I agree on the matching part. A 5.4 Mach1/Boss pumping out around 380 is going to be right there with an LS2 Z28 for around the same price.

I'm seeing a $30K sticker on each of them.

 

Those commercials were aimed at having parents keeping these cars out of the hands of kids and inexperienced drivers. I have seen 2 deadly accidents reported in the past few days with unlicensed drivers with slow cars (one a Civic and another a Saturn) killing their passengers after hitting trees. The cars themselves are not being blamed, but laws aimed at keeping these kids off the street longer have been touted and implemented as they are the biggest risk on the street.

 

With HP numbers going up the way they are it might not compete with some of the 4 door family sedans by then.

 

Ford could easily put out the numbers back then, they turned down a twin turbo 25th anniversary concept and other tuners (Saleen) were able to put out an emissions certified 500 hp car. When other cars in the Market though are putting out large HP numbers you have to put out larger numbers yourself in order to compete. Add to that the fact that Mr. Ford is a Mustang fan and you have the recipe for larger HP output.

 

Ford could not put out the HP then!!! Look around, nobody was even close to the fbodys in Hp then. The reason? They stuck with the "old" tech more fleshed out push rod and Ford commited itself to the modular engine. The engine was not mature enough to put out those kinds of numbers yet. Thats a fact and any thoughts on Ford holding down HP for women is a fantasy.

 

Please point out to me anywhere I said that women were the reason Ford held down HP numbers?

Ford had hp numbers down for a simple reason, they had a large aftermarket including their own parts catalog producing parts for the car to increase performance. Most Ford customers wanted to be able to customize performance to their own liking, and that is a well documented fact. That was one of the large appealing factors to the platform and the reason that there is no other car that has an aftermarket as large as the Mustang, period! Let's break this down by year. 1993 Cobra was very close in actual performance to the LT-1. The 94-94 Cobras fell short mostly due to the computer being programmed to cut out timing during power shifting which slowed down the car considerably. 1996: The Cobra with it's 305 hp if driven by the right driver was faster than a 6spd LT-1. Bob Cosby himself got 104 mph traps out of a bone stock one. 1999 Cobras with the fix and the '01 Cobras were just a hair behind the LS-1 and low 13 second performers in the right hands. The 00 Cobra R is faster than any factory production LS-1 F-body. The mach 1 is right there with the LS-1, maybe a tick behind the 6spd but faster than an auto in 5spd form. The '03 Cobra is ahead of the LS-1 in performance. Where is this asswhipping in performance that you are talking about? I don't see it anywhere except for a few transition years? Want to compare the Firehawk with the Mustang? We can do that too and include Saleens that were on the Ford dealers lots with the Supercharged 4.6 DOHC engine, emissions compliance and a full warranty (yes, he made 4V versions as well as 2V versions). In the Fox body years the Mustang was right with the 5.7 and faster than the 5.0 5spd F-twins.

The Modular program was not in it's infancy when the Mustang got it, it was in it's 5th year of production. The 91 Town car got it first, then the Crown Vic in 1992 and the 4.6 DOHC went in the Mark VIII in 1993. Revisions were made to the intake manifold, cams and exaust before it reached the Cobra in 1996. The 1996 Cobra suffered with being heavily undergeared in 1996-2001 as well. Now considering that Ford had PI heads and Intake in the catalog in 1996 for the 2 valver, it is apparent that Ford had the technnology and ability to offer the car with more HP but chose not to, and at the time it was a smart move because they sold a lot of cars and then a lot of PI heads and intakes to make the car faster. With the Ford era and he being a Mustang fan, the game changed to what you have today, more initial horsepower but still under the competion in most cases in base model forms (v-8 and v-6 models) but with a large aftermarket. To say that a multi billion dollar company could not make it go faster though is simply ridiculous.

 

Um, you have a distorted view. Nothing was making big power 10 years ago. Ford held nothing back. As far a the woman comment, it was in response to somethign else. By the way, i am in no way cutting on Ford. I loved my mustang.

By the way, Cobras had the advantage of costing more. I never said that Ford could not produce more power at higher cost. They just could not do it for the mass produced mustang. Any MFG can make a car faster if they increase the price tag. The 4.6 had NO heavy aftermarket in those days. To tell the truth its not even that great today.

 

Whatever dude

 

Ford set up their mustang lineup with a much greater performance variation than camaro (z28 and SS basically same performance). Each model brought something different to the table. Those who wanted image got the v6, those that wanted something "sporty" got the GT, those with a little more dough and in need of more speed went for the Mach-1, and those that wanted even more hp and performance opted for the Cobra's. Hence the use of THREE v8's (4.6 Sohc, N/A 4.6 Dohc, and S/c'd 4.6 Dohc) to the Camaro's ONE. Each model had a different role/goal. So they had the hp and the motor, but they simply had a different approach than GM as far as how their models where setup and arranged.

Even now, this new 300hp 3valve 4.6 GT will only serve as the base performance car in the mustang lineup with others like this rumored 375hp Mach 1 and 469hp Cobra serving as the real hot models. I see nothing wrong with that. You really can't expect Ford to drop Supercharged 469hp 5.4's in everything from the mid-trim GT to the Mach-1 to the Cobra.

 

This is closer with the Mustangs original heritage and the heritage that the Camaro had when it originally came out.

 

What ever I bet the next cobra will be gnarly but to be so trusting of this story of a freind of a freind?
HP doesnt cause accidents inferior driving does! if hp=speed and speed=death then wouldnt the autobahn be the most dangerous roda in the world????
WE DONT NEED MORE LAWS WE NEED PEOPLE TO FOLLOW THE ONES WE HAVE! And someone mentioned a required driving course I say YES! Let me out on the track and learn some driving techniques...hopefully for cheep.

 

The 4R100 (used behind the 7.3 Powerstroke) had some problems with torque converters. Remember, when you lose your lock-up clutch, you take out the entire trans (eventually). Other than that............. there were just sporadic problems.

The 5R110 has been an amazingly troublefree transmission thus far. Frankly, even I am surprised, as completely new transmissions often have teething problems. Hell, the Allison 1000 wasn't even a completely new transmission (was new to GM) and it had alot of teething problems when they first came out in the HD's. Most of the problems were electronics related.

Thus, if you are talking about the 4R100, I can agree with you to a point (most people had no problems at all), however, if you are talking the 5R110............ you will have to prove that one to me. I have visited the Diesel sites to check up on them also, as we did plan to get an '05 Superduty.

 

This is the reason teens have more wrecks than any other group, usually with low powered cars.

 

I was heading home last night with a friend and there was an 04 cobra infront of me, and cars infront of him. Quiet back road for the most part. He was fading back and punching it for a second (but never going past 45mph in a 35mph zone) never tailgated, and never was really reckless. Sure he kicked the rear end out a little on turns, but never even got close to the edge of his lane.

Good car. Good driver. The guys that want "Cobra"s are a dedicated bunch.

And on a 5.4L, I'm guessing the MPG is going to suck. A lot. Look at what the GT is rated, and realize it cant do more then 2mpg better then that. That's the shame with the 5.4L and 4.6L blown motors. They just dont get good mpg. Otherwise they're great engines!

 

one of the reasons i like the lsx engines so much...and i'm biased but, that's besides the point