V6 Mustang vs. NA Ka24de s13

[FastBack 240]

Who do you think would win in a race? &nbsp;A naturally asperated stock 240 vs a stock 2001 Mustang V6? &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/satisfied.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':satisfied:'>

[InferiorWang]

i think it would be close. &nbsp;mustangs arent nearly as fast as people think they are.

[burgy240]

Actually it would be close because of WHICH mustang it is. &nbsp;There are so many different mustangs that it really depends. &nbsp;I worked at a Ford Dealer and I'll tell you, &nbsp;A nice GT is fast and the Bullitis slightly faster. &nbsp;Of Course the Cobra and Cobra R &nbsp;FLY!!. &nbsp;The six bangers aren't very good however. &nbsp; ALso A rousch Racing mustang stage II or stage III are really nice.

[Phlip]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (burgy240 @ Dec. 09 2002,10:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Actually it would be close because of WHICH mustang it is. There are so many different mustangs that it really depends. I worked at a Ford Dealer and I'll tell you, A nice GT is fast and the Bullitis slightly faster. Of Course the Cobra and Cobra R FLY!!. The six bangers aren't very good however. ALso A rousch Racing mustang stage II or stage III are really nice.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Funny thing really, you see I didn't know you could get any of those with a V6... That was what his question was, right?

[burgy240]

You CAN'T!! I was clarifing the statement that Mustangs aren't that fast. Thanks though newb!!<---J/J <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

[Tubed4evr]

S13 every time &nbsp; . . . I have an 93 HB and my family owns a 2001 V6 mustang and I win hands down whenever my brother and I take em out. &nbsp;Also my friend has a 96 V6 mustang and thats even worse. &nbsp;So you have nothing to worry about from a fairly stock V6 mustang.

[hurleyboi514]

ive beaten a stock auto GT once...

[Evil S14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PHLIP @ Dec. 08 2002,11:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (burgy240 @ Dec. 09 2002,10:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Actually it would be close because of WHICH mustang it is. There are so many different mustangs that it really depends. I worked at a Ford Dealer and I'll tell you, A nice GT is fast and the Bullitis slightly faster. Of Course the Cobra and Cobra R FLY!!. The six bangers aren't very good however. ALso A rousch Racing mustang stage II or stage III are really nice.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Funny thing really, you see I didn't know you could get any of those with a V6... That was what his question was, right?</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
you can get a stage 2 and stage 1 roush in V6 or v8

my girlfriend has a 99 V6 and i smoke her ass in my S14 NA
i mean badly, i have to slow down for her to come close to cathing up

also the 94-98 mustangs are alot slower than the newer ones
ive see Auto Gts run 15s at the track

now the 99+ Gts are a different story, they run a good low 14 stock

now the new cobras? ur just screwed, theyre just damn fast

[Integraholic]

If you go up against a good driver in a V6 5 speed, you're toast. &nbsp;They run low 15's stock from what some people have achieved. &nbsp;But I've seen someone get a low 15 with an almost stock K24. &nbsp;Pretty good driver.

[Evil S14]

i wonder who that good driver is christian? <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'> &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'>

[misnomer]

If you look at the specs, the new Mustangs are beefier. If I am rememboring correctly, the v6 has ~190 hp with even greater torque. I don't know what they weigh, but I don't imagine it would be too much more than a 240sx. As in everything, it all comes down to the skill of the driver. In that race, the better driver will win, though the mustang should have an advantage.

The mid 90s are a different story, those were dog ass slow. The GTs aren't much more powerful than the newer V6.

[Jeff240sx]

Weight. &nbsp;Mustang GTs run about 3800 pounds, IIRC. &nbsp;Their power to weight is terrible, but have ungodly ammounts of torque. &nbsp;They also have a low redline. &nbsp;A 5-speed 240sx will take a 5.0 any day of the week. &nbsp;And one will also take a v-6 mustang. &nbsp;
-Jeff

[Integraholic]

Sorry to tell you, but a 5 speed 240 will not take a 5.0 Mustang.

[40oz]

i don't suggest goin up against the 89 mustang 5.0L there fast stock, and most likely if there willing to race they have done something to it.

[Evil S14]

i took out a 5.0 at the track, but it was a 94
like i said 94-95 5.0's and the 96-97 4.6 liters are slow for a mustang

i can take 99+ V6's no problem, hell i dont even race em anymore its just a waste of time <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/thumbs-up.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':thumbsup:'> &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sleeping.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':zzzz:'>

[DarkRaptor42]

since were flamming mustangs. My Escort GT with intake and exhast (plus stripped out) took a v6 with no prob I was a car length ahead at least. !20 hp with a 1300 lb car and then the wieght reduced beyond that too. I miss that car... but i traded it for my 240. Also took a BMW in it too. That was funny.

[Evil S14]

i never knew a stock escort weighed 1300 lbs, thats like a fockin harley

i think ur more in the 2000 lb range

[blainestang]

Hey Guys,
I just happened to come across this thread on here. I do own a mustang but I'm not going to say that my car would kill a 240 or anything, because it won't. I agree with a few of you that it would be a drivers race, IF BOTH ARE 5-SPEED. I don't know about the 240 autos but the auto in the mustang is definately nothing special. Just a few facts: One V6 I know of just weighed her car and it weighed exactly 3000lbs. That would put the heavier GT at Somewhere inbetween that and the 3800lbs in the new Cobra. (The new cobra has an Iron Block and the obvious Supercharger stuff lacking in the lesser models) &nbsp;Also, Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords (the magazine) got a stock V6 to 14.94 in the quarter mile (obviously not anyone could do that but it can be done). Essentially I am saying that it would probably be a drivers race based on your experiences and the facts that I hve shared.

Good luck with the race, man! See ya guys later

Blaine

[AG240]

Jeff240sx, this reply is directed at you... &nbsp;You are correct about the GT's weight and high torque, but that is it... I own both a 89'GT convertible(heavy) & a 95' 240sx, and both are 5-speeds... &nbsp;I've added only 3:55 gears / pro 5.0 shifer / and K&N conical filter to the GT w/ a 130,000 mile on the motor... &nbsp;I have run a 14.8 on stock tires... On the other hand, I have added intake / pulley / & lightened up the car a bit on my 240sx(w/ 80,000miles), and run in the best of a 15.8... &nbsp;So do the math!!! &nbsp;And yes I have beat a mildly modified mustang 5'0 at the dragstrip with my 240sx, but it was driver error... &nbsp;Had to be!!! &nbsp;Alan

[Evil S14]

15.8 with that stuff? maybe u need to check the compression on ur engine or somethin &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/huh2.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':huh2:'>

[Phlip]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (burgy240 @ Dec. 09 2002,10:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You CAN'T!! I was clarifing the statement that Mustangs aren't that fast. Thanks though newb!!<---J/J <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Fine, and I'd thank you to answer the question asked before calling someone a newbie.

[Jeff240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Integraholic @ Dec. 09 2002,5:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sorry to tell you, but a 5 speed 240 will not take a 5.0 Mustang.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Ok man. &nbsp;Whatever you say.
1989-1993 specs: &nbsp;
205hp @ 4200rpm
275ft/lbs @ 3000rpm.

