Z28x said:I'd like to eventually see:
Mustang GT = 300HP
GT350 = 350HP
GT500 = 450HP (maybe rename it GT450?)
GT-R = 500HP (Cobra R replacement)
Ford GT = 550HP
Alternator said:GT350 and GT500? Where did this come from?
I think they'll stick with the mach.
5ohMustang said:I'm seeing it as probably going like so:
Mustang GT- Standard V8 Mustang
Mustang GT350- A step up from the GT, but still below the cobra (like the Mach 1's and such)
Mustang GT500- I think this will probably replace the Cobra
Mustang GT-R- The replacement for the Cobra R
This would seem to be the most reasonable way of doing things. As for putting out a 500hp GT and a 500hp GT-R at the same time, I think you have to realize the Ford GT is much more than just power. It's got great looks and great handling. It's a purpose built (purpose being racing) car, where as the mustang GT-R is nothing more than a 500hp Mustang with a gutted interior and some cosmetic work.
Just my take on it.
-Brian
cobrabuilder said:In my opinion as a loyal mustang man, I believe a good base for upgrades down the road is what I would like to see. For instance, a high percentage of mustang owners want to buy a car and make it their own by customizing it the way they want it to look and feel. A solid bottom end and solid rear with 31 splines is a great base to start with. If you like nitrous, supercharged, turbocharged, or NA you have a good base to start from and customize it your own way. I would hate to see a twin-turbo stang that puts out gobs of power just to say it is faster than X from the factory. I could care less what the car is from the factory, that is why I own a mustang, to build it the way I want and kick X's butt. Just my opinion though.
tommy0022 said:awalbert88 - you should think before you type .
Of course the entire turbo package would have to be tested vigorously, ANY NEW SYSTEM MUST BE. And yes, It would cost money. What do you think they had to do to the Eaton Cobras before they were released to the public, huh, come on now bud think before you try to come on here and act like you know something. Your a big useless bull****ter. (finally some truth and fact in the forum)
Your basically denouncing an entire technology simply because its new (well thats not even true, japs use em now, hell even dodge did with Stealth)
and besides I didnt even propose it for mass production, I suggested it be used on the 50,000+ cobra r. (which incidentaly is engineered for racing = less standards to meet)
Man, I cant believe how many BS'ersthere are on these forums. Oh, well they give us entertainment as we get to watch our fellow forum members shoot their ignorant arses down and expose their bumpkin intellect.
(oh yah I said Bumpkin!)
next......
tommy0022 said:awalbert88 - you should think before you type .
Of course the entire turbo package would have to be tested vigorously, ANY NEW SYSTEM MUST BE. And yes, It would cost money. What do you think they had to do to the Eaton Cobras before they were released to the public, huh, come on now bud think before you try to come on here and act like you know something. Your a big useless bull****ter. (finally some truth and fact in the forum)
Your basically denouncing an entire technology simply because its new (well thats not even true, japs use em now, hell even dodge did with Stealth)
and besides I didnt even propose it for mass production, I suggested it be used on the 50,000+ cobra r. (which incidentaly is engineered for racing = less standards to meet)
Man, I cant believe how many BS'ersthere are on these forums. Oh, well they give us entertainment as we get to watch our fellow forum members shoot their ignorant arses down and expose their bumpkin intellect.
(oh yah I said Bumpkin!)
next......
SVTdriver said:tommy0022
While I agree that it would be nice ot have some options for forged internal/suspension/what not. Do you realize how little respect you argument get when you try to belittle people? Calling a legitimate fact CAFE and the EPA bs. Is just plain useless. And as for the twin turbos. Yes in your second post you did call it a cobra R. Bu tin you first post (which you may want ot reread) you asked the question about it being simply a Cobra. And he did not denounce the technology. He said nothing against using it. Merely that it would cost a lot of money to put into production (Again please reread posts). Then you did nothing but attack 351CJ. And then in another post claim finally some truth and facts. Yet you produced no facts other than possible consumer demand to refute his points. So where are YOUR facts about any of the arguments?
SVTdriver said:Ok what was ignorant about bring up CAFE regulations and the EPA? And while it could be said that they did not exactly make friendly comments. You were the one who first started spouting about people being a putz. If you want to keep the debate civil. Then fine lets discuss the subject. I would love to discuss whatever you'd like to. But if your going to respond by calling legitimate concerns BS. Then are you adding anything to the discussion?
the "truth and fact finally in these forums" I was referring to was my statement that whatshisname is " a big useless bull****ter"
How does that statement add anything to a sitmulating discussion. He brought up the testing and you even agreed with him.
But sure let's discuss the future mustang technology. I personally don't see turbo's anytime soon. Since Ford is more into superchargers right now (GT, lightning, cobra). Not that it is not good technology. Just that they are preoccupied with the S/C. That and the possibility that there are limited amounts of room in the engine compartment. And I'm not sure (Read I don't know for certain) that a turbo and it's plumbing would fit well. Where as the supercharger has couple different methods of installation.
SVTdriver said:Very true. It would make for an interesting Viper killer. The only problem I'd hace with it is. The Viper is not exactly known for it's great handling.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?