2.4 SS vs Mustang GT
03-04-2008, 05:10 PM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: 05-22-07
Location: Winder, GA
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no doubt that a shitty driver in a GT would lose to a good driver in a 2.4, all he has to do is miss one gear and he's fucked.
03-04-2008, 05:13 PM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: 11-30-06
Location: West Memphis, AR
Posts: 3,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lolz. I love that my girlfriend in her 94' stock V6 mustang says that her car would beat my SS/NA.
I just nod my head and laugh on the inside. She controls the poonanny after all.
I just nod my head and laugh on the inside. She controls the poonanny after all.
03-04-2008, 05:15 PM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: 05-22-07
Location: Winder, GA
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-04-2008, 05:20 PM
#58
Senior Member
Join Date: 05-22-07
Location: Winder, GA
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yea...i think everyone was pissed with the 05+ mustangs because the V6's had 4.0L and the V8's only had 4.6..none the less, they're both quick for their class. And the V6 is a MAJOR improvement.
03-04-2008, 06:57 PM
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-30-06
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Figured I chime in on a few things.
The SS would only have a chance if it was against a 95 or older and a 96-98 would be a close race and 99+ would kill a SS NA.
Not really the 5.4 they had/have isn’t that impressive just makes more torque guys have done swaps and between the added weight and a close to same hp its really no gain. Also like stated it wasn’t cost effective and they would have had to redesign the whole car.
My stock auto ran 14.4 with a 2.1 60’, 13s have been ran but its not the average. With a 5spd and a guy that knows how to drive low 14s are very easy. As for the 02 Turbo prime example of shitty driver. I ran 12.86 in my auto with a 2.1 60’ and a 5spd turbo car should be a solid .5 faster than that.
My brother-in-law works on prototypes for ford, he worked on the Shelby GT500, Bullitt and even a Boss proto. The boss series is most likely going to end up in the Mustangs 2011-2012 and they are going into the F Series pickups very soon. The mustang is getting a slight redesign (ala 96/99) in 09/10, which spy pics are out already, and then a full design in 2011/2012.
Also SVT is coming out with a few surprises too, possibly along the lines of an extreme off-road pickup truck w/ factory nitrous. (Will be like the Saleen N20 once hooked void warranty ) and a few other goodies I’m REALLY excited about.
Some what true
Power more like
GT:350-375 (5.0 NA)
Boss/Mach: 400-425 (5.0 NA)
GT500: 550-575 (6.2 w/ new TVS Eaton)
The Super Snake has nothing to do with ford but all I can say is dony plan on seeing the 777 going into any car unless its some super rare 1 of 1 car.
The TwinForce AKA Eco-boost is what going in a lot of the sedans and even a few trucks, once again you talking later next year at the earliest. The new full sized Lincoln Sedan will be one of the first to get it and should make in the 300-325hp range.
As for the HP wars we got till 2015-2020 and it will be the mid-late 70s all over again
To the OP prolly a 96-98 GT I could believe that if it was an auto Vert.
It didn't have but like 239 TQ i believe, they cammed it and ran a shot of nitrous and made a little over 300 so it's not that shabby, still isn't fast though. I'd say a modded SS/na and a GT would be a drivers race if the GT was stock from a dig, from a roll it's the SS no contest.
I don't really understand why ford didn't use the 5.4L 2V in the Mustangs from 96 on. If they did the mustang vs camaro wars would have been so much closer. There are guys doing 5.4L swaps into there older mustang GT's and pulling 300+ hp and 400+ torque. That would have been badass back in the 90's. I would have bought a mustang GT if it would have had the 5.4L
Also SVT is coming out with a few surprises too, possibly along the lines of an extreme off-road pickup truck w/ factory nitrous. (Will be like the Saleen N20 once hooked void warranty ) and a few other goodies I’m REALLY excited about.
rumors. They are either switching to the boss series engines that are actually fairly big (5.0, 6.2 and even the roush 777 which is the most godly engine ever btw) or going to the twin force series which is probably more likely. They would change around the names a bit, but prices per performance would be similar.
if they go boss, the v6 would get the duratec 6 with 260-270hp, the gt would get the 5.0 (400hp) the gt500 would get the 6.2 (something around 500-550hp) and the super snake would get the 777 (427 with 700hp N/A). The twin forces consist of a tt v6 with something like 400hp and a tt v6 with like 600. either way the hp wars are back in full force and i am ****** excited.
if they go boss, the v6 would get the duratec 6 with 260-270hp, the gt would get the 5.0 (400hp) the gt500 would get the 6.2 (something around 500-550hp) and the super snake would get the 777 (427 with 700hp N/A). The twin forces consist of a tt v6 with something like 400hp and a tt v6 with like 600. either way the hp wars are back in full force and i am ****** excited.
Power more like
GT:350-375 (5.0 NA)
Boss/Mach: 400-425 (5.0 NA)
GT500: 550-575 (6.2 w/ new TVS Eaton)
The Super Snake has nothing to do with ford but all I can say is dony plan on seeing the 777 going into any car unless its some super rare 1 of 1 car.
