PDA

View Full Version : 2011 Mustang V-6 Runs 11.73 was a big deal to MM/FF



ScrapSC
10-28-2011, 08:58 PM
Yup just saw this on video from the Beech Bend NMRA meet. Dont we have a few around here running faster than that??? :D

They also had a supercharger on that V-6 Mustang..

BLOWN38
10-28-2011, 09:51 PM
Yup just saw this on video from the Beech Bend NMRA meet. Dont we have a few around here running faster than that??? :D

They also had a supercharger on that V-6 Mustang..

Cause its a mustang:rolleyes:

XR7 Dave
10-28-2011, 09:57 PM
Well, I'm guessing that it's probably an internally stock motor which is pretty darn exciting really. Are there many other internally stock V6's running that quick?

ScrapSC
10-28-2011, 10:05 PM
Not sure if it was internally stock or not. But it was with all the 2011 technology goodies.

XxSlowpokexX
10-29-2011, 12:53 AM
how long will it last I guess. Thats the big question

XR7 Dave
10-29-2011, 04:51 AM
Post link.....

rjgraul
10-29-2011, 07:09 AM
Post link.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iNQzORkpaw :)

rjgraul
10-29-2011, 07:16 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iNQzORkpaw :)

Here is another one.

http://www.streetfire.net/video/12-second-v6-mustang_640759.htm

jdsgallops
10-29-2011, 08:28 AM
Why shouldn't it be exciting? If you followed the whole article you would know that the bolt ons did little to improve performance, besides the blower. IOW it is a blower, gears, and exhaust car running 11's. NO supercoupe can claim that nor can it claim 13's from the factory. I would happily take that setup ovver the old tech 3.8/eaton setup anyday for my bird. Gas mileage would be sure to improve also. And it would still have abunch of potential left in it. There is no reason NOT to be impressed with this.

nickleman60
10-29-2011, 08:35 AM
Here is another one.

http://www.streetfire.net/video/12-second-v6-mustang_640759.htm

This thread is talking about a 2011 model, not an older model like the link that you posted. And in case you didn't know there's a member on this site with a SC powered V-6 Mustang that runs mid 11's and he goes by the name of Roadhawg, look him up.

XxSlowpokexX
10-29-2011, 09:14 AM
Well of course you are starting off with new technology and a lot more hp...Besides everything else. And no supercoupe due to that and its weight is claiming 13's stock..just aint happening. So being relly impressed with a high 11 just isnt as impresive on a 305hp stock n/a mustang as it is on an already factory SC'd much lower hp thunderbird....I am however impressed with the new motor overall and expect that kind of performace with a blower.

As for a high an SC running high 11's with bolt ons....Depends what you consider boltons..How long the factory bottom end holds also is beyond me. But we do know a stock cammed SC motor with stock mustang split port heads TB and what not can get you into the low 11's. unsure what the best 1/4 or power that has been conducted on a stock bottom end..Maybe Ira?

Now single or twnurbo that new stang motor and lets make some real power!


Why shouldn't it be exciting? If you followed the whole article you would know that the bolt ons did little to improve performance, besides the blower. IOW it is a blower, gears, and exhaust car running 11's. NO supercoupe can claim that nor can it claim 13's from the factory. I would happily take that setup ovver the old tech 3.8/eaton setup anyday for my bird. Gas mileage would be sure to improve also. And it would still have abunch of potential left in it. There is no reason NOT to be impressed with this.

Paul93SC
10-29-2011, 09:35 AM
Post link.....

Here ya go....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCOYuGFR0_k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVFsq5-Ev4c

Personal note: Supercoupe technology is over 20 years old, and the 3.8L 90-degree V-6 wasn't the best engine technology (even back then). SC's are pretty unique cars and they will always have their place in history, but it's no surprise newer technology is superior to the old.

ScrapSC
10-29-2011, 10:28 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bTB3s1pw7E


I saw this on accident when checking out a buddy of mine that was running in King of the Street.

jdsgallops
10-29-2011, 08:14 PM
Well of course you are starting off with new technology and a lot more hp...Besides everything else. And no supercoupe due to that and its weight is claiming 13's stock..just aint happening. So being relly impressed with a high 11 just isnt as impresive on a 305hp stock n/a mustang as it is on an already factory SC'd much lower hp thunderbird....I am however impressed with the new motor overall and expect that kind of performace with a blower.

As for a high an SC running high 11's with bolt ons....Depends what you consider boltons..How long the factory bottom end holds also is beyond me. But we do know a stock cammed SC motor with stock mustang split port heads TB and what not can get you into the low 11's. unsure what the best 1/4 or power that has been conducted on a stock bottom end..Maybe Ira?

Now single or twnurbo that new stang motor and lets make some real power!

11.70's from a street car are impressive no matter what it is. Throw in the fact it will retain close to the factory fuel mileage of 31 mpg and most importantly retain it's factory 100,000mi warranty and there is again no reason to not be impressed. Honnestly though I am really sick of hearing about the weight being a factor. The new Mustang is no lightweightit is approaching that of the 89 to 97 t bird. Especially considering many of the t bird guys are getting weights down to 3650.

sdw
10-29-2011, 08:47 PM
So what's a 305 hp 2011 mustang with mods cost?

vrs

The cost for an 11.7 t'bird.

Sean

rzimmerl
10-29-2011, 09:43 PM
So what's a 305 hp 2011 mustang with mods cost?

vrs

The cost for an 11.7 t'bird.

Sean

Mine cost less then buying the 2011 Mustang and modding it for sure, and its still a stock shortblock on moderate boost.

bowez
10-29-2011, 10:23 PM
Considering I bought my SC for $4000 and then spent $2k on tranny I have over $13k to go to 1.5 second. I'm figuring heads, cam and tune to be ~$1500, should get me awful close and if not 10%OD and Snow. All this with a Eaton M90 case.

Toms-SC
10-30-2011, 12:24 AM
I'd still rather have the new technology. Want fuel economy? 2011 Mustang V6. Want parts? 2011 Mustang V6. Want aftermarket support? 2011 Mustang V6. Want to get your car worked on at the dealership? 2011 Mustang V6. The factory 3.8L V6 in our cars is finished. Parts will only become harder to find, aftermarket support is finished once Dave and Charles burn out. The only thing the Thunderbird has going for it is nostalgia and a comfortable ride.

XxSlowpokexX
10-30-2011, 01:03 AM
I'd still rather have the new technology. Want fuel economy? 2011 Mustang V6. Want parts? 2011 Mustang V6. Want aftermarket support? 2011 Mustang V6. Want to get your car worked on at the dealership? 2011 Mustang V6. The factory 3.8L V6 in our cars is finished. Parts will only become harder to find, aftermarket support is finished once Dave and Charles burn out. The only thing the Thunderbird has going for it is nostalgia and a comfortable ride.