There were no mechanical changes from 1992 to 1993 (aside from hypereutectic pistons replacing the previous forged aluminum pistons), both the horsepower and torque ratings dropped for ‘93 - horsepower by 20 and torque by 25. The reduced ratings were influenced by a stack-up of minor mechanical changes and by changes to Ford’s engine evaluation processes. Dictated mainly by emissions, fuel economy and customer satisfaction requirements, a series of mechanical revisions had been made since Ford initially assigned the engine’s 225-horsepower rating for 1987. These include a restrictive resonator added to the inlet tract (1987-1993) that produced a 5-7 horsepower loss. The small camshaft profile change in 1989 reduced HO output by 3 horsepower. The restrictive mass airflow meter in the inlet tract introduced in 1989 yields 2-3 horsepower less than the speed density system. &nbsp;Some minor exhaust system revisions made between 1987-1993 also add up to another small reduction in engine output. The second contributing factor in the re-rating of the ‘93 V8 involved changes in the processes that Ford used to select engines for testing and the engine’s state of dress (with all engine-driven accessories) during testing. Combined with the ‘87-93 mechanical revisions, the revised-for-1993 testing procedures add up to the ‘93 model year’s reduced output ratings.
This basically means that all Mustangs that were produced from 89-93 were overrated in their hp and torque. &nbsp;For '94, where the car made 10 more horsepower than '93 and before, the 5.0 GT only ran 0-60 in 8.4 seconds, and the 1/4 in 15.2 @ 92.5mph. &nbsp;Mind you... this is the well-paid magazine guy driving, not some guy in the lane next to you. &nbsp;Most people in their 240sx's can run a mid 15 second quarter, and most people in their Mustangs can squeal their tires to a mid 15 second quarter, too.

Finally, according to Autofan.com for the '01 4.6L GT are 0-60 in 6.0 seconds and 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds. &nbsp;
I did not take these numbers from mustanggtworld.com or whatever, because they would be slightly biased. &nbsp;I don't know how you all don't beat a car that the best it can do is 15.2. &nbsp;Has anyone ever raced one on the street? &nbsp;I have, and all I see is tire spin for nearly a second. &nbsp;
Anyway. &nbsp;I would have posted this last night, but my cable modem went out.
-Jeff

[AG240]

Evil s14, is that your age or IQ at the bottom of your reply??? &nbsp;I would guess both!!! &nbsp;Alan

[AG240]

Jeff 240sx, your info is correct and you definetly know a thing or two about your cars... &nbsp;I have been in the game a while my self and started out with Ford Mustangs... &nbsp;I still love my 2 mustangs, and I also really enjoy my 240sx... &nbsp;I was just providing a non biased opinion between the two cars... I am sure if I met you at the track or street in my 89'convertible, I would have my hands full, but if we met while I was driving my 68' coupe mustang (runs in the low 13's with a 150shot of nitrous) I might have the advantage... &nbsp;Not to belittle your car, I thinks its awesome!!! &nbsp;I would love to have a turbo set up, but I'm spread a little thin, as you can see... &nbsp;I really love to dragrace and enjoy being around people that are the same!!! &nbsp;Although, I could do without some of the bull****... &nbsp;I commend your reply, and look forward to future post... &nbsp;Alan

[Evil S14]

actually its neither, i act more like a 13 year old thank you <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

[Evil S14]

Jeff, you must also take note that me and Integraholic are from Indiana, where seeing a stock 5.0 mustang is like a needle in a haystack

[Evil S14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PHLIP @ Dec. 09 2002,10:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (burgy240 @ Dec. 09 2002,10:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You CAN'T!! I was clarifing the statement that Mustangs aren't that fast. Thanks though newb!!<---J/J <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Fine, and I'd thank you to answer the question asked before calling someone a newbie.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
again i said
"you can get a stage 2 and stage 1 roush in V6 or v8

so apparently phillip isnt the newbie here &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'>

[hookedup240]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jeff240sx @ Dec. 09 2002,5:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Weight. Mustang GTs run about 3800 pounds, IIRC. Their power to weight is terrible, but have ungodly ammounts of torque. They also have a low redline. A 5-speed 240sx will take a 5.0 any day of the week. And one will also take a v-6 mustang.
-Jeff</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Um.. Jeff you could not be any more wrong, my friend just got a 94 Gt Convertible which is a 5.0 and it only weighs about 3400 pounds and its a vert so that means a coupe probably weighs somewhere around 3000-3200. It is rated at 215/hp and 300lb/ft of torque. &nbsp;We haven't officially raced but i can tell you from driving it that once that it hits second he would totally pull away and it wouldn't even be a race.I really don't know where you get your info from. The only thing i agree with you is that a 240 could most likely take a v6 which the older ones have 150 hp and the newer ones have 200.

[CoasTek240]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Integraholic @ Dec. 08 2002,5:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you go up against a good driver in a V6 5 speed, you're toast. They run low 15's stock from what some people have achieved. But I've seen someone get a low 15 with an almost stock K24. Pretty good driver.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
totally agreed... and sorry to burst ur bubble Jeff240sx, but ur on crack for saying a 240 would take a 5.0 i know a guy with a 5.0 with minor engine work cams and exhaust race my friends sr20 powered s13 both great drivers and the mustang left him in the dust.
mustangs arent what you guys think.. i hate them , they come stock like that are but an automatic v6 can beat 240's with the right driving.
i hate to say our cars are not that fast. i love em to death but they aren't

[hookedup240]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (CoasTek240 @ Dec. 10 2002,5:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Integraholic @ Dec. 08 2002,5:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you go up against a good driver in a V6 5 speed, you're toast. They run low 15's stock from what some people have achieved. But I've seen someone get a low 15 with an almost stock K24. Pretty good driver.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
totally agreed... and sorry to burst ur bubble Jeff240sx, but ur on crack for saying a 240 would take a 5.0 i know a guy with a 5.0 with minor engine work cams and exhaust race my friends sr20 powered s13 both great drivers and the mustang left him in the dust.
mustangs arent what you guys think.. i hate them , they come stock like that are but an automatic v6 can beat 240's with the right driving.
i hate to say our cars are not that fast. i love em to death but they aren't</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Coastek you are exactly right, i love the 240 too but it isn't fast at all and not made to be, you guys don't like mustangs, i didn't either till my friend got one and i must admit they are really fun to drive, the 5.0 is a beast and can be made very very fast for pretty cheap. or so i've heard

[ImportMatrix240sx]

yo my friend has a 97 V6 and i tore him a new one. &nbsp;i have an intake and exhaust but i still think u could win. &nbsp;just unplug ur transmission fluid regulator.

[Loren]

.....I raced a 2001 V6 Stang in my 97 Maxima.. both 5spds but mine was stock and he had intake/exhaust/ecu. I beat him twice, and we could both drive. although a 97 maxima is way faster than a 240sx..... PS That kid couldn't afford the payments for his stang anymore, and sold it, and got a 90 240sx hatchback, and said it was terribly slow compared to the stang and was saving for a SR.

