doopstr

The 5.0 is Apple Magical.
Does it come with a Vanilla Ice mp3?

Rick_TL-S

Good point, but that seems to be a shared view amongst any car.

Going to go look at a GT tomorrow, just to wet my mouth. If possible, maybe a test drive.

SouthernBoy

You're fine. A surprising number of people think that higher numbered final drive ratios equate to "higher", or taller, gears.

Costco

Thanks for clarifying Terry, I wasn't absolutely sure of the development on the 5.0 but I was just using hearsay from a couple Mustang forums that I've read. I knew for sure that there was extensive headwork though, hell, people were saying that the Coyote heads flowed better than the GT500 heads (again, don't quote me on that )



Just because it has a live rear axle doesn't mean it handles like your grandpa's pickup. The only real disadvantage I see with a solid rear in the Mustang is ride comfort, but only over uneven pavement. It's also so nice to kick the rear end out on a solid axle car... relatively more forgiving vs. IRS. Replace that panhard rod with a Watt's Link and the car will rotate very, very well.

Another downside of a solid rear compared to IRS is higher unsprung weight, but in the end there is lower overall weight. You can put slicks on an M3 but it will probably snap an axle.... but then again a drag race is not its forte. The 5.0 on the other hand will probably take 4,000 RPM clutch dumps on slicks all day long and not voice a single complaint.

Westy6

Pics I took at the NY Auto Show of the new 5.0. Not sure if they'll help any, but eye candy is always good right ?

Gs Dewd

The new 5.0 looks to be killer. I may even have to check one out for myself.

2K2SilverTL-S

I use the term "entry level" loosely as there are no muscle cars that exist below the mustang/camaro/challenger. The "premium" american muscle cars are the Viper/Corvette (GS/Z06/Zr1). Surely the mustang/camaro/challenger are not in the same class as the viper/vette. This is not saying they are not capable cars that have significant appeal. Good luck.

Will Y.

That is why the pony cars are "muscle cars" and the viper/vette are "sports cars."
True "muscle cars" back in the day were the mid-sized chassis like the GTO, Charger, Chevelle, Torino, etc. rather than the pony cars. That niche is now inhabited only by the Charger Hemi, the late GTO/GXP, Taurus SHO and CTS-V.

The Corvette was never a "muscle car," regardless of its performance capabilities relative to "muscle cars."

teranfon

As Will mentioned, perhaps you should be more aware of the proper classification of these particular cars. The Viper and Corvette are not what one would typically refer to as a "muscle" car. And certainly not a "premium" muscle car. They are marketed as a "sports car".



Terry

2K2SilverTL-S

This argument over jargon is a bit silly. The Vette and Viper, despite being "sports cars," are still bearers of the tradition of American large displacement powertrains, and subsequently (in the eyes of many), "American muscle."
I'm sorry, but I didnt realize the Camaro and Mustang are not classified as "sports cars"?

teranfon

I agree somewhat, but I also think your insistence of classifying the Mustang/Challenger/Camaro as "lesser" muscle cars when compared to the Corvette and Viper is foolish as well. You may claim that the Corvette is a muscle car, but most true enthusiasts subscribe to what both GM and automotive historians have referred to it for ages: "America's sports car". A quick google search will confirm this. A Corvette is not a muscle car. GM has always considered it to be a sports car. To compare it to the likes of the Mustang, Camaro, or challenger is irrelevant. In fact, these three cars are more likely to be referred to as "pony cars".

You may like to think that anyone who purchases a pony car is merely purchasing an entry level muscle car, inferior to your Corvette, but that is not the case. Muscle cars are arguably a continuation of the early American "super cars" originating in the early sixties. Even back then, the Corvette was identified as a sports car with it's own specific market.


Terry

subinf

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

alright this "ignore" feature is pretty stupid.. i can see all of vette doc's posts through replies! ahhhhhhhhhh my eyesssss

Will Y.