Tom I guess if I wanted something everyone else had...Id just go buy a mustang....Allthough the new stang motor in my tbird with twin turboes and a 6 speed auto.....NOW THAT WOULD BE COOL..Eco boost tbird FTW!

XxSlowpokexX
10-30-2011, 01:08 AM
11.70's from a street car are impressive no matter what it is. Throw in the fact it will retain close to the factory fuel mileage of 31 mpg and most importantly retain it's factory 100,000mi warranty and there is again no reason to not be impressed. Honnestly though I am really sick of hearing about the weight being a factor. The new Mustang is no lightweightit is approaching that of the 89 to 97 t bird. Especially considering many of the t bird guys are getting weights down to 3650.

That v6 stang will not get a warrenty if it blows up! and as far as weight..Mines a little over 4100 with me in it..AND I get great gas miliage....When I dont get goofy with the foot pedal...But make no mistakes...Id rather hav ethe new 3.7 in my tbird along with a 6 speed auto or manual..And a turbo or two

XxSlowpokexX
10-30-2011, 01:09 AM
So what's a 305 hp 2011 mustang with mods cost?

vrs

The cost for an 11.7 t'bird.

Sean

I dont know....But I build mine cheap!

David Neibert
10-30-2011, 09:50 AM
That v6 stang will not get a warrenty if it blows up! and as far as weight..Mines a little over 4100 with me in it..AND I get great gas miliage....When I dont get goofy with the foot pedal...But make no mistakes...Id rather hav ethe new 3.7 in my tbird along with a 6 speed auto or manual..And a turbo or two

Why would anyone want the new 3.7 when you can get the 5.0 ? Is it really that important to keep a 6 clyinder under the hood of your SC ? I agree that a 3.5 twin turbo, direct injection ecoboost motor would be a cool swap, but the 3.7 NA motor doesn't do anything for me.

If I was going to do another motor swap it would be the new Boss 5.0 with an F series procharger.

David

jdsgallops
10-30-2011, 09:53 AM
So what's a 305 hp 2011 mustang with mods cost?

vrs

The cost for an 11.7 t'bird.

Sean

That is a loaded question. How do you do this apples to apples? How can you take a 20 year old car and compare it to new based solely on ET? you can't really. The options on the new car are much different. The build quality is much higher. It has shiny new paint, interior pieces are still intact and held tightly together. Tires are new. The only way to do a true apples to apples comparison is to totally refurbish the t bird. I know how much money I have just in parts for my Mustang. I haven't included any of my paint prep work in that and haven't touched the rearend save for changing the oil. The only part I haven't unbolted at some point in time is the K member. It will also need rims and tires to be driveable once the other work is done. Add in the parts I need to finish the project and I could easily buy a new Mustang with the money I have spent. Pay myself a measily $10 an hour for doing all the work myself and the mods are easily covered. If you have a shop do the work you might as well just put a deposit on a new Cobra.

Yeah the t bird could likely be done for less than my mustang based largely on the fact the entry level cost of the car and some stock rebuild parts are much cheaper. But as pointed out by another the 3.8 is old news and will soon have no support. The t bird has several known "problems". When the support is gone and all of the used cars are parted out or the pieces on the are in the same condition on all of them you will never have that totally refurbished car.

Slowpoke SEMA has our back on the warranty issue. Ford would need to prove the aftermarket part caused the engine failure. But engine technology is so advanced right now that even our 20 year old 3.8's go 200,000+ miles with no trouble. As long as the tune is safe there would be no worries by me, not to mention that same warranty covers a whole lot more than just the engine.

jdsgallops
10-30-2011, 09:58 AM
Why would anyone want the new 3.7 when you can get the 5.0 ? Is it really that important to keep a 6 clyinder under the hood of your SC ? I agree that a 3.5 twin turbo, direct injection ecoboost motor would be a cool swap, but the 3.7 NA motor doesn't do anything for me.

If I was going to do another motor swap it would be the new Boss 5.0 with an F series procharger.

David

I would much rather keep the heritage of the car by keeping a 6 in it. I would be all over the 3.7/vortech set up or the Taurus SHO 3.5 twin turbo if my mustang was finished and he price was right.

white95v6
10-30-2011, 10:51 AM
umm Pauls high performance went 10s on a stock long block 4.0L 05 up. and Justin Starky(VMP) wents 10s on a stock 3.8L.

ScrapSC
10-30-2011, 11:24 AM
It is a big market and as we all know on here the new Mustang has a huge following. The magazine is called Muscle Mustang/Fast Ford but we see very little of Fast Ford is what gripes many asses out there. The MM part gets 95% of the coverage or so it seems.

XR7 Dave
10-30-2011, 11:49 AM
If any of you are trying to justify what you are doing based on value / dollar / HP that is just silly. We CHOSE to work with 20yr old cars and EXPECT the challenges and downfalls that come with it.

If I were working on V6 or V8 Mustangs i would not CARE about SC Thunderbirds. As such I do not CARE about how fast a V6 Mustang is or isn't in comparison to my SC. I was just interested to know what they did to the motor/car to get where they got.

I have INTEREST in other platforms for their own sake, not to see how they stack up to my OLD SCHOOL T-bird. If you guys insist on comparing an SC to a new Mustang you are just going to end up walking around with a chip on your shoulder which makes for miserable company all around.

Anyway, since I can't view video's on this ~~~ 20yr old computer (trying to stay period correct here, lol), is there a printed article I can read?

MustangJake88
10-30-2011, 01:42 PM
Well, I'm guessing that it's probably an internally stock motor which is pretty darn exciting really. Are there many other internally stock V6's running that quick?
I'm pretty sure all they did was slap a blower, tune, and free flowing exhaust on it and called it a day.

jdsgallops
10-30-2011, 02:14 PM
If any of you are trying to justify what you are doing based on value / dollar / HP that is just silly. We CHOSE to work with 20yr old cars and EXPECT the challenges and downfalls that come with it.

If I were working on V6 or V8 Mustangs i would not CARE about SC Thunderbirds. As such I do not CARE about how fast a V6 Mustang is or isn't in comparison to my SC. I was just interested to know what they did to the motor/car to get where they got.

I have INTEREST in other platforms for their own sake, not to see how they stack up to my OLD SCHOOL T-bird. If you guys insist on comparing an SC to a new Mustang you are just going to end up walking around with a chip on your shoulder which makes for miserable company all around.

Anyway, since I can't view video's on this ~~~ 20yr old computer (trying to stay period correct here, lol), is there a printed article I can read?

