PDA

View Full Version : GT vs SC

mcate
07-23-2004, 05:56 AM
Ok, I sold one of my '95 SC's last week. So the wife & I bought an '04 Mustang GT with automatic trans. (Wife didn't want a 5-speed) We both like the car, & don't really much care how fast it is. But I am a fair bit disappointed in it's acceleration. It's only got about 600 miles on it, so I've only romped on it a couple of times without A/C. But I truly believe the stock SC I just sold would run right alonside with it, if not beat it. And I know my black SC with all the mods would torch it. I guess I just expected a little more from a car with 260 hp, & a few hundred lbs lighter than a T-Bird. I know I could do the usual mods to the intake & exhaust & free up some more ponies, but it's a brand new car. Can't see doing things like that to a new car. And every $ I spend on the 'Stang could be going into my Bird. I'll keep it the way it is. Just wondered if anyone else has noticed this about Mustangs.
T-bird4vr
07-23-2004, 06:35 AM
I've beat on one with exhaust and who knows what else. He was pretty surprised.

Stick a blower on it.

Nice car though, enjoy. Much more potential than the SC, I say Kinne Bell.
mcate
07-23-2004, 07:20 AM
Yeah, I smoked a stock one last week too. I doubt I'll do anything to this one. It's a daily driver for the wife & I. Pretty fun to drive too, & I like the throaty V-8 sound. But it's a lot more cramped than a Bird! Funny that they had to put the power seat switch on the front of the seat because there no room on the side! I like the car a lot, but it'll always come 2nd to my T-Bird.
DamonSlowpokeBaumann
07-23-2004, 04:54 PM
Teh auto stangs are definatekly quicker then the SC..But do not hav ethe same torque feel....Those motors pick up in the mid RPM range..An auto gt will run low 14's//Should at least
mcate
07-23-2004, 05:52 PM
Sure doesn't feel like it! Oh well, just picked up my SC from the shop. I had my 3.73 gears put in today. Can't really stomp on it until they're broken in, but I did a little. Feels great so far. Chip goes in tomorrow.
SC90_Pete
07-23-2004, 07:16 PM
My brother has a stock 2001 GT auto and it is much faster than my stock 90 SC.
pearl95sc
07-23-2004, 08:22 PM
When pearl was stock, i could hang with any stock gt stang up til about 60 or 70 mph. Anything prior to the PI heads/99 and below, was usually a neck and neck race and would come down to the driver and conditions. As far as the newest auto's, especially the convertibles, I feel my 94 auto would give a good run.
dirtybird91
07-23-2004, 10:48 PM
I have owned both cars Dammett! :mad: STOCK for STOCK Mustangs after 1998 will SMASH a Supercoupe.

Believe that! ;)
KwikGSeX
07-24-2004, 04:07 AM
I have owned both cars Dammett! :mad: STOCK for STOCK Mustangs after 1998 will SMASH a Supercoupe.

Believe that! ;)


Friend of our group went 14.3@97 on a stock 2000 automatic GT.. And this was his first time at the track.. I find it highly unlikely an SC will stay with an automatic GT unless it was modded..
mcate
07-24-2004, 06:13 AM
Maybe something's wrong with my GT, or maybe it's just not broken in all the way yet. All I'm saying is that based on seat-of-the-pants feel, the Stang just doesn't feel as fast as I expected. And I hadn't gotten on the gas in my stock SC in a while before I sold it last weekend. It could also be that I'd forgotten what it felt like compared to my much more modded SC.
DamonSlowpokeBaumann
07-24-2004, 10:58 AM
Maybe something's wrong with my GT, or maybe it's just not broken in all the way yet. All I'm saying is that based on seat-of-the-pants feel, the Stang just doesn't feel as fast as I expected. And I hadn't gotten on the gas in my stock SC in a while before I sold it last weekend. It could also be that I'd forgotten what it felt like compared to my much more modded SC.


The seat of the pants feel will be beter due to the torque..But mid to top end the stang will take it
JStudrawa
07-25-2004, 07:43 PM
The seat of the pants feel will be beter due to the torque..But mid to top end the stang will take it

I've noticed that torque always give more seat-of-the-pants feel than horsepower. It feels more powerful to move a non-moving object slower than to move a moving object faster. Perceptions are neat, but numbers don't lie.

That said, I prefer torque.
mcate
07-25-2004, 08:42 PM
How does the saying go? "Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races"?
lessonintorque
07-26-2004, 12:04 AM
My wrx has wiped up on more than a few and on some It wasnt a close race so im not impressed in the least but the 04 stangs with that little snake on the side worry me a bit.
Ps DONT romp on it yet its not ready!!! others will say im wrong but who cares, 2000miles is your break in dont mess up a good thing with impatience.