NO NEW CAR
08-31-2005, 11:03 PM
#11
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pittsburgh/Dayton
Posts: 3,062
RE: NO NEW CAR
ORIGINAL: mustangman02232
i drove a Gt the other day, stock, very, very disapponted in the preformance. The only reason i would buy a GT is for the sound, but seeing as how gas just passed $3 a gallon, im not wasting my money on a car that is 5k more, gets worse gas milage, more on insurance, and isn't that big of a preformace difference. By the way, how the hell do you fit 275s on stock rims when stock tires are 245s? I didnt think that was possible.
Yeah, but an auto v6 isn't a comp. orange 04 manual GT.
08-31-2005, 11:48 PM
#12
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 283
RE: NO NEW CAR
My 275/40's work and look great. No rubbing, and they performe outstanding. I have only minor bolt-ons on my GT and for 15,800 bucks, you cant beat that. Brand new that is. With my heavy foot, and mostly in-town driving, I am averaging about 17-19 mpg. I cant believe that you drive a v6, and you are talking about how disappointing a GT is. Come on man. A Chevy Cavalier can outrun a v6 stang.
On a more positive note, I dont want to trade my car in. I love her. I was only going to give her to my wife is because I knew she would still be in the family. My wife drives a Kia Rio because she is conservative, and she fell in love with the stang. But now I plan on keeping her for a while. The car that is. Thanks for all the input guys, and I hope that v6 works out well for ya man.
On a more positive note, I dont want to trade my car in. I love her. I was only going to give her to my wife is because I knew she would still be in the family. My wife drives a Kia Rio because she is conservative, and she fell in love with the stang. But now I plan on keeping her for a while. The car that is. Thanks for all the input guys, and I hope that v6 works out well for ya man.
09-01-2005, 01:51 AM
#13
RE: NO NEW CAR
ORIGINAL: mustangman02232
i drove a Gt the other day, stock, very, very disapponted in the preformance. The only reason i would buy a GT is for the sound, but seeing as how gas just passed $3 a gallon, im not wasting my money on a car that is 5k more, gets worse gas milage, more on insurance, and isn't that big of a preformace difference. By the way, how the hell do you fit 275s on stock rims when stock tires are 245s? I didnt think that was possible.
Yeah, but an auto v6 isn't a comp. orange 04 manual GT.
275's are the largest tire that will fit on a 17x8" rim.
09-01-2005, 01:56 PM
#14
RE: NO NEW CAR
Acer2428
I see, about 3 seconds is nothing in the 1/4 mile.
I see, about 3 seconds is nothing in the 1/4 mile.
09-01-2005, 02:39 PM
#15
RE: NO NEW CAR
Bull ****. Show me a 155rwhp dyno... Maybe if it were down a cylinder or in need of a tune up.
15.1 is for a non-pi GT MAYBE if you sucked at driving. I hit faster than that in my STOCK AUTO with a bad MAF and bad plug wires (sporradic fuel delivery and spark = fun!) Maybe you meant 14.1? That's what most magazines rated the 99-04GT at. I have yet to see a V6 run 15's in stock form. And yes, I have seen plenty of them run at the track. Most are running mid 16's here. 16.5-14.1 = about 2.5 seconds. That's a big freaking difference. But alas, most GT's run about 14.5 or so.... SO, I'm sorry, it's more like 2 seconds, not 3.
For $5k you could have a GT running 11's too? Your point? And I imagine that 5k doesn't include a new rear end?
You think it could take a non-pi gt, huh? Did you forget that, despite a 180-190 stock rwhp, they also dyno at about 270 STOCK RWTQ. Quite a bit more than your v6...and that's where the race is won.
