What’s wrong with Ford and the new Mustang?

One of my friends brings up some very good points about the S197s in a couple of his latest blogs.
http://www.jwfisher.com/sec-blog/2005/11/24.html#a1018
http://www.jwfisher.com/sec-blog/2005/11/23.html#a1011

who is this guy? i just booked marked his page on like five different places on my computer - he has an enjoyable read and seems incredibly knowledgeable.

He is a driving instructor for a high performance driving school in Texas (http://www.thedriversedge.net/). As a driving instructor he has had the opportunity to drive just about everything from Z06s to EVOs. He has also been running Mustangs in Open Track events since the late 70’s.

Did you check out his Ford section? There is some great info there on everything from concepts to how to install Recaro seats.
http://www.jwfisher.com/sec-ford/default.htm

dont forget to notice the 230HP SC Fusion Escort ZX2 on that site. ;-) another example of how Ford let another company beat them, (Ford made the Focus SVT instead of letting Roush make the Fusion kit, who would buy a SVT Focus when you can have a smaller car w/ better gearing/suspention/power for under 20k(Roush said under 20k for the Fusion)) they didnt make the Fusion and let Dodge and Chevy beat them to the FI i4 market.(the Fusion demo was from 1999)

SRT-4: 230HP 2970LBS - cant handle but great inline(14.0 w/ good driver)
Cobalt SS SC: 205HP 2991LBS- good handler, ok inline(mid 14's)
Fusion ZX2: 230HP 2576LBS - great handeling and inline(should have done 14.0 range if they had tested it

the fusion has 400lbs on the other 2 cars lol

well idk much about that focus RS, other than it was FI but they only sold it in europe... why? i have no idea.

it was there rally version of the car

and ford will never have a low 14sec amazing handeling car for 20k when the mustang is only doing mid 13's and is in no way as nimble.

What would have been nice as far as the Focus goes was the SVE Focus R. But honestly the market being what it was for cars like that we were lucky there was a SVT Focus.

I agree, the new Mustang is too big. Yeah sure it looks cool but, it if I want a car that looks like a 65, 67 or 69 Mustang, or whatever years it's been compared to, I'll go buy one. The new Mustang (05) has become the 71-73 Mustang of today, TOO BIG. Sure, it has 300hp, ABOUT DAMN TIME, ONLY 10 YEARS TOO LATE!! With a car that big it has to have 300hp.
The new Stang also IS NOT aerodynamic. Look at it, it looks like a brick laying flat. Ford had to leave a few of the holes in the grill filled in so it would have more downforce on the frontend because of its lack of aero.
I also think that it DOES NOT look mean at all. Look at the 99-04 Stangs, THEY LOOK MEAN. They have the hood scoop (looks like 69 429 Boss), the backend looks like a 69 fastback (kind of). And the frontend looks mean also, and it's aerodynamic!! I KNOW, I KNOW, I just said I didn't like the new one cause it looks too much like the old ones, yet I like the 99-04 because it looks like a 69. However the 99-04 has hints of the 69, it's not a replica of 64-68 like the new one. Some people say I'm nuts but that's how I feel about the new Stang.
Sorry for the book guys, I haven't been on here for a few weeks.

There is something to be said about looking to the past for ideas. But I agree with what you said about the Mustang its just too much of a copy. Now Dodge did a much better job.
http://www.autoweek.com/images/news/103629http://autoweek.com/files/weekart/2005/1121/challenger_rear.jpg

Actually, if you look at the Charger in that pic, it looks like they just took a Cuda or Challenger/Charger from 70 or 71 (I may be wrong) and changed the frontend, rearend, and wheels but left the rest of the car alone. It does look good though. The 07 Camaro is almost the same way as the Charger. It looks exactly like a 69 Camaro but, w/different front, back, and wheels. The new Mustang doesn't look exactly like the old Mustangs, like that Charger and 07 Camaro, maybe that's why I don't like the new Mustang. I know, I'm contradicting myself. I like the 99-04 Stangs because they have a hint of the old yet, I like the /concept Charger & Camaro that look exactly like the old. Maybe it's just a case of the new Stang trying to look like the old but still trying to look new while the others come right out and say "here I am, a new (07) 69 Camaro w/new front and backend.

