• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-

My car vs. 300C

  • Thread starter Thread starter katshot
  • Start date Start date Mar 4, 2007
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
K

Kilgore Trout

Fried or Broiled ?
10 Year Member
Mar 30, 2005
4,749
95
134
Mar 5, 2007
#21
  • Mar 5, 2007
  • #21
Wow a 300C... Gosh, nice kill there mang

The other day this 18 wheeler revved on me... I taught that biotch to respect the stang just like you schooled that 6000lb war wagon...
 

katshot

Member
Dec 29, 2006
17
0
7
Dover, DE.
Mar 6, 2007
#22
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #22
droid#83853 said:
A 300C SRT8 in the high-12's? All stock? That seems a bit excessive maybe?
Click to expand...

Last year, me and my son were down at Englishtown for what was "supposed to be" a day that a bunch of guys from the Cadillac Forums were going to be there. I brought my FTS and ended up being one of only two that showed up. Great day we thought, until we saw a couple MOPAR's in the pits. One SRT8 Charger and one SRT8 300. These were the first ones I'd seen on the street so we went down and checked them out. They looked nice of course being brand new and all. Then they hit the track. The Charger pulled a 12.8 and the 300 pulled a 12.9 E/T. We immediately ran down to the pits to see what was going on. When the cars returned to the lanes, each driver popped their hoods to cool the engines and we were surprised to see that both were "bone-stock" down to the factory air filters! I have since driven a couple SRT8 300's and I love them! No way will I disrespect these cars on the road.
 

geoffsgt

Member
Aug 7, 2005
176
1
16
Baton Rouge, LA
Mar 6, 2007
#23
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #23
katshot said:
Last year, me and my son were down at Englishtown for what was "supposed to be" a day that a bunch of guys from the Cadillac Forums were going to be there. I brought my FTS and ended up being one of only two that showed up. Great day we thought, until we saw a couple MOPAR's in the pits. One SRT8 Charger and one SRT8 300. These were the first ones I'd seen on the street so we went down and checked them out. They looked nice of course being brand new and all. Then they hit the track. The Charger pulled a 12.8 and the 300 pulled a 12.9 E/T. We immediately ran down to the pits to see what was going on. When the cars returned to the lanes, each driver popped their hoods to cool the engines and we were surprised to see that both were "bone-stock" down to the factory air filters! I have since driven a couple SRT8 300's and I love them! No way will I disrespect these cars on the road.
Click to expand...

Just think if Dodge had done the right thing and made the Charger a sporty car...

And they're both so ugly!
 

01BlkGT

Founding Member
Jan 22, 2002
1,015
0
36
ATX
Mar 6, 2007
#24
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #24
A regular 300C Hemi or not present absolutely no problem whatsoever. If it wins against a 99+ GT then the driver needs to be punished badly. Most of the 1/4 times from 300C SRT-8 owners on their board show low 13's @ 105ish with mods. Others within the same area are in the mid to high 13's stock. Very impressive for a car that size, but having 6.1L and sticky tires from the factory....although not enough to instill fear!
 

04fullitgt

I shower with poo
Nov 13, 2006
0
0
0
Crest Hill, Illinois
Mar 6, 2007
#25
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #25
Kilgore Trout said:
Wow a 300C... Gosh, nice kill there mang

The other day this 18 wheeler revved on me... I taught that biotch to respect the stang just like you schooled that 6000lb war wagon...
Click to expand...



 

Penguin

Active Member
Oct 23, 2003
115
1
28
SC
Mar 6, 2007
#26
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #26
01BlkGT said:
A regular 300C Hemi or not present absolutely no problem whatsoever. If it wins against a 99+ GT then the driver needs to be punished badly.
Click to expand...
Check geoffsgt's sig. He drives a 2003 GT with a best 1/4 of 14.41.
Undercover4.6 has gone, in his 300C, 14.48.
That doesn't seem close to you?

My best 1/8th time is 9.221@78.498mph, 60ft 2.16. I haven't run the 1/4 yet, but I'm sure it's probably a mid to low 14sec.

....although not enough to instill fear!
Click to expand...
It's just a car. You don't have to be afraid of cars.

blubullett said:
Are you guys serious? If you loose to one of those you need to sell your car and stop embarassing mustangs.
Click to expand...
So basically everyone in a Mustang who runs slower than a 14.48 should sell their Mustang? I'm sure you'll find lots of those on Stangnet. You should get started, telling them why they should sell their car.

Didn't we go through this when the SRT-4 Neon or something came out? Like if you got beat by one you should sell your car.

I'm not sure but didn't Kilgore or someone get beat by some crap car in his GT, and now he has a Cobra? I guess you do have to sell your car when you get beat. Man, that sounds expensive.
 

katshot

Member
Dec 29, 2006
17
0
7
Dover, DE.
Mar 6, 2007
#27
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #27
It's funny how every forum you go to has these same debates. You go to the Cadillac Forums and the CTS-V guys are always saying how they smoke damn near anything out there (including Terminator Cobras). You go to the various GM forums and the Z28's, Corvette's, and WS6 Trans Am's rule the street. Here, it's obviously going to be the same thing only it's Mustang's ruling. The funny part is how so many people totally trash-talk the other marques so badly. If you're a multi-brand enthusiast like me, you probably are a little more bothered by this but what are you going to do? People are enthusiastic about their brand of car, and will generally have a rather "slanted" view of it's capabilities. I think in this case, the guys here that are obviously anti-MOPAR or at least heavily pro-Mustang, are being a little unrealistic but that's to be expected I guess since it IS a Mustang forum. Be that as it may, I respect BOTH cars and have driven and raced BOTH cars, and will tell you that "some" Mustang GT's will fall prey to "some" non-SRT8 Hemi-powered MOPAR's. Will it be the fault of the driver? Maybe, but if it is, chances are it'll be the MOPAR coming out on top since they're automatics and are easier to drive fast.
Damn, I can't wait to get to the track and see what my car will do. Until then, I won't know for sure who I should or shouldn't beat out on the road.
 

