I watched Motorweek's test of the Roush Stage 3 Mustang W/ a super charger pumping out 415 HP @ 385 TQ, they only managed a 13.6 sec 1/4 mi. Is it me or should a car w/ that much HP & a $21K bump be in the 12's easy?

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2607b.shtml

 

Doesn't look right to me, the quarter times and trap speeds should be better then that. Who knows though, other conditions may have been a factor.

 

the car sucks?

 

+1

 

Motorweek has been 1/4 mi. testing cars for over 25 yrs. They know what they're doing.

 

Just like Horsepower TV knows what they are doing.

 

With ROUSH 427R (basically a slightly decontented Stage 3) that I tested a couple of weeks ago, the best I could do was a 13.47@106.7 (that was with a density altitude of 1600, which corrects to something around a 13.2@108 if memory serves me correctly). The MPH is about right for a 3800 lb car (with driver) that dyno'd at a corrected 356 RWHP, while the ET reflects my craptacular 2.04 60' time (blame the combination of street tires and my inexperience with the car).

For reference, Evan Smith managed to rip a 12.6-sec run with the Stage 3, where as Road & Track ran a 13.3.

 

My friends and I have discussed the new mustangs over and over. It seems that if for some inane reason if you have a bigger rim then what comes with the stock gt, it kills the car's speed. For some reason, they don't like big rims (which the Roush has). Same thing goes for Mach 1's, cobras, etc.

 

you are correct.thanks for the reality check.and tests have said it handles just a little bit under a Z51 vette.which is no small feat for a 3500lb+ car.

 

sounds like rocket science
could it be that it affects gear ratio???Actually the Roush has 18's and the stock GT has 17's,but the roush has lower profile tires.This negates that argument.And the 275 tires on the rear of the roush should help traction enough to improve et anyway.

 

I didn't get a chance to take the 427R on the track (I didn't think it was wise, as it didn't have the optional big-brake package), but its handling performance on real-world roads was nothing short of amazing. It simply did not feel like a solid-rear-axle car that weighted just a few hundred pounds shy of two tons. The combination of the stiff S197 structure and Roush's engineering = the goodness. If I owned a 'stang, I'd be placing an order for the Roush suspension package in, like, the amount of time it took to dig out my credit card.

The value of the overall package can be debated all day long - in the end, it's a reasonably quick Mustang that handles great and attracts looks like nothing else I've ever driven. In the end, though, there are Corvette folks, there are Mustang fans, and the two shall not meet, nor shall each other ever be able to fairly evaluation the other's value proposition.

 

Nice write-up on Autoblog, Eric. I need to check that place out more often.

I didn't have a chance to watch the vid yet, but some of the bastages posting in the feedback section are a bit harsh!

 

Thanks for the compliment - they're rare, and so I appreciate them greatly

My video skillz do indeed suck - it's now been added to my list of reasons for selecting my current career path - but I was kinda hoping that maybe folks would just be happy to get a chance to see and hear the car in action, as opposed to me spending several hundred words trying to describe my experience (which I also did). Oh well.

 

But don't the bigger rims weigh more than the smaller ones?

 

Yeah, unsprung weight, its a bitch.