Mustang GTR/GT 0-60 Times

[Niko_Fx]

R & T claimed a 0-60 time of 4.9 to the new 300HP Mustang GT and a 0-60 time of 5.0 to the 440HP Mustang GTR...

Am I missing something here? A magazine mistake? An idiot behind the wheel?

[d-quik]

weak!

[my porsche]

did you read the new 6 mustang test think niko? it was 4.9 and 5.0, the 1/4 was also slower in the gt-r, braking was worse, the only thing better was the slolam speed

[Niko_Fx]

did you read the new 6 mustang test think niko? it was 4.9 and 5.0, the 1/4 was also slower in the gt-r, braking was worse, the only thing better was the slolam speed

Exactly... 4.9 for the GT and 5.0 for the GTR, how come?

[my porsche]

not sure, there is 140 more hp, a load more torque, better suspension, maybe it just handles much better, still not worthy of the 40k ish pricetag

can you believe a racing mustang is 125k??!?!?!

[CdocZ]

That was an awesome test. Must be an idiot behind the wheel.......or a typo. Otherwise, that is really wierd.

[ScionDriver]

Write to them, you will either get it printed or since you'll be one of hundreds of people writing in, they might send you some free stuff.

[my porsche]

i was actually thinking of writing to tgemm hold on i will email

[Niko_Fx]

not sure, there is 140 more hp, a load more torque

According to the magazine the GTR is about 200Lbs heavier than the GT... But still that doesn't justify anything, power to weight ratios favor the GTR.

Also, how can the racing version be heavier? WTH is going on?

[Sweeney921]

Also, how can the racing version be heavier? WTH is going on?

Probably because of all the extra bits that make it look faster, but sometimes add too much weight, like:
massive rear spoiler
rollcage
chrome
aesthetic extras

Oh, and can't forget that super heavy engine

[Bob]

maybe gearing... the racing version could be sety up for a higher top speed, thus lower accel, but its should definitely be lighter than street version thats just messed up

[Niko_Fx]

maybe gearing... the racing version could be sety up for a higher top speed, thus lower accel

I thought about that... But still doesn't make much sense, specially with the HP difference... And the GT got better times in the 1/4 mile as well.

Probably because of all the extra bits that make it look faster, but sometimes add too much weight, like:
massive rear spoiler
rollcage
chrome
aesthetic extras

Oh, and can't forget that super heavy engine

The engine is the same N/A engine as far as I know... And the interior seems to be as simple as possible to "lose" weight.

[my porsche]

Dear Road and Track,

Usually your magazine is the most accurate and consistant when it comes to the numbers side of an article. But I must say I was rather confused when I read the article on the Mustangs. The GT-R concept is heavier, slower in 0-60 (5.0 for the GT-R and 4.9 for the normal GT), slower by 0.1 of a second in the quarter mile, braking takes longer, but yet it has 140 more horse power, and much more torque. The only advantage I see from the numbers is that the slalom speed is quite a bit higher. From what I understand it’s not really justified for the pricetag, and that doesn’t even include an engine! For the same price I could get a nice Competition Package M3. Am I missing something, or is this car purely set up for racing, and it gets its pace higher in the RPM range? Or is it just a simple misprint? I’m sure your answer will clarify this for myself, and quite a number of other car enthusiasts as well.

Sincerely,
Colin ******"

thats what i am sending, it will be in the mail tommrowo

[my porsche]

The engine is the same N/A engine as far as I know... And the interior seems to be as simple as possible to "lose" weight.

the engine is a $14,995 5.0 litre cammer engine, it has only been bored out alittle bit, so its not the engine, cuz that is based on the 4.6l as found in the regular gt

[my porsche]

i changed a few thingschanges bolded)
Dear Road and Track,

Usually your magazine is the most accurate and consistant when it comes to the numbers side of an article. But I must say I was rather confused when I read the article on the Mustangs. The GT-R concept is heavier, slower in 0-60 (5.0 for the GT-R and 4.9 for the normal GT), slower by 0.1 of a second in the quarter mile, braking takes longer, but yet it has 140 more horse power, and much more torque. The only advantage I see from the numbers is that the slalom speed is quite a bit higher. From what I understand it’s not really justified for the pricetag of $175,000 (Was that so high because it’s a concept?), and that doesn’t even include an engine! For the same price I could get a nice M3 CSL imported, legalized, and race prepared. Am I missing something, or is this car purely set up for racing, and it gets its pace higher in the RPM range? Or is it just a simple misprint? I’m sure there is some logic behind it, as Ford has a great racing history, and far more knowledge than I do, but as of now, im a bit puzzled to their logic. I’m sure your answer will clarify this for myself, and quite a number of other car enthusiasts as well.

Sincerely,
Colin Latham