My New 2005 Mustang

[KXH]

People are so corny- don't hate just because you ignorant. The GTO is overpriced. Glad it beats the stang with all that extra power in what 4/10 of a second in the quarter mile?by a pro driver and for an extra $4500 you can all that and a lack of fit and finish quality too!!! Have you ever been in one or driven it? What a piece. Way to go GM, ruin Holden's car. See the Car and Driver comparison. If i am getting into the 30's i want a convertible or i am going over to a G35 or high end Z or even an STi. That GTO will be pulled off Pontiacs showrooms inside of 3 years for lack of sales.

As for Mustang being chicks cars, thats true. I have the Ford Sales guide the dealer accidently gave me and the statistics are something like 80% of all Mustang sold are V6 cars, and of that 70% percent are bought by women 17 to 35. For all the V8's sold they are mostly (90%) sold to men ages 40 to 60, they can obviosuy afford the fuel and insurance easiest. 60% of all the V8 models sold are Convertible as well. Etc etc....

But most Mustangs on the road are V6 convertibles owned by women. I am not sure i see what the big deal is with that Stat. I have a GT Vert and i love it. Who the hell cares. Mos tpeople that drive Boxters are women as well that sure wouldn't stop me from buying one. As a matter of fact the only perosn i know with a brand new F360 Modena is a woman.

Here is my ride as most people end up seeing it:

[aquadark]

congrats :)

bad color, tho'...

[Whidbey05]

Got a problem w/ yellow?

[Brandon Live Veteran]

its stupid to compare a NA to a turbo

585607540[/snapback]

Okay, well, both Audi and BMW have 3.0L NA engines that produce way more power than that. It's not news that American companies don't make efficient engines.

[John S. Veteran]

Hi there guys.? I thought I?d share my recent purchase, a 2005 Ford Mustang....

585599786[/snapback]

Awesome choice man, Ford has hit this nail square on the head. A beautiful mixture of nostalgia and new technology. Dealers around here can't keep them on the lots.

[Whidbey05]

Okay, well, both Audi and BMW have 3.0L NA engines that produce way more power than that.  It's not news that American companies don't make efficient engines.

585622913[/snapback]

this thing isnt ment to compete w/ audi or bmw.

Its made to be a cheap sporty looking daily driver, if it made 250hp ford doesnt wanna lose GT sales, and there is no other American sports car to compete with, the car can be easily made to push over 200whp with simple mods, its just a bored out version of the 99-04 3.8l. And the Zetec line and SVT Contour motor are VERY nice motors.

look at benz, c230 Kompressor is a 2.4 SC only making 190hp, now THATS inefficent. we have 2.0 sc's making 210whp or turbo 2.4 making 215whp or n/a 2.0's making 170hp, 2.5 v6's making 200hp.

BMW makes only 138 from 1.9l

and dont bitch they are low level cars, cuz thats basly what the v6 mustang is.

[xmr]

Hold on... you said 4 LITRES but only 210HP!?!? wtf? My dad's Golf 1.8Turbo (modified ecu) can pump out 195HP!

What is the point in having large engines that aren't efficient? There isn't a point to it other than "my engine is bigger than yours ner ner ner na!"

[sean l]

:x

2004 GTO smoked that 2005 mustangs.

the 2005 GTOs have 400HP, 50HP more than the 2004 model, Vette Engine, Vette Tranmission.

585600339[/snapback]

Do you hear the silent slither of the Cooooobbbbbrrraaaaa?

[Whidbey05]

Hold on... you said 4 LITRES but only 210HP!?!? wtf? My dad's Golf 1.8Turbo (modified ecu) can pump out 195HP!

What is the point in having large engines that aren't efficient? There isn't a point to it other than "my engine is bigger than yours ner ner ner na!"

585623730[/snapback]

another n/a vs turbo idiot, but a turbo on the 4.0 and then compair.

yeah the 04 cobra was 390hp and makes the new gto look slow lol

[threetonesun]

Hold on... you said 4 LITRES but only 210HP!?!? wtf? My dad's Golf 1.8Turbo (modified ecu) can pump out 195HP!

What is the point in having large engines that aren't efficient? There isn't a point to it other than "my engine is bigger than yours ner ner ner na!"

585623730[/snapback]

Torque, and more useable power at lower RPMs.

I don't think it's inappropriate to compare NA engines with turbo engines, just so long as the people comparing have some idea of what a power curve is :rolleyes:

[Zip]

yeah, and the Mini Cooper S runs better than that on a 1.6. Oh, and F1 cars used to run 1.3L engines.

