So if the GT-R has somewhere near 500 hp.....
- Thread starter GelatiCruiser
- Start date
Alternator said:
Those were a couple of the names for the Mach 1 and Cobra Replacements that were recently rumored. Of course the Boss name has been kicked around too. I thought I remembered hearing there wasn't going to be a Mach 1 on the '05+ Stangs. I guess we will just have to wait and see.
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.
But, if the GT-R is not meant to be a street legal vehicle (Just for the track). Does it need all of the EPA testing, etc?
cobrabuilder said:
I totally agree with you, I find it so discouraging that I cant supercharge my 2002 gt without having to worry about the rods blowing up on me much sooner.
A simple forged internals option on the gt would solve this.
Im sure this would be popular. Why? cause most guys who pay extra for the GT are into serious power and upgrades. The people who want an inexpensive fuel efficient daily driver can buy the 6.(actually for what we are paying , forged internals should come standard on the GT's V-8)
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......
Where did I even discuss turbo? You want dozens of possible drivetrain configurations, and I'm telling you it will not happen.
The S/C Cobra was available with one powertrain, and had to sell quite a few units in order to recoup development costs. Now, each and every configuration possibility would have to be verified. Turbo/NA/SC, 8.8/9.0/IRS, 5-speed auto/5-speed manual/T-56, 4.0V6/4.6V8/5.0V8
How many options do you want? That's several dozen configurations, each of which would need to sell quite a few units to be justified. It doesn't work economically. I would love to see it happen, but I know it can't.
I don't appreciate the personal attack, and I'd suggest you calm yourself down a bit. This is a good thread - don't make it a flame war.
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'ers
(oh yah I said Bumpkin!)
next......
well 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?
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?
your right, personal attacks arent cool.
however , im just in here for stimulating discussion of upcoming mustang technologies.
I dont feel I was really 100% unprovoked as I didnt initially set out to attack others; I merely requested others opinions.
Dont get me wrong though, I enjoy blowing away ignorant people (verbally) just as much as I like stomping on my 2002 gt when Im already revving 5 grand and have a blonde teenage girl on my lap.
and yes, I DO feel i was responding to somewhat ignorant human beings.
(in their own simple language)
people must think as critically about their own posts as they do their own or accept the consequences.
nuff said - If you dont "feel" me by now then you never will.
however , im just in here for stimulating discussion of upcoming mustang technologies.
I dont feel I was really 100% unprovoked as I didnt initially set out to attack others; I merely requested others opinions.
Dont get me wrong though, I enjoy blowing away ignorant people (verbally) just as much as I like stomping on my 2002 gt when Im already revving 5 grand and have a blonde teenage girl on my lap.
and yes, I DO feel i was responding to somewhat ignorant human beings.
(in their own simple language)
people must think as critically about their own posts as they do their own or accept the consequences.
nuff said - If you dont "feel" me by now then you never will.
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.
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:
the word your looking for is relevant, my paragraph actually is stimulating; just not very relevant.
I dont see turbos coming anytime soon either (superchargers seem to be getting the job done just fine). I do think that even a concept car (ten liter DOHC) mustang with it would be the coolest viper stomping car around. (i guess you could say that the "concept" of the car could be accelerating to 100 mph in less than 4 seconds )
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. It's kinda brutish as most people call it. And I personally want something with good handling and lots of power. That doesn't have to rev to 6k to get into the power band. More of a corvette killer than Viper. Of course if I could have my way. It would handle like a porsche or lotus elise.
Horsepower
440 @ 7000 rpm
Torque
400 lb-ft @ 5500 rpm
that's what it says on 2005Fordmustang.com for the GT-R
440 @ 7000 rpm
Torque
400 lb-ft @ 5500 rpm
that's what it says on 2005Fordmustang.com for the GT-R
Then they must have changed it from the 01 model. Which is the one I have a little exp with. I guess that is good to know.
Similar threads
Progress Thread
Family member 1989 GT- Backstory and updates
