you come off a little butt-hurt with comments like these.
The Boss comes stock with 3.73's, therefore thats how it should be tested.
You seem to be over-looking the fact that a heavier, less expensive car is still coming out on top.
-
đź’ˇ Fun fact. Whenever you start a thread, TCG Mechanic 5000 (our AI bot) will reply to you to start helping. It doesn't know everything and it will struggle with more complex questions but it can get the thread going and provide valuable information. You can choose to disable it prior to submitting a thread.
Mustang. LOL
- Thread starter NetChemica
- Start date
you come off a little butt-hurt with comments like these.
The Boss comes stock with 3.73's, therefore thats how it should be tested.
You seem to be over-looking the fact that a heavier, less expensive car is still coming out on top.
X2, I love how everyone loves to compare the rear end ratios of different cars?!?! WHY???? There are many other factors, like redline of engine, and trans gearing. The rear end gear of a car is only a small factor. All GM knows how to do lately is put a large engine in a car, and try to make it light. In doing so, they have cheap ass ugly interiors and old technology, it worked for a long time, but the competition is catching up. This is why I've given up on GM.
The only point I think Firemandan and myself are getting it, is that we'd like to see how its numbers compare on other tracks against the same cars its being compared against. Call it playing devils advocate, I hope the mustang is faster than the same slew of cars on other tracks, and I suspect it will be, I just don't think the margin will be as wide.
The shortcoming of the Boss that seems to pop up in every review is the brakes. Ford installed 14” 4 piston Brembos up front from the GT500, improved brakes lines, etc but it seems like the brakes need a bit more capacity. It would be nice if Ford increased the rear brakes a bit and added a better caliper (mulit-piston). It’s a moot point, since if you track the car you are going to put different pads on the car.
I think the car is fine where it is, let's be honest man, it's still a Mustang. This thing is pretty much hanging with supercars, and you want more? Haha, I'd be happy where it is, very good race car for the money. I love how everyone in this thread is saying you can't compare it to the old vette, well maybe if GM would get off its ass and make some money, the c7 would be on the horizon, but it ain't.
I know, like I said anyone tracking the car is going to put an aggressive pad on the car and better brake fluid.
I wish I didn't have to buy my wife a car first because I'd have ordered one of these bad boys. Maybe next year
Oh and I remember back in the day when you didn't believe me that Mustangs could be good handling cards
Oh and I remember back in the day when you didn't believe me that Mustangs could be good handling cards
They weren't back in the day!
This is the same chassis as my car. Not much has changed. In fact a lot of Ford has done with the boss is similar in approach to my suspension setup. I have Tokico Adjustable shocks and the Boss runs Koni’s. Koni didn’t make a shock for my car in 2007 when I did my suspension work.
Motor Trend ran a 12.3, faster than the GT500 they tested. I'm guessing the red key was used. 115 trap is moving.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1102_2012_ford_mustang_boss_302_test/index.html
ACCELERATION TO MPH
0-30 1.6 sec
0-40 2.3
0-50 3.1
0-60 4.0
0-70 5.0
0-80 6.2
0-90 7.6
0-100 9.2
PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.6
QUARTER MILE 12.3 sec @ 115.8 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 108 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.98 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.7 sec @ 0.78 g (avg)
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1102_2012_ford_mustang_boss_302_test/index.html
ACCELERATION TO MPH
0-30 1.6 sec
0-40 2.3
0-50 3.1
0-60 4.0
0-70 5.0
0-80 6.2
0-90 7.6
0-100 9.2
PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.6
QUARTER MILE 12.3 sec @ 115.8 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 108 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.98 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.7 sec @ 0.78 g (avg)
Same thing can be said about the Z06/ZR1, sure it can outperform or perform as good as some "supercars" that cost way more money. But in the end its just a fisher priced interior, cobalt steering wheel equipped piece of shit compared to a Ferrari, Lambo, high end Porsche, etc.
I don't know much about early camaro/mustangs but IMO in the 80's and 90's the GM side dominated Ford in this category. Nothing really around from either company 05-present that was impressive. Ford is just starting to have the edge. GM needs to seriously put these new camaros on a diet if they want to complete with Ford.
Um, no. GM didn't start dominating until the LT1 was released in the F-body in 93. The 5.0 was beating the shit out of the TPI motors.
I love how everyone forgets 2010 where the Camaro destroyed the weak mustang. In 2011 a special edition mustang comes out and now GM has to change everything to compete with ford. I think the 2012 SS will get a few improvements and be fine. The Camaro really needs a rear end gear option and suspension tweaking. With the ZL1 coming with a 3.73 I hope that makes it into the SS as well. Forget any weight reduction till the 6th gen comes out.
Are you kidding me? It had nearly a 100 horse power advantage, no shit it will destroy it, now with equal power and a smaller engine, the Mustang decimates the Camaro, what does that say?
You're an idiot. You think that just because the Camaro line flopped for a while that the Mustang was attempting Corvette level performance and market.
The base GT spanks the SS. The Boss is in another league.
The ZL1 Is interesting, but it's still 4,000+ Lbs. Like you said, GM needs the 6th gen out ASAP.
i dont know about this... i like z06s a lot. a lot a lot.
a l o t
but i would take a new mustang over any camaro... v6 over the v6... gt over the ss... etc...
Thread Info
-
Created
-
145Replies
-
6KViews
-
Participants list
