It's Official: 2011 Ford Mustang GT has 5.0-liter V8
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,049
From: Confederate States of America
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 604
From: Elgin,SC
Lets clear this ignorance up shall we. Comparing 2010 Camaro 2SS to a 2010 Mustang GT500. Pricing comes from Edmunds.
Base MSRP with destination and any applicable gas guzzler tax ($1,000 for GT500)
Camaro 2SS = $34,795
Mustang GT500 = $48,575
Delta = $13,780
Throw in HID's on the GT500 and RS package on the Camaro 2SS.
Camaro 2SS RS = $35,995
Mustang GT500 = $49,100
Delta = $13,105
Fully loaded with interior options (I don't consider ground effects and stupid 21" wheels to be traditional or normal options). Note: Camaro does not have the options to compare/compete with the GT500 here, perhaps in 2011 it will, but the prices are higher for the GT500 then.
Camaro 2SS RS = $37,395 (sunroof and interior accent package)
Mustang GT500 = $52,590 (shaker 1000 and electronics package)
Dela = $15,195
Schools out.
FYI, low mileage 07-09' GT500's can be had for very low $30's now and that price will only fall when the 2011 comes out. That is the best performance car deal out their right now in my opinion.
Base MSRP with destination and any applicable gas guzzler tax ($1,000 for GT500)
Camaro 2SS = $34,795
Mustang GT500 = $48,575
Delta = $13,780
Throw in HID's on the GT500 and RS package on the Camaro 2SS.
Camaro 2SS RS = $35,995
Mustang GT500 = $49,100
Delta = $13,105
Fully loaded with interior options (I don't consider ground effects and stupid 21" wheels to be traditional or normal options). Note: Camaro does not have the options to compare/compete with the GT500 here, perhaps in 2011 it will, but the prices are higher for the GT500 then.
Camaro 2SS RS = $37,395 (sunroof and interior accent package)
Mustang GT500 = $52,590 (shaker 1000 and electronics package)
Dela = $15,195
Schools out.
FYI, low mileage 07-09' GT500's can be had for very low $30's now and that price will only fall when the 2011 comes out. That is the best performance car deal out their right now in my opinion.
And even then in the post before this one I said I would give you the price difference.
Although I still believe the GT500 is the top of the line for pony cars right now.
Last edited by Sax1031; Apr 1, 2010 at 08:11 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,217
From: Greenville, SC
Oh please do elaborate, I can't wait......(careful, I know a lot about the GT500).
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,217
From: Greenville, SC
No complaining from me. I'm just calling it like I see it. Two cars with the same trap speed are not faster than each other. One might be quicker due to weight, gearing, traction, etc. and that is the part we are all waiting to see.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 604
From: Elgin,SC
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
That pretty much sums it up. There's no straightline performance difference between the 2 cars. What you choose will boil down to other factors.
That said, the GT ran a 13.5@104 in MT.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html
The car weighed 3570 or about 35lbs less than the 2011. So I'm just wondering why we don't see a 100hp performance delta from the 2010 GT, which would have been 1 sec and 10mph.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 378
From: San Jose
That pretty much sums it up. There's no straightline performance difference between the 2 cars. What you choose will boil down to other factors.
That said, the GT ran a 13.5@104 in MT.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html
The car weighed 3570 or about 35lbs less than the 2011. So I'm just wondering why we don't see a 100hp performance delta from the 2010 GT, which would have been 1 sec and 10mph.
That said, the GT ran a 13.5@104 in MT.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html
The car weighed 3570 or about 35lbs less than the 2011. So I'm just wondering why we don't see a 100hp performance delta from the 2010 GT, which would have been 1 sec and 10mph.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 604
From: Elgin,SC
thats because you dont understand that there are lots of factors involved when it comes to higher powered cars. The .1 and 1 mph only works to a certain point. On top of that, you cant compare results of two different tracks on different days, it doesnt work that way either.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 378
From: San Jose
and further more, if the 2010 mustang is averaging 104mph traps, then it most likely is making closer to 330ish hp. LS1 F-Bodies are in the 105-106mph range with roughly the same weight and 345hp and more torque
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 545
From: Tampa
it has been rumored by ford insiders that the 2010 gt is really a 325 hp car.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
Well now things are beginning to make a bit more sense. The 2011 is running closer to a 70hp delta.
13.5@104 -> 12.8@111
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
If we were to go to the low end of the known 2011 5.0 dynos, and even take a bit more off of that, then we're looking at ~370 RWHP. 2010 GTs don't make anywhere near 300 RWHP, thus a 70 HP delta (even RWHP) seems a bit optimistic...or pessimistic, depending upon your POV. There is much more too it all then just calculated HP numbers using an "average" mph vs an (at best) early mph.
Once we have real dyno numbers from real production 2011 GTs, I think it will be interesting to look at average HP used for a WOT run for the 5.0 vs the LS3 and (for giggles) the 4.6 3V. This would take into account the shape of each engine's power curve (or torque curve, if you wish to use that term) and the effects of transmission gearing.
Once we have real dyno numbers from real production 2011 GTs, I think it will be interesting to look at average HP used for a WOT run for the 5.0 vs the LS3 and (for giggles) the 4.6 3V. This would take into account the shape of each engine's power curve (or torque curve, if you wish to use that term) and the effects of transmission gearing.
