Edmunds Inside Line dynoed the new 2011 Mustang GT and the results were....

[ndubz]

Originally Posted by Vr-4-Life

Then it snowballs into the muscle car movement all over again... its all about who can build them bigger and faster

Giggity Giggity Gooo

[Dr.JZ]

Originally Posted by DaveSTi

If that is the case, it would just be history repeating itself with the 5.0 The old T-5 would always break behind that 302.

Def some truth there...although my 1990 5.0 LX had 150 1/4 passes on it without one trans issue...clutches, that's another story

[Clutch450]

Originally Posted by Chris B.

The new 400+ HP Mustang is going to motivate Chevy to add more Power to the Camaro. It can only be a good thing.

That's what the Z28 Camaro is for.

[fityamaha]

Originally Posted by 420sx

Its still a mustang.

very, very true. It's taken them this long to finally add the some sophistication to their engine? unimpressive

[SleeperGoat]

Originally Posted by Clutch450

That's what the Z28 Camaro is for.

I saw 2015 they are redoing the camaro again to reduce body weight an size plus the SC'd LS Motor.

[Scapegoat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJHqb...ayer_embedded#

[JadedTuner]

Still a mustang and still weighs a too much and handles like crap.

[Renegade_]

Not this mustang chief... It kept up with a new BMW M3 on this track: http://www.trackpedia.com/mediawiki/.../Gingerman.jpg

Gittin Jr. has made ford his bitch and told them what was wrong with it and they listened finally. Steering geometry has changed is what gets me excited the most.

[Scapegoat]

Originally Posted by JadedTuner

Still a mustang and still weighs a too much and handles like crap.

[Sberk06]

Cars from the factory just keep getting faster and faster.. Pretty impressive. I wonder what the 1/4 mile will be? 13?

[Chris B.]

Originally Posted by JadedTuner

Still a mustang and still weighs a too much and handles like crap.

Ignorant comments like this make me laugh. Before I bought my current Mustang, most of my cars were 1900-2400 lb cars that handled very well. I wasn't sure if I would like the Mustang until I drove it. Yes, its a bit heavy compared to a Miata or Civic, but that's the price you pay for having a V8 and meeting modern safety standards. You can always find something that handles better than something else, but to say it handles like crap is just plain ignorant

A 2008 Mustang GT weighs 3350 lbs. with no options. That's within 30 lbs of a 2008 350Z. Yet, I hear no one saying the 350Z weighs too much and handles like crap. The 2005-2011 Mustang GT's have a 55%/45%-53%/47% weight balance depending on options. That's similar weight balance to the 3 series BMW and 350Z. On a road course, the 2008 350Z track and 2007/2008 Mustang GT ran times within a few seconds of each other when completely stock. Both the 350Z and Mustang GT would suffer brake fade after a few laps. The brake fade issue is easily solved when the street pads are replaced with race pads and the brake fluid is replaced.

Currently the 2005-2009 Mustang GT is the dominant car in SCCA F stock. Not only is it fast, but at many divisional events, the F stock Mustang GT's are running faster times than the stock class RX-8's and S2000's.

I've run faster lap times in my Mustang when it was nearly stock than the Spec Miatas were running on the same track the same day. I'm sure the Miata doesn't handle like crap. In Car & Driver's lightning lap competition, a 100% stock 2010 Mustang GT ran faster lap times than the new Miata, Civic Si, the Mugen Civic Si, Mini cooper S, the VW GTI, WRX STi, RX-8, G37 Sport, the Mini Cooper John Cooper Works edition, 2010 WRX, Lotus Elise SC, Mazdaspeed3, Solstice GXP, Honda S2000 CR, Genesis Coupe, 3.8, BMW 135i, and EVO MR. That's not a sign of a car that handles like crap. For 2011 the track pack will include 4 piston Brembo brakes and upgraded springs, shocks, and sway bars. I can't wait to see how much faster it is on a road course after that.

[Chris B.]

Originally Posted by Sberk06

Cars from the factory just keep getting faster and faster.. Pretty impressive. I wonder what the 1/4 mile will be? 13?

Motor Trend got a 12.7 or 12.8 out of the one they tested.

[SleeperGoat]

The new camaro's slow of course its going to beat it if you go on there forums there main worrys was the 05-06 GTO's. The car looks great but deffintly needs help an i'm sure when the 2011 GT comes out they'll finally realize it.

[Tires2theSky]

My first car was a 95 5.0 mustang but i will never own another one. Love the sound of the exhaust, they are pretty nice cars but there are so many around i get tired of seeing them. I would rather drive a slow car than buy a mustang

[DaveSTi]

Originally Posted by Chris B.

