How do you think Ford isin't owned by Obama?  THey've cut R&D on how to make something with 500 HP.  Give me a Camaro anyday though, 5th gen or not.

I agree dude, but they are doing alot of things with the new "muscle" cars that make me scratch my head. Fer the mustangs, I think Ford is trying to send buisness to shelby, roush, and foose (sweet looking car, but about a third of all the summer vehicles up herre are mustangs in one form or another, and they seem to be made for the aftermarket parts industry), then you got the 4 door charger - again, a sweet looking car, but with four doors, it is a high powered family sedan. Then ya got my car, the Monte... If I had bought the gen right before mine, I'd be expecting it to blow up if I hit the brakes hard, and the current gen's ss supervharged model didn't even come with the option of a standard transmission!!

DO NOT take this as derogatory to your vehicles!!!!! They are still gorgeous cars, and I would own one in a heartbeat, well, more than one. I wish I could have gone and bought a vehicle in the days where you had your choice of 3-4 diff engines.I know I am going to get razzed for writing this, but please understand this is my OPINION, and I got told once that I am allowed to have one of those every now again, and if you think your vehicle mighta got it, just remember the whole blowing up and automatic thing...

no ford is dealing with this for NASCAR

I don't really buy the R&D thing. Couldn't you take a GT500 powerplant de tune it a bit and come up with an honest 400hp? Lose the huffer, shrink the cams a bit, maybe up the compression a bit, not sure of GT500 C/R. If you can put a 365hp mill in a Taurus, you can certainly come up with something for the Mustang. Maybe akundert is on to something. Mustangs never seem to stay stock for long so Ford's thinking is "it's gonna get modded anyway so offer low power and somewhat low price for the tuner market." (I Hate to use the word "tuner" when it comes to V-8's, but lack of a better term....)

Wicked-what is the pic of. I'm relegated to my work computer since the one at home died. Work computer is an Air Force computer, so pics/vids are all blocked. Only thing on this page that aren't red X's are the avatars.

Mustangs kinda annoy me, every kid and there dog has one. But here it is different, here just because it says Mustang kids think it is super fast. Even if it had a hamster wheel for a power plant. This retards would think it was fast. They go and race everything. Funny thing is, while there are racing anything and everything thinking it's gonna be tight, really the competitor cars are driving at a normal everyday pace.

Er sorry what was the question?

Mustangs really dislike you Mr.Bunz at least that what they tell me.

That would still require millions of dollars just to detune an engine.  I remember reading an article that it cost GM 2.5 million just for a rim redesign on the Camaro from the 97-98 model years.  Having to work on an engine will probably cost 5 times that.

HOLEE COW!

Ya'd think it would be more cost effective to do it right to begin with...

---

[Quote cutlassracer]

I don't really buy the R&D thing. Couldn't you take a GT500 powerplant de tune it a bit and come up with an honest 400hp? Lose the huffer, shrink the cams a bit, maybe up the compression a bit, not sure of GT500 C/R. If you can put a 365hp mill in a Taurus, you can certainly come up with something for the Mustang. Maybe akundert is on to something. Mustangs never seem to stay stock for long so Ford's thinking is "it's gonna get modded anyway so offer low power and somewhat low price for the tuner market." (I Hate to use the word "tuner" when it comes to V-8's, but lack of a better term....)

Wicked-what is the pic of. I'm relegated to my work computer since the one at home died. Work computer is an Air Force computer, so pics/vids are all blocked. Only thing on this page that aren't red X's are the avatars.

---

the pic is of the 2010-2011 Nascar Nationwide Car the new mustang, ford had put R&D into this for the last 5 years
 

That rim redesign wasn't because there was anything wrong with the rim structually Aimiee, the public just wanted another style of rim.  They have to put it through so many kinds of tests to be sure it was still structurally sound, and the government approves it, that it's not even funny.  Actually, if ya look at it that way, the government is the reason for all of this mess.

A motor, even a detune, has to go through a battery of testing for durability, emissions, performance, and on, and on, then until they are done, there are 10s of thousands of man hours, and millions of dollars spent, just for one engine, and that's before it even gets into the car.  After they build a car with that engine in, there are more tests to perform, and the cycle starts again.