Sorry Dave but I couldn't disagree with your statement more. The whole attitude of this site is Mustang bashing. Look at how the title of this thread was worded. Anybody here who has Mustang experience makes them a know it all and knows nothing about making an SC fast and then excuses of weight and independent suspensions come up. Yet in your own words YOU(The members of this site) CHOOSE the platform on which to base your performance aspirations. There is definately Mustang envy here. I have an interest in both platforms. My Mustang will always be my "track" car. It will be built with the best parts and go as fast as my budget allows. My t bird is my daily driver because we did not want another car payment with a new born. I come here to find out how to repair known problems, increase performance in a relaible cheap manner, and look for affordable parts. It doesn't matter if it has a bowtie on it, has 4 , 6, or 8 cylinders,is made in the us or overseas. They are all cars they all have 4 wheels, they are all internal combustion engines, and they all have steering wheels. There needs to be no brand or model envy.

I do agree though that the whole comparison of a 20 year old car versus new is stupid. I purchased my first new car 5 years ago. And as I was told by others it was a waste of money. I have no need to spend $35 to 40 on a new car. It is a poor investment. I will happily buy an older moldel and refurbish it. The intial cash outlay is less, it is a form of recycling and I enjoy relaxing in the garage working on my own vehicle.

XR7 Dave
10-30-2011, 03:08 PM
Sorry Dave but I couldn't disagree with your statement more. The whole attitude of this site is Mustang bashing. Look at how the title of this thread was worded. Anybody here who has Mustang experience makes them a know it all and knows nothing about making an SC fast and then excuses of weight and independent suspensions come up.

I could make a lot of generalizations about your attitude towards "us" too but I won't go there.

There's no Mustang envy here (meaning at this end of the keyboard). Zero. Damon doesn't have it, neither do a lot of others. A few do, and those are whom I directed my comments to. You are too new for me to have made that comment towards. Instead I was speaking to others who have SC's, have been around here awhile, and made those comparisons.

XR7 Dave
10-30-2011, 03:10 PM
I'm pretty sure all they did was slap a blower, tune, and free flowing exhaust on it and called it a day. Thanks, I was wondering. Running 11's with just that is fun, but I would get excited once someone goes a little deeper and starts to push the limits.

ricardoa1
10-31-2011, 11:15 AM
I can speak for my own, I dont have Mustang envy. But I dont care for the non-exclusive ones, you know the ones that you can rent at Hertz and beat on. I just dont care, but you give me a low production car/exclusive "SPORT" trim and Ill be all over it, no matter what it is it could be an OMNI turbo Id drive it. I care about the cars that I see myself driving and feeling proud about making payments or forking out cash for. Run of the mill cars can be impressive and I always give credit when its due, and if you own a run of the mill car that you built to go fast then you will get my seal of approval, but that doesnt mean I see myself driving it or wishing I had it.

kenewagner
10-31-2011, 11:55 AM
Sorry Dave but I couldn't disagree with your statement more. The whole attitude of this site is Mustang bashing. Look at how the title of this thread was worded. Anybody here who has Mustang experience makes them a know it all and knows nothing about making an SC fast and then excuses of weight and independent suspensions come up. Yet in your own words YOU(The members of this site) CHOOSE the platform on which to base your performance aspirations. There is definately Mustang envy here.


Are you for real:rolleyes: Guys here love Thunderbirds, stock ones as well as modded ones. I for one dont have Mustang envy. In my opinion there so many of them out there that it makes them less unique. Everytime I stop at a stop light I look to the side and theres some kid with a Mustang. They are a good car and have nothing against them I just like having something a little less common. Theres a lot of guys in the club who like Mustangs like roadhawh who dropped a SC motor in his mustang. Absolutely beautiful conversion. Its still at heart a Thunderbird club and yes we choose the platform we build off no regrets there. And you still sound like a know it all, try working at that a little harder:rolleyes:

Ken

XxSlowpokexX
10-31-2011, 01:36 PM
Just to answer my take

Dave N...I think a cotyote powered bird would be cool..But it wouldnt be enough HP for me. I think there would be a cool factor with the 3.7 ecoboost in an SC with a 6speed auto. Surely taking the stang 3.7 with some turboes would be insaine as well...Just being different. I like v8's just like the rest of us. But everyones got one including me and you

Gallops...Bottomline is engines are made to withstand a cetrain amount of "stress" so to speak. Adding an additional 100, 200 rwhp or whatever in and of itself may not cause failure. But even the best tuner does not tune like Ford tunes. Also overevving, missing a gear, bad gas on a supercharged car can cause failure easily on a stock motor that may not be that forgiving. SEMA really cant do anything about that IMO. They can try but bottomline is the engine and associated parts wernt meant to withstand that type of abuse. Warrenties arent for breaking things...They are for replaceing defective parts

As for what costs more and quality..The new mustangs have much better build quality then in the past. But they are still not a PREMIUM car. The SC was at the time a premium car. Yes the SC does have its fair share of engineering marvels which cause it to have a bad name in some areas...But I wouldnt trade my SC for a new stang..If that was the case id own one. I think many of us here would. We dont own SC's because we hate mustangs (some do)..Its because we truly love this platform. No a car built in 1989-1994 wont have the same electrocnic features..But comfort handling and ride quality....Cant be beat. I built my SC to what I wanted..JUst as I would a stang or any other car.

So back to cost. Depends.....Im cheap. However I managed to build an SC for less then the blower kit cost on that v6stang

David Neibert
10-31-2011, 02:11 PM
Damon,

Not that it changes anything, but the twin turbo direct injection Ecoboost motor is only 3.5 liters.

David

PS: I don't hate or envy Mustangs either..if I had a bigger garage I would have already bought a new Shelby GT350.

Miller
10-31-2011, 02:23 PM
I woulda swapped my junk into a stang back when I had planned on it, but then I woulda been a mustang guy. and the police just lo0o0o0ve mustang guys...:p:eek:;)

BirdofPrey97
10-31-2011, 02:25 PM
Damon,

Not that it changes anything, but the twin turbo direct injection Ecoboost motor is only 3.5 liters.

David

PS: I don't hate or envy Mustangs either..if I had a bigger garage I would have already bought a new Shelby GT350.

I am looking forward to the I4 Ecoboost that will be out in 2012.

All in all I would love to have a new Boss Mustang. Have a buddy with a 69 302 boss and the only reason i would have that car is because it came with a 6 pack on it, but now has a 4 barrel. Other than that a new Mustang far out does it in ride, quality, warranty and MPG and even HP. The old cars are just that.

Once good thing about the fuel "crisis" is that it made manufactures pickup the slack and stop putting out the crap they have been since 1976. Way better exhaust on todays car alone. No more power steering pumps, mechanical fans all sorts of fun parts missing now. New times new toys!!

XxSlowpokexX
10-31-2011, 08:30 PM
Damon,

Not that it changes anything, but the twin turbo direct injection Ecoboost motor is only 3.5 liters.

David

PS: I don't hate or envy Mustangs either..if I had a bigger garage I would have already bought a new Shelby GT350.

