TomServo92 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Very nice..... Its pulling about the same times as the 2010 Mustang GT :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) Very nice..... Its pulling about the same times as the 2010 Mustang GT :D Not bad for being extremely overweight (according to some). It's only got an extra 50 horses, so the AWD and superior torque curve must really be getting the power to the pavement. Who says there's no replacement for displacement (and cylinders)! Edited August 19, 2009 by fordmantpw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Very nice..... Its pulling about the same times as the 2010 Mustang GT :D Huh? Not saying this isn't impressive for a car of it's size, but which dragstrip are 2010 Mustang GT's running 13.9's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blksn8k2 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Huh? Not saying this isn't impressive for a car of it's size, but which dragstrip are 2010 Mustang GT's running 13.9's? Even Motor Trend managed a 13.5 at 104 out of the 2010 GT. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...rior_specs.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Even Motor Trend managed a 13.5 at 104 out of the 2010 GT. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...rior_specs.html Pfft...what's 4 tenths of a second amongst friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Even Motor Trend managed a 13.5 at 104 out of the 2010 GT. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...rior_specs.html Exactly, and I realize that this was a 2010 GT w/Track Pack. I'm wondering if the SHO running a 13.9 had the performance package (lower gears). I have a feeling that the SHO will run mid 13's, but I still don't understand this comment "It's pulling about the same times as a 2010 Mustang GT". 13.5 in a quarter versus 13.9 in a quarter is not "about the same times". It's like saying a 13.1 in a Camaro SS is about the same time as a 13.5 in a Mustang GT...it's just not true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) 13.5 in a quarter versus 13.9 in a quarter is not "about the same times". It's < 3% difference...that's really not that far off. Besides, you can't really compare until the cars are on the exact same track at the exact same time driven by the exact same drivers. Any of those variables could cause a +/- 3% margin of error. Anyone familiar with track times should know that. I do, and I've never even been to a drag strip! Edited August 20, 2009 by fordmantpw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomaro Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) Anyone have 60ft and 1/8 mile times for comparison? With Atco Air...its 13.6 Edited August 20, 2009 by atomaro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Gotcha, fordmanptw, that's the reason why I asked, which dragstrips are the 2010 GT's running 13.9 at? Back on topic though, I wonder if the SHO with the performance pack numbers will be that much different than the SHO without. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Gotcha, fordmanptw, that's the reason why I asked, which dragstrips are the 2010 GT's running 13.9 at? Back on topic though, I wonder if the SHO with the performance pack numbers will be that much different than the SHO without. I'd like to see with/without perf pack numbers to see the comparison as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02MustangGT Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I'd like to see with/without perf pack numbers to see the comparison as well... I agree, similar, I'd like to see the comparison numbers on the Mustang GT with the 3.31's, 3.55's, and 3.73's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Huh? Not saying this isn't impressive for a car of it's size, but which dragstrip are 2010 Mustang GT's running 13.9's? So the relatively modest horsepower meant our Mustang could still hustle to 0-60 mph in 5.6 seconds and run through the 1/4-mile in 13.9 seconds at 102 mph http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/auto...ws/4309423.html Thats where I got my info, but I've seen higher trap speeds/lower ET times on other sites....in the real world they are with in spitting difference of one another... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixt9coug Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I wouldnt be shocked if MT's times are corrected as well. The SHO did it legit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I've said it before, and I will say it again................ I want to see times, in cool air. I want to see some of those nice sea level, fall/early winter numbers............ when the RWD vehicles are struggling to get traction, with their hard, cold street tires. All the while, the SHO, will just go................ :D :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbuck15 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Motortrend did a 13.7@102 with the SHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercury Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 The video looks to be Fun Ford Weekend which would have been last weekend at Epping NH. It was Hot Hazy and Humid those two days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 It's amusing that the noisiest was the slowest . It's remarkable how quick cars have gotten since the 80's and 90's, we take this for granted. I remember when my Lincoln Continental got 265 horsepower and now the Ford Fusion can be had with nearly as much for half the price and two less cylinders (and two more gears). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomaro Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Dragtimes.com has 1 2010 SHO listed. 13.710@103.05 the driver name was not listed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 roadandtrack Road and track posted a 13.6 @ 103.8 for an MKS. I'd think an SHO with track pack would have a couple of tenths on an mks. For comparison, RT got a 13.5 for the Nissan 370 Nismo linked from the MKS article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 (edited) I-6 Falcon with single turbo, PFI and 6-speed ZF auto puts down a 13.2. I guess 13.5 for the much heavier AWD D3 Taurus Ecoboost is pretty good..... :rolleyes: Based on G8 pricing, the XR6 Turbo and XR8 would probably sell for about $7,000 less too, but unfortunately I guess we'll never know whether that is true...:shrug: Edited September 13, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joihan777 Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 (edited) There was a good link from the youtube page for an excellent review by CNET. For those of you that know CNET, it's a very good review for Ford! Edited September 13, 2009 by joihan777 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 There was a good link from the youtube page for an excellent review by CNET. For those of you that know CNET, it's a very good review for Ford! CNET reviews Autos? Talk about overreaching... Does anyone else remember using Lynx to access the Shareware Search Engine they acquired from... well I don't know who ran it before they acquired it, but I'll just leave it as "the shareware search engine"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 (edited) 13s is not bad at all. I still not as good as a 1972 GM Victor 7.8s though, l prefer its coke bottle shape its the fizz that gives it the wizz. LINK Edited September 13, 2009 by Ford Jellymoulds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.