StangYellow

Founding Member
Sep 11, 2002
1,052
1
39
Mar 6, 2007
#28
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #28
droid#83853 said:
I ran against an SRT8 on an open track night, and it was a solid 14.00 car.
Click to expand...

Ummm... no you didnt. Those cars are low 13 second beasts.
 

01BlkGT

Founding Member
Jan 22, 2002
1,015
0
36
ATX
Mar 6, 2007
#29
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #29
Geoffsgt:
Best 1/4: 14.412@98.12 w/ 2.298 60' and 1/8: 9.409@77.64

Undercover:
Best E.T.---14.48@93mph w/2.67 60ft

Anything stand out to you besides the so so 60' times? What this tells me is that the GT with a trapspeed of 98mph is considerably faster than the 300C with a 93mph trapspeed. Traps speeds are more important factor than ETs when you are referring to a cars capabilities. So what it is really telling me is that the driver is leveling the playing field, not the car. So again I state, a GT SHOULD have no problem with a 300C, 5.7L hemi or not.
 

d98gt

Founding Member
Mar 14, 2002
4,505
59
204
SE Texas
Mar 6, 2007
#30
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #30
I wish my slow auto NPI would get 14.4s with my 93-94 trap
 

katshot

Member
Dec 29, 2006
17
0
7
Dover, DE.
Mar 6, 2007
#31
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #31
01BlkGT said:
Geoffsgt:
Best 1/4: 14.412@98.12 w/ 2.298 60' and 1/8: 9.409@77.64

Undercover:
Best E.T.---14.48@93mph w/2.67 60ft

Anything stand out to you besides the so so 60' times? What this tells me is that the GT with a trapspeed of 98mph is considerably faster than the 300C with a 93mph trapspeed. Traps speeds are more important factor than ETs when you are referring to a cars capabilities. So what it is really telling me is that the driver is leveling the playing field, not the car. So again I state, a GT SHOULD have no problem with a 300C, 5.7L hemi or not.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but you also need to realize you're comparing apples to oranges here. Or more accurately, an auto trans car to a manual trans car. The auto is just a "point and shoot" car where a manual involves a lot more variables. In my mind, in such a situation, I'm only looking at the E/T's.
 

01BlkGT

Founding Member
Jan 22, 2002
1,015
0
36
ATX
Mar 6, 2007
#32
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #32
That still doesn't make sense, by your argument then that means s/c Mustang GT's that are putting down 400rwhp and running low 12's and trapping 115mph are just as much of a car as say a 900rwhp Supra that is also running low 12's at 150mph. Just b/c the cars run similar times doesn't mean that one isn't a faster car. Regardless of the ET, tranny type, cylinder number, EFI or carb'd, FWD or RWD, green or blue, etc... the trap speed is more indicative when determining the vehicles potential and power output than the ET.

On a side note I do take back what I said, you near bone stock GT's out there might want to look into getting some more mods. It seems it isn't uncommon for the 5.7L 300C to dip into the high 13's with a trap of 100-103. Pretty impressive for a 4200lb sedan.
 

droid#83853

carfax for friendship
Dec 30, 2006
28
0
0
Beating my car to death with a tire iron
Mar 6, 2007
#33
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #33
StangYellow said:
Ummm... no you didnt. Those cars are low 13 second beasts.
Click to expand...


If they are low 13 second cars, this guy didn't know how to do it. I didn't talk to him too much about driving, but it was an SRT8. He was the only old man there. You don't often see old fogey's hanging out with 20-somethings. I still don't like Mopar, but if you it would be easy to win a race in one of those. All you gotta due is slam into the car your racing against. A big car like should do some damage to Honda.
 

droid#83853

carfax for friendship
Dec 30, 2006
28
0
0
Beating my car to death with a tire iron
Mar 6, 2007
#34
  • Mar 6, 2007
  • #34
01BlkGT said:
That still doesn't make sense, by your argument then that means s/c Mustang GT's that are putting down 400rwhp and running low 12's and trapping 115mph are just as much of a car as say a 900rwhp Supra that is also running low 12's at 150mph. Just b/c the cars run similar times doesn't mean that one isn't a faster car. Regardless of the ET, tranny type, cylinder number, EFI or carb'd, FWD or RWD, green or blue, etc... the trap speed is more indicative when determining the vehicles potential and power output than the ET. QUOTE]

That is true. I ran 13.2 at 112mph. Sounds ridiculous, but it's true. I have the slips. Those Gatorbacks didn't have any bite. My cousin ran a low-12's in that speed range with his Mustang.
Click to expand...
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Progress Thread Family member 1989 GT- Backstory and updates
  • JRC99
  • Apr 19, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 26, 2025
JRC99
J
Place to Avoid: Jamison Auto Group in Gulfport, MS
  • D Durden
  • Oct 20, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Thursday at 9:44 PM
Noobz347
Which one of these 3 intakes make the most sense for my 331 combo
  • from6to8
  • Jul 25, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
7
Views
2K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jul 26, 2024
AeroCoupe
87 LX 'Vert
  • fun331
  • Jun 15, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
27
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 30, 2024
Mustang5L5
B
For Sale 2008 Bullitt Street Muscle Car For Sale
  • Bullitz
  • Jun 11, 2022
  • S550 Mustangs for Sale (2015+)
Replies
2
Views
1K
S550 Mustangs for Sale (2015+) Aug 19, 2022
Bullitz
B
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?