Correct my mistake. I got all 3.7 crazy there for a minute

CMac89
10-31-2011, 10:26 PM
The 2011 V6 Mustang motor reminds me of the 370Z. Sounds the same, too. I smell a rat.

MustangJake88
11-01-2011, 06:21 AM
Sorry Dave but I couldn't disagree with your statement more. The whole attitude of this site is Mustang bashing. Look at how the title of this thread was worded. Anybody here who has Mustang experience makes them a know it all and knows nothing about making an SC fast and then excuses of weight and independent suspensions come up. Yet in your own words YOU(The members of this site) CHOOSE the platform on which to base your performance aspirations. There is definately Mustang envy here. I have an interest in both platforms. My Mustang will always be my "track" car. It will be built with the best parts and go as fast as my budget allows. My t bird is my daily driver because we did not want another car payment with a new born. I come here to find out how to repair known problems, increase performance in a relaible cheap manner, and look for affordable parts. It doesn't matter if it has a bowtie on it, has 4 , 6, or 8 cylinders,is made in the us or overseas. They are all cars they all have 4 wheels, they are all internal combustion engines, and they all have steering wheels. There needs to be no brand or model envy.

I do agree though that the whole comparison of a 20 year old car versus new is stupid. I purchased my first new car 5 years ago. And as I was told by others it was a waste of money. I have no need to spend $35 to 40 on a new car. It is a poor investment. I will happily buy an older moldel and refurbish it. The intial cash outlay is less, it is a form of recycling and I enjoy relaxing in the garage working on my own vehicle.
I am a die-hard Mustang person. They are my favorite car hands down. But out of all three off the 5.0 Mustangs I have had, which were equipped with full exhaust and fenderwell cold air kits, my bone stock '89 SC with a Ripper shifter would have blown the doors off of all of them. As much as I love Mustangs, their performance, looks, etc., right now I am DYING to get back into a Super Coupe.

jdsgallops
11-01-2011, 11:27 AM
I am a die-hard Mustang person. They are my favorite car hands down. But out of all three off the 5.0 Mustangs I have had, which were equipped with full exhaust and fenderwell cold air kits, my bone stock '89 SC with a Ripper shifter would have blown the doors off of all of them. As much as I love Mustangs, their performance, looks, etc., right now I am DYING to get back into a Super Coupe.

Now do you have real hard actual numbers to document this or are you just going bySOTP? We got rid of the wife's 01 Gt and replaced it with the 90sc. 260 factory hp plus the same bolt ons as you 5.0 gt's. Should have been 240ish Hp through an auto. My Sc has simple bolt ons and is a 5 speed. Ask the wife which felt faster and she said the sc. Once the SC gets to the track the numbers will tell the story. Bottom line is though a heavier car with less Hp isn't gonna put up better Et's. Torque is what you feel. With the v6 and blower the way ford designed it the Sc will feel faster. Doesn't mean it is. I have heard bolt on some bias ply drag tires will help though.

Slowpoke you must be kidding me. It takes a blower or other power adder to miss a shift or spin a bearing? Been there done that on N/A engines. The issues you listed can happen on ANY engine at ANY power level. SEMA has fought for the aftermarkets right to produce parts that comply with Ford's warranty. You don't miss shifts because of a a blower you miss them because of lack of practice. But I heard the bias ply drag tires help with that too.

BLOWN38
11-01-2011, 11:37 AM
Now do you have real hard actual numbers to document this or are you just going bySOTP? We got rid of the wife's 01 Gt and replaced it with the 90sc. 260 factory hp plus the same bolt ons as you 5.0 gt's. Should have been 240ish Hp through an auto. My Sc has simple bolt ons and is a 5 speed. Ask the wife which felt faster and she said the sc. Once the SC gets to the track the numbers will tell the story. Bottom line is though a heavier car with less Hp isn't gonna put up better Et's. Torque is what you feel. With the v6 and blower the way ford designed it the Sc will feel faster. Doesn't mean it is. I have heard bolt on some bias ply drag tires will help though.

Slowpoke you must be kidding me. It takes a blower or other power adder to miss a shift or spin a bearing? Been there done that on N/A engines. The issues you listed can happen on ANY engine at ANY power level. SEMA has fought for the aftermarkets right to produce parts that comply with Ford's warranty. You don't miss shifts because of a a blower you miss them because of lack of practice. But I heard the bias ply drag tires help with that too.

you have trouble comprehending.

ricardoa1
11-01-2011, 12:13 PM
SEMA? Put on an aftermarket part on your car and bring it to the dealer. If its almost directely related to the failed component. IE Full intake, and your engine fails, Better have someone you know at the dealer~~~~, cause once it goes into the system you better have a very good lawer with some cash in your pocket to go after ford. Drivetrain broken? Well lets take a look at your tire wear....
Its been done over and over at dealerships across america. You get to hear the stories from the folks that lawyer up. But most of the victims are too busy working to pay off the car loan.


This whole mustang/302 threads that have been so popular lately are kinda dumb. If you like a mustang you buy one, if you like Birds buy one. If you like them both. Buy them both, If you could only afford one then pick the one that will make you happy.

Comparing the two cars is just plain dumb. Making each of them fast and better your own exitement and proud ownership, is not.


To add do you get more credit when you take down a mustang with a bird? yes, its called the underdog effect.
Do you get more recognition when a mustang takes down a Vette? yes, same idea.

fturner
11-01-2011, 01:42 PM
The funny thing is, the SC was not built for drag racing in the first place. It was built to run on roads like the autobahn and nice twisty roads. Until recently, no "stock" mustang could match an SC handling wise, and I'd still put an SC that has been totally refreshed against a stock new mustang on the road course any day.

I can easily push my SC over 160mph and feel confident driving it at that speed. I can also easily get 30+mpg cruising around with it as well, and be in nice luxury comfort. Not bad for 20 year old technology.

The motor being a dead horse? I don't think so. Its got a lot of life in it, and as we progress new things are being developed to make more power with it. No one has reached the max potential of the motor yet, and despite its short comings, and lack of aftermarket support, the numbers we are seeing today are very impressive. Just imagine what it would do with new heads and intake.

Its also amusing about the conversation, we're talking 20 years of technology improvements, and a lot of that technology came from the SC in the first place. I would darn well hope the new cars are better.

The worse attitudes and car bashing I've seen and heard both on forums and at the track come from mustang owners. How dare anyone beat that car. Ask a lot of the SC owners around here what its like to post on a mustang forum...... We've had a few mustang owners here who have swapped in the SC motor successfully, and they are always welcomed.

I like my SC, because to date there has been no replacement built that gives me the satisfaction it does, of course I don't 1/4 mile race as much anymore but use the car where it shines the most :D. Road course racing and cruising around in full luxury comfort.

Fraser

jdsgallops
11-01-2011, 01:58 PM
you have trouble comprehending.