DOES ANY OF WHAT I JUST SAID MAKE SENSE?
I THINK I'M GOING TO CHECK MYSELF IN!!
BUT, I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

the interior of the new GT500 is almost a direct copy of the 69 gt500
http://www.mustangheaven.com/stangspecs/2007cobra/images/GT500_4.jpg
http://www.carmemories.com/images/dbimages/1880.jpg

Yeah....I like the new Stang interior, but at the same time I think it looks cheap. No, I'm not usually this picky.

For me form follows function so I like it simple sort of like the EVO MR.
http://www.autoweek.com/files/weekart/2004/1206/mitsumr_interior.jpg

you know most people criticize the 99-04 interior, but i really think it looks cool, and its very simple which i like also.

i personally like the new mustang a lot. that charger in that pic looks exactly like the old one. seriously if we are going to criticize for doing the throwback thing... they went way more hard core on it than ford did. as far as the camaro concept. i thought that was quite possibly the ugliest thing ive ever seen.

those new stangs also handle a lot better than the 99-04 and apparently that 300hp motor really runs awesome, ive heard gm guys praise it. sure its heavy, buts its not actually that much heavier than the 99-04.

Well as much of a mustang guy as I am I have to admit, that Challenger is sweet looking. And Im sure the mopar boys arent gonna miss a beat when it comes to putting some power under the hood. They've come out swinging with the new charger, great styling and an available 340hp SRT is nothing to sneeze at.

That is what brings me to my problem with Ford. Like someone else said, 300hp it is about time. Even now I think 300hp is too little to late.

Mustang = 300
Charger = 340
GTO = 400

yeah i think fords falling behind

Hey its not always about power.
Case in point 300hp, faster than a Carrera GT, street legal, and starting at $37,350 its the Aerial Atom.
http://www.openwheelers.com.au/videos/Top_Gear_Ariel_Atom_2_Full_segment.mpg

its also probably LIGHT

Yea its right around 1100 pounds

Honestly that was a lousy read this guy is full of contradictions and he is basically a moron IMO. This guy knows enough to be dangerous and that's it. I'm def dumber for now reading this dribble.

Yea its right around 1100 pounds

thats about 1300 less then my escort

I don't know guys, the more I see from Ford lately the less I like. Yeah, they have a supercar in the GT but, who can afford one. Sure they have the GT500 coming out next year, also....$40,000. Then the Cobra, Mach 1. They're all cool but for most of us to be able to afford them we'll have to wait until they're are 10 years old with 90,000 miles before we could afford them. Like I said before, the Mustang is now huge. It looks like a Lincoln, I know, it's built on the same platform as the Lincoln. The wheels look like they belong on a Lincoln.

I guess I just long for "the good ole days" when you could leave the dealership with a stripped down GT (LX) 5.0 for $16,000. But at the same time I want the Mustang to be up there with GM in horsepower (atleast 350) in the base model. Then for the SVT/special Mustangs they should be right there with the Z06, etc. etc. Yes it does take more than just horsepower, it's also how you put that power to the ground. I guess I'm just stuck on the 5.0.

GOD, I SOUND LIKE MY GRANDPA

you just contradicted yourself

You cant have a supercar and sell it for 25k. the mustang is by far the most affordable of all its competition. actually the mustang really doesnt have much competition. Other muscle cars all cost much more than the mustang. hell when camaros were new they cost well over 30k. the cobra beats the piss outa those to. and guess what, your stripped down 5.0 for 16k also had 225hp... its different when the hp starts going up.

Like I said before, the Mustang is now huge. It looks like a Lincoln, I know, it's built on the same platform as the Lincoln. The wheels look like they belong on a Lincoln.
Actually the new Mustang is not built off of the Lincoln DEW98 platform it’s built off of the Mazda D2C platform. Lincoln will be getting their hands on the D2C platform for a proposed 09 model. The DEW98 platform is virtually dead. The last cars to use the DEW98 platform were the T-Bird, Lincoln LS, and Jaguar S-Type. This is a sad thing since the DEW98 was far more advanced than the D2C platform. Jaguar will be the only one to continue to use the DEW98 platform however it has been tweaked beyond the revision it received in 03.

