Nothing new to me....I knew they were slow, were gonna be slow, and are slow. Ford's cars still can't catch up...lets think of it as the Camaro is taking a rest until Ford gets to 350HP. That will be in what........2007 LMFAO. My LT1 when it was stock Dyno'd better.

 

It's so funny because in 1993 when the LT1's came out I was saying the same thing sorta...why would I buy a new LT1 when it's no faster than my 1986 Buick Grand National. I mean, come on, 7 years later and Chevy STILL can't make the Camaro faster than my GN? I'm not being sarcastic...I really felt that way. And after a $25 chip and $300 exhaust I was using the same arguement against the LS1.

You LT1 guys have to look at more than just horsepower when you consider the Mustang. Look at the whole package and the price...when you compare it to Pony cars of the past (GM and Ford), its the best package we've had in years.

 

I am a Camaro fan. I have never really liked Mustangs, short of the 69 and 70's.

However, I don't understand how people are bashing these dyno numbers on a car rated at 300hp.

Yes, it is on par with the top of the line 1993-1997 F-Bodies... but, cost factored for inflation, they are cheaper or at least equal, and they HAVE to be better quality... Previous Mustangs and F-Bodies, while not as bad as some say, were NOT up to par with other modern offerings.

So, what the Mustang GT respresents, is good performance, at a great price. What else did anyone expect?

Everyone knows there are going to be more powerful versions of the Mustang coming, and they are going to likely be LS1 beaters.

All this coming from our camp, who doesn't even have a car, and hasn't for 3 model years now.

(I can't believe I am defending Mustang, but come on folks, realize this is going to be the "mid-model" of this car.... and you are throwing stones from a camp that has no car at this point!!)

 

Anyone claiming their stock LT1 dynoed 270+ RWHP is too stupid to be driving it.

 

It's not really the HP, it's still putting out 300 lb./ft. of torque. A magazine ran a 5.3 0-60 and a 13.6 1/4 with the '05 Mustang. Those are very close to LS1 times.

*The number may be a few 0.1 seconds off. But I do know that they covered the 0-60 in mid 5's and the 1/4 in high 13's.

 

Why would they do that? Underrating is much safer to do, plus they could do like GM with the 01's and "revise" the intake for an additional hp gain

 

That was a 5.1 second 0 to 60.

 

At least Ford still builds a Mustang. More than I can say for the POS company known as GM.

 

naw its cool. i just have decided to give people the same sort of negative attitude they do through their posting. notice how i only post like that when its something negative that there is no reason for negativity involved?

 

strong runner...maybe a rating of 325 hp would have been closer to the truth

 

Hmm, unless i'm wrong, an auto GT has gone 13.6 and now one (don't know if auto or manual) is dyno'ing at damn near 280whp with a pretty conservative state of tune. Yeah, that's upto par with your stock LT-1 .

Oh, and btw, Ford has surpassed 350. Infact, they've surpassed 400hp. Maybe you've heard of the 2003/04 Cobra???

Some of you guys . Hate the car, but least give it its due respect. Not exactly Ls-1 #'s, but impressive and nice nonetheless considering this is only the base performance v8 in the mustang lineup.

 

Not bad.
And unless I'm mistaken, the '05 GT is tuned/calibrated to run on 87 octane from the factory.
It might make near 300rwhp with more aggressive timing/fuel curves and 92 and up octane in the tank.
I'd still like to see some "real" track times in the hands of owners.
S.

 

Newayz noone cares about the cheap interior packages and **** Ford offers. LT1 will dyno over 270 stock, usually aroun 288, is what mine did stock. I have only put in about $300 and I'm pushin 327/433 on the fly. And GN's were """""TURBO"""" V6's. If you put a TURBO on the Camaro it wouldve been way better, and by the way im killin those now. Buick/Chevy/GM same thing, so how are they gonna be competative with each other.??

 

Your bone stock LT1 F-body made 288rwhp? And is making 327/433 for only $300? Surrrrre.
I could line up half a dozen turbo V6 bricks (mine included) that would crack you so hard you'd think you pulled into a parking space.
And BTW...GM never offered a turbo on a Camaro, so it's a moot point.
S.

 

288whp from a stock Lt1, yeah right .

The "if you put turbo on the..." line, very classic, lol.