Well, the gov is 99.9% of the time the problem and never the solution, and not just auto related problems.....but I digress. I remember reading an issue of Muscle Mustang and Fast Ford around 2000 when the cancellation of the F-body was being talked about. All the readers were cheering the death of the Camaro. The editor mentioned that being a bad thing since no competition would mean no incentive to improve the Mustang. Judgeing by the hp numbers, I'd say he was right.

And if you have the R&D dollars for a 365 horse Taurus, I think you could scrape together enough $ to take already proven tech and build a 400 horse Mustang. Between all the different flavors of mod motors from the GT500 to the trucks to the crate engines to the normal passenger cars I still don't think it would sink the ship money wise. Not reinventing the wheel here.

Totally agree with blaming the govn't - even the late model 07 dodge ram's with the blue tec engines had serious bad problems, same as the diesel fords, when they switched to engines that were only supposed to be fuelled by ULSD - the dodges got away from that one lucky - they just got plugged injectors, and major carbon build up on their turbo's and then blew some rather fantastic amounts of black smoke out their tailpipes (cuz THAT'S better for emissions controls). On the Fords, there were a couple of them what built up enough heat in the catalytic converters from carbon build up to be able to set fire to anything underneath them - happened to a guy I know, so he moved the truck, turned it off, put out the fire, then turned around just in time to see his truck burn down cuz it was still hot. They actually had to code the cruise control on these things to have a high idle, just so that the engine would run hot enough to burn off the carbon buildup.

There are SO many aftermaket options to help fuel economy and emissions that really do work very well, and even boost power - why not make those standard, instead of screwing up an engine that worked pretty well, and then charging customers out the arse to fix their mess ups? Makes you wonder...

This is true.  I was surprised to hear the Tarus SHO was back myself.  I reckon the reason MAY be there was some public interest in a new SHO, because it's been several years since the last one, and Ford at this point figured the GT500 package would suffice. 

But saying that look at it this way: 

Fully loaded 2010 Shelby GT500 Coupe: $49,895 500HP 5.4 liter Supercharged V8, 6-spd manual

Fully loaded 2009 Chevrolet Camaro 2SS:  $44,000 426HP 6.2 Liter V8, 6 spd manual, auto available for around $1,300

Fully loaded 2009 Dodge Challenger SRT-8:  $45,660 425HP 6.2 liter HEMI V8 6-spd manual.  auto available for $635.00 LESS.

Kinda seems to me that I could pay 3500 or so more, and have a far superior car when put agianst the Challenger SRT, and the Camaro SS.  I couldn't dig up the performance specs on the 2010 GT500, but it appears on paper to be a better car.  Maybe this is why Ford hasn't made more HP out of the GT.  It considers the GT to be it's midway car.  Same as the R/T Challenger's 5.7 liter HEMI is to the SRT-8's 6.2 liter variant. If this is the case, that means the Camaro looses out, because it DOESN'T have a small V8, just the V6 and the 6.2 liter.  Both the Mustang and the Challenger also have V6s, a small V8, and a big V8 available, while the Camaro does not have that.  Seems to me Ford is on the money, but maybe I'm crazy...

 

*All prices, and info pulled from the vehicles respective website*

Mustangs have always been an "entry level" V8 car....low power, lightweight, less options....  Ford is stacking them with more and more amenities and slowly bringing the power up but they're still the "featherweight" cars of the group

Camaro, more muscle, more amenities, better looks, better engine....its always been the same throughout history. 

Hey Caleb FUK U again!

I know don't why Ford even trys to figure sh-t out they should just call u, after all you know everything again.

By the way GM is owned by  the government & PONTIAC is Deceased

Ford is the only American car company that isn't up sh-it creek.

---

[Quote Racertci]

Ford the only American car company that isn't up sh-it creek.

---

Why do you think I bought a Ford again Tony?  (Even though on the fan cruise, I had ANOTHER Ford that broke down on me...)

 

Let us end this BS right now.