You cant have a supercar and sell it for 25k. the mustang is by far the most affordable of all its competition. actually the mustang really doesnt have much competition. Other muscle cars all cost much more than the mustang. hell when camaros were new they cost well over 30k. the cobra beats the piss outa those to. and guess what, your stripped down 5.0 for 16k also had 225hp... its different when the hp starts going up.


The 99-01 Cobra was also priced right at $30K too. The Camaro SS and Z28 were built to take on the Cobra not the Mustang GT. The Cobra didn’t come stock from the factory capable of “beating the piss” out of the Camaro till 03 when they were SC, cost $35K, and a year after the last Fbody. The Mustang has been the most affordable of all the late model “muscle cars” because it has been the lowend V8 in its market. Ford may have the advantage right now since it’s the only car in the market. However when the Challenger comes out its base V8 will still have more power than the GT Mustang.

No reasonable person expects Ford to produce a supercar like the GT for $25K. However many of us do expect Ford to produce a highend model Mustang that doesn’t weigh 2 tons and cost $45K. The GT500 may make more hp stock than any other Mustang but it also weighs like I said 2 tons. That is more weight to move than any Mustang ever built other than the last GT500 vert but the new GT500 vert may even out weigh that. The GT500 may make twice the hp as a fox body did stock but it will also weigh over 1200lbs more. When weight goes up like that the effectiveness of the power increase goes down.

it does weigh a lot, but have you seen tests of that gt500? that thing is a beast. with a simple pulley swap ur lookin at 550hp also. its the same motor thats in the GT. Apparently its the best handling mustang yet. the solid axle is remarkably smooth on cornering in that car. when road and track tested it, they said it did better in bumpy corners that the GT did. Not bad for a solid axle. But the good thing about the axle is straight line stuff. I think that car is going to be a 1/4 mile monster. but then again i havent been in it, so i dont know this from experience. I have a suspicsion also that it does a much better job of putting power to the ground than a fox.

of course i couldnt argue with making that car a little lighter.

it does weigh a lot, but have you seen tests of that gt500? that thing is a beast. with a simple pulley swap ur lookin at 550hp also. its the same motor thats in the GT. Apparently its the best handling mustang yet. the solid axle is remarkably smooth on cornering in that car. when road and track tested it, they said it did better in bumpy corners that the GT did. Not bad for a solid axle. But the good thing about the axle is straight line stuff. I think that car is going to be a 1/4 mile monster. but then again i havent been in it, so i dont know this from experience. I have a suspicsion also that it does a much better job of putting power to the ground than a fox.

of course i couldnt argue with making that car a little lighter.

1. the pully on the GT500 can not be changed (one reason people cancelled orders)
2. its a 5.4 not the 4.6 (a SC 4.6 05 has been proven to make over 480whp/480wtq, thats more crank then the GT500 for about 20k less)
3. it puts the power down better because it has a shit load more weight

You are paying Ford an extra 25k for a SC you can do for 6k a suspention you can do for 2k, and vinyl decals.

GT = 3,450 pounds
GT500 = estimated 3,800 pounds

So for 17k less you can make more power, handle great and weigh less.

The GT500 is the BIGGEST pos I have sever seen for make. It's a great example of a great idea done HORRIBLY wrong.

1. the pully on the GT500 can not be changed (one reason people cancelled orders)
2. its a 5.4 not the 4.6 (a SC 4.6 05 has been proven to make over 480whp/480wtq, thats more crank then the GT500 for about 20k less)
3. it puts the power down better because it has a shit load more weight

You are paying Ford an extra 25k for a SC you can do for 6k a suspention you can do for 2k, and vinyl decals.

GT = 3,450 pounds
GT500 = estimated 3,800 pounds

So for 17k less you can make more power, handle great and weigh less.