The point isn't output/liter, it's what you're doing with it. V6 Mustangs are cruiser cars, they're very much a soccer mom ride, despite what the GT owners might say. IMO, a V6 convertible is a sweet car and stays true to it's roots. The problem, if you want to point one out, is that this new V6 engine of Fords appears to be quite weak, and it looks like 200 odd horsepower is all it will ever put out.

585602656[/snapback]

so why cant they make it have a more efficient smaller engine in it? it wastes less fuel that way. i dont see the point in putting the v6 badge on it when most modern inline 4's come close - thats all its for, the badge. if it doesnt need any more power its just a waste.

its only got 2 valves per cylinder for christ sake. thats just lazy on fords behalf.

[MR_Candyman]

so why cant they make it have a more efficient smaller engine in it? it wastes less fuel that way.  i dont see the point in putting the v6 badge on it when most modern inline 4's come close - thats all its for, the badge.  if it doesnt need any more power its just a waste.

its only got 2 valves per cylinder for christ sake.  thats just lazy on fords behalf.

585625949[/snapback]

Sorry, but that 2 valves per cylinder comment's pretty ignorant. If you actually knew how very, very little the additional 2 cylinders makes then you wouldn't have said that.

EDIT: ok, yes, I decided I'll explain WHY it was designed that way...here we go...

The name of the game is velocity and turbulence/mixing of the intake charge at differing engine speeds. At low engine speeds, one intake valve gives increased velocity, hence better gas mixing and better cylinder filling. If you open a second intake valve at low engine speed, the velocity drops dramitically, leaving poor intake filling and a lean intake charge. The result is engine knock and less torque. On the other hand, at high RPM, breathing is the name of the game. The valves are open such a short length of time you need the maximum available intake area. Therefore 2 intake valves work better at high RPM. All of this is of course subject to the exhaust system design. A proper extractor exhaust can make a significant difference on a two valve system and a restrictive exhaust can nullify all the gains of a 4 valve system. These are SYSTEM designs we are talking about, both intake and exhaust are related. Change one parameter and you must change the rest of the system or you have wasted your time. To wit, most guys who add street superchargers don't see much need to have 4 valve heads because the supercharger is packing the cylinders as full as they can get at streetable RPM. The real world test is to compare the RPM vs Horsepower (or torque)charts that come from dyno testing. Look at similar engine displacements with 2 valve and 4 valve heads. Then look at the curves for two entirely different engines with the same horsepower ratings. For example, compare a turbo, 4 valve, 2 liter racing engine (500 Hp @ 10,000 RPM) to a naturally aspirated 2 valve 427 cubic inch street engine (500 Hp @ 5000 RPM). Now you see the complexity of comparisons! There are no universal answers, just better or worse applications for what you want to do with your engine. When you have only 2 valves, the air/fuel mixture entering the cylinder can be tangential to the circle of the cylinder, giving a high degree of swirl, better air/fuel mixing and hence better performance at lower revs in an SI engine. At higher revs, enough turbulence is available to create good mixing, and so 4 valves are better, as they allow greater airflow. Somwe advanced 4-valve engines, such as the honda VTEC, close off one valve at low revs and power demands, to increase the swirl. Hope this is useful

Edited March 16, 2005 by MR_Candyman

[threetonesun]

so why cant they make it have a more efficient smaller engine in it? it wastes less fuel that way.  i dont see the point in putting the v6 badge on it when most modern inline 4's come close - thats all its for, the badge.  if it doesnt need any more power its just a waste.

585625949[/snapback]

Read the whole thing next time. A V6 will produce a much different power curve than 4 of equal power. You could shift at 2k in every gear and get a nice smooth ride, unlike a 4 banger that won't see any real power till higher in the RPMs, and won't see peak power until close to redline.

[MR_Candyman]

Read the whole thing next time. A V6 will produce a much different power curve than 4 of equal power. You could shift at 2k in every gear and get a nice smooth ride, unlike a 4 banger that won't see any real power till higher in the RPMs, and won't see peak power until close to redline.

585626823[/snapback]

2k? I have cars that redline at 800 rpm.

But ya, it's all about power curves...where you get your power and torque that matter. What power curve you want is dependant on what characteristics you want your car to have. There's several ways to alter your power curves, but there's always going to be a big difference between one of a v8 and one of an inline 4, or a v6, or v12, etc. Different engines have different applications.