[Jeff240sx]

Ok. &nbsp;I didn't quite remember, but I was only off by 400 pounds. &nbsp;And "I couldn't be any more wrong"? &nbsp;You wanna cut some slack to someone that doesn't own a mustang, or run to the websites before I post?
I also posted some numbers. &nbsp;Evils14 and a couple other people have ran stock 240sx's into low-mid 15's. &nbsp;94 GT specs are 15.3 1/4mile, and 93 are a little slower, with 10 less horsepower. &nbsp;I have seen stock mustang 5.0s race at the dragstrip. &nbsp;Dragstrips tell you exactly how good of a driver you are, and that magazine numbers don't mean shit, and at the strip, 5.0s get terrible traction thru most of 1st, and the beginning of second, comming in at mid-high 15 seconds. &nbsp;Shit. &nbsp;Some websites out there give the mustang GT 19 second quarter mile times. &nbsp;
So.. 240sx's can run mid 15s with a competant driver, and are easy to drive because they don't have gobs of tire-shredding torque. &nbsp;GTs can run mid 15s with a competant driver because they spin tires.
-Jeff

[burgy240]

Phlip-----I did answer the question, incorrectly, &nbsp;I said you can't get those with v6's and I was wrong because I guess you can getRousch racing stangs w/ v6. &nbsp;I was generally talkin about th eFord Factory produce stang however. &nbsp;And as for the Newb...I was just poking fun, wasn't serious. &nbsp;notice the J/J after it.

I think that there is so much discrepency about the stangs because there are sooo many different types and they are so easily modded that you never know when you rfaceing a stock stang or not. &nbsp;I love driving them though. &nbsp;I used to drive them all the time on Dealer trades or my buddies Ford dealership.

[crioten]

ok, i got a friend who wants to race...he has a 98 v6 mustang(stick) and i have a s13 auto...who would win, im guessing he would...right?

glen

[Therian]

Tidings from the mustang world...

Just a couple things I'd like to point out...

a 99-03 GT can hit high 13's stock. &nbsp;
a 94-98 will hit anywhere from mid to high 14's...(87-93's will be slightly faster)
a 94-98 V6 will run anywhere from low to high 15's
a 99+ has 14's in its blood

let's compare a '93 5 speed 240HB to a 5 speed '95 V6 mustang shall we?

V6 stats:

HP: 150
TQ: 215
Weight: 3050 pounds

240 stats

HP: 155
TQ: 160
Weight: 2800 pounds

As you can see, the stats are fairly close with the exception of the mustang having far more torque than the 240. &nbsp;The torque difference will make up for the weight difference substantially. &nbsp;It WILL be a drivers race with 5 speeds, but if a auto was matched with an auto, the stang will pull on the 240...mainly due to the stang's torque multiplication factor. &nbsp;

Now to those of you that say to can beat GT's...you've obviously been racing automatic verts with an old lady behind the wheel or the GT didn't think you were racing.

[Evil S14]

hehe the gt i did beat at the track was an automatic vert, but he knew we were racing, at leat i assume he did &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

there is so much variable in mustangs its not even funny, it all depends on the year/trim/engine
everything
its just kinda broad to just say v6 mustang, i think alot of it has to do with the year because they changed them alot, unlike our cars which basically have remained the same from 91 and on

i think nobody really has a magical 240sx that runs faster than the other, i think its purely driver. the 60 foor in a 240 is alot of the race, because there isnt much variable after that.
a 2.4 60' and a 2.1 60 foor is the difference between a 16 sec quarter mile and a 15.3 quarter mile
oh and im speaking from the stock standpoint

[ShadowGT]

As a former 240 owner (damn good car) and a current owner of both a '00 v6 Stang and an '03 GT (both 5 speeds) I can tell you this: &nbsp;the auto v6 Stangs aren't all that fast, particularly pre '99 when they were only putting out 150 hp. &nbsp;99 and up are 190. &nbsp;The '99 and up GT has 260 hp and 302 ft lbs of torque, bone stock. &nbsp;Here are some stats on various 240's and Mustangs from Car and Driver and Motor Trend. &nbsp;Judge for yourself:

1989 240 sx
transmission: &nbsp;Unknown
1/4 Mile: 16.5 &nbsp;

1990 Nissan 240 SX SE
0-60: 8.8 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Unknown
1/4 Mile: 16.5 &nbsp;

1991 Nissan 240 SX SE
0-60: 7.9 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Unknown
1/4 Mile: 16.1 &nbsp;

1993 Nissan 240 SX SE
0-60: 8.4 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Unknown
1/4 Mile: 16.3 &nbsp;

1995 Nissan 240 SX SE
0-60: 8.3 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Unknown
1/4 Mile: 16.1 &nbsp;

1995 Ford Mustang V6
0-60: 9.9 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Unknown
1/4 Mile: 17.3 &nbsp;

1999 Ford Mustang
Obtained from C&D February, 1999
0-60: 7.1 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 15.6 &nbsp;
1/4 Speed: 90

2000 Ford Mustang
0-60: 7 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 15.5 &nbsp;

*My personal best in my '00 0-60 was 6.7 w/ a true dual exhaust and CAI.

As far as the GT's go, sorry guys, not chance unless you have some heavy mods:

1995 Ford Mustang GT
Obtained from C&D February, 1997
0-60: 6.5 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 15.2 &nbsp;

1999 Ford Mustang GT
Obtained from C&D February, 1999
0-60: 5.5 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 14.2 &nbsp;
1/4 Speed: 98

2001 Ford Mustang GT
Obtained from MT June, 2001
0-60: 5.4 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 14 &nbsp;
1/4 Speed: 100

2002 Ford Mustang GT
Obtained from C&D November, 2002
0-60: 6.3 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Automatic
1/4 Mile: 15.1 &nbsp;
1/4 Speed: 93

I consistently run low 5's 0-60 in my '03 GT.

If you're going up against a pre '99 v6 stang w/ an auto, you can win. &nbsp;If it has a 5 speed, expect it to be a little quicker. If I had to bet on a stock 240 against a stock 99 and up v6 5 speed Stang, I'd go w/ the Stang.

No stock 240 will take a stock GT, although a 240 could probably hang with a pre '99 auto GT for awhile.

Just my 2 cents...

[Evil S14]

our cars run 16.1?
i never beleive these damn magazines ive never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever hit a 16 ever
everytime i raced this year all ive hit for my worst time was a 15.8 and my best 15.3
and this is no heavy modification, just a damn apex-i n1 dual
although i am shocked to see the 2002 GT auto only run a low 15 because i know someone who has one with flowmasters who ran a 14 flat

[dave240sx]

Nobody is going to believe me on this cause everybody has their mind set on "03 mustangs are damn fast". &nbsp;But my friend with an 02 camaro SS runs dead even with 03 mustangs. &nbsp;and he's stock. &nbsp;

02 Camaro SS &nbsp;-->335HP
03 Mustang Cobra--> 390? HP

03 mustang should roast him in a drag, but they don't cause their pieces of crap. &nbsp;(that's why they were discontinued a cuple months ago for a while) &nbsp;Camaro's have 335 HP Naturally asparated. &nbsp;LS1 motorsports have a turbo kit for 7lbs of boost that puts the Camaro around 550. &nbsp;The 03 Mustang 8lbs. &nbsp;and only 390HP.

Back to stock. &nbsp;Camaro runs dead even with the 03 mustang if not beating it. &nbsp;My friend has done it and plenty of people have video's online of them if you go to some msgboards and look for them. &nbsp;Just thought I would clear some stuff up for you guys.

