2011 Mustang

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Also, the company itself states the V6 can beat an older V8.
[/quote]

Yes, an older V8. This is not in dispute (again, go read my earlier post).

Also:

“We might have found our minds wandering on the speed-limited straights, but the Mustang had no problem holding our attention in the corners.”

“V6 Performance Package” v “V8 GT”.

Again, all things being equal…[/quote]

LOL. I got the V6 because it got better gas mileage and beat the freaking V8 from LAST YEAR.

Let’s say that again…MY FASTER CAR USES LESS GAS.

Oh my gawd what a bad decision.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Let’s say that again…MY FASTER CAR USES LESS GAS.

[/quote]

Hippie!

With all things being equal, a 2011 Mustang V6 will not beat a 2005-2009 Mustang GT. Yes the 2011 V6 has 305 crank hp or 265-275 rwhp compared to the 2005-2009 mustang gt’s 300 hp or 260-270 rwhp, but the other factor is torque. The 2011 V6 has 280 lLB feet of tq but the 2005-2009 has 315.

Ceteris Paribus. Got to go with steely here. Apples to Apples.

[quote]gmantheman wrote:
With all things being equal, a 2011 Mustang V6 will not beat a 2005-2009 Mustang GT. Yes the 2011 V6 has 305 crank hp or 265-275 rwhp compared to the 2005-2009 mustang gt’s 300 hp or 260-270 rwhp, but the other factor is torque. The 2011 V6 has 280 lLB feet of tq but the 2005-2009 has 315.[/quote]

So the company is lying?..and the videos?

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Let’s say that again…MY FASTER CAR USES LESS GAS.

[/quote]

Hippie![/quote]

Whatever, dude. I enjoy how fast my car can go while only filling it twice a week.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]gmantheman wrote:
With all things being equal, a 2011 Mustang V6 will not beat a 2005-2009 Mustang GT. Yes the 2011 V6 has 305 crank hp or 265-275 rwhp compared to the 2005-2009 mustang gt’s 300 hp or 260-270 rwhp, but the other factor is torque. The 2011 V6 has 280 lLB feet of tq but the 2005-2009 has 315.[/quote]

So the company is lying?..and the videos?[/quote]

But does the 2011 V6 beat the 2011 V8 (same package)?

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]gmantheman wrote:
With all things being equal, a 2011 Mustang V6 will not beat a 2005-2009 Mustang GT. Yes the 2011 V6 has 305 crank hp or 265-275 rwhp compared to the 2005-2009 mustang gt’s 300 hp or 260-270 rwhp, but the other factor is torque. The 2011 V6 has 280 lLB feet of tq but the 2005-2009 has 315.[/quote]

So the company is lying?..and the videos?[/quote]

But does the 2011 V6 beat the 2011 V8 (same package)?
[/quote]

No. But it uses about 8mpg less gas or more everyday.

I haven;t seen the times but I know they were close…which means this year, because of the upgrades, you would largely just be paying for a name unless you raced your car on tracks.

This is freaking Houston, Tx. I barely get to open it up at all ever just to see what it can do…but when I have, trust me, you definitely don’t feel like it is a “v6”.

Just being real. This is the first car that made me smile while driving it just because of the feel.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Let’s say that again…MY FASTER CAR USES LESS GAS.

[/quote]

Hippie![/quote]

Whatever, dude. I enjoy how fast my car can go while only filling it twice a week.

[/quote]

HA!! No doubt man, your car does rock (even if it has a small package) :wink:

It’s good I’m driving it then. Our packages balance out.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

This is freaking Houston, Tx. I barely get to open it up at all ever just to see what it can do…but when I have, trust me, you definitely don’t feel like it is a “v6”.

Just being real. This is the first car that made me smile while driving it just because of the feel.[/quote]

I’ve driven the 2011 V6. It’s a wonderful car. I’m happy that I fit in it.

It shocked me too…but it had more room than the camarro. That was another reason I got it.

With the seat laid and pushed back, I lay out completely with legs stretched out in it. I couldn’t do that in a jeep. If I were taller than 5’11" I am sure I wouldn’t be able to though.

QWhat I do hate are the leather seat backs…because they curve in like race seats. This does NOT feel good for someone with a wide back.

I had to buy a cover for the seat that flattened the back out just so I can relax on it.