"Sports cars" refers to 2-seat, 2-door cars; purists use the term to apply only to convertibles, while others permit the term to include certain performance-oriented 2-seat coupes, including some by Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche, etc.

The pony cars, beginning with the Mustang, have always been 4-passenger two-door rear-wheel drive compact coupes, or at least more compact than the contemporary mid-size family sedan.
The current Challenger and Camaro are thus different from their predecessors as they are built on full-size car platforms, accounting for more weight and size.
Regardless, the pony cars have never been "sports cars" as defined by enthusiasts, regardless of the misnomer as used in advertising campaigns and by car salespeople.

Joe5.0

I test drove a '11 V6 Automatic (all they had available) a couple days ago.

I actually WANTED to drive the V6, because in reality its the only new mustang *I* can buy. My 95 Cobra (~475hp) is more than enough for me.

I thought the interior was VERY nice for a car costing $25k. It did have the Shaker 500 radio and leather, so it was optioned up a little bit.

I felt it had the typical 'throttle by wire lag', but once it was moving the V6 definitely wasnt slow. I didnt plant it from a stop, but the shifts overall were fast and smooth. Lack of paddle's or sport shift is a small negative, but if I were to buy it'd be the M6 anyways.

If I were to guess the V6 coupe I drove would probably be mid/high 14's @ 95-97mph. It didnt feel as snappy as my CL-S6 off the line, but alot of that has to do with gearing, and I'm sure it would pull very good once moving.

Overall I was impressed with it, but until I can drive a 6MT V6 and 5.0 I'll reserve my final judgement.

BTW you can get a well optioned 2010 GT (315hp) for about the same price as a new V6, so you could save probably close to $6-7k off a '11 5.0, throw on a supercharger and tune and be faster. Food for thought.

SouthernBoy

If I can step in to clarify this a little..

The hey day of the mid-sized big block horsepower wars "officially" began in 1964 and was pretty much over by 1969. It peaked in 1966. For everyone's information, the term "muscle car" was never used. Those cars were known as "supercars" and that is the term you heard and applied to the four GM entries (GTO, Chevelle, 442, and Skylark GS), the Ford Fairlane, the Mercury Comet, the Plymouth Satellite, and the Dodge R/T. The "muscle car" term didn't show up until it was all over.

The first of these cars was the Pontiac Tempest LeMans ordered with the GTO option package (there was never a GTO as a distinct model until 1966). Chevrolet followed suit in 1966 with their SS396, along with Oldsmobile and Buick. There were 201 Chevelles built in 1965 with a 396 but that particular engine only saw life in those 201 cars - it was a hybrid of a sort (really an oddball).

The Mustangs, Camaros, Firebirds and similar cars were classed as "pony cars". Even though they all reached that vaulted level of quarter mile hero with the right options, they were never considered supercars. Of course, the Corvette was a sports car, plain and simple. BTW, the Torino was never in this picture since it was not even in production at that time.

While this may all seem just a bunch of misguided semantics, it really isn't since words and terms have meaning. The local drag strips were dominated overwhelmingly by GM products (sorry Terry but that's how it was). I can tell you that for the dollar, these were the best cars made anywhere in the world (we're talking solid and built to take it). Car companies weren't stupid. The adage, "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" was very true and they knew these supercars were not being boiught by granny to make trips to the grocery store. Most all were sold with 4-speed transmissions and for GM, that meant one of the revered Muncie boxes.

I know all of this stuff because I lived it. I grew up in the 60's, spent a lot of time at local tracks, was in a car club, and owned one of the classic original supercars. This was my life at the time.

Just wanted to clear up some smoke.

rockstar143

iTrader: (6)

^I think the 5.0 motor and the technology incorporated is really what's intriguing me. Although being faster is always nice.

