2011 GT lays down......

[hottwheels04]

dont forget they have got a a 12.7@111 as fastest time so far, and with no doubt soon guys will prob be getting 12.3-12.6 out of @ 110-113, and dont forget they weigh 3,500-3,650 lbs, our sn95's only weigh 3,050-3,400lbs so with that being said your Lighter car with 347rwhp ran same time,

ET isn't nearly as much of an hp indicator as trap speed is. That's why 900 hp Supras run 12s at 150 mph.

My windsor-swapped, full accessory, saleen clone convertible was 3680 pounds - so there goes your theory.

so I would say they make 340-390rwhp stock

Wow, so now a bunch of bone-stock, mass-produced identical cars have make somewhere between 340 and 390 rwhp eh? Wow, that's quite a spread. I sure hope I wouldn't be one of the unlucky ones that got one of those crappy 340 rwhp ones.

Paul.

Paul dont be dumb. supras run them times due to being mosty high hp dyno queens with only top end and no traction and no boost down low and a crappy irs to launch on lol hence a 12.8@150 supra time lol.., but I was talking the trap speed not so much the e.t so if 2 cars ran same identiacl trap speed 111 and both ran 12.8 e.t and 1 is a sn95 and the other is a 2011 gt, I would assume it might have something todo with the 2011 making more power and the sn95 being lighter...

and 340-390rwhp means autos and 6speed manuals,this is a gt they do have autos and manual option lol we all kno auto cars dont make the same as a manual of the same car,and numbers on dyno vary... and this is pretty much the new all motor version of the terminator, ford said the 03-04 cobra was "390hp
and people were dynoing anywhere from 330-380rwhp bone stock, and so far I have seen 3 dyno numbers on the new car, 368,376,395 rwhp has been the numbers so far for a 6 speed car, so now slap an auto version on the dyno and thats prob 330-370rwhp so that would make these cars prob 330-390rwhp get it? lol so that means the new gt is 412+hp stock as much as the 03-04 cobra was only 390hp cough cough :wave:

 

[1996mustangGT]

:happy1:

 

[Paul]

Paul dont be dumb.

Those who live in glass houses...

I was talking the trap speed not so much the e.t so if 2 cars ran same identiacl trap speed 111 and both ran 12.8 e.t and 1 is a sn95 and the other is a 2011 gt, I would assume it might have something todo with the 2011 making more power and the sn95 being lighter,

OR, you could view it from another standpoint, and understand that MAYBE they make similar power.

and 340-390rwhp means autos and 6 speeds,this is a gt they do have autos and manuals lol we all kno auto cars dont make the same rwhp as a manual of the same car,

This is gibberish. I think instant-messaging has destroyed the ability of America's youth to write complete sentences with a cogent thought.

and this is pretty much the new all motor version of the terminator, ford said the 03-04 cobra was "390hp
and people were dyning anywhere from 330-380rwhp bone stock, and so far I have seen 3 dyno numbers on the new car, 368,376,395 rwhp has been the numbers so far for a 6 speed car, so now slap an auto version on the dyno and thats prob 330-370rwhp so that would make these cars prob 330-390rwhp get it? lol

Dynos and correction factors have a lot to do with wildly different numbers, which is why I am quick to call BS on dyno sheets. If you REALLY think that those vary THAT MUCH in actual (absolute) power output, then you're kidding yourself.

Paul.

 

[hottwheels04]

Paul dont be dumb.

Those who live in glass houses...

I was talking the trap speed not so much the e.t so if 2 cars ran same identiacl trap speed 111 and both ran 12.8 e.t and 1 is a sn95 and the other is a 2011 gt, I would assume it might have something todo with the 2011 making more power and the sn95 being lighter,

OR, you could view it from another standpoint, and understand that MAYBE they make similar power.

and 340-390rwhp means autos and 6 speeds,this is a gt they do have autos and manuals lol we all kno auto cars dont make the same rwhp as a manual of the same car,

This is gibberish. I think instant-messaging has destroyed the ability of America's youth to write complete sentences with a cogent thought.

and this is pretty much the new all motor version of the terminator, ford said the 03-04 cobra was "390hp
and people were dyning anywhere from 330-380rwhp bone stock, and so far I have seen 3 dyno numbers on the new car, 368,376,395 rwhp has been the numbers so far for a 6 speed car, so now slap an auto version on the dyno and thats prob 330-370rwhp so that would make these cars prob 330-390rwhp get it? lol

Dynos and correction factors have a lot to do with wildly different numbers, which is why I am quick to call BS on dyno sheets. If you REALLY think that those vary THAT MUCH in actual (absolute) power output, then you're kidding yourself.

Paul.

ok lets settle this I hate mod motors as much as you but these are gonna be sick cars esp when even motor trend ran a 12.7@111 with 1, its ok paul we kno u like pushrods and chevys lol dont need to ps over dyno numbers, they have been dynoed anywhere from 360-395rwhp for a 6 speed car and im sure with an auto they will dyno 330-370rwhp.

THE END!

 

[Paul]

Like I said, actual power output doesn't vary that significantly, and I call major BS on them making 395 rwhp. This is why you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internetz.

Paul.

 

[hottwheels04]

Like I said, actual power output doesn't vary that significantly, and I call major BS on them making 395 rwhp. This is why you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internetz.

Paul.

I agree with your somewhat but I just figured to fill you you in when I had the gap of 340-390rwhp, being the autos will of course make alot less hp, I say they make 360rwhp for a manual,being I ve seen 3 dyno and theyve been in the 360,370,390 rwhp range, I would say 360rwhp for a manual is a good # being its rated 412 crank hp stock...

 

[sneaky98gt]

For those saying that the Mustang numbers are "bs" or whatever, track times don't lie. Mustang went 12.7

You're right, track times don't lie. MPH is a great indicator of horsepower.

My '94 GT went 12.88 @ 111 mph on street tires, very similar to the new mustang. It made 347 rwhp. That's a lot less than that "dyno sheet" is claiming.

Paul.

I don't disagree with the mph part. But gearing and weather also has a lot to do with it, especially weather. I lost almost 2 mph in the 1/8 by increasing 20 degrees and little humidity. That is quite significant, and the same thing could be happening here. Elevation also plays a big role in it. I know guys with LS1 Camaros that only run low 14s at like 101; they are also racing in Colorado with an elevation of like 5000 ft. If Motortrend would give us a density altitude, we could settle this argument right here and now.

Also, if the tested Mustang was hooking really well, that would deflate the mph a bit; if you spun with your car a bit, then your mph would be inflated some. I know that last time I went to the track, my best ET runs had a mph of about 1.5 mph less than some of my other, not so good ET runs. There's another bit of that mph accounted for. Also, if they were REALLY babying it out of the hole (it does have some pretty small tires for that amount of horsepower. I can attest to that: I can't even begin to hook up my 325 hp on 255 street tires...), that would deflate the mph quite a bit. I can guarantee that this car makes more than the 347 hp your car is making (not knocking on your car at all).

I understand what you're saying about not necessarily believing the dyno numbers we are seeing, but I see no reason to doubt them. They have been dynoed on several occasions now, putting down between 375 (I think was the lowest one) and 395. It certainly sounds feasible to me. Don't forget that the new '11 has some sort of adaptive ECU that can change the timing and whatnot on the fly depending on what gas is put in it. It's easy that the lower (i.e. Ford advertised numbers and/or possibly track times) were tested on 87 octane, where as the higher hp dyno runs were on 93 premium.

There's someone on the other Mustang forum I'm on, and he already has a '11 GT ordered. I don't know when he'll be getting it, but when he does, we'll know everything we want to about them. And there won't be a need for all the jealous folks to keep bashing them.

 

[Rice_slayer]

^ You are right about altitude making a huge difference, ask Chris if you don't believe me. Im only 1500m above sea level and it hurts 1/4 mile times. stock S197 gts run 14.4-13.8 here at 99-102, depending on driver, but they average 14.3. My car with gears and exhaust, granted a crappy 60' time, got me a 15.1@92mph, which isn't too bad. I will say paul maybe be right, you guys maybe right, the REAL test is when consumers dyno them and take them to the track...

 

[Venom351R]

our sn95's only weigh 3,050-3,400lbs

You show me a 94/95 with no weight reduction that weighs 3,050 and I'll show you some ocean front property in utah.

 

[hottwheels04]

...

 

[Venom351R]

Why are you putting down weight from the V6, it has nothing at all to do with the 2011 or the 94/95 as mentioned in this thread. Your looking at 3,500+ with driver for any 94/95 GT/Cobra

 

[hottwheels04]

Why are you putting down weight from the V6, it has nothing at all to do with the 2011 or the 94/95 as mentioned in this thread. Your looking at 3,500+ with driver for any 94/95 GT/Cobra

our sn95's only weigh 3,050-3,400lbs

You show me a 94/95 with no weight reduction that weighs 3,050 and I'll show you some ocean front property in utah.

Heres right from ford and road and track:
for 1994 sn95 mustangs.

base 1994 v6 sn95 coupe:
FORD CURB WEIGHT =3,055 lbs.
Road & Track AS TESTED 0=3065 lbs.


base 1994 v8 mustang gt coupe
FORD CURB WEIGHT=3,227 lbs.
ROAD AND TRACK AS TESTED=3,330 lbs.


1996 mustang gt coupe
FORD CURB WEIGHT=3,410 lbs.
ROAD AND TRACK AS TESTED= 3,580 lbs.


1996 ford mustang cobra coupe
FORD CURB WEIGHT= 3,355 lbs.
ROAD AND TRACK AS TESTED= 3,515 lbs.

1994 ford mustang gts coupe base v8 gt 16'' inch rims
FORD CURB WEIGHT= 3,084 lbs.
Road AND TRACK AS TESTED= 3,285 lbs.


1994 ford mustang cobra convertible
FORD CURB WEIGHT = 3,500 lbs.
ROAD AND TRACK AS TESTED= 3,650 lbs.

1995 ford mustang gt coupe fully loaded 17 inch rims
FORD CURB WEIGHT= 3,400 lbs.
ROAD AND TRACK AS TESTED= 3,565 lbs.

1995 ford mustang base gt coupe 16'' inch rims
FORD CURB WEIGHT=3,065 lbs.




1996 ford mustang base gt coupe 16'' inch rims
curb weight 3,084 lbs.


1997 ford mustang cobra coupe
curb weight= 3,393 lbs.
road and track as tested= 3,543 lbs.

1994 ford mustang gt convertible
curb weight 3,414 lbs.
ROAD&TRACK AS TESTED= 3,579 lbs.

saleen s-351 5.8 n/a coupe

ford curb weight= 3,420 lbs.
road and track as tested=3,570 lbs.






all weights = 3,050-3,600lbs and all sn95 mustangs :icon_salut: :thumbsup:


NOW LETS SEE THAT PROPERTY SIR HAHAH J/K :wave:


Because theres weights for all sn95 models v6 coupe, v6 vert, gt coupe, gt vert cobra coupe,cobra vert and saleen coupe all SN95'S all stock curb weight and as tested weight with no weight reduction bone stock which = 3,050-3,600lbs


now add in modded cars with weight reduction or v6 cars with v8 swaps base cars that are light with smaller 16-17 inch rims etc, are cars usually weight 2,800-3,600lbs which is why I said "OUR CARS WEIGH 3,050-3,400+lbs" :wave:

 

[Venom351R]

no one was talking about V6's when you threw out the 3,050 weight. You injected a V6 weight into the topic when it had nothing to do with it. No one mentioned anything about a V6. We are talking about 94/95 V8's and the new 5.0. So I go back to what I said. There are no 94/95 GT/Cobra under 3,500 with a driver.

 

[hottwheels04]

no one was talking about V6's when you threw out the 3,050 weight. You injected a V6 weight into the topic when it had nothing to do with it. No one mentioned anything about a V6. We are talking about 94/95 V8's and the new 5.0. So I go back to what I said. There are no 94/95 GT/Cobra under 3,500 with a driver.

again a v6 is still a sn95 car,where in my statement did I say JUST V8 GT? we were talking about sn95 curb weight vs the new 2011 mustang,and and paul stated his was a heavy vert that weighed in @ 3600lbs so i went by lowest possible weight of a sn95 gt/v6 and lowest and highest of new 2011 v6 or gt...

which was 3,050-3,600lbs for sn95s and the new 2011 v6 and gts are 3,500-3,800lbs.

and your wrong, because My car for example is a base gt = to a v6 weight and gt's, even with my heavy rims 18'' inch chrome saleen rims only weighed in 3,300lbs,now if I put on my stock or smaller lighter rims then my saleen rims or did weight reduction a whole other ball game, so stock as tested check above road and tracked weight of a base 96 gt with cloth seats no extras base 16 inch rims only weighs 3,100-3,400 lbs which you want to see it's actual weight without fuel and driver would be 3,055-3,200 lbs curb weight, so maybe you should read up what I meant. :thumbsup: are cars are not as heavy made them out to be,there about 100-300 lbs heavier then a fox and foxes are in the 2,800-3,200lb range.

 

[deesnutsgt]

Peak numbers are 365 lb-ft of torque at 4,350 rpm and 395 hp at 6,600 rpm. All of these at-the-wheels figures were obtained in 4th gear on a Dynojet 248 chassis dyno and include a 3% SAE weather correction factor.

6 speed gear ratios



1st 3.66
2nd 2.43
3rd 1.69
4th 1.32
5th 1.00
6th 0.65
Final drive 3.31:1
Problem highlighted in red and solution in green (guys over on corral spotted this). It would slightly lower the numbers but these motors are making more then advertised.

s

Peak numbers are 365 lb-ft of torque at 4,350 rpm and 395 hp at 6,600 rpm. All of these at-the-wheels figures were obtained in 4th gear on a Dynojet 248 chassis dyno and include a 3% SAE weather correction factor.

6 speed gear ratios
1st 3.66
2nd 2.43
3rd 1.69
4th 1.32
5th 1.00
6th 0.65
Final drive 3.31:1
Problem highlighted in red and solution in green (guys over on corral spotted this). It would slightly lower the numbers but these motors are making more then advertised.

actually, the opposite is true. dyno's read the highest in a 1:1 gear. so if done in 5th this car would have made MORE rwhp.

Correct. I saw a vid on youtube where a magazine ran it on the dyno. It made 430+whp. looking for said vid now to post

 

[deesnutsgt]

First Test: 2011 Ford Mustang GT

Dyno at 1:19

 

[Venom351R]

again a v6 is still a sn95 car,where in my statement did I say JUST V8 GT? we were talking about sn95 curb weight vs the new 2011 mustang,and and paul stated his was a heavy vert that weighed in @ 3600lbs so i went by lowest possible weight of a sn95 gt/v6 and lowest and highest of new 2011 v6 or gt...

which was 3,050-3,600lbs for sn95s and the new 2011 v6 and gts are 3,500-3,800lbs.

and your wrong, because My car for example is a base gt = to a v6 weight and gt's, even with my heavy rims 18'' inch chrome saleen rims only weighed in 3,300lbs,now if I put on my stock or smaller lighter rims then my saleen rims or did weight reduction a whole other ball game, so stock as tested check above road and tracked weight of a base 96 gt with cloth seats no extras base 16 inch rims only weighs 3,100-3,400 lbs which you want to see it's actual weight without fuel and driver would be 3,055-3,200 lbs curb weight, so maybe you should read up what I meant. :thumbsup: are cars are not as heavy made them out to be,there about 100-300 lbs heavier then a fox and foxes are in the 2,800-3,200lb range.

blah blah b/c when it comes down to it you cant compare a V6 to a GT/Cobra or to the new 5.0. They are light years apart. Who cares how much the V6 weighs b/c any GT/Cobra and new 5.0 will hand it its ass so who gives a flying crap of what the curb weight is

 

[Shame302]

Like I said, actual power output doesn't vary that significantly, and I call major BS on them making 395 rwhp. This is why you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internetz.

Paul.

Don't know why you are such a doubter but it doesn't really matter. Within a few months we should all have a pretty solid idea of what they actually put down. No use arguing it. The GM product is nice, aside from the trash can they dropped it into. Of course, that's subjective.

As for those saying the engine is maxed out, I don't believe that. I'm still willing to bet they will take 6-8lbs of boost without opening them up with about the same risk the "current" NA modulars take.

 

[ademily87]

i'm gettin one...

 

[deesnutsgt]

Me too. im up for debate on this or a terminator. 400hp with a warranty would be nice