Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Asian Imports
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-02-2005, 11:48 PM   #16
Bino
Written Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, Oregon, USA
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by fudge
But isn't a V6 lighter and shorter engine?

Yeah, and a 4cyl is lighter yet... what's your point?
__________________
Build 'em Light and Wind 'em Tight.
Bino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2005, 11:51 PM   #17
Bino
Written Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, Oregon, USA
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by VG30DE
I agree with the WRX Launch, GT win, but hard AWD launches are gonna kill Subaru drivetrains and I'm not talkin about just clutches. Mustangs are made to drag race and you can throw dime a dozen beefy rear ends into them. I'd take my Subaru with the front wheels disconnected if I could. Ahhh the beauty of 2 wheel drive .

Who are you freakin' kidding. A Mustang is sure as hell not "made to drag race", I mean seriously, Mustangs are made to drive secretary's back and forth to work. "Made to drag race"... I'll be chewing on that all day... the ignorance of todays youth is appalling.
__________________
Build 'em Light and Wind 'em Tight.
Bino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2005, 11:58 PM   #18
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
The problem continues to be that you're assuming the non V8 Mustang is supposed to be a performance flagship, instead of a sporty, but much more insurance friendly version of the car for those people who simply don't NEED a race car.

and... Blah blah blah, we've gone through this, what you assume what I assume is wrong, simple as that. We're going nowhere with this, give it up.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 12:27 AM   #19
72firebird
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bino
Who are you freakin' kidding. A Mustang is sure as hell not "made to drag race", I mean seriously, Mustangs are made to drive secretary's back and forth to work. "Made to drag race"... I'll be chewing on that all day... the ignorance of todays youth is appalling.

what he should have said was mustangs are more suited for drag racing. but thats true compared to any rwd car to a fwd car. fwd cars arent as well suited for it. (not saying they cant do it) they just have a harder time hooking up traction for some reason. awd is quick on launches and accelaration especialy if the front and back have a good ratio of bite (50/50 or 40/60) its just its not as easy on their components. whereas cars like the mustang (like someone said) have dime a dozen rear ends that you can put in them to handle more load and torque. take a fwd drag car and a rwd drag car. put the same engines and same gears in them and the rwd car for some reason will stomp all over it all day. but then again fwd is way better in the turns
72firebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 01:29 AM   #20
Bino
Written Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, Oregon, USA
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72firebird
what he should have said was mustangs are more suited for drag racing. but thats true compared to any rwd car to a fwd car. fwd cars arent as well suited for it. (not saying they cant do it) they just have a harder time hooking up traction for some reason. awd is quick on launches and accelaration especialy if the front and back have a good ratio of bite (50/50 or 40/60) its just its not as easy on their components. whereas cars like the mustang (like someone said) have dime a dozen rear ends that you can put in them to handle more load and torque. take a fwd drag car and a rwd drag car. put the same engines and same gears in them and the rwd car for some reason will stomp all over it all day. but then again fwd is way better in the turns

So... when did the WRX become FWD? As I recall we were talking about AWD versus RWD, which basically negates nearly all of your logic. Your AWD logic is correct but in no way supports your overall argument.
__________________
Build 'em Light and Wind 'em Tight.

Last edited by Bino : 08-03-2005 at 01:43 AM.
Bino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 04:19 AM   #21
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
and... Blah blah blah, we've gone through this, what you assume what I assume is wrong, simple as that. We're going nowhere with this, give it up.

There's no assumption when you state it outright. You don't like the V6 because it doesn't offer enough performance. You said so. it's not MEANT for performance, therefore your criticism of it misses the point of the car. Period.

Every insult you fling at the car proves you are incapable of GETTING the point.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 04:40 AM   #22
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72firebird
fwd cars arent as well suited for it. (not saying they cant do it) they just have a harder time hooking up traction for some reason.
Because, when you accelerate, the weight shifts back in the car (just like you get pushed back in the seat). This means that there is more weight over the rear wheels. Traction is directly proportional to the amount of weight on the wheels, so in a rwd, the traction to the drive wheels is increased during acceleration, but in fwd, the traction to the drive wheels is decreased.
__________________
You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 08:51 AM   #23
VG30DE
CF Enthusiast
 
VG30DE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bino
Who are you freakin' kidding. A Mustang is sure as hell not "made to drag race", I mean seriously, Mustangs are made to drive secretary's back and forth to work. "Made to drag race"... I'll be chewing on that all day... the ignorance of todays youth is appalling.

