4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang Technical discussions on 1996-2004 4.6 Liter Modular Motors (2V and 4V) within.

Why not Ford?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-15-2005, 01:26 PM
  #21  
codyss
 
codyss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location:
Posts: 527
Default RE: Why not Ford?

Well 03YellowPony,

The G92 IROC-Z could pull .89 on the skid pad and the 00-02 SLP/Bilstein optioned Camaro SS's pulled .90 on the skid pad. My Cobalt SS pulls .89 on the skid pad.

So you be the judge...........
codyss is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 01:28 PM
  #22  
xx9gt6xx
4th Gear Member
 
xx9gt6xx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,235
Default RE: Why not Ford?


ORIGINAL: codyss

Well 03YellowPony,

The G92 IROC-Z could pull .89 on the skid pad and the 00-02 SLP/Bilstein optioned Camaro SS's pulled .90 on the skid pad. My Cobalt SS pulls .89 on the skid pad.

So you be the judge...........
Take you and your Cobalt home...
xx9gt6xx is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 02:06 PM
  #23  
jlauth
2nd Gear Member
 
jlauth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location:
Posts: 357
Default RE: Why not Ford?

Ford uses there engineers where as GM does not in my opinion. GM cars until very recently all, yes all, use a 350 (vans, lux cars trucks, vettes, camaros,TAs). Ford makes great power out of smaller engines, which helps gas milage, and overall cost of the product. If you remember the 2000 cobra R had 385 hp which is much more than the all GM cars of that time but the Z06, and this was still out of a smaller engine. Like someone said earlier in the post ford also considers the aftermarket parts craze when they produce new cars. Ford makes the GT model for people who want power (and a damn good looking car) but do go race on the weekend, but they also know with a few mods that the GT is capable of beating a LS1 TA or camaro.
jlauth is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 02:16 PM
  #24  
Dark_Horse
3rd Gear Member
 
Dark_Horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 850
Default RE: Why not Ford?

JD1969

The styling is completely opinion. FWIW mine does not rattle much if at all, I know they are not all like mine but this is just what I can say having owned one. As for style and interior the 99-04 Stangs have basicly the same interior as the 94, and the shifter is is a very awkward position and to me, the Camaro SS and WS6 cars look way more aggressive than a Stang, again though just IMO.
true the WS6 dose look more agressive. if i didn't love mustangs and i went to a GM car i think the TA's look the best out of the 3 of them.

And also i was wondering why Chevy made the Camaro, Ponitac made the TA, AND the Firebird. why did ponitac make 2 of the same cars? or is there a diffrence other then looks. whick one costs more? is there better suspenison, or is it all for looks?
Dark_Horse is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 02:38 PM
  #25  
n/a_threat
2nd Gear Member
 
n/a_threat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 488
Default RE: Why not Ford?

Ford/Motorcraft/SVT have GM beat for one reason. . .

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/featuredvehicles/4303/


The greatest Mustang EVER!!!


[IMG]local://upfiles/25836/3F3AB11963B147A1945A0ADDDB24FC2B.jpg[/IMG]
n/a_threat is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 02:55 PM
  #26  
Derf00
Gentleman's Relish
 
Derf00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 13,090
Default RE: Why not Ford?


ORIGINAL: n/a_threat

Ford/Motorcraft/SVT have GM beat for one reason. . .

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/featuredvehicles/4303/


The greatest Mustang EVER!!!


[IMG]local://upfiles/25836/3F3AB11963B147A1945A0ADDDB24FC2B.jpg[/IMG]
Okay I like the engine mods but that damn body kit makes it look like a buck toof wabbit! It may kick some serious **** but i'd feel like a tool if I wasn't racing it.
Derf00 is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 03:21 PM
  #27  
rbstang
6th Gear Member
 
rbstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 5,608
Default RE: Why not Ford?

ORIGINAL: Derf00


ORIGINAL: n/a_threat

Ford/Motorcraft/SVT have GM beat for one reason. . .

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/featuredvehicles/4303/


The greatest Mustang EVER!!!


[IMG]local://upfiles/25836/3F3AB11963B147A1945A0ADDDB24FC2B.jpg[/IMG]
Okay I like the engine mods but that damn body kit makes it look like a buck toof wabbit! It may kick some serious **** but i'd feel like a tool if I wasn't racing it.
That car only ran a 12.7 1/4 mile? and it has 590 hp? Hmm.... Codes N/A GT ran 12.6... Either that driver was drunk when he raced or hes just a horrible driver.
rbstang is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 03:24 PM
  #28  
jlauth
2nd Gear Member
 
jlauth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location:
Posts: 357
Default RE: Why not Ford?

i think that the firebird was considered the v6 version. I believe that to be called you must have a V8, but who knows and who cares i am a mustang man. Oh and the Super Stallion was a piece of work could also run on alcohol i believe, another reason why i said ford uses there engineers. Cars like that and other SVE cars as well as SVT cars are just amazing.
jlauth is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 06:54 PM
  #29  
Fallstar01
4th Gear Member
 
Fallstar01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,654
Default RE: Why not Ford?


ORIGINAL: JD1969

The styling is completely opinion. FWIW mine does not rattle much if at all, I know they are not all like mine but this is just what I can say having owned one. As for style and interior the 99-04 Stangs have basicly the same interior as the 94, and the shifter is is a very awkward position and to me, the Camaro SS and WS6 cars look way more aggressive than a Stang, again though just IMO.
I guess that's what I meant that it appealed to a smaller portion of the population. For some people (not myself but others), it might have appeared almost too aggressive. About the rattles, I admit that comment was mostly heresay. I must say that sometime during the early to mid 90s I went from absolutely loving the cars to thinking they were just over-the-top looking. I remember helping a buddy replace a window in his 97 (which was an increadible PITA because of the curves of the car) and thinking that the car was just a few refinements and design cueues away from being the hotest thing out there. These days, I admit that I'd really like to get one for a project car somewhere down the line.
Fallstar01 is offline  
Old 12-15-2005, 10:02 PM
  #30  
BBKBadBoy
2nd Gear Member
 
BBKBadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location:
Posts: 219
Default RE: Why not Ford?

ORIGINAL: JD1969.
The styling is completely opinion. FWIW mine does not rattle much if at all, I know they are not all like mine but this is just what I can say having owned one. As for style and interior the 99-04 Stangs have basicly the same interior as the 94, and the shifter is is a very awkward position and to me, the Camaro SS and WS6 cars look way more aggressive than a Stang, again though just IMO.
I know its your opinion but if your comparing the SS and WS6 to a GT then of course you would get a more aggressive out of the SS and WS6 but if your you would say regular Z28 and Trans Am the GT looks better in my opinion but as far as the SS and WS6 goes, The 03-04 Cobras look better but in a way they do look better than the 99-01 cobras
BBKBadBoy is offline  


Quick Reply: Why not Ford?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:46 PM.