[HBK_2007]

Originally Posted by HMUSN a Fox. she is slow

lol, thats the 2nd time uve been asked within 5 mins, lol

[HMUSN]

[HBK_2007]

did u get ur interior figured out?

[HMUSN]

not quite yet.

probably just carpeting without the deadener and a cheap racing seat for now.

[HBK_2007]

gonna stay fox?

[HMUSN]

dunno yet honestly.

[HMUSN]

still waiting for that race.. sleeper AND torres.

[SleeperStang88]

wow that fox is slow as balls haha.....wat does it run its 1/4 in ? actaully i would race ya, know i would lose, i will still race, only cuz i wanna see those sweets ass tail lights of yours haha cuz thats all id see

[HMUSN]

it's good for tens post tune.

[SleeperStang88]

wow, i envy you haha wat year is it? my cuz has a 93 with lots of work done to it, but i havent seen him in 5 years so im not sure wat he has done to it they are sick cars for sure

[HMUSN]

like I say.
fox or die!
lol
mine is a 91 GT

[Russ 3 ll PGT]

Originally Posted by SleeperStang88 ive beaten an SVT contour, my friends girlfriend drives one

Sorry to MM for bringing back an almost dead thread...but...

There is absolutely no way on earth you beat an SVT Contour. They have just as much (if not more) HP than you with a MTX (manual transaxle aka. manual transmission). I've driven several v6 'Stangs and know they are not quick by any means. You may have beaten a Contour SE, but not SVT. I've never lost to a stock (or bolted) V6 Mustang in my C-SVT or my Probe GT.

[supermachone]

a v8 would be a better platform to start with if you dont have bookoo bucks to spend, but look at chris's ride, he almost pushin 400 hp out of a v6

[6er_w/a_Vengance]

lol...when it comes down to it...if u want a BA sixxer ask Chris whats next on your mod list...as for u vs a GT...ehhh...might as well just go ahead and race, im surprised no ones told u that its best not to ask what,or if ull win but just to do it...

[SleeperStang88]

i tryied to race them but non of em willl race. i dont see them very often either, its hard to get races out here

[SleeperStang88]

oh russ, i live in michigan and your in ohio ....if you ever wanna run them , im only a few hrs away

[Blainestang]

Originally Posted by MIA Its all about tq.

Really?

2007 Honda Civic Si: ~2900lb, 139 ft/lb
1993 2.3L Mustang: ~2800lb, 135 ft/lb

Pretty even match-up, right?

No... try about 5 seconds difference in the 1/4-mile.

Originally Posted by SleeperStang88 im p&p my intake and heads with a cam this winter along with dual flowmasters, so i should be up around 220rwhp or so , by then i shouldnt have too much of a problem with most cars like a mustang or the "grocery getters"

Well, to be honest, there are quite a few "grocery getters" that make 220whp, now. Most late-model V6 Sedans make 260-280 @ the crank. Of course there are other variables, too, but I wouldn't write them off considering several are capable of times in the low 14's range.

Originally Posted by HMUSN around 230 rwhp.

I wouldn't say that's average. I've seen stock auto 99-04 GT's put down as little as 205whp on dynojets... and several bolt-on 99-04's still in the 220's.

Certainly there are stock GT's that make 230whp, but that would be an above-average 5-speed, IMO. The overall average is notably lower, especially when you include autos.

Originally Posted by HMUSN it may. the TQ of the gt still might get ya

Originally Posted by SleeperStang88 dam you torque!! hey wat do you drive hmusn?

Well, if you're making similar peak hp at similar RPM's, then inherently, you're making similar torque. The GT has an obvious torque advantage at lower rpm, but that's not where you race. I would still say the GT has a powerband advantage over a typical heads/cam V6 in the 220-230whp range, but the torque advantage isn't nearly as significant in the upper rpm range (where you race) as it is in the lower rpms.

Originally Posted by Russ 3 ll PGT Sorry to MM for bringing back an almost dead thread...but... There is absolutely no way on earth you beat an SVT Contour. They have just as much (if not more) HP than you with a MTX (manual transaxle aka. manual transmission). I've driven several v6 'Stangs and know they are not quick by any means. You may have beaten a Contour SE, but not SVT. I've never lost to a stock (or bolted) V6 Mustang in my C-SVT or my Probe GT.

"No way on earth" he beat an SVT Contour?

Are you talking about the same SVT Countour I'm thinking of? I would agree that a SVTC should be faster than an auto 99-04 V6, stock vs. stock, but we're talking about a typically 15-second car vs. a typically 16-second car... maybe 1 second difference in 1/4-mile time?

All else being equal, a second (if that) is a big difference, but when you account for driver skill, reaction time, engine "health", etc... 1 second can disappear quickly. Case in point, my stock-ish V6 Mustang had the lead on an AMG E55 at the 1/8-mile mark one race? Even at the 1/8-mile mark, he SHOULD have been way out in front, but... he wasn't.

So, while the SVTC *should* win, it's hardly a "no way on earth" type scenario.

[Avaric3]

Originally Posted by SleeperStang88 im p&p my intake and heads with a cam this winter along with dual flowmasters, so i should be up around 220rwhp or so , by then i shouldnt have too much of a problem with most cars like a mustang or the "grocery getters"

any sports car will still blow you away tho

[HMUSN]

the GT the op is questioning probably makes around 180-190 rwhp ( it's non pi)
I used a 17% cut off because we don't know if the car is auto (20) or a 5 speed)
I used the same formula for the TQ differences
the GT makes around 240 rwtq



v6/ GT
RWHP 157 VS. RWHP 186
RWTQ 186 VS. RWTQ 240

Also as blain stated you need to put in the transmission specs, powerband, gearing...ect all that comes into play.



And yes TQ matters in a race.

Horsepower sells cars, Torque wins races ~ Carol Shelby.

Unless you are street racing to triple digit numbers and that's just retarded of you to begin with.

EI: a 99-04 mustang tops out (stock) at around 110 (est) and has 190/190 (est) HP.

if that little 2.3 tops out higher in mph than the 99-04 does of course he will eventually win.

HP is a derivative of TQ. If you don't have the TQ to get you into the HP range quicker than the other guy you will loose the race

[Blainestang]

Originally Posted by HMUSN And yes TQ matters in a race. Horsepower sells cars, Torque wins races ~ Carol Shelby. Unless you are street racing to triple digit numbers and that's just retarded of you to begin with. EI: a 99-04 mustang tops out (stock) at around 110 (est) and has 190/190 (est) HP. if that little 2.3 tops out higher in mph than the 99-04 does of course he will eventually win. HP is a derivative of TQ. If you don't have the TQ to get you into the HP range quicker than the other guy you will loose the race

Torque definitely matters, but it isn't ALL that matters, like the other guy said.

There are many variables, but HP over the rpm range in which you race tells you significantly more about a car than a torque number does.

Torque means nothing without rpm... which is why the Civic Si is 5 seconds faster than the 2.3L Foxbody despite similar weight and torque.