interesting little race...from about 25 to 95....we both pulled out at the same time from a light...he pulls out and kinda accelerate at a medium pace...I start to do the same to get up next to him....he hears me coming (injen intake)...and stands on it...I let off a bit to even us up a little, and then gun it...dead even thru 2nd, but when I hit third (and chirped the tires)...I started walking him...had a length and a half at 90 or so when I bailed out...he goes by me all ****ed off...haha...I do love the new max...from a stop he would have pulled me a little, but I woulda caught him by the end of a 1/4 mile...anyone else toast a mustang guy? Id love to have one (new mustang), but what is it with the guys who drive the stock ones...TOOLS!

 

Non-Cobra Mustangs are a for girls. All show no go.

 

5.4 0-60 stock! That's not for girls.

 

Show me a Mustang that does 5.4. C&D says 6.3 for the V8 GT, and they aren't that bad of a driver. Your everyday run of the mill Mustang (V6 or V8) is a kitten. You need a Cobra SVT for some roar.

 

C&D are HORRIBLE drivers - they don't even power shift! Check Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords or 5.0 magazines.... they'll tell you the true 0-60.
Mustangs, however, have the same problem we do - the engine is wasted unless its a stick.

-Brian

 

I think this is a true statement for all cars.

 

Yes, this is very very true.

-Brian
"will never drive automatic"

 

I think I'll stay out of this one......(bites tongue)

 

That banner is killing me!

 

Dave - that is definitely a sweet stang... have you ever been to MustangWorld.com? Its very similar to this site.

Just curious what you run off the juice.

-Brian

p.s. don't bite your tongue - you probably know more about what the word "fast" means than most.

 

Stock GT stangs are known to do 13.9's stock on occasion. But that's with launching out of the hole with a 1.9 - 2.0 60. On a role it's whole nother ball game

 

Your banner makes me laugh. A lot. It may be the funniest thing I've ever seen.

 

My car has run 14.008@97 in pure street trim, and 13.67@100 with slicks and skinnies. And the 1999+ cars are a whole lot quicker, get me in one and you'll never even see yourself in the mirrors. I ran 13.68@103 in my buddy's 2k1 with just an x-pipe, That's stout. But if you can't drive, even the fastest car can fall victim. Just don't act like you out powered the Stang, that would be a negligent statement on your part Out drove him, prolly, out powered him, prolly not. The new Stangs repeadedly trap in the 99+ range out of the box. As opposed to the Maxima's that trap regularly in the 95-96 range stock. But it can happen, I raced my friend in his 2k2 Max, vs my Mustang, I spun off the line, he hooked and pulled 1 car on me and it stayed that way all the way to 140.

 

I even got a pic of the speedo, we were heading to the track that nite, so I had my digi cam handy That was in 5th gear with the 3.55's I just took out last weekend.

 

I was at the track last week. I was surprised to see both 5.0's and newer GT's running in the high 14's and mid 15's. Of course there were a few that had mods and running slicks that were faster.
As for how they stack up against the Maxima, I'd pick the Maxima any day of the week. For ride, comfort, safety,reliability, and resale value. The FORD might be a little faster (depending on the driver), however it's still a FORD. They suck. Has Ford ever made a vehicle that hasn't been recalled less than 3 times?

 

I forgot to mention... the other day I was driving home from work. I pulled up to a yellow 6 cylinder stang with the sports package. This car was definately "Latino Engineered". Curb feelers, shiney mag wheels, KLOK radio station sticker, and flea market music blasting. What really made me laugh was the cobra emblem glued to the fender. I didn't know they made single exhaust cobras.
I had a friend in highschool that had a '94 prelude. He stole a 2.0 emblem and glued on to his trunk. Moron!

 

It was automatic car you raced. Ford's automatics are kind of like Nissan's (they suck)(at least when compared with the manuals) and the GTs with autos are significantly slower than the manual ones. The auto GTs only run mid to high 14s, which is fairly easily beatable by you. The manual GTs run 13.8-14.1 stock trim. If it was a manual car then the guy didnt know how to drive, or he missed ALL his shifts . So I agree with the mustang guy above, even though I own a Z28

Andy

 

Actually, I'd have to give the Maxima's auto tranny props for closing the gap between itself and the 6 speed. Less than a half a second in the quarter isn't bad.

 

Here's a link to car-stats.com for a 2001 GT

http://www.car-stats.com/stats/shows...tsgivenid.aspx

 

I traded a 1999 5-speed GT for my 2002 6-speed Maxima. The Mustang was faster, period. And for those who believe the Max has the advantage from a rolling start, it doesn't. Rolling starts give the advantage to the car with the most torque (given similar weights and gearing). The reason is--it takes less time to spin the engine to peak power when it's doing so with more torque. Car mags created the 5-60 mph test just so the high-torque American cars would have something they could show off. With 302 flt lbs of torque, it doesn't much matter what gear you're in, you get right now acceleration.

