Banilejo

Hasn't Nissan's VQ V6 been making around 300hp out of 3.5 liters since 2006? At least in the 350z. This one is 3.7, a 3.7L VQ makes 330hp nowadays. Good for ford but not ground braking horsepower #s to me given the displacement.

MPG is impressive, I assume it mostly contributed to high gearing to get that highway number.

CarAndDriver

It was about time. The outgoing V6 passed its use by date a long time ago.

I'd have to go with the V6 Mustang over the V6 Camaro. The Mustang is much trimmer, has better interior styling and seems it would be easier to live with on a daily basis yet be just as fun to drive, if not more. From what I've read, it seems the Mustang is a lot more fun in the handling dept. than the capable yet ponderous Camaro.

77mjd

I guess it would be smart to price it very close to the V-6 Camaro.

Wonder if Dodge will also counter and replace the garbage engine in the base Challenger?

T-ReX-8

iTrader: (1)

You are Joking right...

REsuperD

of all these new pony cars, the mustang is the only one i'd actually own myself. the new gt really does look pretty awesome; the v6, not as awesome, but still decent-looking. they're all elephants, but the comparatively the camaro is a boat, and the challenger might as well be a full-size pickup truck. i'm really digging this new v6 mustang, if there's a gt-look-alike trim for the v6, along w/ the track pack, this'll be a pretty sweet deal

still, even tho the mustang has the best driving dynamics of the three, it might not really matter. for most people who buy these cars, looks, sound, and straight line grunt are what they want. i totally see way more camaros running around right now than mustangs. they really need that new v8 in the mustang

Grungepup

iTrader: (2)

but its STILL a mustang... blah

Symbioticgenius

This. THIS. T-H-I-S!

I like the Camaro styling, and understand bringing back the old school etc, but what pisses me off is how dare the same company that makes the Corvette, produce to POS we currently call the Camaro. They could have done so much better.

The time I found the specs of the Camaro was when I truly decided that GM deserves to die.... Impala's aren't even cop cars anymore lol, they've been replaced by Altimas and Prius'

Nonetheless, I'm glad the mustang is improving, I still don't understand why there suspension remains so antiquated, granted, I know little about serious drag racing, but if it doesn't help there, I'd love to see a lighter Stang with a decent suspension setup. Nonetheless, I'm glad its where it is.

kersh4w

iTrader: (3)

solid rear axle is very helpful in drag racing. independent rear suspension is about the worst thing you can do.

CarAndDriver

I wish the Mustang would go to a fully independent rear suspension, but I understand that in normal daily driving the majority of owners won't even notice the difference. With limited development dollars, something has to be scrimped. Hopefully, it'll lose it in the next big overhaul.

And hopefully the Camaro will go to Jenny Craig.

MICHGoBlue

why is high revving necessary when most of the power is available down low in the RPM range?

I guess the quick turn-in and the grip from the stock summer pirellis have car editors/writers raving about the new stang.

Maybe one of these days I'll stop by at a Ford dealer and check it out for myself.

renesisgenesis

Because the higher it revs the lower you can gear the car, so it will have more grunt at ALL rpm, including down low, assuming it still makes a good amount of torque at that rpm, which i'm sure it will at 3.7 liters. so you can have 280 ft/lb of torque and 280 bhp, or you can have a higher redline and also have 280 torque, but 305 bhp. so obviously higher revving is better.

Symbioticgenius

Now I understand the reasoning behind them keeping the rear axle. Cool.

MICHGoBlue

I'm not sure if it's as clear cut and simplistic as that, but since I'm no engine guru, I'll take your word for it.

But wouldn't the extra cost for a higher redline such as stronger pistons be passed onto the consumers who got the V6 most likely because it's more affordable?

renesisgenesis

yeah that's true i guess. One thing that sucks for the stang is that it's 3500 pounds, so the only way to get good power is to have a pretty expensive motor. An s2000, for example, only weighs 2800 pounds so it can be fast with just a simple 4 banger, albeit a really nice 4 banger. The solid rear axle bugs the hell out of me. I think the solid rear axle should be the new symbol for the republican party. It represents stupidity and a stubbornness to change.

RyansRx8

And let me guess this thing is gonna cost like 30k? **** that not even close to being worth it from a v6 n/a that I think looks like straight *****...buy an 03-04 cobra for 20k and its **** ton faster and looks way better

RotoRocket

iTrader: (1)

Buy Ford stock at your peril.

They have over 100 billion in debt, are struggling to refinance a huge chunk of it, still lose money on every car they sell, the UAW is picking more battles with Ford, and their profit center (pickup trucks) sales are down 40% from last year's already depressed levels.

I am just stating the facts.

I think Ford's P/E ratio is along the lines of negative 55 or greater.

m477

I had a 1995 Nissan 240SX a few years back (4-cyl). Compared to the same model year Mustang V-6, it had 10 more hp (and weighed over 300lbs less). I'd say the V-6 Mustang has made some significant progress in the past 15 years.

Chad D.

iTrader: (19)

With the upgrades being done, I am especially exited to see what the upper versions are going to be. ie- Roush, Saleen, Gaffoglio, Cobra, Shelby, Steeda.
Boy I am happy I bought my Ford stock @ under 2bucks. (Sold half of it and bought my 8 two months ago).

77mjd

^^^Yup. Just because Ford didnt take a bailout doesn't mean they are in any better shape than the other 2. They are still on very thin ice and I wouldn't invest in any of them. I don't even see how other companies allow Ford to have that kind of credit. The crushing overhead in the US auto industry has to be brought way down or they will all be dead...and technically two of them already are.

kersh4w

iTrader: (3)

symbiotic got it, but apparently a lot of other people did not.

FORD KEEPS THE SOLID REAR AXLE IN THERE INTENTIONALLY.

WHAT TYPE OF RACING ARE MUSTANGS KNOWN FOR?

HMMM, I DONT KNOW. MAYBE DRAG RACING?

since when do drag racers have IRS? there was a huuuuuuge argument in the camaro world where many camaro enthusiasts were very upset that chevy gave it IRS. ford kept in there for a reason. and its really not cost cutting. its about keeping the enthusiasts happy. and since when do we get angry at a company for that? (mazda, rotary, unprofitable, but its kept around? hmm.)

and unless you have serious intentions on purchasing a mustang for autocross/road racing, why are you upset about it?

dos

Awesome post man, could not have said it better. I know while I had my RX-8 many people said why don't they put a turbo 4 in that...

CyberPitz

Pardon my ignorance but "turbo 4"?

WTBRotary!

iTrader: (6)

Hey Grunge, why does your Santa hat have 2 white dots? lol I thought they only came with one...

WTBRotary!

iTrader: (6)

Word, he RG had a hard time explaining it but yes, higher power in the upper RPM's is better for gearing purposes, having Max torque at 5200 rpms (Rx-8) is better than 3000 rpms because then the power would die out faster and the redline would be lower etc... if you can have a consistent about of torque from 3-5.5k that would be ideal (in my opinion).

WTBRotary!

iTrader: (6)

Word....

And yes i know i should of multi-quoted people... :/ lol