Saw this on a automotive website. 0-60 in 5.2 and the quarter in 13.9 @ 105 mph sounds pretty good. After doing some checking it seems the GT's times are not too bad at all compared to its closest competition in price and performance, the 350Z and the G35. The average 0-60 times for the G35 was 5.7 and the quarter was 14.6 @ 98 mph. The 350Z was a bit faster with 0-60 in 5.4 and the quarter in 14.2 @ 101 mph.
05 GT performance times
- Thread starter mball
- Start date
mattdee1
Active Member
mball said:
That doesn't sound right to me at all. A car that traps at 105MPH should be capable of way better than 13.9.
sweet~Low~93
New Member
mattdee1 said:
STANGNET Calculator give this-
E/t 13.11 = 3425 lbs. 300hp.
104.25 MPH from - 3425 lbs. -300hp-
See what it will do with a Stang driver
GelatiCruiser
Founding Member
Even so....if you're trapping 105, and you can light the tree well....then you'll be looking at better than 13.9....unless you stop to pick up a paper on your way.
Alot of times the magazines don't experiment much with launches. They drive the car in the 1/4 in a manner that the "average Joe Public" could expect to easilty replicate themselves, and in a way that can consistently be duplicated with all the other cars they test such that testing is consistent from car to car. Yeah, it's B.S.. And then again, some mags go out there and wring the car for all its got (Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords comes to mind first). A 105 mph trapspeed should translate into 13.20-13.40, depending on how good the torque grunts out of the hole.
MM&FF claims they put an 05 GT on a dyno and got 295 RWHP. That menas its more like 320 - 330 HP at the crank. 
The Ford engineer I spoke with said: "It has a very robust 300 HP".
I tried to pin him down on how much HP it really has. I mentioned the MM&FF 295 RWHP #. He got a startled look on his face and said "It's better than the Mach 1 engine. In some ways A LOT better. It has a much better torque curve."
So I tried to pin him down again saying why are you rating it @ 300 HP when it's sounding pretty clear that it has a lot more. His reply was that the official ratings are chosen by marketing for many reasons. Insurance rating being one of them with other reasons being that they want to make sure that they never again have an engine (like the 01 Cobra) that would not meet its advertised HP rating under ANY circumstances.
I have the feeling that the 05 is going to be a screamer!
The Ford engineer I spoke with said: "It has a very robust 300 HP".
I tried to pin him down on how much HP it really has. I mentioned the MM&FF 295 RWHP #. He got a startled look on his face and said "It's better than the Mach 1 engine. In some ways A LOT better. It has a much better torque curve."
So I tried to pin him down again saying why are you rating it @ 300 HP when it's sounding pretty clear that it has a lot more. His reply was that the official ratings are chosen by marketing for many reasons. Insurance rating being one of them with other reasons being that they want to make sure that they never again have an engine (like the 01 Cobra) that would not meet its advertised HP rating under ANY circumstances.
I have the feeling that the 05 is going to be a screamer!
numenor27
New Member
blazinsteed
New Member
351CJ said:MM&FF claims they put an 05 GT on a dyno and got 295 RWHP. That menas its more like 320 - 330 HP at the crank.
The Ford engineer I spoke with said: "It has a very robust 300 HP".
I tried to pin him down on how much HP it really has. I mentioned the MM&FF 295 RWHP #. He got a startled look on his face and said "It's better than the Mach 1 engine. In some ways A LOT better. It has a much better torque curve."
So I tried to pin him down again saying why are you rating it @ 300 HP when it's sounding pretty clear that it has a lot more. His reply was that the official ratings are chosen by marketing for many reasons. Insurance rating being one of them with other reasons being that they want to make sure that they never again have an engine (like the 01 Cobra) that would not meet its advertised HP rating under ANY circumstances.
I have the feeling that the 05 is going to be a screamer!
Underpromise and overdeliver. It's a lot better than the other way around.
As for the major car mags not getting times as good as, say, MM&FF, it doesn't matter. These guys are not into the 1/4 (neither am I) and they test all cars in the same way. That way you can get a relatively constant standard for comparison against other cars. Times vary due to weather conditions at the track.
You track guys will probably all get better times than they do. Still, from what I've seen, the new Mustang is going to deliver very respectable performance even in stock form. It's going to be a great car.
GelatiCruiser
Founding Member
RICKS said:
No doubt....by "light the tree well", I mean get out of the box....good 60' times can net you a nice run.
If it puts out a true 295 rwhp, then it will trap better than 13.9. My car only puts out 308, all be it with way more torque and i hit 13.1. My best trap speed was 109. Only reason i could see magazines making the predictions on what it will trap is because of the lack of tire and grip off the line. But anyways this is all speculation. When the z06 came out they all predicted mid 12's at best. Then car and driver and motor trend ripped off 12.0's.
4 years ago in a comparison with an SS, T/A, gtp, r/t pick up, and a lightning. Mototr trend got a 99 gt to do a 5.4 0-60 and a 14.0 flat 1/4 @99.
4 years ago in a comparison with an SS, T/A, gtp, r/t pick up, and a lightning. Mototr trend got a 99 gt to do a 5.4 0-60 and a 14.0 flat 1/4 @99.
Similar threads