15.1 is for a non-pi GT MAYBE if you sucked at driving. I hit faster than that in my STOCK AUTO with a bad MAF and bad plug wires (sporradic fuel delivery and spark = fun!) Maybe you meant 14.1? That's what most magazines rated the 99-04GT at. I have yet to see a V6 run 15's in stock form. And yes, I have seen plenty of them run at the track. Most are running mid 16's here. 16.5-14.1 = about 2.5 seconds. That's a big freaking difference. But alas, most GT's run about 14.5 or so.... SO, I'm sorry, it's more like 2 seconds, not 3.
For $5k you could have a GT running 11's too? Your point? And I imagine that 5k doesn't include a new rear end?
You think it could take a non-pi gt, huh? Did you forget that, despite a 180-190 stock rwhp, they also dyno at about 270 STOCK RWTQ. Quite a bit more than your v6...and that's where the race is won.
09-01-2005, 03:01 PM
#16
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 3,645
RE: NO NEW CAR
ORIGINAL: Acer2428
Bull ****. Show me a 155rwhp dyno... Maybe if it were down a cylinder or in need of a tune up.
15.1 is for a non-pi GT MAYBE if you sucked at driving. I hit faster than that in my STOCK AUTO with a bad MAF and bad plug wires (sporradic fuel delivery and spark = fun!) Maybe you meant 14.1? That's what most magazines rated the 99-04GT at. I have yet to see a V6 run 15's in stock form. And yes, I have seen plenty of them run at the track. Most are running mid 16's here. 16.5-14.1 = about 2.5 seconds. That's a big freaking difference. But alas, most GT's run about 14.5 or so.... SO, I'm sorry, it's more like 2 seconds, not 3.
For $5k you could have a GT running 11's too? Your point? And I imagine that 5k doesn't include a new rear end?
You think it could take a non-pi gt, huh? Did you forget that, despite a 180-190 stock rwhp, they also dyno at about 270 STOCK RWTQ. Quite a bit more than your v6...and that's where the race is won.
Bull ****. Show me a 155rwhp dyno... Maybe if it were down a cylinder or in need of a tune up.
15.1 is for a non-pi GT MAYBE if you sucked at driving. I hit faster than that in my STOCK AUTO with a bad MAF and bad plug wires (sporradic fuel delivery and spark = fun!) Maybe you meant 14.1? That's what most magazines rated the 99-04GT at. I have yet to see a V6 run 15's in stock form. And yes, I have seen plenty of them run at the track. Most are running mid 16's here. 16.5-14.1 = about 2.5 seconds. That's a big freaking difference. But alas, most GT's run about 14.5 or so.... SO, I'm sorry, it's more like 2 seconds, not 3.
For $5k you could have a GT running 11's too? Your point? And I imagine that 5k doesn't include a new rear end?
You think it could take a non-pi gt, huh? Did you forget that, despite a 180-190 stock rwhp, they also dyno at about 270 STOCK RWTQ. Quite a bit more than your v6...and that's where the race is won.
09-01-2005, 03:04 PM
#17
Retired MF Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,891
RE: NO NEW CAR
ORIGINAL: blueangelfightr
PWNED! [sm=exactly.gif]
ORIGINAL: Acer2428
Bull ****. Show me a 155rwhp dyno... Maybe if it were down a cylinder or in need of a tune up.
15.1 is for a non-pi GT MAYBE if you sucked at driving. I hit faster than that in my STOCK AUTO with a bad MAF and bad plug wires (sporradic fuel delivery and spark = fun!) Maybe you meant 14.1? That's what most magazines rated the 99-04GT at. I have yet to see a V6 run 15's in stock form. And yes, I have seen plenty of them run at the track. Most are running mid 16's here. 16.5-14.1 = about 2.5 seconds. That's a big freaking difference. But alas, most GT's run about 14.5 or so.... SO, I'm sorry, it's more like 2 seconds, not 3.
For $5k you could have a GT running 11's too? Your point? And I imagine that 5k doesn't include a new rear end?
You think it could take a non-pi gt, huh? Did you forget that, despite a 180-190 stock rwhp, they also dyno at about 270 STOCK RWTQ. Quite a bit more than your v6...and that's where the race is won.