I've run a couple v6 mustangs before and beat them both. &nbsp;

-Dave-

[CoasTek240]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ImportMatrix240sx @ Dec. 09 2002,6:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">yo my friend has a 97 V6 and i tore him a new one. i have an intake and exhaust but i still think u could win. just unplug ur transmission fluid regulator.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
what the hell is that supposed to do.


well since we're on the topic of giving stories. i'm not gonna brag and say i'm a good driver, but i dont suck. i had my SOHC s13 with clutch shortshifter grippy tires zigenfireball exhaust and hotshot intake v/s a stock auto v6 2001 mustang and i killed him off th line all the way till the end and he pulled so hard on me towards the end, if it had been 10 ft more he woulda beat me. they arent as slow as you think. u guys just dont like them.. eithe do i, but i'm telling the truth.
you guys speak as though our cars are fast. they arent. i love them just as much if not more than anyone else here. 204's are all i've owned &nbsp;but they arent fast stock. they were'nt meant to go in a staright line fast.
sorry <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/satisfied.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':satisfied:'>

[blainestang]

Dave,
I am not going to argue with the fact that the SS is an awesome car, because it is. But:

1) the new cobras dyno at 360-370 RWHP (that is ~425 crank hp)

2) Because it is an unbelievably fast car for the money and it has crazy hype surrounding it, many people buy them just to have it and pound the crap out of it. These people are the ones that get beaten by stock SS's, super crappy drivers that just want to have the sweetest car for the money (IMO). For example, a guy just posted on SVTperformance.com that got beat by a slightly modded new SS. The race would have been extremely close except for the fact that the guy in the Cobra downshifted to FIRST at 40MPH wasting tons of time having to shift out of it right away and wasting time getting to the Cobras "power gear," 2nd. Driver makes the difference ANY time that two cars are close in performance.

3) I know that this is the despised "magazine racing" but the Cobra ran a time identical (actually .01 seconds faster) to the Z06 in the quarter mile. Even though everyone likes to say that magazine times are terrible, which they sometimes are, this at least proves the potential for the Cobra.

Summary: Many people that are buying the new cobra buy it because it is relatively cheap and is comparable in the quarter mile to almost any production car available. These people often are CRAPPY drivers and there are no Autos to save their butts and the Cobras rep. Finally, the cobra is AT LEAST as fast as the SS but it is a drivers race.

Blaine

[SpectorV]

the 240 is definatly a nice import, its my favorite of any import out there. I have respect for it over many many others. My friend has a nice one, its a 93 240 DOHC 2.4 with Cat back exhaust, CAI, Racing pulley, and an ignition system from jacobs. I was suprised at how fast his car actually was. I have drove it for my self. Very nice pull on those things (above 4200 rpms)compared to other imports I4s I have driven. We decided to go to the track and run them to see who was faster. I have a 2001 V6 manual with 3.73 gears, Tlok diff, and a CAI with a flowmaster exhaust cat back. (heavy ass 17 by 9 chrome rims also) He ran a 2.3 60ft and pulled a 10.3 at best (8th only here) vs my 2.2 60ft and 9.6 best. His car does have high miles no doubt and it was his like 2nd trip to the track. I know he can do better at least a 10.0 or 9.9s with practice and good conditions. The v6 driven correctly stock vs stock will win but not by a whole lot (stock the mustang manuals are good for 15.4 quaters), but it is a drivers race you put a good driver in the 240 the 240 will win. The mustang (01 up) has 193bhp at 5400rpm and 225tq at 2900, flat curve also, the tq drops by only 900 rpms from 2800 - 4900rpm. Mine dynoed at [email protected] and [email protected] I do have respect for the 240s and they are fast cars. If i had to get an import it would be a nissan. People just dont give enough props to the V6 stang OR the 240 for that matter cuz they just figure they are slow, well the pre 99 stangs are VERY slow like 17.0s stock in an auto, &nbsp;I used to have one .... I know.

[Evil S14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (CoasTek240 @ Dec. 10 2002,1:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">well since we're on the topic of giving stories. i'm not gonna brag and say i'm a good driver, but i dont suck.
they arent as slow as you think. u guys just dont like them.. eithe do i, but i'm telling the truth.
you guys speak as though our cars are fast. they arent. i love them just as much if not more than anyone else here. 204's are all i've owned but they arent fast stock. they were'nt meant to go in a staright line fast.
sorry <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/satisfied.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':satisfied:'></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
im not bragging but id say i was a good driver, and its not because i dont like the mustangs that i think they're slow (I have to live with it, my gf drives one) its that compared to the V8s they are slow, and the fact that they are a sports car that run 16s is pretty sad too. &nbsp;Maybe its the fact that here in Indiana, maybe elsewhere, 17 year old kids with V6 mustangs think they're the hot shit. I think i just hate the mustang attitude

[Integraholic]

Yeah, like Brandon Giles.

[ShadowGT]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Evil S14 @ Dec. 11 2002,12:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">our cars run 16.1?
i never beleive these damn magazines ive never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever hit a 16 ever
everytime i raced this year all ive hit for my worst time was a 15.8 and my best 15.3
and this is no heavy modification, just a damn apex-i n1 dual
although i am shocked to see the 2002 GT auto only run a low 15 because i know someone who has one with flowmasters who ran a 14 flat</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
You are correct about magazine times--they are not representative. &nbsp;For example, there is a guy I know with &nbsp;just cold air induction and an exhaust who's 02 GT auto is running consistant 13's. &nbsp;Go figure.

[ShadowGT]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (dave240sx @ Dec. 11 2002,12:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Nobody is going to believe me on this cause everybody has their mind set on "03 mustangs are damn fast". But my friend with an 02 camaro SS runs dead even with 03 mustangs. and he's stock.

02 Camaro SS -->335HP
03 Mustang Cobra--> 390? HP

03 mustang should roast him in a drag, but they don't cause their pieces of crap. (that's why they were discontinued a cuple months ago for a while) Camaro's have 335 HP Naturally asparated. LS1 motorsports have a turbo kit for 7lbs of boost that puts the Camaro around 550. The 03 Mustang 8lbs. and only 390HP.

Back to stock. Camaro runs dead even with the 03 mustang if not beating it. My friend has done it and plenty of people have video's online of them if you go to some msgboards and look for them. Just thought I would clear some stuff up for you guys.

I've run a couple v6 mustangs before and beat them both.

-Dave-</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Dave, no reason to get offensive, the Mustang is a good car. &nbsp;I've had 240's (1) Eclipses, Mustangs, Olds and Camaros. &nbsp;They've all been very different, but very good cars. &nbsp;The only piece of crap I've ever had is a Dodge pick up, but that's another forum. &nbsp;Maybe I've been lucky, but I can't say my imports have been any better quality than my domestics, or vice versa. &nbsp;Different cars are built w/ different philosophies. &nbsp;It's like this, my best friend has a 1991 300 zx TT. &nbsp;0-60 I can beat him, 1/4 mile I can beat him (barely) but after that his turbo's are spooled up and he begins to pull away. &nbsp;Plain and simple, his car will walk me on top end. &nbsp;It all depends on what the car is designed for. &nbsp;HIs car is heavier and has less torque, but he has more hp and is more aerodynamic. &nbsp;Horsepower alone is only part of the picture: &nbsp;vehicle weight, gearing, torque, aerodynamics, and most importantly, driver, all play a role. &nbsp;Know what I mean?

As far as the '03 Cobras go, if your friend can beat one with his '02 SS, then he's either spraying or the cobra is sick. &nbsp;The '03 Cobras will easily go 0-60 in 4.5 and consistently hit the 1/4 in the 12's at better than 110 mph. &nbsp;The 02 SS is fast, but it can not beat a '03 Cobra if both drivers are equally experienced and both cars are stock. &nbsp;I'd say your friend can run dead even or beat an '03 GT, but not a Cobra. &nbsp;One last thing, when did Ford ever stop producing the '03??

