HorsePower

FordPerformance · Jun 21, 2007

Why does FORD always seem to underpower their products as compared to the competition? The competiton equips their performance vehicles right out the box. We're forced to take a beating on the street until we make mods. Give it to us from the start. (I KNOW IT'S THE WHOLE BANG FOR THE BUCK) I'm new to the stangnet forums. What do you guys think?

scottfree · Jun 21, 2007

I agree! My cousin has 95 z28 auto and its not even a race he can beat me so bad. His car is all stock with over 100k miles and if he jumps on it at 60 it will spin tires.

Spdfreak · Jun 21, 2007

They do it so they don't have to woory about the motor going bad until after the warranty runs out.

FordPerformance · Jun 21, 2007

What's up to the Mustang masses! It feels good to be driving a stang. I have been a mustang fanatic since I first rode in a red 84 1/2 GT. I had a 90 LX that I should've kept. I traded my 04 GT for my current 06. They have always been underpowered. I read the reviews of the new models year after year the competitions cars are produced with more power. I don't have alot of funds for the extreme mods. The common bolt ons are sometimes a stretch. Three or four hundred bucks adds up. And with a wife and family please. I have to get it when I can (birthdays, father's day, etc.) You get the picture! I have to watch out for the old bowtie boys and the new in 09. Not to mention the Hemi Heroes. Mustangs rule the market and we have to buy the $54,000 500GT. To really kick a**. I going to try'em everytime I get though.

05MGT · Jun 21, 2007

It is a little frusterating having to listen to a bowtie guy talk smack about how a 10 year old Camaro can still whoop a brand new stang.

Jenns01TA · Jun 21, 2007

Frustrating or not, it is a simple fact and a legitimate question.

I have owned 3 Mustangs: modified, tracked and loved them all. But, I can also agree with the statement that Ford is having issues producing viable engines that are performing from production comparable to the competition.

Looking at my wingie ugly TA, in 2001 the LS1 was underrated at 310/340. I have to wonder why it took Ford five years to pull close to these numbers. I am an avid motorsports enthusiast and an engineering nerd. So, in all objectivity and remaining "brand blind", I have to wonder WHY does it cost so much and WHY is it such a struggle for Ford to produce a comparable engine in performance and durability.

I have some mild piston slap and the valve train is loud. But, other than my weak 7.5" 10 bolt, at 83,000 miles I can still smack most the competition out there. My garage and heart still hold a place for another Mustang. However, both have plenty of room for another LS engine and perhaps a HEMI. Motorsports addiction is blind to brand and name.

kooldawg6 · Jun 21, 2007

05MGT said:
It is a little frusterating having to listen to a bowtie guy talk smack about how a 10 year old Camaro can still whoop a brand new stang.

"Sad But True"
Sorry, just had to throw that in there 05MGT
One thing about the 95 Z28 is it had a very decent amount of torque. "No replacement for displacement" Had the Mustang ever been mass released with the 351 or the now 5.4...ALL NEW BALLGAME!!!!! It never was, so we have to live with that. Ford hasn't had a huge release of Mustangs comparable to the GM big boys. Mustang won out with the styling, build quality and heritage. However in todays market, it's not uncommon to see the competition out there with at least 400-425 HP on tap available to anybody with the cash(not limited production cars). I believe Ford can AND needs to have the power output near 400 HP for the '09 launch in the base GT. Since now the new Camaro and Challenger have "the look" and will have that much HP and will be reasonabley priced I'm sure, it just may lure many former and future Mustang owners to the "other side". I know I will NEVER buy a GM car, but it sure will be great to have them out and about on the streets.

homebrewer · Jun 21, 2007

I think one of the main reasons that the GM cars always come ahead on power, is because until the release of the LS1, the GM small block was almost 100% unchanged since 1955. Without any real changes in design or tooling, they were able to get a LOT of power out of an engine they released over 50 years ago. Considering how often Ford changes basic engine structure (comparatively), I see how GM stays ahead most of the time. They built something in the mid 50's that stood the test of time, and did not require any major changes until just recently. Even today, with the LS7, they are quite a bit ahead of their time, and it won't need to be changed significantly.... until the new C7R comes out that is.

That being said, GM does have it's own flaws, just as all manufacturers do. While the engine may put down some nice numbers, other factors come into play when people are buying a new car. Personally, in my past, I've always been a Chevy guy (please don't hate me, but I still regret not buying that 69 Chevelle SS 3 years ago...). I bought my mustang because it is by far the best option out there. But honestly, when the new Camaro comes out in 09, I won't rule out trading the stang for one......

FordPerformance · Jun 21, 2007

You guys have vast knowledge on the subject. I only scratched the surface. If that. I love the mustang. The competition is definitely trying to make their presence known. The Charger RT or SRT8 are awesome vehicles. If I wasn't a die hard mustang person. I would have one of those rides. With GM coming with the Camaro and Chrysler with the Challenger. Dearborn has to do what it needs to do to keep current mustang owners and draw new faithful.

FordPerformance · Jun 21, 2007

Jenns01TA, I'm very new. What I'm doing wrong? Leaving a trail?