The GT500 is the BIGGEST pos I have sever seen for make. It's a great example of a great idea done HORRIBLY wrong.

dude get a frickin clue. By GT i meant ford GT... you know the one with the 5.4. christ. if you just read earlier posts youd know that. also is the 4.6 can put down that power, it just goes to show that the 5.4 in the 500 is gonna have a lot more potential. tell you what, id take that pos over anything else ford is making, maybe except the ford gt. and let me ask you something, after putting all that money into the suspension and S/C on a mustang gt... do you really think its gonna weigh any less. not much. your third point... well its retarded and thats not at all what i meant.


edit- can you show me some proof that you cant swap the pulleys, i believe you, but its kinda retarded sounding i dont know why ford would do that... i also imagine there would be some way to get around it.

We are talking Mustangs, why would I assume you were talking Ford GT not mustang GT?

For the price of a GT500 you can have a Mustang GT making well over 500WHP. On the GT500 you need a whole me SC to upgrade the power from it. making it 50k + price of a new SC.

If you dont care about a name or the added cheap effects on the 500 you can tell that the GT is a much better car for those that care about performance.

Surrently you can pick up a new Mustang GT for about 23k, get a 5.4 from ford for about 5k, and Sc for about 6k thats 34k + tuning.....thats a lot less then 50k, and would make more power.

Incase you didnt wanna read all of that.....GT500 NOT worth 50k!

edit- can you show me some proof that you cant swap the pulleys, i believe you, but its kinda retarded sounding i dont know why ford would do that... i also imagine there would be some way to get around it.
It’s not that you can't its just not as easy to do as the 03/04s. The GT500s will have an Eaton R122 with a 10 rib pulley that it is driven by the rear belt, not the front belt like the 03/04's. Because of this it will have a short snout so there won't be much room for a smaller pulley. The bottom pulley can't be swapped for a larger pulley either. There is only something like 10mm of clearance.

http://www.stangsunleashed.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12&hl=blower

its the same motor thats in the GT.
I am sorry but it’s not the same. The only thing that is shared between the GT and GT500 is the heads. The heads will use the same castings but the cams will be totally different.

do you really think its gonna weigh any less. not much.
Well if you want to look at 4.6 DOHC AL block and the 5.4 DOHC "pig iron" block there is a big difference. There is 159lbs difference between the 80lbs 01 Cobra block and the 239lbs "pig iron" 5.4 block.

***Please don’t get me started on the whole AL vs. “pig iron” issue.***

Well if you want to look at 4.6 DOHC AL block and the 5.4 DOHC "pig iron" block there is a big difference. There is 159lbs difference between the 80lbs 01 Cobra block and the 239lbs "pig iron" 5.4 block.

***Please don’t get me started on the whole AL vs. “pig iron” issue.***

well what i was trying to say, with the cars having a weight dif of about 350lbs, was that after adding the S/C and all the suspension peices that the weight difference would be minimal between the cars, not the engines, it doesnt take a genious to know AL is lighter.

isnt the gt500 around 40K?

well what i was trying to say, with the cars having a weight dif of about 350lbs, was that after adding the S/C and all the suspension peices that the weight difference would be minimal between the cars, not the engines, it doesnt take a genious to know AL is lighter
What I was trying to show is that most of the added weight is due to the "pig iron" 5.4. It also puts more weight in the worst possible spot. The GT500 is more than likely looking at a 57/43 weight distribution.

isnt the gt500 around 40K?
Nope its $45k+ now

The hardest part of the Mustang is that it has unprecedented market positioning in terms of revenue. We have a V6 coupe that starts just below $20,000 and then we work all the way up to a Shelby GT500 that's probably going to be in excess of $45,000. So you're talking about more than a twofold increase and there are no other cars out there that do that.

http://www.themsj.com/media/paper207/news/2005/11/07/Alumni/Ford-Mustang.Project.Leader.Hau.ThaiTang-1048480.shtml?norewrite&sourcedomain=www.themsj.com

That is slightly more than a base level C6 Vette. In a straight line it’s going to be a fair fight between the two cars but if there is a corner the Vette is gone. I am sorry but for the money the Vette is the clear winner of the two cars. I just hope Ford hasn't doomed the SVT Mustang due to its price.

Ford is already upsetting many of the SVT loyalists due to the poor leadership of HTT. Honestly they released the prototype way too early. Yes it sparked interest but much of that interest has now become dissatisfaction. Proposed prices have gone from under $40K to $45K+, to many cost cutting changes (i.e. no more twin screw), and now dealerships are telling people on the waiting list they will be something like $10k over invoice. Honestly I think SVT is a lost cause if HTT remains in charge and things like this don't change.

Dealers have been telling people on waiting lists the gt500 will cost 50k or more after markup.

very few have found a dealer selling at MSRP.

and the painted stripes are now due to be just decals.

I am largely against v6 mustangs (think they are a waste of metal since Ford havent given them a good motor in over 10yrs) but I have found that of the 05+ line the ONLY mustang I like is the v6+Pony Package.

the way i see the line up:
v6 = decent car, if Pony pkg included is the most out of the line up to look like the classic

GT = great motor but should have the pony pkg look, the huge fogs are ugly

GT500 = I like NOTHING about it and find NOTHING on it impressive.

the painted stripes are now due to be just decals.
The painted stripes never even had a chance. Even the Ford GT has vinyl decals and its $150K+ :lol: .





Yea I know the GT has painted LM stripes but the side stripes are still vinyl.

thats pathetic

Yep it sure is...its also classic Ford cost cutting

well i wouldnt argue with most points on this page of the thread. except i think the fogs on the gt's look pretty cool, and i disagree that the 3.8 is a bad motor, atleast the more recent ones, the older ones did suck. the 3.8 is very very reliable and is a pretty tough motor. but it doesnt come with a whole ton of power stock, but that could have something to do with the fact that ford doesnt want it competing with the gt, which has 260hp compared to 195... so if they added much more power the v6 no one would buy a gt.

but even GM gave the f-body v6's a package that gave them better gear/exhaust and i think intake. come on a 1994 v6 mustang w/ a 150hp v6? my 91 taurus had 120.

in 1998 v6 stang - 150HP, there best i4 was 130 in a MUCH lighter car

ford needs to give the v6 either a VERY well designed v6 (like the 3.5 they have coming out soon) or do one of 2 things tuners have been dong for years.

1. Use a 3.0 duratec block w/ Contour SVT head/cams ect making about 230hp crank(redone for a rwd car ofcourse)

2. do like current v6 owners do, make it into a 4.2l motor so it can make real power. :)

personaly i think if they apply the technology on the 3.5 they have coming out and apply it to a 4.2 it can make some REAL power,

Ford just needs to drop the V6 in the Mustang. Ford, Volvo, Land Rover and Jaguar will be using a new 3.2 litre inline six in various applications. The standard engine is expected to produce 240bhp with a turbo-charged version approaching 300bhp.

Hey The Stang00, how did I contradict myself?

Also, what are you talking about when you said we can't have a supercar for $25k? When I mentioned a supercar from Ford being the GT, I meant the GT=remake of the GT40. If that's the case, then you just dogged the escort guy for the same thing you did. Anyway, just wondering what you meant, I believe it was on page 2.
Thanks.

but even GM gave the f-body v6's a package that gave them better gear/exhaust and i think intake. come on a 1994 v6 mustang w/ a 150hp v6? my 91 taurus had 120.

in 1998 v6 stang - 150HP, there best i4 was 130 in a MUCH lighter car

ford needs to give the v6 either a VERY well designed v6 (like the 3.5 they have coming out soon) or do one of 2 things tuners have been dong for years.

1. Use a 3.0 duratec block w/ Contour SVT head/cams ect making about 230hp crank(redone for a rwd car ofcourse)

2. do like current v6 owners do, make it into a 4.2l motor so it can make real power. :)

personaly i think if they apply the technology on the 3.5 they have coming out and apply it to a 4.2 it can make some REAL power,

thats why i said the newer 3.8's the older ones were a little underpowered... to say the least. i mean the 99-04 (190-195hp). maybe i should have clarified. and actually, the svt focus had that 170hp I4. but im sure ur aware of that. yes the v6 f-budy did have slightly more power, but it also had a larger price tag.

take my mustang, guess how many problems ive had with the engine... zero. infact the entire car has been perfect. its got about 75k on it right now, which isnt a real high number... but it still hasnt had a single problem. and with some new rods you can put some good boost on the motor too. only problem is the rear end isnt meant to take anything over 300hp so itll go. and the tranny will last with those numbers a while, but its not really built to take it either. but those two things have nothing to do with that engine.

edit- im not gonna try to say they should keep with this motor tho, i do agree that i think the new ones are better, especially the 3.5

Well that pisses me off about the price raise. I thought this car was gonna be the sh*t. They were projecting it to be the 1st prod. car with 500hp under 40k. I can live with the solid axle(prefer it really)and the weight as long as it comes from a bigger motor, but this marking up prices sucks. Just like the Ford GT, it started at 140k and i went crazy over this thing until i found out you couldn't get one for 200k in cash. (in birmingham)

and if Ford ever puts hybrid motor in a mustang, i will probably become a camaro fan. :2cents:

Hey The Stang00, how did I contradict myself?

Also, what are you talking about when you said we can't have a supercar for $25k? When I mentioned a supercar from Ford being the GT, I meant the GT=remake of the GT40. If that's the case, then you just dogged the escort guy for the same thing you did. Anyway, just wondering what you meant, I believe it was on page 2.
Thanks.

i might have to look into the inline six, thats kind of a neat idea.

meant you contradicted urself when u said u want it up there with gm in hp (350-400) and still $16K. not possible really. and also you said you want the 5.0's, but still up there in power, when the 5.0 had 225hp.

but the 5.0 was a good motor and it wouldnt surprise me if ford could have bored it out and put some better heads on it etc... and made it competitive with the ls1. but since you have one you might know more about that than me.

Well that pisses me off about the price raise. I thought this car was gonna be the sh*t. They were projecting it to be the 1st prod. car with 500hp under 40k. I can live with the solid axle(prefer it really)and the weight as long as it comes from a bigger motor, but this marking up prices sucks. Just like the Ford GT, it started at 140k and i went crazy over this thing until i found out you couldn't get one for 200k in cash. (in birmingham)

and if Ford ever puts hybrid motor in a mustang, i will probably become a camaro fan. :2cents:

actually the gt started at just under $130k... lol i follow it from the beginning. I do agree though, the price raise and the unswappable pulleys kinda piss me off., i can live with the weight increase to cause the new stangs have a isgnificantly better suspension.

thats why i said the newer 3.8's the older ones were a little underpowered... to say the least. i mean the 99-04 (190-195hp).

Same motor just difernt heads, single port injecton vs slit port


and actually, the svt focus had that 170hp I4. but im sure ur aware of that.

the SVT Focus was also welling for 18-19k wehne the v6 stang was selling as 17-18k. I use the ZX2 because the ZX2 was selling at 13k vs the 20k for the stang in 98. And for the record the 143hp S/R is on par w/ the SVT focus in both accelleration and handeling for 16k, which in turn makes the 99+ look worse.


take my mustang, guess how many problems ive had with the engine... zero. infact the entire car has been perfect. its got about 75k on it right now, which isnt a real high number... but it still hasnt had a single problem.

ive seen 4 05's either being towed or on flatbeds already, that more then any other stang ive ever seen


and with some new rods you can put some good boost on the motor too. only problem is the rear end isnt meant to take anything over 300hp so itll go. and the tranny will last with those numbers a while, but its not really built to take it either. but those two things have nothing to do with that engine.

I can say the same for an Escort, give it better rod bolts and a LSD and it can take over 200whp, or over 300 if you take compression into account. whoodee frick'n do

Same motor just difernt heads, single port injecton vs slit port



hmm so you think me... a 3.8 owner doesnt know that. but its not the same engine, the old one was notorious for head gasket problems, the 99-04's arent. that was fixed. plus the 99-04 actually start out with some decent kick. esp in lowend.

ive seen 4 05's either being towed or on flatbeds already, that more then any other stang ive ever seen

well its good that i wasnt talking about the 4.0... but even still, im sure all thatll get worked out.

I can say the same for an Escort, give it better rod bolts and a LSD and it can take over 200whp, or over 300 if you take compression into account. whoodee frick'n do

My whole point was it can take a lot of boost, not that it could take any. besides, how much more boost would it take for the escort to reach the same numbers... and id be willing to bet that the block cant take as much boost. not only that, but i know for a fact that zetecs are expensive little guys to mod.

expensive? hell you can buy a turbo kit to make 200whp for only 4k (turbo kit), add about 2k for basic boltons and head work your in business.

do yo know how many cars the zetec shares parts w/?
whole focus line, Escorts/Puma's in the UK, Contour and Cougar. all american I4's are more expencive then jap ones.

why? kids look at HP on hondas and dont see TQ as a factor. so more jap cars are being bought for.

Zetecs are strong motors. They can make over 300whp N/A, there are 220hp(stock) versions in the UK, and Focus-power has a focus making over 500HP still on stock cams, and they have 10psi and a 125shot they havent used on it yet. :) lol

there are 220hp(stock) versions versions in the UK
Yep the RS is a verry nice car too
http://forddesktops.com/desktops/focusrs/Ford_Focus_RS_1.jpg

But wait till 07
Mazda sourced 2.3i Turbo-Charged engine with 280bhp on tap, intelligent 4WD system with centre Differential, aggressive bodystyling similar to the Fiesta RS Concepts, luxury interior, lightweight body panels!
http://www.focuscosworth.co.uk/news/archives/Shock_new_Focus_RS.htm

expensive? hell you can buy a turbo kit to make 200whp for only 4k (turbo kit), add about 2k for basic boltons and head work your in business.


exactly, turbo kit for the 3.8, get one new for 3k and be makin over 250 easy. with just that.

As far as the RS goes, yeah that is a nice car... If they sold them here it would probably be my next car. Im a big focus fan. I know the zetec is a good motor, but its still more expensive than a lot of other motors, i think your probably right about the reason being that kids all look at hondas and whatnot. from what i hear the 2.3 duratec is a little more wallet friendly. idk if its necessarily a better motor though. im not trying to discredit anything you said about the zetec though, i like it. what pisses me off is that everyone still bashes american reliability and and technology when we have motors like that one that is just as good or better than a lot of japanese motors. my mom actually has a focus, those things really handle quite well.

Yep the RS is a verry nice car too
http://forddesktops.com/desktops/focusrs/Ford_Focus_RS_1.jpg

But wait till 07
Mazda sourced 2.3i Turbo-Charged engine with 280bhp on tap, intelligent 4WD system with centre Differential, aggressive bodystyling similar to the Fiesta RS Concepts, luxury interior, lightweight body panels!
http://www.focuscosworth.co.uk/news/archives/Shock_new_Focus_RS.htm

so your saying the new focus RS will have 280hp? i might just have to try to get one imported in a few years.

they made a 450hp AWD RS200 in the UK in the 80's it was a turbo 2.0L

I have YET to see ford pring a car that sweet over there

the 450hp version did 0-60 in 2.8 secs
there was a 550HP version also.

Blogs just seem to be getting more like blogarbage these days...

Did that writer actually research to see if Ford had launched an all-new 3.5 liter V-6?

Last time I checked, the new Mustang is having its best sales year since 1994. Around 192,000 Mustang will be built by the end of this year. Are great sales somehow a "problem?"

check the link for the new V-6 and 6 speed auto

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=484038

Is something "wrong" with beating Porsche, BMW, Nissan, etc. on the race track?

http://www.grandamerican.com/News/Article.asp?ID=5227

http://www.multimaticmotorsports.com/mustang/empringham.html

http://www.grandamerican.com/News/Article.asp?ID=5269

http://www.theraceforum.com/images/forum/2971-20-1.jpg

http://www.theraceforum.com/images/forum/2971-28-1.jpg

A new Shelby GT350 should be built with the weight kept down. The original Shelby GT350s handled better than the GT500s.

1965 Shelby GT350

http://www.netcarshow.com/ford/1965-mustang_shelby_gt350/1024x768/wallpaper_02.jpg

with the rant on things American from "The Tao of Jeff"...