2002 Chevrolet Camaro SS
Obtained from MT December, 2001
0-60: 5.2 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.5 &nbsp;
1/4 Speed: 107

2003 Ford Mustang Cobra
Obtained from C&D June, 2002
0-60: 4.5 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 12.9 &nbsp;
1/4 Speed: 111
Additional Information

[SpectorV]

Evil S14

"the fact that they are a sports car that run 16s is pretty sad too."

and a 240 doesnt run 16's, Every 240 i have seen, moded or not usually runs high 15s low 16s. the mustang manual, in stock form is good for 15.5s with an average driver. The two are not far off, so when you put down the mustang the same is true for the 240, they nearly run the same times. (Mustang is averagely faster though)

[ShadowGT]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Evil S14 @ Dec. 11 2002,7:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (CoasTek240 @ Dec. 10 2002,1:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">well since we're on the topic of giving stories. i'm not gonna brag and say i'm a good driver, but i dont suck.
they arent as slow as you think. u guys just dont like them.. eithe do i, but i'm telling the truth.
you guys speak as though our cars are fast. they arent. i love them just as much if not more than anyone else here. 204's are all i've owned but they arent fast stock. they were'nt meant to go in a staright line fast.
sorry <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/satisfied.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':satisfied:'></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
im not bragging but id say i was a good driver, and its not because i dont like the mustangs that i think they're slow (I have to live with it, my gf drives one) its that compared to the V8s they are slow, and the fact that they are a sports car that run 16s is pretty sad too. Maybe its the fact that here in Indiana, maybe elsewhere, 17 year old kids with V6 mustangs think they're the hot shit. I think i just hate the mustang attitude</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
You have a point in that there are some people (SOME) who drive v6 stangs that like to pretend like they are driving GTs or CObras, just like there are SOME 240 drivers that like to pretend they're in a 300 or 350zx. &nbsp;The 240 is a quick little car, just like the v6 STANG, but they were not meant to be in the same class as the GT or the 300/350. &nbsp;That doesn't mean that with mods a 240 or Mustang Coupe can't be very fast, because they both can...the point is, the "Mustang" attitidude is alive and well, just as it is with imports. &nbsp;I know a guy w/ a v6 Stang that has Cobra bumpers, badges, exhaust, wheels, etc, but it aint no Cobra. &nbsp;That, imho, is gay. &nbsp;Just as much as those guys in stock imports who put wings and decals all over them like it's a freakin outtake from "Fast and the Furious," yet when you look under the hood the car is a bone stock family sedan. &nbsp;We all have to live with that. &nbsp;There are a lot of pretenders out there that give those of us with V6 Mustangs and 240's a bad name. Just because you think you're hot s**t doesn't mean that you are. &nbsp;Sometimes you're just plain s**t.

[Evil S14]

i was commenting on the fact that the mustang is in fact a sports car, and with the V8 it is, but the fact is they market an economy version of their sports car with a V6 so it has the sports car looks with out the sports car performance (or costs for that matter)
im just saying a V6 mustang is a sports car that isnt and a 240 is just a car

[AG240]

Evil S14, I have seen you comment several times on this post that your stock S-14s runs low 15's!!! Your joking right??? &nbsp;I hope you don't expect me to by that one(even with a catback exhaust)... I guess the 1/4 mile tracks in Indiana are shorter than in Georgia... &nbsp;Please tell me you have documentation!!! &nbsp;Generally speaking, a 10th in the quarter mile is worth 10 horsepower... &nbsp;So I guess your car is a special edition(NOT!!!<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'>, that made an extra 30 to 50 horsepower!!! &nbsp;I know several guys local running every bolt-on and mod known to the 240 crowd(cams/flywheels/etc.), and they run 14.8 - 15 flat!!! &nbsp;Whats up??? &nbsp;I can't wait to hear this one... &nbsp;Alan

[Evil S14]

oh good lord another non beleiver <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/dozingoff.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':zzz:'> well i dont think the 1/4 mile here is any different than georgia. We run at IRP where the NHRA US Nationals are run, so im sure the track is legit.
As for my time being legit, there are several people on this board who have seen this (Kouki S14, Integraholic, etc) and if u relly really dont beleive me, I invite you, no actually i challenge you to come up here, if i dont run a 15.4 or lower, ill pay for ur trip, if i do, ur just SOL
and heres a timeslip
http://portfolio.iu.edu/jrjimene/240slip.gif
car 120 bud

[AG240]

Well that's really nice of you!!! &nbsp;I have been needing a little vacation trip... &nbsp;No really, I guess you have got me... &nbsp;I see the proof!!! &nbsp;But I feel you are still leaving something important out... &nbsp;I believe now that you have run a 15.34, with your car, but IT AIN'T STOCK!!! &nbsp;First, a 2.19 60' time... &nbsp;That's pretty good for street tires!!! &nbsp;Second(my favorite), is your elapsed speed of 87.31... &nbsp;That on a quarter mile calculator mean you are putting down 155 horsepower to the wheels in a 3000 lb car(w/ driver) ... &nbsp;No way!!! &nbsp;Again, I believe you have a really nice looking car(saw your picture), aswell as a quick car, but you have more done to your car than your letting on... &nbsp;I want you to know that I am not targeting you!!! &nbsp;I love cars, and own a few including a 95'base model 240sx... &nbsp;I just know what they are capable of, and that does'nt seem possible with your lack of mod's... &nbsp;Alan

[Jeff240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AG240 @ Dec. 12 2002,11:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well that's really nice of you!!! I have been needing a little vacation trip... No really, I guess you have got me... I see the proof!!! But I feel you are still leaving something important out... I believe now that you have run a 15.34, with your car, but IT AIN'T STOCK!!! First, a 2.19 60' time... That's pretty good for street tires!!! Second(my favorite), is your elapsed speed of 87.31... That on a quarter mile calculator mean you are putting down 155 horsepower to the wheels in a 3000 lb car(w/ driver) ... No way!!! Again, I believe you have a really nice looking car(saw your picture), aswell as a quick car, but you have more done to your car than your letting on... I want you to know that I am not targeting you!!! I love cars, and own a few including a 95'base model 240sx... I just know what they are capable of, and that does'nt seem possible with your lack of mod's... Alan</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
There is a lot more than horsepower and weight that determines your 1/4 mile time, and trap speed.
First, there is the 60' time, which evils14 had an extremely good one. &nbsp;Next, tire compound, size, and grip on the track. &nbsp;These will all change from track to track, and between tire brands. &nbsp;Then shift speed. &nbsp;Powershifting will reduce time by alot, but won't increase trap speed.
Then there is elevation, and most importantly, temperature. &nbsp;
Just letting you know all the different variables in a quarter mile run.
Finally. &nbsp;Horsepower ratings differ from car to car. &nbsp;AceinHole dyno'd at 144? rwhp. &nbsp;That should be like 165 at the crank. &nbsp;Add on an intake, and isn't it possible to get about 7 hp off an exhaust? &nbsp;That would put him damn close to 155 rwhp.
-Jeff
-Jeff

[AG240]

Is it possible, Yes... &nbsp;Is it probable, No... &nbsp;I know of two normally aspirated vehicles that I have seen the dyno sheets, that hit 156 & 159 horsepower respectively to the wheels... &nbsp;Both cars had similar modifications... &nbsp;These mods Included custom intake / header / cams 91' / lightened flywheels / pulleys / ECU / etc... &nbsp;I am sure I'm forgetting something, but you get my point... &nbsp;Yes, I agree that all tracks run different and that temperature play a role, but again my point is that a basically stock 240sx can't produce these numbers both dyno or track...

[rhit06]

An S13 would beat a 6 cyl mustang every time if the driver is even somewhat good. &nbsp;the V6 mustangs are not fast at all!!

[SpectorV]

Well I ran a 14.7 @ 93 with gears and exhuast, and have the slips to prove it. So you think thats slow for a car with two mods? I've ran a few 240s the closest was me in front by 3-4 cars (where he had exhasut, pulley, induction, and an ignition). And if the mustang is not that fast (which its not) then the 240 is even slower, 15.3 is very do able in a 240 but it will have to have more mods than just a Cat back. Power to weight ratio and also taking in to account the gearing they simply do not have enough power to run those times stock. The mustang V6 (mine) weighted in at 3045 lbs at the track, the 240 aint much lighter and the mustang v6 also has nearly 100ftlb of tq on it not to mention the 40 more hp over it also. The 240 is classified as a sports car also by ANY place you will call and try to get insurance. The auto stangs are no match for a stock manual 240, dont confuse the manual stangs with the autos though its a different world. The manual is at least .5 faster in the quarter. I ran a 15.8 with a 2.2 60ft and broke the rear end off the line, still managed to run a 15.8.


If you want to see a nice collection of V6 time slips go here and check out thise and compare mods for your self....

www.v6power.net &nbsp; (click on the time slips link on the front page)

[Evil S14]

well theres nothng done to the engine so all i have over a stock 240 is coilovers. &nbsp;That sould help with the launch but doesnt explain everything. &nbsp;on that particular day it was about 50 degrees. &nbsp;Those were on half bald sonor crapass tires, no LSD, and no i dont powershift (Bad Tranny Problems) &nbsp;im highly doubting that anything was done to the engine since the preivious owner was an older lady. and i onnly weigh 130 lbs &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'>
this was all with full interior.
and oto give u an even better idea of everything, i put my 18"s on and i ran a 15.6 which is still pretty good considering all that rotational mass and taller gear ratio and this was in 90 degree weather! the track was prob damn near 100+ on the surface
so this is not a fluke, this didnt just happen once, i am quite consistant and if any of the indian boys wanna scope out my car at the track next year, itll still be the same, lowered with an Apex-i N1 dual
Ill be the black 240 running low 15s &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/thumbs-up.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':thumbsup:'>
i think every s14 on this board is very capable of running the same times, my car isnt special, u just gotta have the feel for the car and shoot for that 2.1 60'

Post script: I beleive the N1 dual makes you lose TQ

[Integraholic]

He did it, I was there. &nbsp;He's a pretty good driver. &nbsp;You just gotta get to know your car and how it shifts and reacts to the track. &nbsp;The track conditions that night were great. &nbsp;That same night I also achieved my best time of 14.5 with one after market engine modification. &nbsp;They had just put down VHT traction compound so we were getting some awesome traction. &nbsp;Plus the temp was really low, and that made our cars run so much better.

BTW, hey Jason, did that bird ever fly into your oil fill? &nbsp; <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'> &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

[ShadowGT]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (rhit06 @ Dec. 12 2002,12:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">An S13 would beat a 6 cyl mustang every time if the driver is even somewhat good. the V6 mustangs are not fast at all!!</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
I would be more than happy to race 240 that has the same mods as I do in my '00 Mustang (CAI and exhaust). &nbsp;0-60 and 1/4 mile I have no doubt I would win 9 out of 10. &nbsp;The reason I say 9 out of 10 is because ever so often a factory freak comes along that just runs right off the assembly line than the other cars. &nbsp;I can't explain it, but I've seen it happen with everything from motorcycles to cars. &nbsp;That said, in general, I believe the 99 and up v6 Stang w/ 5 spd will take any 240 w/ similar mods.

Top end, the 240 would have me because the computer shuts the V6 Stangs down at about 118. &nbsp;The Mustang is not all that heavy, and it has a lot more torque than the 240. &nbsp;Torque is what matters in short races, but like I said earlier, different cars are designed for different things and there are always exceptions. &nbsp;As Spector pointed out, the auto v6 Stangs are NOT even close to the 5 speed. &nbsp;Trust me.

[Phlip]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (burgy240 @ Dec. 10 2002,8:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Phlip-----I did answer the question, incorrectly, I said you can't get those with v6's and I was wrong because I guess you can getRousch racing stangs w/ v6. I was generally talkin about th eFord Factory produce stang however. And as for the Newb...I was just poking fun, wasn't serious. notice the J/J after it.

I think that there is so much discrepency about the stangs because there are sooo many different types and they are so easily modded that you never know when you rfaceing a stock stang or not. I love driving them though. I used to drive them all the time on Dealer trades or my buddies Ford dealership.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
No offense taken, but one must understand that I live in NC, land of straight pipes, flowmasters and 5.0s...There are cats here that drive 4-500 HP stangs on the street in the winter, no less. For this reason, everything with a horse on the hood swears they are the shit and often, I am FORCED to suck the doors off a V6 stang twice weekly, just to get to work. I know how the cars come and I was simply drawing attention to the fact that the original question was about V6s. I can beat a bone-stock 5.0 or the early 4.6s (ask the dude on bryan Blvd.) but I guaran-damn-tee it's because of me and not the cars, me driving his car would result in a reversal of roles and I realize that...

[/etc/shadow]

My friend has a stock 2003 V6 Mustang and I have a stock 1990 240sx (KA24E). We're basically neck and neck. I have been driving stick for a lot longer than he has, though... but he still has a good handle on it.

[Therian]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ShadowGT @ Dec. 12 2002,6:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteBegin--rhit06+Dec. 12 2002,12<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (rhit06 @ Dec. 12 2002,12<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'>7)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Top end, the 240 would have me because the computer shuts the V6 Stangs down at about 118. </td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
actually the 240's (atleast here in Canada) cannot make it over 180 kilometres an hour

[FastBack 240]

James.....................I had asked a simple question and it was finally answerd in the 3rd page. It was a question NOT to piss any 240 enthusiests off or in that matter any V6 mustang enthusiests either. My friend has a Mustang and said there was no way in hell I could beat him and i've proven time and time again I could and he comes up with some BS excuse why I won and he still says I can't, so thats why I asked........to prove him wrong. PEACE

[KoukiS14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (burgy240 @ Dec. 08 2002,11:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Actually it would be close because of WHICH mustang it is. There are so many different mustangs that it really depends. I worked at a Ford Dealer and I'll tell you, A nice GT is fast and the Bullitis slightly faster. Of Course the Cobra and Cobra R FLY!!. The six bangers aren't very good however. ALso A rousch Racing mustang stage II or stage III are really nice.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Well, in case Chris hasn't commented... &nbsp;I haven't read all this yet... on I-65 at least. . . =) &nbsp;

The Rousch Mustang is the slowest piece of shit I've ever seen. &nbsp;The new Mustang V6 is supposed to be fast. &nbsp;Granted, I know nothing about Rousch stages, but it had all the Rousch crap on it. . .side pipes. . hell it was even yellow. . haha. .

We'd even wait till he backed way off and tried to pass. . he'd take off hard and build speed, then we'd wait. . and go, and he couldn't pass. &nbsp;


But... couldn't beat us in his car, even with my fat ass and all our luggage rollin along hahaha


-Rob

[KoukiS14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AG240 @ Dec. 11 2002,07:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Evil S14, I have seen you comment several times on this post that your stock S-14s runs low 15's!!! Your joking right??? I hope you don't expect me to by that one(even with a catback exhaust)... I guess the 1/4 mile tracks in Indiana are shorter than in Georgia... Please tell me you have documentation!!! Generally speaking, a 10th in the quarter mile is worth 10 horsepower... So I guess your car is a special edition(NOT!!!<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'>, that made an extra 30 to 50 horsepower!!! I know several guys local running every bolt-on and mod known to the 240 crowd(cams/flywheels/etc.), and they run 14.8 - 15 flat!!! Whats up??? I can't wait to hear this one... Alan</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
I was there. . I videotaped it. &nbsp;I HELD that timeslip in my hands haha. . I even have a copy of it here on my computer. =) &nbsp;It DID happen. &nbsp;Exactly as he describes. .


-Rob

[KoukiS14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (James @ Dec. 13 2002,12:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">3 pages about stock 240's against stock V6 Mustangs?
Why is everyone all excited about beating the "econo" model?

Why don't we then discuss how the 240 could beat a Civic DX, non-turbo Eclipse, non-turbo MR2, Crx HF, etc. etc. (you get the point).
Who cares? Does a stock 240 suck that much as to only compare it to mid-trim level cars?
That's the impression I take from the previous replies.
Tell me it's not so! <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Lemme field this one. . haha

Because... Mustang is a front engine, RWD. . NON econo model, as you put it. &nbsp;The Mustang is SUPPOSED to be a sports car. &nbsp;We use it as an example, because it's putting out around 200 HP, and is a V6, and STILL can't beat our "slow" 240s. &nbsp;We think it's funny as hell, and it's just further proof that domestic drivers are mostly really stupid. &nbsp;V8 Mustangs aren't even fast, considering... The #s are good for a Japanese or German LUXURY car, but. . . a V8 car that small should go much faster. &nbsp;

just my .02 =)


-Rob

[KoukiS14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Therian @ Dec. 09 2002,10:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Tidings from the mustang world...

Just a couple things I'd like to point out...

a 99-03 GT can hit high 13's stock.
a 94-98 will hit anywhere from mid to high 14's...(87-93's will be slightly faster)
a 94-98 V6 will run anywhere from low to high 15's
a 99+ has 14's in its blood

let's compare a '93 5 speed 240HB to a 5 speed '95 V6 mustang shall we?

V6 stats:

HP: 150
TQ: 215
Weight: 3050 pounds

240 stats

HP: 155
TQ: 160
Weight: 2800 pounds

As you can see, the stats are fairly close with the exception of the mustang having far more torque than the 240. The torque difference will make up for the weight difference substantially. It WILL be a drivers race with 5 speeds, but if a auto was matched with an auto, the stang will pull on the 240...mainly due to the stang's torque multiplication factor.

Now to those of you that say to can beat GT's...you've obviously been racing automatic verts with an old lady behind the wheel or the GT didn't think you were racing.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
LOL yeah let's also compare...

93 240sx HB: 0-60 7.5 seconds
94 Mustang V6: 0-60 10 flat

I know, 0-60 isn't that crucial... But.. I can tell you, I have raced many many many V6 Mustangs, old and new, and I spank them EVERY TIME. In my 92 HB, and my 97 LE.

They can't handle for shit, they're heavy, and slow... Most worthless piece of crap ever. Why they make a V6 mustang, I'll never know... A mustang is a muscle car, it's not a sports car... never has been, may very well never be... If you take the engine out of the muscle car, it's just another damn grocery getter, as it has been since the 60s.

I give credit where it's due, a MODIFIED Mustang V8 is fast, a stock one... NONE are fast. Not what they should be, IMO..

BTW... not meaning to flame ya man. =) &nbsp;But... &nbsp;Mustangs aren't THAT fast. &nbsp;I know, a GT should be able to beat a 240sx, and they do, marginally... But I've followed one, and he could not pull on me (94 5.0) &nbsp; My car IS NOT FAST.

-Rob

[ShadowGT]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KoukiS14 @ Dec. 15 2002,5:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL yeah let's also compare...

93 240sx HB: 0-60 7.5 seconds
94 Mustang V6: 0-60 10 flat

I know, 0-60 isn't that crucial... But.. I can tell you, I have raced many many many V6 Mustangs, old and new, and I spank them EVERY TIME. In my 92 HB, and my 97 LE.

They can't handle for shit, they're heavy, and slow... Most worthless piece of crap ever. Why they make a V6 mustang, I'll never know... A mustang is a muscle car, it's not a sports car... never has been, may very well never be... If you take the engine out of the muscle car, it's just another damn grocery getter, as it has been since the 60s.

I give credit where it's due, a MODIFIED Mustang V8 is fast, a stock one... NONE are fast. Not what they should be, IMO..

BTW... not meaning to flame ya man. =) But... Mustangs aren't THAT fast. I know, a GT should be able to beat a 240sx, and they do, marginally... But I've followed one, and he could not pull on me (94 5.0) My car IS NOT FAST.

-Rob</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Rob, I will admit that the pre 1999 V6 Mustangs were slow, particularly w/ an auto. &nbsp;a 1995 w/ an auto probably is just under 10 secs 0-60. &nbsp;I think 9.9 is the average. &nbsp;The 5 speeds were a good sec and a half quicker.

The car only had 150 hp stock and is a little heavier than a 240. &nbsp;I think a 5 speed pre 1999 up against a 240 would be a better race, but a 240 would usually win. &nbsp;

A 1999 or up is a different story.

An average '99 and up V6 Mustang will consistently run the 1/4 around 15.5 and will run 0-60 in 7 seconds flat. &nbsp;In my 2000, I added CAI and exhuast and I can easily run 0-60 in 6.7 and the 1/4 in the low 15's w/ 15.3 my best so far on street tires. &nbsp;When you compare pre '99 Stangs to the new models, you are comparing apples and oranges.

As far as GT's not being that fast, you are correct if you are talking about the 1994-98 models which were some of the worst years for Mustangs.

The 1995 GT could run 0-60 in 6.5 and do the quarter in 15.2 on average---just a tad quicker than my '00 v6. &nbsp;Not great for a V8 car, I will admit. &nbsp;Of course with a few simple bolt ons, these cars can easily be awakened from the semi-coma Ford put them in from the factory. &nbsp;It really doesn't take a lot of effort to make these cars much faster.

If you are talking about a '99 and up GT not being fast, then I have to ask what you are smoking:

2001 Ford Mustang GT
Obtained from Motor Trend June, 2001
0-60: 5.4 &nbsp; Transmission: &nbsp;Manual
1/4 Mile: 14 &nbsp;
1/4 Speed: 100
Top Speed: &nbsp;145
An auto will run 0-60 in 6 secs flat. &nbsp;This isn't fast to you?

This is an average. &nbsp;There are guys over at Stangnet who are posting time slips on automatic GTs with just an exhaust and K&N running in the 13's! &nbsp;There are lots of guys with just bolt ons running 12's in their 5 speeds GT's (1999 and up).

So a 240 against a pre 1999 Mustang would be a victory for the 240 most of the time.

1999 and up, a 5spd Stang against a 5spd 240 would be a good race, but the Mustang should win unless the driver is a bonehead.

Against a GT, any year, no chance.

[KoukiS14]

No, it's not fast at all for a small 2 door V8 powered car. &nbsp;It'd be impressive and up to date, for that matter, if the V6 would pull those numbers. &nbsp;I don't think the 6.8 0-60 time of the 94-98 GT was impressive. &nbsp;They have made it faster, so maybe some day.... i'll be impressed. =) &nbsp;I do agree, OVERALL... I'd take a Mustang over a Camaro any day. &nbsp;

And, can't vouch for the drivers in the new mustang V6s, but... Numbers aside, they aren't fast at all. &nbsp;If they were, my slow 240sx couldn't have beaten them. &nbsp;

I'm not trying to flame, or. . piss anyone off. . BUT... &nbsp;I still don't consider a Mustang a fast car, unless it's a Cobra R. . I LIKE the Cobra R. =) &nbsp;So there's hope for me yet, right?! haha


-Rob

[ShadowGT]

Cobra's are hard not to like, especially the '03, but there is hope for you <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'>

[projectsilvia1]

i have a 93 240sx coupe se (silvia conversion front end)....with injen intake, hotshot header, apex 3" exhaust, asp pulley, jim wolfe ecu, and that is it....i keep up with 89-93 5.0s, i raced a brand new mustang gt on the street and he only beat me by a half a car, i think it was an auto but still i can hit 15.0's right now on street tires anyday of the week....

my car is not gutted or any other kind of weight loss...this car pulls hard...if i get the jim wolfe stage II cams i know i will be in the mid to high 14's easy...

are cars are not slow!!!!
[email protected]

[KoukiS14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ShadowGT @ Dec. 14 2002,10:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Cobra's are hard not to like, especially the '03, but there is hope for you <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
I'll be honest.... I've pulled into the Ford dealership with the full intention to make fun of Mustangs parked there... (with some friends) but then... we're all in agreement "wow. . that's one nice looking car!!" haha

One that comes to mind. . White Rousch stang with white wheels. . (or am I thinking Saleen?)

But... the fit and finish COULD be a lot better... the interiors still look plasticy and stuff. . . I can't put my finger on it, and not trying to badmouth the car... but Ford has been doin this too long haha

I'll admit.. the reason I don't like the cars is that . . I live in Indiana... MOST of the owners give these cars a bad name, and are the voice of them... Soooo.... If something is endorsed by a total social retard for years, would you buy it? &nbsp;I know this isn't the whole story, but... This is how it is here... &nbsp;import hating white trash, bla bla. . all the stereotypes you can imagine. &nbsp;=) &nbsp;I WANT to believe in them, but these people introduce a certain level of hate...

-Rob

[Evil S14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KoukiS14 @ Dec. 15 2002,12:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'll admit.. the reason I don't like the cars is that . . I live in Indiana... MOST of the owners give these cars a bad name, and are the voice of them... Soooo.... If something is endorsed by a total social retard for years, would you buy it? I know this isn't the whole story, but... This is how it is here... import hating white trash, bla bla. . all the stereotypes you can imagine. =) I WANT to believe in them, but these people introduce a certain level of hate...

-Rob</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Indiana is the mustang freaking capital of the world, shish Kenny Brown Performance is even based here in indy. &nbsp;I seriously drive down 31 and every 3rd car is a damn stang, im just glad i dont have one, i look like a fool driving my gf's

[KoukiS14]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Evil S14 @ Dec. 15 2002,2<!--emo&<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'>)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Indiana is the mustang freaking capital of the world, shish Kenny Brown Performance is even based here in indy. I seriously drive down 31 and every 3rd car is a damn stang, im just glad i dont have one, i look like a fool driving my gf's</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
hahaha yeah I've lived here so long, when I was looking at replacing my Rodeo back in 97 after the rollover (see http://12.222.108.59) (http://12.222.108.59) I was gonna buy an F body or Stang hahaha. . scary. . . =)

Yeah, I've talked to Kenny Brown before... I used to do tech support for IQuest, and we hosted their site. He seems pretty cool, but one of the guys I worked with often drove a Kenny Brown stang... This was before any supercharging, but Kenny said they had some plans... NO idea what's goin' on with it now, I can't get interested in domestics...

But.. yeah... Evil S14 knows what's up, and why we're so divided in this state.... Lots of automotive segregation goin' on here. =) Pretty soon, we'll have seperate carwash bays for domestics!! haha


BTW... Go to my page (it's sort of slow because it's on my computer, I think limited to max of 128 KBps) and go to pics, and then go to Rodeo.. You can see the whole reason I now drive a sports car!!! &nbsp;It would take a shitload to roll my 240 (notice &nbsp;that back right wheel.. the ONLY damage caused by the actual collision)

-Rob

[misnomer]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If something is endorsed by a total social retard for years, would you buy it?</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

Just tell me you don't own a Dell, dude <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'>

Good debate, guys, though it seems you've come to a consensus?

Mid-90s mustangs, from the factory, are really fairly dissapointing. I do dissagree with whomever it was that said they were much like the muscle cars of old- family sedans with two doors and big engines. Though my friend's '94 wasn't on par with my s13 in handling or accelleration, it is no grocery getter.

As it's been said before, between the v6 Mustangs and 240s, it would largely be a drivers race. 240s would prolly have an advantage over the mid-90s v6, but a tough time with the newer ones.

Thanks for being civil, everyone. You guys kick ass :-)

[Krunko]

i had an 86 mustang GT and I don't think it would have a problem taking...probably all stock 5spd 240's....it was stock too.

[SpectorV]

around here i have just about gave up on being friends with any non v6 mustang, the v8 guys are snoody and uneducated on the v6, thinking its just a base model 120hp car. They all think they are the badest guy on the road. Some are nice but very rarly do you find one, unless he is old lol.

[mbmbmb23]

The reason the V6 mustangs are dogs is because they are geared differently than the V8's.........and the ECU's are detuned for gas mileage to appease Ford's largest market for the V6 mustang......car rental companies.


-m

[SpectorV]

"The reason the V6 mustangs are dogs is because they are geared differently than the V8's.........and the ECU's are detuned for gas mileage to appease Ford's largest market for the V6 mustang......car rental companies."

The auto and manual are geared exactly the same. I have a T-5 tranny with the exact same ratios as any gt that has ever had a T-5 v6 or V8 and the T-45 is almost exactly the same as well. (3.35 first, 190 second, 130 3rd 1:1 fourth and a .68 final drive ratio with stock 3.27 rear end gear.)

the older ones are way way dogs they had 2.73 rear gears (all pre 99 v6s and pre 99 gts had stock 2.73 rear gears unless the gt got the optional 3.27 rear)


and my ECU is tuned for 87 just like any GT out there also. With a 93 octane program with a chip for reflash you gain 5hp from the car, not worth it unless you are modified to need it.

[mbmbmb23]

Yeah, sorry to not specify. I was talking about pre 99 V-6's. My dad swapped a Ford Ranger 7.5 inch posi rear end into his 96 V6 pumpkin and it likes to rev now. He swapped an OEM stock GT exhaust on there, and the exhaust note is very GT like, epecially with the 3.73 (or whatever) gears. Right now he's rebuilding an 01 V6 and will turbo it....then drop it in. I can't wait.


-m

[a2ddryft]

a good driver is important too..