Ford has a Marketing department that has sold Mustangs successfully since 1964.

In the real world over the last 45 years Mustangs have preformed just as well as comparably priced Chevys or Mopars. During the last 25 years Ford had made sure that their cars have had a rather large Price advantage over a comparable Chevy.

2010 Mustang GT Starts at $27845.00 and runs a 13.5 quarter

2010 Camaro SS Starts at $30110 and runs the quarter in 13.25 to 13.5

Let’s keep the v6 Camaro out of this it runs 14.5 quarter nice for a v6 but still out of this league.

Also let’s not bring in the Roush cars or the Saleen editions or the GT500’s

I’m not going to say one is better then the other (I’m biased) but please don’t let anyone else chime in with a definitive answer to Mustang Versus Camaro because you would be just as wrong as the other butt-cracks who have displayed their automotive ignorance for the world to see on this thread.

 

So, I guess Mustangs are the be all end all of human existance? No one else is allowed to have an opinion, tci has spoken. Someone please lock this thread.

No Cutlass go ahead and look stupid a second or third time.

Sorry Racer - not out to bash any cars - I actually really like the stangs, as well as the cameros. I'm just saying that a little more thought coulda been put into the engineering and design on them before they started pushing the modern versions of these cars off the lot. It doesn't matter what is said here - like I said, about every fourth person out here has one, and that's gotta say something about the history and maketability of the car.

And I am not biased - there isn't many of the newer muscle cars that I would turn my nose up at.

 Stated HP ratings Mean Nothing. All the auto makers lie and always have lied when it comes to stated HP ratings. One should look at independent testing and  the cars preformance numbers from those tests before making a statement about any car. Also the Mustang GTs handle and brake better then the Camaro and the Challenger and that has nothing to do with HP ratings.

I know, and across the board, I gotta say, that, while there are some sweet loking cars coming off the lines, they just don't seem to have the same standards on quality as they used to. But they are still WAY better than the peices of crap they letting onto the market in the 90's. I guess that's kinda relative as well though - there's always a few bad apples in any particular run.

Aimie,

If you want a bad cars look to the early 80's American cars. They were mostly Dogsh-t. The Escort, EXP, Fairmont, and LTD 2 were crap, The Chevy Citation and Malibu were junk and the K Car Please don't get me started.

NOOOO! My 1980 Buick Regal was where it was at!!! But, ya, my 1981 olds was crap...

OK - I can see where you are coming from..

Tony, I used the stats off the manufacturer website because I couldn't find any indepedent tests for the 2010 GT500.  They don't seem to exist yet.    I got a bit long winded, but I was basically trying to say the same thing you did.  That the Mustang really was where it is at, because of the amount of choices.  I was just using the HP ratings as a starting base.  I could've gone on all day about handling, and on, and on.  Maybe I just should have said cutlassracer was wrong, and not explained myself???  Not sure.

Funny thing is, all the Mustang support here is comin from a Chevy guy...

I am in agreement with you Chris.

Chev guy? Who be that?

Me Aimie.  I'm a Chevy guy that drives a Ford.  I still wear my Chevy hats & shirts while I drive that Ford...  I do like it though...  lol

LOL! That I can understand!! Sry - long day makes for vapid lady... And don't feel TOO bad - I'm a mopar girl what drives a chev and loves the old tbirds and stangs! I wonder if they make medication for that?

No worries.  Maybe they should...  I bash my buddies F250, then I turn around and realize I drive a Ford to...  Doh!

In all reality though, as long as it's American I like it, and a couple imports.  Nissan, Lotus, Aston Martin, couple exotics, etc.

Same - not so much on ferrari or lotus, but starting to love the bugatti's too - I'm gonna get me one of them Veyrons one day! 'S funny cuz if you'da caught me before I purchased my new monte, I'da told ya that there would never be a chev in my driveway with my name on it.

I say I'm a mopar girl, cuz they seemed to combine the best of ford and chev, and that's as good a place as any to build a fence at.