Jenns01TA · Jun 21, 2007

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward%27s_10_Best_Engines#20th_Century

(Now, no smackng me for pulling a "V" here and all - Derailing the thread a bit and armchair magazine quotes )

One thing has also been noted, Ward's has awarded most of their "10 Best" to engine designs that yield the most HP/TQ per engine displacement. There are many automakers now that are able to meet and exceed any of our American made cars with a little Inline-4 or V-6. Some of it is forced induction, yes. But, there is also a statistical pattern shown that bigger is not always better. This reminds me of the dark days before the Oil embargo. HUGE engine displacement and Gobs of torque in an era that sees limited supplies of refined gasoline.

FordPerformance · Jun 21, 2007

Thanks for breaking me in. I don't want to end up like V! I love to see the pics, check out mods etc. Hey. Is anybody else experiencing there radio/cd player freezing up. Mine (shaker500) recently froze up and got really hot. I know for some reason it gets really hot in the ride. I read some theories on this awhile back. Has anyone narrowed it down?

07BLKSTANG-GT · Jun 22, 2007

There is hope. The 07 S197 platform is now built with the 5.4L engine in mind. I am sure the 5.4 can easily put out at least 400hp. If Ford were smart, they would add the 5.4 engine as an option.

scottfree · Jun 22, 2007

07BLKSTANG-GT said:
There is hope. The 07 S197 platform is now built with the 5.4L engine in mind. I am sure the 5.4 can easily put out at least 400hp. If Ford were smart, they would add the 5.4 engine as an option.

I think n/a version of it should be standard on all gt's

07BLKSTANG-GT · Jun 22, 2007

scottfree said:
I think n/a version of it should be standard on all gt's

and keep the engine block cast iron. Ford should also consider shaving a few hundred pounds of the GT version.

Fourth Horseman · Jun 22, 2007

homebrewer said:
But honestly, when the new Camaro comes out in 09, I won't rule out trading the stang for one......

Yeah, same here. I'll have to see how I feel about the Camaro when I see one in person. So hard to tell from show car images on the 'net. But yeah man, GM's V8s just feel right to me. Not that I don't like my small Ford modular V8s, because I do, but let's face it: 4.6 liter should be the entry level V8 with the 5.4 n/a in the middle and the 5.4 s/c at the top. At least, that's how I'd like to see it.

STLShelby · Jun 22, 2007

homebrewer said:
I think one of the main reasons that the GM cars always come ahead on power, is because until the release of the LS1, the GM small block was almost 100% unchanged since 1955. Without any real changes in design or tooling, they were able to get a LOT of power out of an engine they released over 50 years ago. Considering how often Ford changes basic engine structure (comparatively), I see how GM stays ahead most of the time. They built something in the mid 50's that stood the test of time, and did not require any major changes until just recently. Even today, with the LS7, they are quite a bit ahead of their time, and it won't need to be changed significantly.... until the new C7R comes out that is.

That being said, GM does have it's own flaws, just as all manufacturers do. While the engine may put down some nice numbers, other factors come into play when people are buying a new car. Personally, in my past, I've always been a Chevy guy (please don't hate me, but I still regret not buying that 69 Chevelle SS 3 years ago...). I bought my mustang because it is by far the best option out there. But honestly, when the new Camaro comes out in 09, I won't rule out trading the stang for one......

I agree chevy small blocks are hard to beat. I'm in my mid 50's and grew up in the musclecar era. When i was young all i mostly owned were Chevys. You could build two smallblock chevys for what it cost to build one Ford or Mopar. Parts were cheap, plentiful and very interchangeable.

As for as the SS 396 Chevelle you regret not buying, be careful if you decide to purchase one in the future. 1968 was the last year you could verify that it was a factory SS by the vin# 1969 up you need the build sheet.

In 1971 i bought a 69 SS396 Chevelle from a friend. It had the L78 375hp. 396 with a Muncie M22 rockcrusher 4spd. and a 12 bolt 4:11 posi. You could blow the tires off it at 60 mph. Looked brand new had 24,000 miles on it and paid $1250.00 for it. Guess i'm showing my age.

STLShelby · Jun 22, 2007

Fourth Horseman said:
Yeah, same here. I'll have to see how I feel about the Camaro when I see one in person. So hard to tell from show car images on the 'net. But yeah man, GM's V8s just feel right to me. Not that I don't like my small Ford modular V8s, because I do, but let's face it: 4.6 liter should be the entry level V8 with the 5.4 n/a in the middle and the 5.4 s/c at the top. At least, that's how I'd like to see it.

It's funny, what's considered the big engines now were the little guys in the old days.

shadowland2000 · Jun 22, 2007

Like it's any great feat to just keep upping the displacement. I love muscle cars too but at $3 plus for a gallon of fuel, I also want efficiency. The only way fuel prices are ever going to come down is if we stop driving mountains of metal with huge engines.

scottfree · Jun 22, 2007

gas prices will come down when we take a more churchhill like attitude with iran and also stick it to the tree huggers and drill in anwr.

HorsePower

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

mine works really well and can take a fair amount

Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency