Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Multimedia & Entertainment
The Garage
2011 GT lays down......
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sneaky98gt" data-source="post: 708289" data-attributes="member: 11327"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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).</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sneaky98gt, post: 708289, member: 11327"] 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. ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Random media
Latest posts
Post A Pic Of Your Latest Purchase Thread...
Latest: RAU03MACH
Today at 2:42 PM
The Garage
What Did You Do To Your Car Today?
Latest: shovel
Today at 1:48 PM
The Garage
M
1994 mustang key turned nothing happens
Latest: MasterDot
Today at 12:03 PM
94-95 5.0 - Specific
New Member from Virginia
Latest: Daryl
Yesterday at 8:55 PM
New Member Introductions
D
TKX shifter position
Latest: dsrtjeeper
Yesterday at 2:54 PM
Drivetrain
Share this page
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Forum statistics
Threads
78,534
Messages
1,535,741
Members
16,186
Latest member
Armand
Members online
Navy_mike
shovel
Forums
Multimedia & Entertainment
The Garage
2011 GT lays down......
Top