67mustang302

The problem is that a bone stock S197 GT still isn't as fastas a Camaro from nearly 10 years ago, and that's just shameful of Ford

PWORLDSTANG

No, not a drag at all.Personally, I LOVE my car. And I keep modding becausethe car just has so much damn potential I might as well utilize some of it. Ford did VERY WELL with the Terminator, and that's why don't hear one singleTerminator ownercomplain about the Terminators performance. I can go on and on about the Terminator, butthere is no need to. Itsreputation speaks for itself.

But what about the lower model Mustangs and the rest of Ford's vehicle line up? Not everyone can afford a GT500, or Ford GT. If so, we'd all have them. These are each top model cars within Ford. And the reality is, most people can't afford either of them.

So is it asking too much of Ford to compete more competitively with the performace of other Manufacturers cars? In my opinion, it isn't. And that's why there's a lot of Ford owners who aren't satisfied with the performance of their vehicle.

fazm

its pretty close to on par with the 1st ls1's

they were 13.4ish cars
the gt is a 13.5 car (ive seen 13.4 stock)

not to mention that u couldnt buy an ls1 for 24k msrp even 10 years ago.

4.6 liters vs 5.7 liters.

even when the new camaro comes out, they arent going to be in the same class simpley because of cost.

if ur going to compare things, compare prices

02 camaro SS vs 03 cobra. same price, and the cobra whipes the floor (not to mention its capabilities without opening the motor)
if u even want to compare it to an 01 cobra vs 01 SS they are same price, and right on par with performance.

PWORLDSTANG

I don't see that as a problem at all being that the Camaro isn't even in production anymore. But I understand what you're getting at, and I agree with you.

The Ford car (Mustang GT)that IS affordableto the average middle class American still isn't superior in performance to a car that's 10 years older than it, AND is no longer in production. I agree 100%, that's shameful of Ford.

V8LSX

GM is trying to put out new stuff and hoping to hit a real seller to stay alive, Ford is pinching every penny to stay alive.

94Blk5.0

The people that seem to have contentment issue with the new Mustangs seem to keep comparing them to the LS1. Thats fine go for it, but honestly the 05+ GT is cooler/quicker/looks better/etc. then most cars on the road. I find I enjoy my car a lot more if am not comparing it constantly to other cars, just enjoy it for what it is. The LS1 cars are quick, but so are the S197, and remeber most the Mustang/F-Body sales come from the V6/auto model. Quarter miles time are meaningles to the average car buyer. Come onguys, you are complaing about a $25K, 300HP, mid-high 13sec in the1/4 mile, 25MPG car with some damn good styling cues. I don't get it.

Redneck97

uhhh all LS1's are the same you could of bought a Camaro Z/28 for around 22k back in 02.........and they dont run 13.4 its usually a little lower then that stock. your compareing a 5.7L (350bhp) vs. 4.6 (300hp) car. If you wana crunch numbers the camaro wins in pure performance for cost.....

But the 03/04 Cobra's were a different story..... [:@]

fazm

notice, i didnt say what you could buy one for, i said MSRP. why doesnt everyone read before they post?

you can buy a new gt for 22k too. and a stock z28 is a mid 13 second car. the gt is a mid 13 second car. the new GT will out handle a z28 as well.

Redneck97

No actually the MSRP fora Z/28 was $21,875......

Why dont you ever research before YOU post?

And yea I could see a sn197 being almost the same on handeling but the F-body being better becouse of were the engine was placed.

http://www.cars.com/go/crp/research....p;aff=national

67mustang302

There are certainly differences that make a straight S197 vs LS1 Camaro comparisonimpractical. But the point is that the 2008 Mustang GT, the base model V8performance pony car from Ford,with an overhead cam engine and 10 more years worth of technology, R&D, materials advancement etc, with variable cam timing, is only matching the performance of a car that that was produced 10 years earlier as a base model V8 performance pony car from GM, and hasn't been made for the last 5 years. Now, Ford is getting that performance with less power from a smaller engine which does speak to the engineering achievement of such, and the S197's are very well priced, but again it just seems that Ford is 10 years behind the performance curve. Ford could be doing a lot better in the performance department than they have, and they could do so without spending extra money. My view(as some of you know) is that Ford made a huge mistake jumping to the Modular powerplant as a performance enginein the Mustangs in 96, before R&Ding it to the point where it would benefit from the technology potential it had. The 4.6L Mustang powerplant(with the exception of the Machs, Termies etc) until the current 3V engine has basically sat on a mountain of untapped potential and not been a strong performer, especially the non PI 4.6's. Ford went to the Modular family so they could supposedly benefit from the technological advancements it offered over a pushrod engine, yet 10 years later it's only just starting to truely benefit fromthat potential(again with the exception of the Machs, Termies etc) that it has, and "come of age" as it were. In the meantime GM continued the development of the pushrod type powerplant sticking with what they knew rather than trying to do something totally different, and they evolved from the LT1 to the LS1, and now we have the LS2, 3, 7 etc. The LS2 is a larger engine yes, but producesthe samehp/cid(roughly)as the 3V 4.6(without all the technology of variable cam timing etc)and it costs less(I actually searched, and in some cases the LS2 crate engine is more than $1,000 cheaper than a 3V 4.6 crate)since it's a much less complex design than Ford's Modular, yet with 33% more power(mainly from the displacement). GM has managed to produce a much superior engine in terms of performance, it's complexity is lower(which has a reliability and maintenence advantage), and they managed to do it without having to use a highly complex, technologically advanced engine(they use same basic configuration that American manufacturers have been using for more than half a century), and neither did they have as radical a change in manufacturing process to produce their newer engine family like Ford has had to do. This isn't a rant against the Modular, it has plenty of potential, but that's just the problem, from the factory it's mostly just potential. Ford seems to have jumped in with both feet before they were really ready, and it's the consumer who has suffered. GM seems to have taken a much better approach, and it's customers were rewarded. Ford R&D'd a totally new engine and basically started from scratch(started in what, the early 90's when they began putting 4.6's in Crown Vics?) to develop a performance engine, and GM simply continued with what they had. Where is GM now and where is Ford now?