I have no trouble comprehending. He pointed the finger at everything that could go wrong but the driver. His tune argument is even more ridicoulous. I first tweecered my Mustang when modding it. I got sick of all the playing and time and decided to pay a nationally known tuner big money to do the tune on the new combo instead. Needless to say going to a respected shop and having a nationally known professional tuner do my car I listened to them when they told me it was all it had in it. Never mind it would barely spin a tire. Used my own knowledge and changed one thing and had all my power back. Got sick of the "professional tune" and put a tweecer back on it. With a tweecer I could put the car much closer "to the edge" than a paid professional as they aren't going to take the liability of destoying your property. Not to mention tuning a simple bolt on car really isn't going to need much in the way of changes. The really funny thing to me is the new 5.0 cars are running stock block, crank, and ported heads with a blower and going mid 8's. Ford doesn't build them like they use too. The are over engineered from the. Factory KNOWING they are going to get modded and to insure reliability even if they are not.

Regardless of which car you prefer the "bashing" needs to stop. Ford played 2nd fiddle for too long to Chevy. Both cars are built by Ford. We should be applauding each other when new milestones are set. Besides where would we all be if the original 5.0 hadn't lit the spark to the aftermarket like it did?

David Neibert
11-01-2011, 05:38 PM
I have heard bolt on some bias ply drag tires will help though.


Good advice !

Roadhawg
11-01-2011, 07:28 PM
Mustang Rule!!!!!!
I had to say that, I have 3 Mustang plus a supercharged Tbird. ;)

ScrapSC
11-01-2011, 07:50 PM
:)I didnt post this up for anyone to get butt hurt. :) I also disagree with the statement that this site is all about mustang bashing. That is straight up BS!! Funny thing is I came across this video when checking out a good buddy of mine that ran in the street shootout at Bowling Green. They picked 9 cars and he was one of them. Love the look and sound of his car. Your generalizations of what we think on this site is overreaching and way off base when you make the comment that it is all about mustang bashing.....:D

Micahdogg
11-01-2011, 09:56 PM
11.7 is impressive no doubt. But, I think it's on par at best with what has been going on.

For instance, back in 2005, the GT Mustang was 300HP and ran 13's stock. The pumped up 4.0L was 210 HP and ran low 15's. I remember being pretty impressed with the PowerHouse Turbo kits that were putting V6's firmly into the 12's (and with less boost than you would think).

So for a 2011 to run 13's stock, then shave off two seconds with boost is par for the course IMO. I'm still more impressed at what it can do stock.

BirdofPrey97
11-02-2011, 08:13 AM
1989 Thunderbird SC 260hp V6 Supercharged

2012 Focus 247hp I4 Turbocharged
If you want to get crazy get the ST-R version for just under $100k.

2013 Taurus 290hp V6 Turbocharged 27mpg

Ford has I believe 14 vehicles they plan to put the Ecoboost Series Engines into.

EcoBoost 3-Cyl 1.0L Turbo
EcoBoost I4 2.3L Turbo
Engine: EcoBoost I4 1.6L Turbo
Engine: EcoBoost I4 2.0L Turbo
Engine: EcoBoost V6 3.5L Turbo
Engine: EcoBoost V8 Turbo

Formula Ford EcoBoost
Ford C-Max
Ford Edge EcoBoost
Ford Explorer EcoBoost
Ford F-150 EcoBoost
Ford Fiesta EcoBoost
Ford Flex EcoBoost
Ford Focus EcoBoost
Ford Focus ST-R EcoBoost
Ford Mondeo EcoBoost
Ford Ranger EcoBoost
Ford Mustang EcoBoost
Ford Taurus SHO EcoBoost
Land Rover Evoque EcoBoost
Lincoln MKS EcoBoost
Lincoln Navigator EcoBoost


Life will be interesting, but there is still nothing that makes me feel better after a long day or week of work and going home and wrenching on the SC. Now with the kid, new house, new location and wife the real challenge to making the SC better is just finding the time to bolt things on. ;):D

XR7 Dave
11-02-2011, 08:58 AM
Tuning is very important. The SC got it's relatively bad name over the years because no one could tune it. Think how many people took their 94 Mustangs and swapped out the T4M0 for an A9L because they couldn't tune the T4M0. There was a long list a few years back. The SC had much bigger challenges. The Tweecer didn't work on the SC at all until we developed the definition files for it just a couple years ago.

But with respect to the new 3.7L V6 - tuning will not be an issue and I highly doubt that durability will be an issue either. The current Ford prescription for durability testing on any and all new powerplants is retardedly comprehensive. If I were to wager a guess, I'd say that the new V6 should live long and prosper at 450-500rwhp levels. That would be my guess. Our motors "live long and prosper" at about 300-350rwhp levels.

With proper tuning of course.

MustangJake88
11-02-2011, 10:08 AM
Now do you have real hard actual numbers to document this or are you just going bySOTP? We got rid of the wife's 01 Gt and replaced it with the 90sc. 260 factory hp plus the same bolt ons as you 5.0 gt's. Should have been 240ish Hp through an auto. My Sc has simple bolt ons and is a 5 speed. Ask the wife which felt faster and she said the sc. Once the SC gets to the track the numbers will tell the story. Bottom line is though a heavier car with less Hp isn't gonna put up better Et's. Torque is what you feel. With the v6 and blower the way ford designed it the Sc will feel faster. Doesn't mean it is. I have heard bolt on some bias ply drag tires will help though.

Well I hate to say it but it was quicker than all of my Mustangs I've had. All of my 5.0's had the stock E7T heads, which are a huge cork on those engines. My SC had power all through the gears. Granted my current Mustang pulls hard on top end having a Trick Flow plenum and full exhaust with 2.73 gears, my SC still felt like it pulled a tad harder with just a cold-air kit and 3.27's. And I am very aware of the torque the SC puts out. That's why mine would smoke first and second gear, and chirp third. If I put a decent set of heads on my Mustang it would run like a raped ape, but I don't have the money right now.

MustangJake88
11-02-2011, 10:11 AM
Mustang Rule!!!!!!
I had to say that, I have 3 Mustang plus a supercharged Tbird. ;)
You sound like me! I love me some Ford Power! Hell, still to this day I still miss my '89 Taurus SHO 5-speed. That's another car I still contemplate picking up again, but another SC is first on my list.:cool:

XxSlowpokexX
11-02-2011, 02:01 PM
My SC is faster then my fox stang with heads/cam/intake/exhaust and so on...I can finally say that haha!

ricardoa1
11-02-2011, 02:10 PM
As for price do you want to use new parts or used?. Also what base are you starting with? Mint sc or project wheels falling off. Again tought to answer. But i bet the mustang will be about 30k and the sc will be around 15-20k.