Ignorant comments like this make me laugh. Before I bought my current Mustang, most of my cars were 1900-2400 lb cars that handled very well. I wasn't sure if I would like the Mustang until I drove it. Yes, its a bit heavy compared to a Miata or Civic, but that's the price you pay for having a V8 and meeting modern safety standards. You can always find something that handles better than something else, but to say it handles like crap is just plain ignorant

A 2008 Mustang GT weighs 3350 lbs. with no options. That's within 30 lbs of a 2008 350Z. Yet, I hear no one saying the 350Z weighs too much and handles like crap. The 2005-2011 Mustang GT's have a 55%/45%-53%/47% weight balance depending on options. That's similar weight balance to the 3 series BMW and 350Z. On a road course, the 2008 350Z track and 2007/2008 Mustang GT ran times within a few seconds of each other when completely stock. Both the 350Z and Mustang GT would suffer brake fade after a few laps. The brake fade issue is easily solved when the street pads are replaced with race pads and the brake fluid is replaced.

Currently the 2005-2009 Mustang GT is the dominant car in SCCA F stock. Not only is it fast, but at many divisional events, the F stock Mustang GT's are running faster times than the stock class RX-8's and S2000's.

I've run faster lap times in my Mustang when it was nearly stock than the Spec Miatas were running on the same track the same day. I'm sure the Miata doesn't handle like crap. In Car & Driver's lightning lap competition, a 100% stock 2010 Mustang GT ran faster lap times than the new Miata, Civic Si, the Mugen Civic Si, Mini cooper S, the VW GTI, WRX STi, RX-8, G37 Sport, the Mini Cooper John Cooper Works edition, 2010 WRX, Lotus Elise SC, Mazdaspeed3, Solstice GXP, Honda S2000 CR, Genesis Coupe, 3.8, BMW 135i, and EVO MR. That's not a sign of a car that handles like crap. For 2011 the track pack will include 4 piston Brembo brakes and upgraded springs, shocks, and sway bars. I can't wait to see how much faster it is on a road course after that.

Time for some objectivity:

1). a few seconds a lap is a major difference.
2). laptimes don't just take into account handling, they take into account power and braking as well as driving ability.
3). BC of said power differences, it's really no reflection on handling ability to mention a host of cars that come with much less than the GT does.
4). Power to weight of the Mustang is higher than pretty much every car on your list. It makes sense for it to run faster depending on the track (short track, advantage shifts to a lighter better handling car...big track advantage shift to big power)
5). F Stock is a pretty weak SCCA class. The Mustang is put in there for a reason, and while the S197 platform is leaps and bounds better in the handling department than the old 1979 Fairmont fox body or SN195, it is not a good autocross platform due to its size and yes handling outside of F stock.
6). The 2011 is a huge step in the overall performance department. The next step is to get an IRS under the rear for better handling on bumpy tracks and better ride quality isolation over bumpy roads. Unfortunately, since 95% of Mustang owners drag race only, it'll be an uphill climb for people that know that a car has a steering wheel.

[mckpat03]

Originally Posted by chris b.

motor trend got a 12.7 or 12.8 out of the one they tested.

12.8 @ 110

[Chris B.]

Originally Posted by DaveSTi

Time for some objectivity:
1). a few seconds a lap is a major difference.

I can agree with that depending on the length of one lap.

Originally Posted by DaveSTi

2). laptimes don't just take into account handling, they take into account power and braking as well as driving ability.

I don't disagree with that. Car & Driver's Lightning Lap times are all with the same drivers. They run consistent lap times and are very familiar with the course.

The transition from acceleration to braking and braking to acceleration is part of handling. If the car gets unsettled easily, its slower. When you look at most affordable performance oriented street cars, their braking distances aren't hugely different, even from 70+ MPH. Things like pedal feel and modulation are important. To many people, brakign and pedal feel are also part of overall handling.

Originally Posted by DaveSTi

3). BC of said power differences, it's really no reflection on handling ability to mention a host of cars that come with much less than the GT does.

4). Power to weight of the Mustang is higher than pretty much every car on your list. It makes sense for it to run faster depending on the track (short track, advantage shifts to a lighter better handling car...big track advantage shift to big power)

The Honda S2000 CR, BMW 135i, and Genesis Coupe 3.8 aren't at a major disadvantage when it comes to power to weight. Especially since the Mustang GT's Car & Driver tested weren't stripped base models.