(In General) Mustangs are cheap, they make big power cheap, and the parts are cheap (all comparitively). If Ford wanted them to handle, they would've done independent suspension in the rear, but they haven't except for special models. Yes most of that is a cost issue but the fact remains that a solid rear axle in the straight line is a traction getter. Send the power back there from a V8 that can be pushed to 400,500, or possibly 600+ hp with one of the cheapest hp/$ ratios I can think of (besides the Small Block Chevy). Yes this doesn't mean they are "meant" to drag race. Funny cars are "meant" to drag race, but as a production car in the used car arena, I can't think of a much better deal. And if I'm an ignorant youth, then please post me wrong.
VG30DE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 01:55 PM   #24
fudge
let's fighting love
 
fudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bino
Yeah, and a 4cyl is lighter yet... what's your point?

That lighter cars have an advantage.
fudge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 03:45 PM   #25
Bino
Written Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, Oregon, USA
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by fudge
That lighter cars have an advantage.

You're right, I expect the next Z06 Corvette to ditch the LS7 427 at the last minute and go with an all aluminum 4cyl so it can improve performance...
__________________
Build 'em Light and Wind 'em Tight.
Bino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 03:51 PM   #26
Bino
Written Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, Oregon, USA
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by VG30DE
(In General) Mustangs are cheap, they make big power cheap, and the parts are cheap (all comparitively). If Ford wanted them to handle, they would've done independent suspension in the rear, but they haven't except for special models. Yes most of that is a cost issue but the fact remains that a solid rear axle in the straight line is a traction getter. Send the power back there from a V8 that can be pushed to 400,500, or possibly 600+ hp with one of the cheapest hp/$ ratios I can think of (besides the Small Block Chevy). Yes this doesn't mean they are "meant" to drag race. Funny cars are "meant" to drag race, but as a production car in the used car arena, I can't think of a much better deal. And if I'm an ignorant youth, then please post me wrong.

By the time you get 400-600hp out of a Mustang you're talkin' serious $$$ you'd be WAY better off going with a Camaro at that point (because of the point you made about part prices). A buddy of mine is putting a Cobra 5.0 motor in his 66.5 Mustang, he regularly makes comments about how this project would cost him half as much if it were a SBC.

I still don't agree, the WRX would probably be hella expensive to do that with. But there are hundreds of people making in excess of 400, 500, and 600hp with their 4G63, it's just a built motor and the correct turbo away.

I will not deny that the Mustang is better suited for a straight line than it is for the corners... I just didn't care for the "meant for drag racing" part.
__________________
Build 'em Light and Wind 'em Tight.
Bino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 04:23 PM   #27
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bino
Who are you freakin' kidding. A Mustang is sure as hell not "made to drag race", I mean seriously, Mustangs are made to drive secretary's back and forth to work. "Made to drag race"... I'll be chewing on that all day... the ignorance of todays youth is appalling.


Actually, that's one of the reasons the live axle was retained. Ford knows the popularity of the Mustang GT centers around it's drag race prowess these days, and they know what the aftermarket does with them.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 04:25 PM   #28
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
Because, when you accelerate, the weight shifts back in the car (just like you get pushed back in the seat). This means that there is more weight over the rear wheels. Traction is directly proportional to the amount of weight on the wheels, so in a rwd, the traction to the drive wheels is increased during acceleration, but in fwd, the traction to the drive wheels is decreased.

Unless you do with the chassis the same thing you do to keep a car from leaning in the curves. It's called weight transfer management. Swaybars take and force the weight to transfer back to the inside when cornering, instead of letting the weight transfer all to the outside of the corner. So do stiffer springs. So on FWD drag cars, the suspension is set up to transfer weight back forward under load, much the same way, using springs and shocks.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 04:29 PM   #29
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bino
By the time you get 400-600hp out of a Mustang you're talkin' serious $$$ you'd be WAY better off going with a Camaro at that point (because of the point you made about part prices). A buddy of mine is putting a Cobra 5.0 motor in his 66.5 Mustang, he regularly makes comments about how this project would cost him half as much if it were a SBC..

Actually, those of us doing engine swaps have found that Ford motors are generally cheaper to do swaps with. And there's a reason the Mustang continued when the Camaro didn't: it was cheaper to make the Mustang quick, with 9-10 second street daily driver mustangs being cheap and easy to build. Some chevy engine parts are cheaper, but as an overall package, it's cheaper to go quick with a Mustang.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2005, 04:37 PM   #30
fudge
let's fighting love
 
fudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bino
You're right, I expect the next Z06 Corvette to ditch the LS7 427 at the last minute and go with an all aluminum 4cyl so it can improve performance...
Somehow I don't think that would be a smart move to improve sales though.
fudge is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.