Conclusion: you raced an automatic or an unskilled manual driver.

 

 

or a 96 - 98

 

If you want to quote the magazines for their 0-60 and 1/4 mile times then you need to quote one for your own car as well. Sure, MT got a 2002 Mustang GT to do 1/4 mi in 14.7 seconds which is the same as they got out of a 2002 Altima. We all know dang well that the Maxima and Altima arecapable of running low 14's stock. Well guess what, the stock GTs are capable of low 14's as well and in some rare occasions high 13's.
The 2002 GT and 2002 Max are near identicle in straight line (street) performance. The person who wins that race is probably a better driver.

 

I raced older body shape 5.0 GT a while back and pulled on him pretty good.
It was a rolling race, from like 50mph, I dropped it into 3rd and he was history.

The driver was all mad and stuff after he caugth up to me. He had some work done to the car too, at least it sounded loud.

 

I didn't say the Max was a faster car. What I was getting at was that it's pretty weak for a V8. I would never consider going against an f-body V8, but I wouldn't bat an eye for a Mustang GT. I agree, it's a driver's race.

 

your service engine light is on..

 

My friend has a completely stock 99 GT. I can pull him on the highway from 60-100, but in the 1/4 he kills me.

Last time we were at the track he ran 14.0's and 14.1's at 99+ mph. The best I can muster is in my sig.

From a stop with a similar drivers the mustang will win. I have seen totally stock 99+ GT's in the high 13's.

Actually, I think 4 door family sedans are for girls.......


--Ray

 

Well if you can pull on him in 2000 5-speed, I can asure you that I can pull even more on him in my 2002 6-speed.

 

Not saying you can't, just saying that a stock 2002 6 speed will lose in the 1/4 with similar drivers.

Has anyone raced a 2000/2001 5 speed against a 2002 6 speed from a highway roll? I would be interested in the results.

Does the 2k2 dyno more hp at the upper rpms than a 2000? (6000 rpms+)

--Ray

 

I never raced a 2000 5-speed in my 2002 Maxima, but after having 2000 5-speed for 2 years and now driving 2002 6-speed, there is no way 2000 5-speed will be even close to 2002 6-speed.

 

is that the "Check Engine" light? j/k

 

A healthy VQ35 makes it's peak power @6k or above. I am pretty sure a VQ35 makes more HP than a VQ30 (With VI) at every RPM.

 

It does make more power, BUT it's also hauling about 250-300lbs more weight.


Dave

 

A good point but thats not what he asked. He specifically asked "Has anyone raced a 2000/2001 5 speed against a 2002 6 speed from a highway roll? ". The context of the question is in reguards to a VQ30DE-K. There is no real weight difference between a 2000, 2001 or 2002. The A33 is listed as being about 200+ heavier than the A32 yes but the A33's weigh the same.

 

Yes it is the check engine light, I have no cats, and it trips every so often.

 

All show No go Huh. Check out these numbers for V6 Mustangs. I Have a V6 Auto Mustang with a few mods (CAI, Underdives, 3:45 rearend, timing advance) that out ran my stock 2K Max auto also.

http://www.v6power.net/timeslips/times.htm

 

okay...mustang with mods against a stock 2k auto...that's not really fair is it?

 

lol...every time I read about Mustangs getting their A&&es kicked I LMAO...The Current Stock Mustang GTs have 260 HP and a lot more torque than the current Maximas...better 60 ft time is about it thought b/c the Max has the Variable Intake (like the famous Gen I and Gen II SHO), so through a quarter mile a 2002 6 SPD or ATX will be a Great race for either a 5 Spd or Auto Mustang GT...it would come down to driver skill throught the quarter mile and then all the way up to top speed the Max would progressively kill the Mustang especialy if it were an ungoverned SE 6 Spd. This is only applicable to a Stock GT though.

 

Correction...Only the Bone Stock 87-88 5.0 LX Notchback (which weighed less than the 5.0 LX Hatchback) ever ran under a 14.0 and the trap speed was only in the high 90 mph range. The 60 ft times sound about right. FYI...I joke with CE RACING (Bob does all the work on my Mustang...His 2000 GT runs 7.60 @ 183.00 MPH) that my wife's 02 SE ATX would have killed my GT 5 Spd back in the day if all things were equal. A stock Mustang GT 87-98 only ran mid to high 14s...some of the later years and all of the convertibles ran in the 15's. Some Cobra convertibles are only in the very high 14's...so the Max is damn Fast, and technology is something it has on its side.

 

My 89 Lx sedan ran 14.85 stock with an auto. I droped a Tremec T5 and ran 14.1 with a Mac catback and an H pipe . After some TFS ported heads, 4.10 gears and an E 303 cam, I hit 12's..NA. Yes I left out some mods, which I will not disclose... ....