2k2silver, I have your back normally in the sense of thinking bragging stories are cool. But you came in and say it's a lesser car than a vette by using jargon, then 2 posts later say that the jargon is silly. It's kinda contradictory.

teranfon

Hi SB

I agree somewhat, as the for the most part Ford was focused on oval racing and sports car racing. The Cammers and Hi-risers were designed primarily for oval racing. In the in early years, GM offered the best bang for the buck for the drag strip. A fact not lost on many enthusiasts as GM withdrew from racing and offered little factory support and development. Fords were generally very expensive, and some of their offerings were available only in limited numbers. One day I'm going to build a reproduction of one of the legendary Ford Thunderbolts.

One cannot overlook the offerings of Chrysler as well. For a time it was only they and Ford that offered factory support to many racing teams.



Terry

SouthernBoy

Ford never had a really viable entry in the supercar race during that period. The 390 was just not up to par to the other players. There were some 427's that made it into the mid-sized cars, as you well know, and they were crazy good. But they were not generally available to the public at large. I did know a fella who had a 427 Mercury Cougar, however. The thing Ford did do is put some serious engines in their full sized cars - the Galaxie received the 406 and the 427 and were nothing to sneeze at. But full sized cars were not classed as supercars, though some were very quick.

Plymouth and Dodge made the 426 Hemi available for general street use in the 1966 model year as a $907 option, which included other needed goodies for that engine. But in stock trim, it was not as quick as one may expect. They also tuned the 440 for supercar use and it was a serious torque monster.

Now I have to ask this. Was the 406 CID engine also known as a "Thunderbolt" engine? A friend of mine's brother had a '62 Galaxie with a tri-power 406 and a 4-speed and that car at that time was the quickest car I had ever been in.

teranfon

Ford generally kept their top engines for the full size entries, as this is what they used for NASCAR. The 390s and 427s being the most popular. Ford was pursuing their "Total Performance" agenda in the early/mid sixties, and were focused on both the European sports car racing and oval track racing in the United States. More than a few variations of the 390s and 427s were made available to drag racers, but the package was generally sold via the parts counter and installed at the dealership.

The Chrysler 426 Hemi was, in the opinion of many, more legend than actual performance on the street. The 440, particularly in V code was a much stronger motor. The street Hemis also suffered oiling issues, pushing much of the oil into the cylinder heads and causing problems elsewhere. I'd love to do one eventually. That and a 1962 Pontiac Catalina 421 Superduty.

The 406 was nothing more than a 390 with .080 larger bore. Stuff like carburetion, cam, ignition, bearings, and exhaust are unchanged from the 390. In fact all FE Fords are basically the same. Displacement was achieved from either stroke or increased bore. Blocks, cranks, cams, and most else are the same across the board. 352s, 390s, 406s, 410s, 427s, and 428s are nearly identical in outward appearance. The engine in your friend's car would have been the 405 horsepower version (401 hp for single carb) In fact the 390 I'm building now came with 427 identified crank and rods installed when the engine was new. I don't think, however, the engine was ever identified as a "Thunderbolt" engine.

Good times back then. I would have liked to be a part of it.


Terry

Sarlacc

I'm actually kind of glad that tool made those stupid comments.

Because I am thoroughly enjoying the conversation/lesson between terry and SB...This is segment/time period of cars I'm very interested in right now and have the least amount of historical knowledge regardless of all the classic car shows Ive been to in the past 6 months.

CocheseUGA

I missed out on all the live action, but I learned real quick with a stableful of friends with muscle cars and pony cars.

I'd take the 440 over the 426, as well, unless you were going soley on bragging rights. As is the case with the 396 over the 454 or 427. Only experience I had with the bigger Ford engines was the 429, and it was rarely seen on the street.

I miss those days, and that was only 15 years ago.

teranfon

Hi David

Don't take my word as the absolute truth. I've been around these cars for most of my adult life, and there is always another tidbit that comes up in conversation that I was not aware of.

It was a glorious time however. I may not have lived through it, but at my age I had opportunity to purchase these cars at greatly reduced prices. Hemis, 396 cars, Boss 302s, and so many other wonderful cars were available late seventies for much less than they sell for now. I purchased my first Shelby in the early eighties for under $10 000.00. It needed work, but that's another story.

