be for Ford to basically do what Dodge did with the Charger/Challenger, but in reverse - design a sedan with as much parts commonality with the Mustang as possible, but don't call it a Mustang to avoid offending the purists. Call it a Falcon, even. I read in MT this month that they are doing exactly that with the next generation. However, it is going to be a Lincoln and compete with the ATS - which shares the next-gen Camaro platform.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Six years ago Mazda got 260hp out of the DISI turbo 2.3 with a tiny rear end turbocharger, and I suspect the current Ecoboost probably still shares a lot of that design. I've got 113k on mine with no major problems. The L3-VDT is a pretty incredible engine all-around. Not only is 260hp a conservative rating for MS3, but there is a good 20-30hp on the table just from an intake. A factory TD06-16g (which I believe is an Evo stock unit) should easily be good for 330hp off of the factory floor and leave enough headroom to make the V8 guys worry a bit. Realistically though, I wouldn't be surprised to see the 2.0L Ecoboost putting down roughly 260hp. Anything more than that would probably be detrimental to fuel economy and would destroy the stock V6 driveshaft. Oh god, I just thought of something: 330hp 2.3L turbo Mustang + BOSS 302 suspension goodies = SVO! 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2012 02:17
|
|
|
optikalus posted:BMW got it right with the latest 3er Those are the worse loving cup-holders ever designed. Hardly anything fits in it, and what few things do, are at a pretty high risk of falling anytime you change directions a little quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2012 00:33
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:I'm pretty ignorant about this but it seems like a magic bullet. There has to be some sort of downside, right? Well, a bad tune has the potential to destroy your engine while giving Ford an excuse to deny a warranty claim on it. There are plenty of good reasons for manufactures to be conservative with their tunes. Emissions and drive-ability being two big ones.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2012 07:41
|
|
|
Lord Gaga posted:And taking a good photo requires ~effort~ So does making a terrible Photoshop, but we still got one of those.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2012 03:22
|
|
|
They might as well take the turbo-six for a market test flight. They could create a new package for it and sell it for around the price of a GT. The Ecoboost F150 sells along-side it's V8 brethren at effectively the same price, and the market has been receptive. Cited from the above link: quote:The last time the V6 outsold the V8 in America’s most popular truck was 1985. If the turbo-six can be embraced by the notoriously finicky full-sized truck market, then there is every reason to believe the Mustang community will be just as receptive. The best aspect of a twin-turbo Mustang --for Ford, that is -- is that it will leave Chevrolet scrambling to respond. Now, if only Ford had a decent plan to fix Lincoln.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2012 05:38
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I don't think this one would be cost effective. Either they turn up the boost like a true SVO revival, or they find some way to get more power out of the NA 3.7. The Ecoboost 6 would completely decimate the NA 3.7, no matter how much Ford manages to turn the dial up on it. The 3.5 Taurus SEL runs mid 15s (a bit faster without AWD) in the quarter mile with 290 horsepower while the SHO puts down a 13.7. If they turn the boost up, even the slightest, a turbo Mustang risks being faster than the V8.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
BGCHEEZ indeed; it must be short for big cheesenuts. I agree on having his car towed.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
Devyl posted:Oh yeah, without a doubt! Honestly, it looks like the best setup for this would be a nice sequential. Throw a healthy-sized Garrett or Turbonetics turbo on one side and you'll have massive 4 digit power at the wheels. Ford is still being really tight-lipped about actual numbers this is putting down and I don't blame them with the COPO Camaro nipping on their heels. I bet that thing is putting down four digits right now with the two tiny turbos.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2012 03:33
|
|