Disapointing top end performance?

romans8:28 · Dec 14, 2004

I was just checking out the Car and Driver comparison test between the new GTO and the 05 GT (posted here in this forum).

The 1/4 was only seperated by .5 seconds (13.3 vs 13.8) a very tight race Kudos to the stang.

However at higher speeds the new Mustang listed 0-130 mph @ 25.6 verses 19.6 for the goat. Looks like the new goat walks the 05 GT above 100mph with a full 6 seconds to 130. Higher speeds would get ugly.

Is the lack of horsepower (relatively speaking when compared to the GTO) coupled with poor aerodynamics (for attaining speed) to blame? gearing? thoughts..........

Rootus · Dec 14, 2004

The faster you go, the more important both aerodynamics and horsepower become. The GTO has more horsepower, whether or not it is more aerodynamic I do not know.

SWYZ721 · Dec 14, 2004

6 spd

Rootus · Dec 14, 2004

SWYZ721 said:
6 spd

Has what to do with it?

JonJon · Dec 14, 2004

Rootus said:
Has what to do with it?

Better gearing

max2000jp · Dec 14, 2004

Simple...The GTO has 100 more crank hp.

romans8:28 · Dec 14, 2004

max2000jp said:
Simple...The GTO has 100 more crank hp.

Whats intresting to me is with the goat rated at 400 crank hp you would think it would give the Cobra a better run........

19.6 to 130 is no competition at all for a Cobra

Rootus · Dec 14, 2004

JonJon said:
Better gearing

If the T56 in the GTO is anything like the one in my Mustang, the 1-4 ratios aren't all that different, the extra gear is 5th.

Dave

max2000jp · Dec 14, 2004

romans8:28 said:
Whats intresting to me is with the goat rated at 400 crank hp you would think it would give the Cobra a better run........

19.6 to 130 is no competition at all for a Cobra

Don't know if the LS2's crank hp figures are factual, but Ford underrated the Cobra's motor. They both weigh roughly the same, so it must be gearing or aerodynamics. I am too lazy right now to compare the two

Rootus · Dec 14, 2004

max2000jp said:
Don't know if the LS2's crank hp figures are factual, but Ford underrated the Cobra's motor. They both weigh roughly the same, so it must be gearing or aerodynamics. I am too lazy right now to compare the two

I have heard rumors that the LS2 is turning out to be a bit weak.

ttbit · Dec 14, 2004

romans8:28 said:
Whats intresting to me is with the goat rated at 400 crank hp you would think it would give the Cobra a better run........

19.6 to 130 is no competition at all for a Cobra

Power under the curve, probably. A positive displacement SC is hard to beat. My Kenne Bell gives me about 375 rwtq from 2000-4500 rpm and peaks at 403. Peak HP numbers are not everything.

romans8:28 · Dec 15, 2004

ttbit said:
Power under the curve, probably. A positive displacement SC is hard to beat. My Kenne Bell gives me about 375 rwtq from 2000-4500 rpm and peaks at 403. Peak HP numbers are not everything.

excellent point, I do believe you have hit the nail on the head.

Darkhorse845 · Dec 15, 2004

Someone hit the nail on the head!

RandyB · Dec 15, 2004

Hmmm... The mighty LS2 is supposed to have a broader torque curve than even the 405 hp LS6, probably due in large part to the extra stroke. Both motors pull pretty hard up top though. I really like the idea of a 5.4 3V in the new Mustang, both s/c and n/a versions. Hope it comes to fruition.

CatmanJJ · Dec 15, 2004

Factory tune is seriously hurting the top end on these cars.

Disapointing top end performance?

romans8:28

New Member

Rootus

Officially Addicted

SWYZ721

Member

Rootus

Officially Addicted

JonJon

max2000jp

romans8:28

New Member

Rootus

Officially Addicted

max2000jp

Rootus

Officially Addicted

ttbit

romans8:28

New Member

Darkhorse845

Banned

RandyB

New Member

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet

Disapointing top end performance?

New Member

Officially Addicted

Member

Officially Addicted

New Member

Officially Addicted

Officially Addicted

New Member

Banned

New Member

Captain Tangnet

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency