2011 Mustang V6 now with 305 ponies
#26
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
MPG is impressive, I assume it mostly contributed to high gearing to get that highway number.
#27
2005 Black RX-8 GT 6M
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Jose Area
Posts: 6,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
#29
Stormtrooper RX8??
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a sweet V6, but the 315HP V8 they are currently using is doing just fine in their war with Chevy and Dodge. Check this out...
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...tang_gt_page_4
Ford is going to seriously make the other two cars its b**ches in 2011 when they get their 400HP V8.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...tang_gt_page_4
Ford is going to seriously make the other two cars its b**ches in 2011 when they get their 400HP V8.
#30
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
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
#32
You Dumbass!!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chevy shot themselves in the foot when they made the Camaro such an elephant. I mean, with the amazing engines that Chevy makes in a chassis weighing as much (preferably less) than the mustang, it would completely rape face. I think I've about given up on GM, sad as it is to say.
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.
#34
2005 Black RX-8 GT 6M
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Jose Area
Posts: 6,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
And hopefully the Camaro will go to Jenny Craig.
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
#36
mod edit
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
#37
You Dumbass!!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#38
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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?
#39
mod edit
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
#40
Brettward is/has a G
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
#41
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.
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.
#42
rotary courage
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
#44
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
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.
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.
#45
Hit & Run Magnet
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?
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?
#46
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?
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?
#49
Drummond Built
iTrader: (6)
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.
#50
Drummond Built
iTrader: (6)
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?
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?
Word....
And yes i know i should of multi-quoted people... :/ lol