I think what made these cars so attractive was their affordability. if you had a decent job with good credit, you could walk into any Ford, GM, or Chrysler store and for the most part order what your favourite driver was running. And these cars could be ordered a la carte. If you wanted a specific powertrain with a kleenex box holder, you could get it. The cars could be personalized. They could be made to suit your personal tastes.


Terry

Joe5.0

If your friend told you that either he's a retard douche bag that takes you for a fool, or he is that himself. An 05 with those mods is probably making under 300 to the wheels.

SouthernBoy

For me, it's always fun to talk about the American supercar era. One of the things I have caught some flak about a number of times is from people who didn't live then and have read some magazines indicating these supercars were only good for low 15's to high 14's. I have some of these magazines from back then and it does make you wonder... unless you lived then and saw them run on the strips. Have to remember, the tire that GM shipped on these cars in 1966 was a 7.75 x 14 which only had a footprint of around 5 1/2". You can imagine that first gear was basically going to be all smoke along with a good deal of second gear when you're shoving 420+ ft/lbs of torque to the clutch. In truth, with slicks and some simple carb and ignition turning, mid 13's were the usual times with lower 13's and high 12's in there (my stock L34 396 Chevelle with these items turned 13.3's).

Terry;

Did I ever tell you that I "played" with a Boss 429 Mustang in 1970 when I had my Chevelle? I didn't run him... just played a little down the highway.


Here's a little piece of trivia. In the, I think, September '63 issue of Car and Driver, they did a road test of the new Pontiac Tempest LeMans with the GTO option - which also had the tri-power setup (348HP) - I still remember what the cover and some of the black and white pictures in this issue and test looked like. Anyway, this "GTO" left the C&D testers aghast with awe in both its quickness and its road course manners. It recorded quicker times than a 427 Mercury Merauder they had recently tested and what really set the purists on fire was the fact that C&D said that this "GTO" would beat any Ferrari on any American road course (boy did that comment cause a stir).

Come to find out later there was a reason for this. Pontiac had slipped them a "GTO" with not a 389 under the hood, but a 421. Ford did something similar in a March 1966 C&D test of six supercars (I have this issue). They "massaged" the 390 in their entrants.

I'm happy you're enjoying this little dialogue.. it is fun.

SouthernBoy

I have to tell you that the finest example of Chevy's porcupine head big block was their 427 in the following designations: L72, L72, L88, L89, and ZL1. The 396 was fabulous in its L78 configuration (mine was the L34), and the 454 LS6 and LS7 (which never saw the street) were great engines as well. But the 427 in as mentioned here was pure magic. Besides, just the term "427" is nothing short of mystical.

teranfon

I remember that article. I think I read it in the early eighties when it was reprinted, and GM admitting the car was a ringer. I think the 421 was a great engine. And the looks of the '62 Catalina? Damn................ One of my all time favourites.

I remember you telling me about the Boss 429 you almost ran one night. I don't think those Boss nines really ran all that well on the street. Like the 426, it seemed to shine on the racetrack instead.

Speaking of tires: The Marauder I'm currently doing will have 1964 reproduction bias ply 8:00-14. Tread width? A whopping 5.5 inches. And I have over 400 pounds of torque from 1500 to 4000 rpm, peaking with 457 pounds at 2500 rpm. Gingerly. Very, very gingerly.

Hey, did you ever keep up on the whereabouts of the Chevelle? Or has it unfortunately faded into memories over time.


Terry

rockstar143

iTrader: (6)

You may not be far off,
He is cuban so a light embellishment of the truth would not be unheard of. Ha ha...
Either way, he's making some power. He's done a few more things, maybe not to that extreme but it moves.

chill_dog

I couldn't agree more.