Tim Groth
11-02-2011, 02:25 PM
Tom I guess if I wanted something everyone else had...Id just go buy a mustang....Allthough the new stang motor in my tbird with twin turboes and a 6 speed auto.....NOW THAT WOULD BE COOL..Eco boost tbird FTW![/

Since I've bought my Mustang I get news on the upcoming Stangs from the forums and so forth... The 2013 GT500 has been rumored/speculated/ possibly confirmed to come with a 5.8l V8 w/ Twin Turbos FYI :D

600hp stock is the baseline - more hp than the Camaro ZL1 is what Ford is going for.

Things are about to get really interesting in the modern area of muscle car wars.

-Tim

XxSlowpokexX
11-02-2011, 03:03 PM
5.8 liter? WHich engine is that? I say tt a 6.2 and call it a day haha

BirdofPrey97
11-02-2011, 03:05 PM
5.8 liter? WHich engine is that? I say tt a 6.2 and call it a day haha

http://www.ecoboostcentral.com/category/ecoboost-engines/engine-ecoboost-v8-turbo/

Not much details available to the public.

jdsgallops
11-02-2011, 03:22 PM
Well I hate to say it but it was quicker than all of my Mustangs I've had. All of my 5.0's had the stock E7T heads, which are a huge cork on those engines. My SC had power all through the gears. Granted my current Mustang pulls hard on top end having a Trick Flow plenum and full exhaust with 2.73 gears, my SC still felt like it pulled a tad harder with just a cold-air kit and 3.27's. And I am very aware of the torque the SC puts out. That's why mine would smoke first and second gear, and chirp third. If I put a decent set of heads on my Mustang it would run like a raped ape, but I don't have the money right now.

Still don't see any hard factual numbers here. What you feel is meaningless. Did any of these cars ever make it to the track and have numbers to verify what you are claiming? I know what a stock bolt on 5.0 will do. I had a friend go through a string of them for a while. One of his early one, an 87 gt IIRC, had the stock 2.73's and an off road pipe and went 14.5's. That is at least a 1/2 sec quicker than a stock 89 sc. His last one went 13.3's@103 on a stock rebuild long block stock intake and bolt ons using a "tiny" 235/60 15 bfg drag radial. Any bolt on 5.0 Mustang that can't run 13's needs one of two things. A driver mod or a set of bias ply drag tires for lack of driver.

Tim Groth
11-02-2011, 03:42 PM
Here's the link from my email news letter. http://view.autos.ibemail.com/?j=fe9415747060027e71&m=fea215707766017c77&ls=fdf815737c65007e751d717d&l=fed515717764077e&s=fe2616797661047b731274&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe60167274610c7b7117&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=ExactTarget&utm_campaign=&r=0

Pasted from my Droid so hope link ads some insight...

-Tim

kenewagner
11-02-2011, 03:49 PM
Still don't see any hard factual numbers here. What you feel is meaningless. Did any of these cars ever make it to the track and have numbers to verify what you are claiming? I know what a stock bolt on 5.0 will do. I had a friend go through a string of them for a while. One of his early one, an 87 gt IIRC, had the stock 2.73's and an off road pipe and went 14.5's. That is at least a 1/2 sec quicker than a stock 89 sc. His last one went 13.3's@103 on a stock rebuild long block stock intake and bolt ons using a "tiny" 235/60 15 bfg drag radial. Any bolt on 5.0 Mustang that can't run 13's needs one of two things. A driver mod or a set of bias ply drag tires for lack of driver.

Man you really got work on your I know it all attitude (I had, I know, used my knowledge) and blowing people's statements off. God gave you two ears to listen twice as much as you talk. Try giving the tire thing a rest too, getting kind of old:rolleyes:

Ken

jdsgallops
11-02-2011, 04:12 PM
Tuning is very important. The SC got it's relatively bad name over the years because no one could tune it. Think how many people took their 94 Mustangs and swapped out the T4M0 for an A9L because they couldn't tune the T4M0. There was a long list a few years back. The SC had much bigger challenges. The Tweecer didn't work on the SC at all until we developed the definition files for it just a couple years ago.

But with respect to the new 3.7L V6 - tuning will not be an issue and I highly doubt that durability will be an issue either. The current Ford prescription for durability testing on any and all new powerplants is retardedly comprehensive. If I were to wager a guess, I'd say that the new V6 should live long and prosper at 450-500rwhp levels. That would be my guess. Our motors "live long and prosper" at about 300-350rwhp levels.

With proper tuning of course.

I contacted Mike recently(designer/owner of the tweecer) and verified with him that the files had been updated as the only info I could find in searching was several years old. He did say the GURE series had been cleaned up, though he was concerned that the A0H0(for my 90 5 speed looked to be a small file that may have been missed. Since I am down a lap top right now I can't do much. But having that info helps my argument in getting a new one. If you helped clean these files up Dave, thank you. Since I am already familiar with the tweecer is saves me time and money.

jdsgallops
11-02-2011, 04:22 PM
Man you really got work on your I know it all attitude (I had, I know, used my knowledge) and blowing people's statements off. God gave you two ears to listen twice as much as you talk. Try giving the tire thing a rest too, getting kind of old:rolleyes:

Ken

Sorry Ken won't be giving up the tire thing. I believe too much in actually learning to drive the car first. As far as the rest of my wording I. Use those words because it is my experience not book or internet hersay. Besides if I were truly a "know it all" I would be in every thread and tell every person how to fix everything. I remain very quiet until I see uneeded bashing(again look at the way the title of this thread was worded) or bad advice. What I am is very opinionated because of MY experiences and will defend them to the death. That is what our great country is all about. Which means if you don't like what I have to say you have the freedom to ignore it or go to your control panel and add me to your block/ignore list.

David Neibert
11-02-2011, 04:28 PM
Sorry Ken won't be giving up the tire thing. I believe too much in actually learning to drive the car first. As far as the rest of my wording I. Use those words because it is my experience not book or internet hersay. Besides if I were truly a "know it all" I would be in every thread and tell every person how to fix everything. I remain very quiet until I see uneeded bashing(again look at the way the title of this thread was worded) or bad advice. What I am is very opinionated because of MY experiences and will defend them to the death. That is what our great country is all about. Which means if you don't like what I have to say you have the freedom to ignore it or go to your control panel and add me to your block/ignore list.

By your own admission, you don't have any experince racing your SC with or without a drag tire, so why not keep it real and stick to the facts, until you do.

David

kenewagner
11-02-2011, 08:23 PM
Sorry Ken won't be giving up the tire thing. I believe too much in actually learning to drive the car first. As far as the rest of my wording I. Use those words because it is my experience not book or internet hersay. Besides if I were truly a "know it all" I would be in every thread and tell every person how to fix everything. I remain very quiet until I see uneeded bashing(again look at the way the title of this thread was worded) or bad advice. What I am is very opinionated because of MY experiences and will defend them to the death. That is what our great country is all about. Which means if you don't like what I have to say you have the freedom to ignore it or go to your control panel and add me to your block/ignore list.