The TwinForce AKA Eco-boost is what going in a lot of the sedans and even a few trucks, once again you talking later next year at the earliest. The new full sized Lincoln Sedan will be one of the first to get it and should make in the 300-325hp range.
As for the HP wars we got till 2015-2020 and it will be the mid-late 70s all over again
To the OP prolly a 96-98 GT I could believe that if it was an auto Vert.
Last edited by 04YellowGT; 03-05-2008 at 10:57 AM.
03-04-2008, 10:22 PM
#60
Banned
Join Date: 03-20-07
Location: st.louis
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For one in st.louis, i have never ever seen a 99-04 GT stock or with exhaust ever touch a low 14 second pass........2 valve mustangs are a ******* joke unless totally built.
03-04-2008, 10:26 PM
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-17-07
Location: right behind you.
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey don't get me wrong the 2v 4.6 were all disappointments, but seriously...your car was no faster stock.
03-04-2008, 10:59 PM
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-30-06
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-04-2008, 11:06 PM
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-19-05
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FIRST time my friend and I took our '01 GT's to the track, my friend went 14.1@99 and I went 14.2@100 with 2.1 and 2.2 60's, respectively. His was bone stock, mine had exhaust. Oh, and it was ~80 degrees out, if not more on the track, with FL humidity.
03-05-2008, 12:59 AM
#64
Banned
Join Date: 06-11-07
Location: Az
Posts: 5,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-05-2008, 11:11 AM
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-30-06
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HAHA Nothing Im a big fan of it. 
The tq gain just wasn't enough though and the hp gain was very minimal. Add that on to the added weight of the 5.4 (people call Mustangs "Heavy" as it is LOL) and the cost of redesigning and it just wasn't worth it. Look at the Lightning they only made 380/450 with a blower on them take the blower off and you dont got much more than whats out now.
Also thats why you don't see a lot of 2V Guys switching to the 5.4. A few people have done it and it just isn't cost effective or practical.
The tq gain just wasn't enough though and the hp gain was very minimal. Add that on to the added weight of the 5.4 (people call Mustangs "Heavy" as it is LOL) and the cost of redesigning and it just wasn't worth it. Look at the Lightning they only made 380/450 with a blower on them take the blower off and you dont got much more than whats out now.
Also thats why you don't see a lot of 2V Guys switching to the 5.4. A few people have done it and it just isn't cost effective or practical.
03-05-2008, 11:28 AM
#67
Banned
Join Date: 06-11-07
Location: Az
Posts: 5,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HAHA Nothing I’m a big fan of it.
The tq gain just wasn't enough though and the hp gain was very minimal. Add that on to the added weight of the 5.4 (people call Mustangs "Heavy" as it is LOL) and the cost of redesigning and it just wasn't worth it. Look at the Lightning they only made 380/450 with a blower on them take the blower off and you don’t got much more than what’s out now.
Also that’s why you don't see a lot of 2V Guys switching to the 5.4. A few people have done it and it just isn't cost effective or practical.
The tq gain just wasn't enough though and the hp gain was very minimal. Add that on to the added weight of the 5.4 (people call Mustangs "Heavy" as it is LOL) and the cost of redesigning and it just wasn't worth it. Look at the Lightning they only made 380/450 with a blower on them take the blower off and you don’t got much more than what’s out now.
Also that’s why you don't see a lot of 2V Guys switching to the 5.4. A few people have done it and it just isn't cost effective or practical.
03-05-2008, 12:32 PM
#68
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 02-27-07
Location: MD
Posts: 1,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-05-2008, 12:51 PM
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-29-05
Location: AZ
Posts: 7,926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i see no reference to a 2.4 beating a new edge stang anywhere in this thread????
good job to the OP's though, 2.4's can definitely hit 14's N/A...I'd like to see what a fully built N/A 2.4 could do. I'd bet you could be running mid-high 13's on street tires.
good job to the OP's though, 2.4's can definitely hit 14's N/A...I'd like to see what a fully built N/A 2.4 could do. I'd bet you could be running mid-high 13's on street tires.
03-05-2008, 02:17 PM
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-17-07
Location: right behind you.
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cobalt was talking about how on speed channel they dynoed a mustang that put down 22xwhp and 26x wtq and he thinks with the weight difference the 2.4 would for sure take it from a roll and maybe from a dig. the non-pi's didnt put down nearly those numbers stock, the PI 4.6's did and they have gone 13's bone stock. that's 2.4 rape.
Last edited by cakeeater; 03-05-2008 at 02:17 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
03-05-2008, 02:46 PM
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-30-06
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It still doens't hide the fact that it was with a blower, 5.4 2Vs just arent that impressive NA without a nice head and cam pkg.
03-05-2008, 03:15 PM
#73
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 02-27-07
Location: MD
Posts: 1,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The type of mustang has been verified, not a V6 though. Unless some old dude thinks its cool to slap GT badges on his mustang. But I dont think older people really care what we think of their cars so I dont think he just threw some badges on and called it a day
03-05-2008, 03:16 PM
#74
Banned
Join Date: 11-29-06
Location: CT
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
/Thread