Modded Mustang Forums banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

4.6 vs 4.6

Jump to Latest
101 - 120 of 203 Posts
#103 ·
i would stic kit in the tail pipe lol ya the 73's were really kinda boats. the hoods were not the best. but I love it.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#104 ·
07stanggt said:
No yours wont
Click to expand...
OK, most!;)
Damn bro... I would definitely fit in as far as not being able to wait for the new camaros to come out. As far as times at the track... never been. Going to go after i go from this 3.60 pulley to the 3.20 pulley in a few weeks.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#105 ·
BakerFX4 said:
OK, most!;)
Damn bro... I would definitely fit in as far as not being able to wait for the new camaros to come out. As far as times at the track... never been. Going to go after i go from this 3.60 pulley to the 3.20 pulley in a few weeks.
Click to expand...
LOL. You got a nice ride no doubt.
 
#106 ·
07stanggt said:
your on slicks im running on radials. small ones at that. sorry dude lb for lb you cant keep up.

No one in here is new to this? you think i and every other guy here that races doesnt run 2vs on a weekly basis?


But i digress. I'll let you have the internet race.

there are fast 2vs no doubt. But i tell you, i beat a lot of blown 2vs man, i have yet to see one on motor that wasnt a race car keep up.


Point being is not to bash a 2v mustang, i like them like any mustang, but the weight issue is really a non issue.
Click to expand...
i dont doubt you beat blown 2v's, your car is stout. i not trying to cause any type of arguement, just makiing points.

Mickey said:
sweet2kstang, he was comparing his all motor times and trap to your nitrous times and traps...he was better on both

dont compare throwing heads, cams and a-arms on to keep up, you still have NITROUS!
Click to expand...
does 07stanggt not have heads and cams? i not trying to make apples and oranges comparissons, i looked in his garage before i posted it so my point wouldnt be bashed like what you just posted.
 
#107 ·
Its the angled tail lights on the 10 that I dont like. It almost has a Taurus feel to it. Not sure where that comes from, but thats the vibe I get. I love the s197 from tip to tail. Everything about that car is sexy, and as for retro, there isnt a retro style outthere yet that compares to the s197. My brother has a legendary lime 05 gt, and it feels snappier than my Edge when I close my eyes and just feel it. But with all my senses, they feel about the same even though I know his is quicker. Honestly though, I love looking at the s197's almost as much as looking at a well balanced Edge, but I dont like driving his as much as my Edge. And honestly, I could afford to own a s197, but I dont think I could trade off my Edge to get it.

Having said all that, if I was to pick what I wish Ford would have done is close to what they did, but with a few exceptions. They should have had the 3v in the Edges with a 4v option "cobra". Then in 05, went with a 5.4 3v standard gt with a 5.4 4v option. But I am being greedy, because the 10 would suffer in the end. Everyone would be all sorts of dissappointed because the 10 is only producing 540hp stock. And the gt500 would be in the Super Snake land. lol
 
#108 · (Edited)
07GTconvertible said:
OK, seriously, You know there are 3 different fastback styles in that time period, right? (64.5-66, 67-68, 69-70) Are you just generalizing that you like the "good old days" of Mustangs? So for example, if I had to pick, I would choose the 69 fastback, which is quite a bit different than the previous models. Just would think you would have one favorite out of the three different cars is all.
Click to expand...

come on dude, seriously??? Give me some credit. If I didnt know at least the history of my favorite car, I wouldnt even post here. Of course there are 3 diferent styles but I was saying the 60's fastbacks (all of them) look awsome. For the record, the 1969 BOSS 429 is the hotest mustang ever IMO. 1970 FB's even though slightly diferent come in seconed

Image
 
#110 ·
I read this whole thread trying to get worked up for a good argument, but it just ain't happnin'. Oh well.
However, for the weight record, mine weights 3450 with me in (220 lb.s), 1/2 a tank of fuel, and everything in place in the car Plus two full bottles. Hell, I even had the spare and jack in the car when we weighed it.
 
#113 ·
acmillr said:
I read this whole thread trying to get worked up for a good argument, but it just ain't happnin'. Oh well.
However, for the weight record, mine weights 3450 with me in (220 lb.s), 1/2 a tank of fuel, and everything in place in the car Plus two full bottles. Hell, I even had the spare and jack in the car when we weighed it.
Click to expand...
So like we said about ~200 lbs less than the S197s.
 
#114 ·


Intake, Tune, Nitto NT555RII's (racing tire) this was before my shifter (not like it would make a huge difference)

Show me an SN95 do that with those mods. They all talk like they can at my track and then run 14.02 and cant break 13s.

About the 4v 01 cobras and machs, one of my best buds has the N/A 01 cobra, with full bolt ons, and i still have him by maybe by a car or two. you can't hate on the S197s, call them pigs all you want but there still damn fast. He wants to trade for one now haha.

S197 FTW.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #115 ·
SUMMARY:

99-04= 2v, heads don't flow as good, car is lighter, sounds awesome
2005-2009= 3v, heads flow better, car is heavier, still sounds good, responds better to mods, stock vs stock the faster vehicle

This is all I needed to know. I shoulda known it would start an argument. THANKS to everyone who contributed whether by providing good info or by just bashing the opposition!
 
#116 ·
My S197 weighs 3540 with a stereo system in the trunk and no light weight mods at all! My 93 Fox car weighs 3225 with no light weight mods! A guy I work with has a 2v with no light weight mods that weighs 3485! All on the same scale! when did 65lbs difference become heavy! I ran 14.20 at Bristol all 100% stock 3.55s and my friend ran 14.15 in a 2v with CAI & tune LTs Full exhaust & T-body intake spacer UDPs and better clutch. Both of us had 2.0 60ft times and the same 99mph! I added C&L CAI and bama tune UDPs shorty headers BBK T-body and ran 13.25 on street tires @ 104mph! ENOUGH SAID!

I know these times may seem a lil slow to what some of you guys run but Bristol is a slow track! :mad:
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#118 ·
Jakashh said:
how exactly does a 2v sound better than a 3v? i guess i haven't paid attention much...
Click to expand...

Actually that is the one area i agree with the 2v crowd on. You listen to a cammed 2v or even a stock 2v with bassani etc they sound good. I mean, i like the way my car sounds, but thats heads, cams and a 2000 exhuast setup. I think there was a vid of a cammed 2v that acmllr did, your not going to make a 3v sound like that.

QTRHORSE said:
My S197 weighs 3540 with a stereo system in the trunk and no light weight mods at all! My 93 Fox car weighs 3225 with no light weight mods! A guy I work with has a 2v with no light weight mods that weighs 3485! All on the same scale! when did 65lbs difference become heavy! I ran 14.20 at Bristol all 100% stock 3.55s and my friend ran 14.15 in a 2v with CAI & tune LTs Full exhaust & T-body intake spacer UDPs and better clutch. Both of us had 2.0 60ft times and the same 99mph! I added C&L CAI and bama tune UDPs shorty headers BBK T-body and ran 13.25 on street tires @ 104mph! ENOUGH SAID!

I know these times may seem a lil slow to what some of you guys run but Bristol is a slow track! :mad:
Click to expand...

LOL. Enough said.
 
101 - 120 of 203 Posts
About this Discussion
202 Replies
48 Participants
Last post:
Mr.Stang08
Modded Mustang Forums
posts
6.3M
members
83K
Since
2005
A forum community dedicated to all Ford Mustang owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, racing, builds, modifications, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
96 - 04 Modular Mustangs 5.0 Mustangs New Members Introductions Classic Mustangs