So lets see in post #14 you say your really sick of weight being an issue but in post 41 you say "Once the SC gets to the track the numbers will tell the story. Bottom line is though a heavier car with less Hp isn't gonna put up better Et's." Tells me you not consistent with your weight argument besides as David points out, you havent even been to the track with it. In post #59 you state "Still don't see any hard factual numbers here" than go on to talk all about your buddy and what his numbers are,where are your numbers?. In post #29 you say "My Mustang will always be my "track" car. It WILL BE built with the best parts and go as fast as my budget allows". Sounds like you have no numbers to back up anything. Sounds like you dont even have a built Mustang. Is that true. Why are you on here busting peoples chops and cant including numbers to back up you statements. I dont even hear you talking about maybe owning a prior fast car with claimed numbers to back up all your so called experence. A lot of these guys who have posted in this thread run at the track year after year with Thunderbirds and understand its strengths and weakness and have real world experence driving their thunderbirds. Take your SC to the track than tell us your real world experence or finish your Mustang and do likewise. See I can be opinionated as well thanks to our great country and your welcome to block or ignore me as well;)

Ken

MustangJake88
11-02-2011, 08:34 PM
Still don't see any hard factual numbers here. What you feel is meaningless. Did any of these cars ever make it to the track and have numbers to verify what you are claiming? I know what a stock bolt on 5.0 will do. I had a friend go through a string of them for a while. One of his early one, an 87 gt IIRC, had the stock 2.73's and an off road pipe and went 14.5's. That is at least a 1/2 sec quicker than a stock 89 sc. His last one went 13.3's@103 on a stock rebuild long block stock intake and bolt ons using a "tiny" 235/60 15 bfg drag radial. Any bolt on 5.0 Mustang that can't run 13's needs one of two things. A driver mod or a set of bias ply drag tires for lack of driver.
Timeslip pics or I call BS. MM&FF took a stock 5.0 LX hatchback, installed gears, exhaust, pullies, electric fan, cold air intake, throttle body, and a shifter and they barely broke 13's with it. You don't need to run a car at the track to be able to tell if it was quicker than another car. My SC pulled hard when I could get it to hook up decently. You have to put into consideration that all of my 5.0's were automatics. So if you seriously still think you're going to sit here and try to convince me that my Mustangs are quicker than my old Super Coupe then you are just wasting your time. Not trying to be an ~~~. I was the one driving the vehicles.

Micahdogg
11-02-2011, 08:46 PM
A local guy around here Troy Griffitt's went 13's in his bone stock 93 LX hatch 5.0L with a T-5 and drag radials.

http://www.andersonfordmotorsport.com/cars/Tgriffitts.html

That car went 11.9's with the n/a 302 back in 1997. But he broke T-5's all the time, poweshifted the hell out of the car, constantly spit clutches out, etc....

There is a fine line between "learning how to drive" and beating your investment within an inch of it's life while breaking the same parts over and over just for a timeslip so you can say "ha, see..." on the internets.

XR7 Dave
11-03-2011, 09:28 AM
A local guy around here Troy Griffitt's went 13's in his bone stock 93 LX hatch 5.0L with a T-5 and drag radials.

http://www.andersonfordmotorsport.com/cars/Tgriffitts.html

That car went 11.9's with the n/a 302 back in 1997. But he broke T-5's all the time, poweshifted the hell out of the car, constantly spit clutches out, etc....

There is a fine line between "learning how to drive" and beating your investment within an inch of it's life while breaking the same parts over and over just for a timeslip so you can say "ha, see..." on the internets.

Which is kind of where I was going with that whole "buy some bias ply tires" thing. I've been to the track way too many times with kids hoping to run xxx on street tires only to have to get towed home. It's not worth the bother. We can't all be hero's. :rolleyes:

pro street rich
11-03-2011, 09:45 AM
11.70's from a street car are impressive no matter what it is. Throw in the fact it will retain close to the factory fuel mileage of 31 mpg and most importantly retain it's factory 100,000mi warranty and there is again no reason to not be impressed. Honnestly though I am really sick of hearing about the weight being a factor. The new Mustang is no lightweightit is approaching that of the 89 to 97 t bird. Especially considering many of the t bird guys are getting weights down to 3650.

So please tell me when this change was made from Ford?? 5 Years or 60,000 is the right answer.... Please get that right will you..
Now as for a 11 second street cars well there are a bunch of them around here. Most people don't brag on just how fast the car they drive really is. The fastest page is so out of wack and no one even cares, or so it seems. Sure you can get anything to run if you want, but most people don't care. Now while you are at it, lets get another couple over 4 feet tall and go out on a double date in a 11 second car... Will it be a mustang?? heck no, just try to sit in the rear seat for more than 10 seconds with another person and you will see what I am talking about... My t-birds have had a lot of people in the back seat without using a shoe horn to get them in or a crane to get them out... Try that with a mustang LOL.......Rich

ScrapSC
11-03-2011, 10:32 AM
Sad thing is this Nar Nar just cant get it through his thick skull that I wasnt bashing the mustang when I TITLED this thread. No need in getting butt hurt and whining/crying over the title.... The title wasnt bashing the car.... It was bashing MM/FF... Um MM/FF make a big deal out of it.... I dont see anywhere in that statement that I was bashing the mustang. What I get tired of hearing is articles only about the the Mustang.

That friend of mine I was talking about has a GT500 with a 6 speed and ran a 9.96. My cousin runs a 351 with a centrifigal and needs to dial a tune in. He ran a 6.60 in the 1/8th... So I am not bashing the cars and if I were, get over it.:) Sounds as though you should be on Corral or SVT forum instead of on the SCCoA site with all the crap you have been spitting out anyway. ;)

So it isnt the car I have an issue with. It is the magazine and I feel that there are other Ford cars that I feel they should cover that have become pretty quick. :D

kenewagner
11-03-2011, 10:45 AM
Sad thing is this Nar Nar just cant get it through his thick skull that I wasnt bashing the mustang when I TITLED this thread. No need in getting butt hurt and whining/crying over the title.... The title wasnt bashing the car.... It was bashing MM/FF... Um MM/FF make a big deal out of it.... I dont see anywhere in that statement that I was bashing the mustang. What I get tired of hearing is articles only about the the Mustang.