---

[Quote Racertci]

Aimie,

If you want a bad cars look to the early 80's American cars. They were mostly Dogsh-t. The Escort, EXP, Fairmont, and LTD 2 were crap, The Chevy Citation and Malibu were junk and the K Car Please don't get me started.

---

Ha Ha...I had a 1984 EXP that I drove for a little over 220,000 miles.  It had a problem stalling out, kind of like a vapor lock deal.
 

I actually got a letter from AAA asking me to update my car, because they were tired of me using my free tow's.  You can't find one of those things now with a search warrant...even on Ebay.   Talk about a disposable car.

Still trying to figure out when I said Mustangs were all junk and everything else is totally superior to any Ford product, but I'm an idiot, right? I just found it odd about the Taurus/Mustang thing. So, Tony, !@#$ you and the Mach1 you rode in on.

I dont like Mustangs. Mopar makes me smile. The new Charger with 4 doors makes me gag. The Challenger makes me happy.

AssRacer I got pissed at Caleb's remarks which is nothing new for me you just got in the line of fire. You Called Ford Pathetic and said they needed to wake up and then the BS about a Stang GT is only slightly better then a V6 Camaro based on HP alone needed addressed.

 

At least Jond91 puts some logic behind his opinions. Big Thumbs up Jon!

I AM GOING TO PUT AN END TO THIS.....THE 4.6 IS GOING TO BE REPLACED BY A 5.0 VARIENT OF THE 6.2 that will be in the raptor THAT WILL HAVE OVER 400+ HP......THIS IS THE LATEST NEWS i AM HEARING FROM FORD seriously, did you really think Ford would let a taurus be faster than their LEGEND? The engine should be out by the 2011 model year.....I think that engine in the lighter more agile mustang will DESTROY anything that gm will put in a CAMARO

haha, nothing against them, theyre solid cars, just over-produced in my opinion. unless its a Cobra, Shelby, Saleen, or Rousch, Mach 1 or one of the fancy ones

Mmmm......... saleen....

well in a way that is true, however 60% of all mustang sales are v6 powered, 40% are v8 baised (including roush, saleen, gt, cobra, shelby, ect)

---

[Quote Nightmare]

I AM GOING TO PUT AN END TO THIS.....THE 4.6 IS GOING TO BE REPLACED BY A 5.0 VARIENT OF THE 6.2 that will be in the raptor THAT WILL HAVE OVER 400+ HP......THIS IS THE LATEST NEWS i AM HEARING FROM FORD seriously, did you really think Ford would let a taurus be faster than their LEGEND? The engine should be out by the 2011 model year.....I think that engine in the lighter more agile mustang will DESTROY anything that gm will put in a CAMARO

---

This was my thinking. Most car companys don't let 4 door sedan numbers outshine their "performance" cars. Numbers being bogus or not. Wasn't calling Ford pathetic, was calling the idea of the Taurus outshing the Mustang pathetic. With a 400 horse motor and keeping most everything else the same (including price, maybe) they should have something to beat Obama Motors and UAW/Fiat Motors over the head with. I happen to like Ford, quite a bit in fact. Not counting the rebadged Pinto years, there aren't many Mustangs I don't like.

---

[Quote Nightmare]

well in a way that is true, however 60% of all mustang sales are v6 powered, 40% are v8 baised (including roush, saleen, gt, cobra, shelby, ect)

---

It's ford's way of making sure that the mustang is available to more people than just the ones what can afford the the more expensive performance packages. If a person's only got 40grand, and not much past that, but still wants a stang, they can get the smaller engine, and still afford to put gas in it afterwards. Plus, they basically make the underpowered version their "entry level" performance car which is a plus for them in two ways. One, they get more cars on the street that are damn sexy and have the ford mustang badging (paid advertising), and two, the person who buys the cheaper version will eventually realize they want the performance version for more money, cuz normally (not sure if this is true of the stangs), the lower powered version will end up costing comparitively little in maintenance, will be cheaper on gas, will still have a good amount of kick, and will most likely still handle like it is on rails - like Mr Burnz said, a kid will buy a stang even if it is powered by a hamster on a wheel, cuz stangs go fast. Ensures repeat buisness.