2K2SilverTL-S

I certainly agree with you. I was a bit general in my terminology as many automotive journalists and the public in general tend to classify American sports cars/pony cars/muscle cars under a broad spectrum class due to their similar philosophy of applying large displacement to achieve brute force and a "chew you up and spit you out" attitude. What I meant to say was that the Vette is certainly in a different class (with its 2 seat setup and optimization of its power/weight ratio) than the pony cars. I admit I should not have used the term "entry level" as the camaro/mustang have a different style/philosophy than the Vette/Viper. What I was saying was that today the mustang/camaro are the 1st available in the spectrum of American large displacement power-house cars. While I (and many others) still consider the mustang/camaro "pony cars" as "sports cars" despite having 4 seats and significant heft, their philosophy/style and history is certainly different than the Vette. Thanks for the flashback through history for us who didnt get to live through this automotive golden era.
Rockstar143, I did not mean to imply that the mustang was any less of a car than the Vette, but rather in a different class. I have a lot of respect for the new mustang as it seems to trump the '10 GT500 without FI or the grossly inflated sticker. I hope a new stang is in your future and I wish you the best of luck on your mission to pick one up.

2K2SilverTL-S

This is an interesting vid posted on another forum....an 2011 GT getting beat by a stock LS1 Camaro SS. Probably needs some more breaking in, but still interesting.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2fo3KHupBM

ghttf

acurazine the definitive 60's american car resource

SouthernBoy

You're just jealous (heh, heh).

SouthernBoy

I forgot to thank Westy6 for the fabulous pics of the new 2011 Mustang at the Auto Show. Really great to see those.

SouthernBoy

You have made a correct observation about the generality of the term "muscle car" and how it has been applied to a number of different machines. Sounds to me like you both know and have an appreciation for fine and fun cars.

Sarlacc

Scroll down in car talk and look for the 2011 Mustang GT thread I made earlier this week with all the pics I took.

SouthernBoy

Unfortunately for me, the last time I saw my '66 396 Chevelle was as the buyer, a Navy guy stationed at the Bethesda Naval Hospital (where JFK was autopsied) drove it away in October 1971. It was sad, but as they say.. hindsight is usually better than foresight. I had put a set of Midas mufflers on the car which caused a drop of around 40 HP. The Hooker headers were still installed but those mufflers choked them off quite a bit. I also left the R3310 780 CFM dual feed Holley on it to feed those header but again with such restrictive mufflers affecting the exhaust, that carb couldn't really do its work. The reason for this was a ticket a perspective buyer got while test driving the car. At the time, it had straight thru mufflers (glass packs) and a cop didn't exactly like his nailing it as he was on an access ramp for a major highway (I paid the ticket).

As for the Boss 429 Mustang (a rust color), I had thought that 429 engine was a Hemi design but it wasn't. It was a semi-hemi like the big block Chevy. Still, it was one sweet thing to see.

The first 426 Street Hemi I ever saw was in a Plymouth Belvedere Satellite parked in a gas station with the hood up, signifiying for all to see. Good Lord was that a pretty sight. But the 427 L72/L74 engines that graced the '66 Corvette were my favorites. All business and just crazy quick. You had to live back in those days to really appreciate that machinery.

BTW, the hardest street race I ever had was against a 1965 Chevelle with an L79 engine (327/350HP). I, and most of the guys at the drive-ins, knew the owner and knew his car was bad. It was only a matter of time until he and I met up. And when it happened, I had a burned out tach light. We made three runs. The first one, I bogged. The second one, I smoked the tires. For number three, I had a friend get in my back seat with a flashlight on my knee-knocker tack (remember those, Terry?), and he had one of his friends get in his car to make it fair. I beat him! Man was I on top of the world. In two years of serious street racing back then, I lost once - to another '66 SS396 L34 Chevelle. Reason? Mine was box stock when I ran him.

God, I could go on and on with this but dinner beckons.

SouthernBoy

Yeah, I saw those. Beautiful. Really love to see this.

SouthernBoy

BTW, I was behind a Challenger at a light about two+ weeks , the same color as the one in your sig, and when the light changed, he got into it a bit. I was never able to see exactly what he had (engine, tranny) but it was sweet when that light changed.

Sarlacc