Had the opportunity over the weekend to rent an '07 V6 'Stang convertible while in Chicago. I drive a tuned GT stick, so I was curious to see the difference between mine and the V6.

Needless to say...it was kinda big.

I was impressed by the top mechanism, comfort of the standard seats, etc. But, performance wise, it was quite a step down from a GT. Before I get flamed, I'm not trying to start the same war that a few others have started here, but the difference was pretty significant. Yes, it was a rental car (with 1100 miles), and it's possible it was running a governor, but wow... it had nowhere near the "oomph" of the GT. I was actually surprised.

Anyone else have a similar experience?

 

Ahhh, maybe we should conclude that the extra hp/torque(especially when CAI/tuned) makes quite a bit of difference. The reason I bought a GT(was thinking of a V-6 initially) was because I test drove a V-6 first and quite honestly, wasn't very impressed by it's alleged "oomph". Drove a GT and it was quite what I expected, but I think the V-6 has it's place(just not in my ownership) and it makes tons of people happy.

 

i love my v6. when i bought the car, me and my dad were at the dealership and he was asked me if i was sure i didn't want the v8. the v6 had enough power to suit me and it would keep my lead foot under control. i think 300HP is too much for any 18 yo. my 210 suits me just fine and i can still beat most people at lights. besides, once you get to know your car you can really push it.

besides, rentals are normally automatic. i've impressed a trans am owner with the way it picks up.

i do agree, there is a HUGE difference between the two, but thats where the 100 hp/100 tq come into play. i dont understand why you were surprised. if the v6 ran like the v8, then why would people spend the extra money on v8?

 

I feel you, I drive my GTO, then I drive the mustang. It feels like it has less than half the horsepower. Then I realize it does.

Results for a Mustang GT should be similar.

 

Shouldn't the "San Diego Special" be Charger blue with gold stripes?Being born(and raised) in San Diego, I really due miss the "small town" aspect, but it seem every time I go down there, it has changed once again[&o]Really miss the old Diego.........are you gonna go on the cruise next weekend sdsguy?

 

I would hope that you felt the difference of 90 horsepower and 80 ft-lbs of torque!!!

Actually, since your GT is tuned, the difference is greater. A tune really wakes up the 4.0 V6 too. With tune, cai, and exhaust, the 4.0 is near 230-235 hp at the crank.. and that nets 1/4 times in the 14.6-14.9 range-- and those are respectable numbers. There are sc'd and turbo'd 4.0s running 11s & 12s. (From this forum).

You're right though.. a stock V6 is definitely sluggish, compared to your GT, but it is a car that is on par with the older GTs.

 

ive learned something today....the v8 has more performance than the v6.....wow.....no idea

i dont understand why you are so surprised with the difference

 

lol

 

I rented a V6 also... Definately a big difference from the GT. Felt more likea regular car than a sports car. I personally don't have anything against my fellow stanging V6, but was certainly surprised at the difference.

Of course whats the point in selling a more expensive version if its barely better than the other version....

 

The V6 would be great for a young person until they get used to driving, but if I'm going to own a sports car I want it to be a sports car. I would buy a 250hp lambo, so why do I want a 250hp mustang I could get that from a nissan maxima. Don't freak out, it is just my opinion.