Honda S2000 CR: 240 HP, 2800 lbs = 11.6 lb/HP
Genesis Coupe 3.8: 306 HP 3390 lbs = 11.1 lb/HP
BMW 135i: 300 HP 3375 lbs = 11.25 lb/HP
Pontiac Solstice GXP: 260 HP 2975 lbs = 11.4 lb/HP
2010 Mustang GT: 315 HP 3533 lbs = 11.2 lb/HP

I seriously doubt that anyone would say the S2000 CR isn't a great handling car and for a 3500+ lb solid axle car with a similar power to weight ratio to run similar or faster lap times, then that's a sign of an overall good handling car.

Also, a car being able to handle more power without the chassis getting unsettled is part of overall handling.

Originally Posted by DaveSTi

5). F Stock is a pretty weak SCCA class. The Mustang is put in there for a reason, and while the S197 platform is leaps and bounds better in the handling department than the old 1979 Fairmont fox body or SN195, it is not a good autocross platform due to its size and yes handling outside of F stock.

True, F-stock itself isn't a strong class, but when F stock 2005+ Mustangs are running faster times in divisional events than the stock class RX-8's and S2000's, then the S197 isn't a poor handling car. That's why I mentioned, "the F stock Mustang GT's are running faster times than the stock class RX-8's and S2000's"

Originally Posted by DaveSTi

6). The 2011 is a huge step in the overall performance department. The next step is to get an IRS under the rear for better handling on bumpy tracks and better ride quality isolation over bumpy roads. Unfortunately, since 95% of Mustang owners drag race only, it'll be an uphill climb for people that know that a car has a steering wheel.

The IRS has been a cost issue. It costs more money to put an IRS in the car and also a lot of R&D money. Its never been a selling point for the Mustang to have an IRS. So its not worth it to put an IRS in the car. The bumpiest track I've been on was the infield courses at Pocono and I didn't have an issue there. I'm sure there are tracks worse than Pocono. I just haven't been to them yet.

Also, its amazing what better shocks do to the ride and handling of the solid axle S197. Get rid of the cheap shocks Ford put on the rear and it rides like a totally differnet car. The new solid axle setup is a completely different setup than the 1979-2004 Mustang solid axle setup. It shares nothing with the 1978 fairmont other than the ring and pinion gears.

[JadedTuner]

Originally Posted by Chris B.

Ignorant comments like this make me laugh. Before I bought my current Mustang, most of my cars were 1900-2400 lb cars that handled very well. I wasn't sure if I would like the Mustang until I drove it. Yes, its a bit heavy compared to a Miata or Civic, but that's the price you pay for having a V8 and meeting modern safety standards. You can always find something that handles better than something else, but to say it handles like crap is just plain ignorant

A 2008 Mustang GT weighs 3350 lbs. with no options. That's within 30 lbs of a 2008 350Z. Yet, I hear no one saying the 350Z weighs too much and handles like crap. The 2005-2011 Mustang GT's have a 55%/45%-53%/47% weight balance depending on options. That's similar weight balance to the 3 series BMW and 350Z. On a road course, the 2008 350Z track and 2007/2008 Mustang GT ran times within a few seconds of each other when completely stock. Both the 350Z and Mustang GT would suffer brake fade after a few laps. The brake fade issue is easily solved when the street pads are replaced with race pads and the brake fluid is replaced.

Currently the 2005-2009 Mustang GT is the dominant car in SCCA F stock. Not only is it fast, but at many divisional events, the F stock Mustang GT's are running faster times than the stock class RX-8's and S2000's.

I've run faster lap times in my Mustang when it was nearly stock than the Spec Miatas were running on the same track the same day. I'm sure the Miata doesn't handle like crap. In Car & Driver's lightning lap competition, a 100% stock 2010 Mustang GT ran faster lap times than the new Miata, Civic Si, the Mugen Civic Si, Mini cooper S, the VW GTI, WRX STi, RX-8, G37 Sport, the Mini Cooper John Cooper Works edition, 2010 WRX, Lotus Elise SC, Mazdaspeed3, Solstice GXP, Honda S2000 CR, Genesis Coupe, 3.8, BMW 135i, and EVO MR. That's not a sign of a car that handles like crap. For 2011 the track pack will include 4 piston Brembo brakes and upgraded springs, shocks, and sway bars. I can't wait to see how much faster it is on a road course after that.

i love how you instantaneously choose to compare it to various imports especially the 350Z. (oh and the Z handles like crap too and weighs a butt load).

A few seconds in the racing world can be the difference between first and last. So your point is moot. I never said it didnt have any potential to be a great handling car (as all cars do with the right amount of $$$$ cough KR cough).

And to be fair about your car and driver mention, track selection plays a huge key in what car will come out on top. On a tight road course the smaller cars will shine, and on a large drawn out course the larger more powerful cars will shine. I'd love to know what track they tested at. Also, gearing plays a KEY role.