That friend of mine I was talking about has a GT500 with a 6 speed and ran a 9.96. My cousin runs a 351 with a centrifigal and needs to dial a tune in. He ran a 6.60 in the 1/8th... So I am not bashing the cars and if I were, get over it.:) Sounds as though you should be on Corral or SVT forum instead of on the SCCoA site with all the crap you have been spitting out anyway. ;)

So it isnt the car I have an issue with. It is the magazine and I feel that there are other Ford cars that I feel they should cover that have become pretty quick. :D

I could see that in your wording right away. I subscribed to the magazine for a year but since it is biased toward Mustangs and saw few other Ford cars I dropped it. I even sent in pictures of my bird and its modifacation history, thinking how cool would that be to be in the magazine. Yep I saw little in Mustang bashing going on in this thread but some people see things not there and probably hear voices in their head as well:rolleyes:

Ken

old_coot
11-03-2011, 11:01 AM
Sad thing is this Nar Nar just cant get it through his thick skull that I wasnt bashing the mustang when I TITLED this thread. No need in getting butt hurt and whining/crying over the title.... The title wasnt bashing the car.... It was bashing MM/FF... Um MM/FF make a big deal out of it.... I dont see anywhere in that statement that I was bashing the mustang. What I get tired of hearing is articles only about the the Mustang.

That friend of mine I was talking about has a GT500 with a 6 speed and ran a 9.96. My cousin runs a 351 with a centrifigal and needs to dial a tune in. He ran a 6.60 in the 1/8th... So I am not bashing the cars and if I were, get over it.:) Sounds as though you should be on Corral or SVT forum instead of on the SCCoA site with all the crap you have been spitting out anyway. ;)

So it isnt the car I have an issue with. It is the magazine and I feel that there are other Ford cars that I feel they should cover that have become pretty quick. :D

My thinking is the magazine's purpose is to generate sales for the aftermarket, period. So they are going to go with things that can generate the most sales-ergo the mustang.....what's new about that.

Roadhawg
11-03-2011, 11:42 AM
Has anyone thought of putting a Supecoupe engine in a Mustang?

neverfastenough
11-03-2011, 11:47 AM
Has anyone thought of putting a Supecoupe engine in a Mustang?

Nope, can't be done. Shame because that would make a mustang cool ish.:p

kenewagner
11-03-2011, 11:55 AM
Has anyone thought of putting a Supecoupe engine in a Mustang?


If someone did they would be a genius:D

Ken

ScrapSC
11-03-2011, 02:01 PM
Cant be done!!!! Might as well research and try to invent the Flux Capacitor!!!!

fturner
11-03-2011, 02:41 PM
The Tweecer is old junk now, as it can't come close to the QH in capability, both for mustangs and SC's.... which shows how behind you are in tech, which also shows you are missing out on some very important tuning elements.

Fraser

pro street rich
11-03-2011, 03:34 PM
Cant be done!!!! Might as well research and try to invent the Flux Capacitor!!!!

If I could find a way to close the hood on a carbed big block then I think I can find a way to drop a sc into the engine bay of a mustang... There is more room there than what we now have to work with. The only drawback will be getting the brain box to work. With all the aftermarket stuff out there I think even that can be worked out....Rich

Miller
11-03-2011, 03:40 PM
If I could find a way to close the hood on a carbed big block then I think I can find a way to drop a sc into the engine bay of a mustang... There is more room there than what we now have to work with. The only drawback will be getting the brain box to work. With all the aftermarket stuff out there I think even that can be worked out....Rich


he was only kidding rich, its been done :rolleyes::rolleyes::p

David Neibert
11-03-2011, 03:53 PM
he was only kidding rich, its been done :rolleyes::rolleyes::p

Yes, it's been done numerous times. There is even a forum dedicated to it on v6powernet.

David

Miller
11-03-2011, 03:55 PM
I was supppper close to doing the swap myself.. I had my car all taken apart to sell stuff I didnt need, but I got all sentimental and couldnt go thru with it. Also, I figured the cops would break my balls more for driving a stang.

pro street rich
11-03-2011, 04:00 PM
Yes, it's been done numerous times. There is even a forum dedicated to it on v6powernet.

David

Heck there are days I don't even know my own name. I do how even know just how much room there is not in a mustang as all I have to do is walk out to the garage that is hooked to the house and sit in one... The one nice thing about the mustang/shelby is they leave more room in the garage for other stuff. With both a shelby and a sc parked next to each other you can see the room.....Rich

kenewagner
11-03-2011, 04:14 PM
Yes, it's been done numerous times. There is even a forum dedicated to it on v6powernet.

David


You should stay away from that site David or you cant keep your Mustang bashing status:rolleyes::D:D

Ken

Roadhawg
11-03-2011, 04:58 PM
he was only kidding rich, its been done :rolleyes::rolleyes::p

The best part about going fast in a Tbird is, the police think you are on the way to the hospital, to witness the birth of your grandchildren.

When you go fast in a Mustang the police know you are speeding.

Miller
11-03-2011, 05:00 PM
exactly. Even when not speeding, they would know I am going to soon enough. Thats why I like my nerdy tbird ;) that be a good lisc plate. nerdybird haha

kenewagner
11-03-2011, 08:48 PM
The best part about going fast in a Tbird is, the police think you are on the way to the hospital, to witness the birth of your grandchildren.

When you go fast in a Mustang the police know you are speeding.

Ouch, I resemble that remark

Ken

David Neibert
11-04-2011, 11:52 AM
Ouch, I resemble that remark

Ken

Whenever I get pulled over in one of my SCs, I just pretend that it's not my car.

"Sorry officer, I didn't mean to squeal the tires back there, it's my son's car and I'm just not used to driving anything this peppy"

David

Miller
11-04-2011, 11:56 AM
last time I got pulled over, he saw me coming, in rush hour traffic, 3 lanes away. I rolled my window down and he said what the hell is wrong with this thing. and the rest, is history.

kenewagner
11-04-2011, 12:07 PM
Wednesday I got the car out and used it to deliver parts around the city. (trying to burn up gas before winter) Everbody had to look it over and had to lift the hood a few times. On the way back to the shop I was just getting ready to romp on it and there were two cop cars just sitting in a speed trap. They looked me over real close but luck me I hadnt gone over the speed limit.
Lucky me:rolleyes:

Ken

rjgraul
01-25-2012, 09:29 PM
After reading most of this thread......Has anyone driven the 2011 or 2012 Mustang with the 3.7?

I test drove a 2011 Mustang with the 3.7 6 speed manual yesterday and all I can say is Wow. I will have one some day.

Oh yea....The sales staff at the ford dealer were all over my 94 SC and some of them had never seen an SC before so I had to pop the hood for them. They even asked if I was going to trade it in and I said No Way!

It is really nice having a rare vehicle that everyone doesn't have. :D

ShawnM93
01-25-2012, 09:41 PM
I love the new sport package mustang, 6 speed manual, 3.7, quick car.
However, the new v6 mustang in an auto with 2.73s was very disappointing, not a dog, but nowhere near as fast as you might think.
2012 mustang v6 auto vs 1996 lt1 convertable 6 speed (exhaust only)
camaro walks mustang from a roll and dig.