Bull ****. Show me a 155rwhp dyno... Maybe if it were down a cylinder or in need of a tune up.
15.1 is for a non-pi GT MAYBE if you sucked at driving. I hit faster than that in my STOCK AUTO with a bad MAF and bad plug wires (sporradic fuel delivery and spark = fun!) Maybe you meant 14.1? That's what most magazines rated the 99-04GT at. I have yet to see a V6 run 15's in stock form. And yes, I have seen plenty of them run at the track. Most are running mid 16's here. 16.5-14.1 = about 2.5 seconds. That's a big freaking difference. But alas, most GT's run about 14.5 or so.... SO, I'm sorry, it's more like 2 seconds, not 3.
For $5k you could have a GT running 11's too? Your point? And I imagine that 5k doesn't include a new rear end?
You think it could take a non-pi gt, huh? Did you forget that, despite a 180-190 stock rwhp, they also dyno at about 270 STOCK RWTQ. Quite a bit more than your v6...and that's where the race is won.
09-02-2005, 12:28 AM
#18
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 283
RE: NO NEW CAR
Well, I don't know all the numbers like you guys, as I have yet to dyno it or take it to the track. All I know is that for a few bolt-ons in my "whimpy gt that a V6 could out-run on a good day" it hauls ***. This is completely off the subject, but I just got my Diablo tuner in, and was wondering if any of you guys with a Diablo and an auto could suggest some good shift points/firmness? I already tinkered with it a little bit, and like what I see so far. Thanks, and as for that slow *** V6, I really hope you enjoy it in whatever fantasy land you are livin in.....take a GT my ***.....
09-02-2005, 08:52 AM
#19
RE: NO NEW CAR
I never said the GTs were whimpy. As for the dyno, i didnt actually see the dyno. I saw it on Horsepower TV with joe Elmore's Project Nightmare which is a 96 4.6, but it also had 125k on it. The 15.1 was straight out of car and driver's comparison test a while back with the Dodge Stratus and Monte Carlo SS. I know you could have a GT running 11s for 5k too, but thats 5k more then the GT. My point was that there is about a 5k price difference in the two. I also was not aware that the 5.0s had so much torque, i thought they only had about 215.
As for the diablo tune, the 4.6s powerband is about 4500 rpm, so you want it to shift above that so when it shifts, it will come back down into the powerband.
As for the diablo tune, the 4.6s powerband is about 4500 rpm, so you want it to shift above that so when it shifts, it will come back down into the powerband.
09-02-2005, 09:59 AM
#20
Retired MF Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,891
RE: NO NEW CAR
ORIGINAL: mustangman02232
I never said the GTs were whimpy. As for the dyno, i didnt actually see the dyno. I saw it on Horsepower TV with joe Elmore's Project Nightmare which is a 96 4.6, but it also had 125k on it. The 15.1 was straight out of car and driver's comparison test a while back with the Dodge Stratus and Monte Carlo SS. I know you could have a GT running 11s for 5k too, but thats 5k more then the GT. My point was that there is about a 5k price difference in the two. I also was not aware that the 5.0s had so much torque, i thought they only had about 215.
As for the diablo tune, the 4.6s powerband is about 4500 rpm, so you want it to shift above that so when it shifts, it will come back down into the powerband.
I never said the GTs were whimpy. As for the dyno, i didnt actually see the dyno. I saw it on Horsepower TV with joe Elmore's Project Nightmare which is a 96 4.6, but it also had 125k on it. The 15.1 was straight out of car and driver's comparison test a while back with the Dodge Stratus and Monte Carlo SS. I know you could have a GT running 11s for 5k too, but thats 5k more then the GT. My point was that there is about a 5k price difference in the two. I also was not aware that the 5.0s had so much torque, i thought they only had about 215.
As for the diablo tune, the 4.6s powerband is about 4500 rpm, so you want it to shift above that so when it shifts, it will come back down into the powerband.
according to Car and Driver a 99-04 GT does the quarter in 15.1