[CJC]

I am soooo jealous. I can't even get my license for a month :p

[threetonesun]

2k? I have cars that redline at 800 rpm.

585626849[/snapback]

You sure that's not a tractor? :laugh:

Although, you're probably right, 2k would be high for an auto Mustang's shift point.

[MR_Candyman]

You sure that's not a tractor?  :laugh:

Although, you're probably right, 2k would be high for an auto Mustang's shift point.

585626992[/snapback]

no, I have a 73 1/2 plymouth roadrunner with a 440 and a 68 dodge charger with a 383, and they're both around 800rpm redlines. The multiplier's done by the 100's not 1000's like most of today's cars. This is one of the reasons muscle cars last so long with proper maintenance

[Whidbey05]

a 70 440 roadrunner makes peak HP at 4700 rpm dumbass

Edited March 17, 2005 by Whidbey05

[MR_Candyman]

a 70 440 roadrunner makes peak HP at 4700 rpm dumbass

585627418[/snapback]

I have it, so go f yourself

[larry]

I'm not gonna read all 8 pages of this stuff but I will tell you the Mustang owns you all.

I have an old 5.0 GT that is the best car to build up. Most aftermarket parts available. I hope I'm on topic..lol

[pto]

hmmm, never heard that befor. a "chick picking up car" maybe, but I've never known or heard of any chicks driving Mustangs.

what would be considered a "man car"? unless you mean all cars in general, and a real man drives a truck, lol.

585599856[/snapback]

In dallas it's, without a doubt, a chick car.

not the 05, but most girls in my school have one. Maybe like 4 guys, in which they have saleens and GTs.

[Whidbey05]

V6 stangs are majorly a girl/college kids car

[Whidbey05]

I have it, so go f yourself

585627730[/snapback]

you either dont know what a redline is or every website in the world is wrong

428 hemi GTX/RR 425hp@5000 490tq@4000

440 6 barrel GTX/RR 390hp@4700 490tq@3200

383 4 barrel RR only 335hp@5200 425tq@3400

what the **** car hits redline b4 even max tq?

[kaffra]

V6 stangs are majorly a girl/college kids car

585628102[/snapback]

lol, so i guess the guys are in trucks?

[Zip]

Sorry, but that 2 valves per cylinder comment's pretty ignorant. If you actually knew how very, very little the additional 2 cylinders makes then you wouldn't have said that.

EDIT: ok, yes, I decided I'll explain WHY it was designed that way...here we go...

The name of the game is velocity and turbulence/mixing of the intake charge at differing engine speeds. At low engine speeds, one intake valve gives increased velocity, hence better gas mixing and better cylinder filling. If you open a second intake valve at low engine speed, the velocity drops dramitically, leaving poor intake filling and a lean intake charge. The result is engine knock and less torque. On the other hand, at high RPM, breathing is the name of the game. The valves are open such a short length of time you need the maximum available intake area. Therefore 2 intake valves work better at high RPM. All of this is of course subject to the exhaust system design. A proper extractor exhaust can make a significant difference on a two valve system and a restrictive exhaust can nullify all the gains of a 4 valve system. These are SYSTEM designs we are talking about, both intake and exhaust are related. Change one parameter and you must change the rest of the system or you have wasted your time. To wit, most guys who add street superchargers don't see much need to have 4 valve heads because the supercharger is packing the cylinders as full as they can get at streetable RPM. The real world test is to compare the RPM vs Horsepower (or torque)charts that come from dyno testing. Look at similar engine displacements with 2 valve and 4 valve heads. Then look at the curves for two entirely different engines with the same horsepower ratings. For example, compare a turbo, 4 valve, 2 liter racing engine (500 Hp @ 10,000 RPM) to a naturally aspirated 2 valve 427 cubic inch street engine (500 Hp @ 5000 RPM). Now you see the complexity of comparisons! There are no universal answers, just better or worse applications for what you want to do with your engine. When you have only 2 valves, the air/fuel mixture entering the cylinder can be tangential to the circle of the cylinder, giving a high degree of swirl, better air/fuel mixing and hence better performance at lower revs in an SI engine. At higher revs, enough turbulence is available to create good mixing, and so 4 valves are better, as they allow greater airflow. Somwe advanced 4-valve engines, such as the honda VTEC, close off one valve at low revs and power demands, to increase the swirl. Hope this is useful

585626044[/snapback]

you cant claim that when you just copied and pasted it that off the net. do you really think that theres not much difference between the two?? :sleep:

http://www.billzilla.org/2v4vpage2.htm