itsstock02

slick35thgt

New Member

Oct 5, 2009

213

0

0

Leitchfield, KY

Jan 14, 2010

#21

• Jan 14, 2010

• #21

We can talk weights all day, people. Fact of the matter is, the variable in any comparo between two vehicles is the driver. Stock for stock, with equally matched drivers, the 3V car will beat the 2V everytime. If Ford produced a new Mustang GT that made older model GT could beat stock for stock with identical drivers, I would be one of the first guys on the phone with Ford, trust me.

 

D

Dragstr05

New Member

Dec 21, 2004

643

1

0

Stafford VA

Jan 14, 2010

#22

• Jan 14, 2010

• #22

I see this turned into quite a weight debate. The S197's are no joke. I do love my 2000, and I favor the new edge far more, but stock for stock its not happening. Sure, an EXCELLENT driver in a 99-04 GT coupe with a 5spd could take a S197 with a mediocre or poor driver, but most drivers dont fall under the "excellent" category. Also consider that virtually every mod, including power adders, respond far better to the 3v in the S197.

This is an almost pointless debate. Equal mods, S197 has the upper hand majority of the time.

 

B

bdcardinal

tree hugger

Jun 10, 2003

3,612

16

69

santa barbara, CA

Jan 14, 2010

#23

• Jan 14, 2010

• #23

my 98 with coilovers a full tank of gas and full interior was around 3148 lbs when MM corner weighted it.

 

Kornnut

Founding Member

Nov 25, 2000

1,999

48

108

Tulsa

Jan 14, 2010

#24

• Jan 14, 2010

• #24

The 3v cars are pretty decent stock. Wife has an 06 GT. The car sitting outside in the pic is her former 03 GT. Both of the cars are/were auto. The 06 would eat the 03 alive. The grey car in the garage is mine. Gears, catback, tune, and nice tires it would out run the 06*I think*. I really want to take the 06 to the track this year for a pass or two. If the grey car runs and gets tires it may make a pass as well just to see what it will do and what the time difference is. As far as weight Bill Putnam(mustang92) has a real good chart for the weight of 99-04 GT cars. Weight Reduction - Modular Revolution Forums

 

fast97gt

Active Member

Jan 2, 2007

1,082

2

49

north carolina

Jan 14, 2010

#25

• Jan 14, 2010

• #25

Ateup said:

Does it stick as good as the grammar and spelling you learned in school did?

Click to expand...

OOO har har, my GOD your one them arses who think we're writing a midterm paper on this site, well get the F*** over it we're not doing a term paper and are not in grammer school. oh and look i can use faces too.

 

streethorse

15 Year Member

Oct 8, 2005

1,042

6

58

Dallas Texas

Jan 14, 2010

#26

• Jan 14, 2010

• #26

streethorse said:

2010 Mustang= 3467 lbs
2004 Mustang= 3114 lbs
Thats a 353 lb difference

Click to expand...

These weights were V6 models. But from everwhere else I look the weights
Im seeing for GT's are not that much higher.

Curb weight of 04 GT= 3317 (no passengers or cargo)
Curb weight of 10 GT= 3533

Seems too light but thats what Im seeing, show me the proof if these are
inacurate cause Id love to see it. And no I have never had my car on a scale.
Im mean Google never lies, right?

 

trombonedemon

Well-Known Member

Jun 25, 2009

1,962

39

59

U.S.A, U.S.A., U.S.A.!

Jan 14, 2010

#27

• Jan 14, 2010

• #27

Huh!? How are these weighing so different. Somebody really should call Ford, once and for all, and ask how are they weighing there vehicles, w/or w/out fluids, w/or w/out the extra options, the range is just too much to take seriously.

 

Ateup

Active Member

Sep 21, 2009

748

2

28

Jan 14, 2010

#28

• Jan 14, 2010

• #28

fast97gt said:

OOO har har, my GOD your one them arses who think we're writing a midterm paper on this site, well get the F*** over it we're not doing a term paper and are not in grammer school. oh and look i can use faces too.

Click to expand...

Apparently I need to spell out for you the irony in your original post. It would have never been brought up if you didn't clearly state in so many words that you had a mind like a steel trap.