[newmoon]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

To start, you're comparing cars that were almost 5 years apart. Secondly, it's hilarious you bring up the 2012 Boss....because the guys at MT couldn't get the 2016 GT PP to even come close to 12.3....despite the car having roughly the same power/more torque

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/chevr...rd-mustang-gt/

But hey, they got the Camaro SS to the 12.4

My response was to Blaq, about Ford being 3-yrs late to the 12:30s-12:40s party with the 18-GT. Ford actually was there in 2012, although in an Boss version of the 5.0.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by islander033

Still freaking out? wow and lol

Yea...we really are freaking out.

I love it when a troll can't get his way so he starts saying random things like "oh you're mad" or "you guys are freaking out" and then just keeps repeating it and repeating it as if he's hoping it'll catch on or something. Meanwhile the GT is 3 years late, still a POS, can't corner for shit, costs more, has less options, and you have to order a specific one and hope for the very best conditions and pro-driver-level skills in December to pull it off. I'd be more freaked out that it'll snap a driveshaft and lose control and barrel into me than I would be about it being fast.

Originally Posted by newmoon

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So Chevy was finally able to get an auto equipped SS to run 12:30s, and a manual equipped version to run 12:40s in MT 2016 reveiw. MT got the manual Boss 5.0 to run 12:30s in 2012. Granted it is the Boss version but it is still a 5.0 with no torque

Talking GT vs SS. I've said many times that I have no problem with the higher up models like the Boss, GT500, Termi Cobras, Mach 1s. I'm talking about the GT.

Originally Posted by newmoon

My response was to Blaq, about Ford being 3-yrs late to the 12:30s-12:40s party with the 18-GT. Ford actually was there in 2012, although in an Boss version of the 5.0.

Plus if you wanna bring up the Boss then we had the ZL1 and Z28 both of which were low 12 sec cars. But again, I was talking about the GT. It is 3 MYs late to the party...like graduating from high school at 21.

[TEEZYSS]

Originally Posted by newmoon

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So Chevy was finally able to get an auto equipped SS to run 12:30s, and a manual equipped version to run 12:40s in MT 2016 reveiw. MT got the manual Boss 5.0 to run 12:30s in 2012. Granted it is the Boss version but it is still a 5.0 with no torque

ok riddle me this....

We want to compare the 2018 GT to the 2 year older 6th gen.... and that's ok.....by mustang owners standards

But its not ok to compare the 2015-2017 GT to the 2016-17 6th gen because we have more cubes. Even though they were out the same years.

Now its ok to compare the 2012 BOSS which by the way never ran 11's on stock street tires even though it had a Boss intake, better cams and head along with more compression and was tuned for the added parts by Ford vs the 6th gen. But by mustang standards that's ok

Hell ford didn't even call it a coyote because of the changes it was called a Roadrunner. But lets compare away!!!!

I guess there is no shock here..... I mean FBO coyotes compare to stock 6th gen all the time.

We are "SCARED AND FREAKING OUT" because we call BS on something's that have to do with the 2018 GT times. Like a stock car running 2-6 tenths faster on street tires then what most of the shop cars are getting on drag radials. Trapping 2 mph more in the 1/8 then any other stock car and 1 mph less then lunds tuned car. But I guess the driver was hitting the paddle shifter harder then everyone else because his 60ft was damn near the same.


Its comical to read what is being said on M6G...

[FastCarFanBoy]

In this thread... A bunch of guys who have little understanding of the variables that affect how similar cars run on a racetrack and a few guys who should fully understand but appear to be playing dumb.

[TEEZYSS]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

In this thread... A bunch of guys who have little understanding of the variables that affect how similar cars run on a racetrack and a few guys who should fully understand but appear to be playing dumb.

its the coyote way or no way lol

[Zodiac]

Originally Posted by TEEZYSS

I love internet pros.

This thread is full of them.

[ULTRAZLS1]

http://www.mustangandfords.com/how-t...18-mustang-gt/

The article

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

http://www.mustangandfords.com/how-t...18-mustang-gt/

The article

Every single pass was an 11.XXX run...and the quickest was in positive DA.

[SpeedIsLife]

The only way they could have gotten a faster time beyond that, while staying showroom stock, would have been running a base GTPP A10, which would likely be a bit lighter in weight, but not by much.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Every single pass was an 11.XXX run...and the quickest was in positive DA.

I would hope so. it was a track rental with evan smith in good air.

maybe in a little better air they can rent him another track and go for the Camaro 11.77 time

ford sure didn't do enough to make ir hard for GM next year. Which really shows how high the 6gen put the bar. how far ahead of the game GM is. a completely new motor and transmission is struggling to overtake GMs 4 year old combo. They could trounce the GT with a power bump and the ten speed. But im not holding my breath on a power bump.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I would hope so. it was a track rental with evan smith

thanks I can read

Again with the track rental caveot. ROFLMAO.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

The only way they could have gotten a faster time beyond that, while staying showroom stock, would have been running a base GTPP A10, which would likely be a bit lighter in weight, but not by much.

They could have had -1500 DA. Sounds like his fastest run was closer to 400.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Again with the track rental caveot. ROFLMAO.

facts bother you?

[SpeedIsLife]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

They could have had -1500 DA. Sounds like his fastest run was closer to 400.

I meant in those conditions.