Without it, my lats won’t let me lay back.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It shocked me too…but it had more room than the camarro. That was another reason I got it.
[/quote]

The other thing was the Camaro was nothing but one big blind spot. You’re supposed to be able to see the cars you’re passing. Maybe that was subliminal on the designer’s part thinking that they would never be out in front of anyone.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It shocked me too…but it had more room than the camarro. That was another reason I got it.
[/quote]

The other thing was the Camaro was nothing but one big blind spot. You’re supposed to be able to see the cars you’re passing. Maybe that was subliminal on the designer’s part thinking that they would never be out in front of anyone.[/quote]

Bingo. I spent weeks deciding between the two, but one HUGE negative was the fact that the Camaro feels like driving a tank with bad vision.

You can not see what is around you. I can see around my whole car in the mustang.

The front window is also smaller and it has little to no head room. You couldn’t wear a hat in a Camaro.

the Camaro steering wheel sucks too.

[quote]Marzouk wrote:
I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again.

There is a replacement for displacement. It’s called brains and technology.

400bhp from a 5.0 V8 is inefficient as hell.

2012 Nissan GTR makes any american muscle car look like an 8 yr old boy in a tutu. [/quote]

thats kinda BS considering it costs 4x more then most american muscle cars… i can afford a 25/30k car, a 80+k car i can not afford…

thats like comparing an SS camaro to a fiat 500… only they are closer in price…

[quote]Ratchet wrote:

[quote]Marzouk wrote:
I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again.

There is a replacement for displacement. It’s called brains and technology.

400bhp from a 5.0 V8 is inefficient as hell.

2012 Nissan GTR makes any american muscle car look like an 8 yr old boy in a tutu. [/quote]

thats kinda BS considering it costs 4x more then most american muscle cars… i can afford a 25/30k car, a 80+k car i can not afford…

thats like comparing an SS camaro to a fiat 500… only they are closer in price…[/quote]
]

Good point about the price, but i was talking about the engine. Yeah the nissan is more expensive.

I’m just trying to say that they could easily tune/engineer a 3.0 v6 to have 400 - 500 bhp, without much effort.

These ‘muscle cars’ are the equivalent of Prof X with his 20’'+ arms only being able to curl 10lb dumb bells.

Don’t get me wrong, i’d buy a Camaro/Mustang/Challenger in a heart beat. For 30k u pretty much can’t beat it. For that you couldn’t even buy a low low low German car.

[quote]PimpBot5000 wrote:

As a guy who knows dick-all about cars, how have Mustangs historically held up in regards to longevity? (assuming regular maintenance and care)

[/quote]

My Mustang’s 45 years old and is still great, although I don’t drive it daily anymore. It’s needed some work, but I suppose that’s to be expected.

I see many from the 70’s still on the road…but most of the ones I see are late 90’s and early 00’s. I do not see many 2008 models or later driving around.

In general. they seem to hold up if you take care of them.

I try to always get my oil changed on time…and I tend to take more care with my driving now…mostly because this is my first car that no one else owned before…so anything that fucks it up is definitely my fault…

Now, to the OP…

Back on track here, the only way to know what you want is to go drive everything… tell the salesman you want to drive all of the stuff out there before you talk price, they will understand…

I personally would stay away from all dodge/chrystler cars cause they are made like crap and that is a proven fact… other then that, you really cant go wrong… also consider nissian 370z, or a mazda miata if you want to try something different but similiar… totyota really has nothing sporty anymore, honda has the CRZ but thats way off from a muscle car, the 370 and miata are a lot of fun…

Im finally getting rid of my 1999 camaro but i need better milliage some im buying an insight and using the gas savings to buy an H2…

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I see many from the 70’s still on the road…but most of the ones I see are late 90’s and early 00’s. I do not see many 2008 models or later driving around.

In general. they seem to hold up if you take care of them.

I try to always get my oil changed on time…and I tend to take more care with my driving now…mostly because this is my first car that no one else owned before…so anything that fucks it up is definitely my fault…[/quote]

if you really wana help your car live long, use Royal Purple motor oil (its pricy, but its what most nascars run)… also, i like K&N filters as they are the best… also, dont wait 100k miles to change the spark plugs, they will be corroded into the block and break off… instead, change every 50-70k miles and when you do, put on new wires… dont be a cheap bastard… Ive done that with my camaro and I’ll be rolling 200k before spring…