Hp/liter has ZERO effect on the performance of a car. Heck, the new Corvette Z06's hand-built 505 hp LS7 weighs 71 pounds less than the new BMW M5's 5.0 liter V-10. The new Z06 gets 26 mpg and it is the only production car sold in America with more than 400 hp that doesn't get a gas guzzler tax (same goes for the C6 Corvette but it has an even 400 hp).

A Saleen S7 Twin Turbo smokes many Euro exotics and it has racing heritage.

The Austrailan Ford Falcon should be built here.

check this link

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=379989

Mustang = 300
Charger = 340
GTO = 400

Different cars for different markets.

bout time someone that agrees with me came in here...

Different cars for different markets.

What do you mean by that? Its my opinion that all three of these cars would be aimed at the same market.

What do you mean by that? Its my opinion that all three of these cars would be aimed at the same market.

Well, the new Charger R/T has four doors, no manual transmission available, and isn't as sporty as a new Mustang GT.

The new Pontiac GTO costs more (by around $8,000) and is pitched against more expensive cars like the Infiniti G35 Coupe and the BMW 3 series coupe.

As a side note, the new Mitsubishi Eclipse SE (V-6 model I think) is priced similar to a new Mustang GT, but it is fwd and weighs a lot.

http://www.autobytel.com/images/2006/Mitsubishi/Eclipse_Gs/400/06_Mtsu_EclpsGS_expasspick.jpg

thats a good assesment. the GTO is more a gentlemens cruiser, ableit a fast cruiser. its heavy, costs a lot... its not quite as sporty, thats why the 05 mustang gt is actually faster than an ls1 GTO. dispite having less power. The same is not true however of camaros and WS6's, those ls1 cars are faster than the 05 mustang gt

As a side note, the new Mitsubishi Eclipse SE (V-6 model I think) is priced similar to a new Mustang GT, but it is fwd and weighs a

the Eclipse was never ment to really be a sports car, just a car be be a coupe and still perform with the performance v6's not v8's. its alos only 263hp not 300.

and its GT not SE, the SE is like 28k


thats a good assesment. the GTO is more a gentlemens cruiser, ableit a fast cruiser. its heavy, costs a lot... its not quite as sporty, thats why the 05 mustang gt is actually faster than an ls1 GTO. dispite having less power. The same is not true however of camaros and WS6's, those ls1 cars are faster than the 05 mustang gt

the GTO is being pushed a a refined muscle car. The LS1 GTO was in like 04, why not compaire the LS2 in the 05 to the GT since they are both 05's?
that like me saying my Escort can make a 98 v6 Mustang look like a child w/ down-syndome at the track because it has more power, but it weights a lot more then me. It's not a fair comparison, a fair comparison would be a 99 v6 that is more of a driver race and it's the same year.

the Eclipse was never ment to really be a sports car, just a car be be a coupe and still perform with the performance v6's not v8's. its alos only 263hp not 300.

and its GT not SE, the SE is like 28k




the GTO is being pushed a a refined muscle car. The LS1 GTO was in like 04, why not compaire the LS2 in the 05 to the GT since they are both 05's?
that like me saying my Escort can make a 98 v6 Mustang look like a child w/ down-syndome at the track because it has more power, but it weights a lot more then me. It's not a fair comparison, a fair comparison would be a 99 v6 that is more of a driver race and it's the same year.

dude i just dont get you, your argument makes no sense. you are just totally missing the point. i was making the point that the mustang is sportier by pointing out how it wins in a race when the other car has more power, thats due to gearing and suspension etc... it does not matter what year of car we are talking about!! what year has nothing to do with the concept itself. the only reason the result is different with the ls2 GTO is because the mustang is then at an even greater disadvantage. and even then, its still a close race, thus still verifying my point. the whole freaking point here is that im not trying to compare them because they arent meant to be compared with each other!! they are different types of cars.

also, no stock escort in 99 is going to beat a stock manual v6 stang from 99 period.

Too much love in here.

Yes the new S7 is insanely bad and when i win the lottery i will own one. Not arguing but 0-60 in 2.8 out of 450hp seems a little much. The Enzo ran 3-3 with 650hp, given it does weigh 3200lbs but come on. A 2.8 would throw it in the S7 range and run 1/4 at mid-high 10s. It would theoretically have to weight about 1770lbs.