Do we think Ford is going to make an S650 GT500/Cobra?

[FI Fiend]

Just a regular Challenger Hellcat. The Redeye is just slightly out of my budget. I'd prefer the Charger but they're all Redeyes and are 20k more than a regular Challenger Hellcat.

I'm also considering a lightly used Camaro ZL1.

I can find both cars for under 70k - the Challenfers have lots of discounts right now. The ZL1s were always kind of cheap as well just in general compared to the GT500 and Hellcat, and that still seems to ring true on the used market.

Nice, I had a charger WB hellcat. It wasn't a redeye and was still overkill even for 305 tires so I don't think you'd need that.

I had a blackwing after that though and gotta say the alpha platform is pretty great so you should def check the ZL1. I was looking into them but got spooked by the visibility and got the mustang.

Sponsored

 

[robvas]

I like to joke that when enthusiasts like that complain about sound, it's because they've already lost the argument. They have nothing else to bitch about, which only goes to show how good Ecoboost mustangs are.

What's so good about them? Crappy 4 cylinder in too big of a chassis that fits an amazing V8 engine.

 

[Mustang1987]

What's so good about them? Crappy 4 cylinder in too big of a chassis that fits an amazing V8 engine.

They're reliable, inexpensive, and give great performance.

 

[robvas]

They're reliable, inexpensive, and give great performance.

Great performance?

Compared to?

A Civic Type R will kick its ass if you want to compare to four cylinder sports cars.

And they run the 1/4 mile like a 3V Mustang GT from 2005

I fail to see the appeal.

An engine with the nickname "Ecoboom" is reliable?

 

[robvas]

But it's worth remembering the most badass production mustang from the 1960s would get smoked by a base mustang Ecoboost.

This is the dumbest argument people can throw out there. A 60' Mustang would get smoked by a minivan. Who cares?

Besides, plenty of the 420-something cubic inch mustangs from the 60's ran 13's in the 1/4 mile back then in the magazine tests, so with a modern tire on them they'd easily beat the current EB.

And, not sound like a rototiller doing so...

 

[9secondko]

What's so good about them? Crappy 4 cylinder in too big of a chassis that fits an amazing V8 engine.

and let’s be honest. Sound is a really big deal.

The v8, along with all the rest of its benefits, sounds awesome like a burbling fire breathing dragon, devouring the road.

Meanwhile, the 4 banger just sounds like… farts, stinking up the place.

that’s just keeping it real.
Sure, turbos help make the 4 cylinder respectable in performance, but come on man. The sounds is horrid, whereas the v8 audio is likely to to raise testosterone levels.

you hear a v8 and it sounds like power. You hear a 4 cylinder and you just want that guy to go buy a real muffler. Could even make you appreciate the “sound” of an EV at that point.

 

[robvas]

^^ and there are some good sounding four cylinders, they are all hi revving engines though.

 

[BoostRabbitGT]

you hear a v8 and it sounds like power. You hear a 4 cylinder and you just want that guy to go buy a real muffler. Could even make you appreciate the “sound” of an EV at that point.

(shrugs) I'd say in that case that the EcoBoost would be less tempting for car thieves than the GT, especially if you have to park your Mustang outside every day.

 

[Mustang1987]

Great performance?

Compared to?

A Civic Type R will kick its ass if you want to compare to four cylinder sports cars.

And they run the 1/4 mile like a 3V Mustang GT from 2005

I fail to see the appeal.

An engine with the nickname "Ecoboom" is reliable?

You do realize a Mustang Ecoboost starts at $32k and a civic type r starts at $46k, and the mustang Ecoboost still has a better 0-60 than the type r

 

[robvas]

You do realize a Mustang Ecoboost starts at $32k and a civic type r starts at $46k, and the mustang Ecoboost still has a better 0-60 than the type r

We're going to need the performance package on the EcoBoost so the price is closer to 37k

Please don't use 0-60 for anything. Use a full quarter mile or laptime. Which the CTR beats the ecoboost in either.

Costs a little more but it's by far the better car.

 

[Mustang1987]

We're going to need the performance package on the EcoBoost so the price is closer to 37k

Please don't use 0-60 for anything. Use a full quarter mile or laptime. Which the CTR beats the ecoboost in either.

Costs a little more but it's by far the better car.

They don't make a performance package on the Ecoboost mustang.... So it's $32k... And you're comparing it to a $46k car, and the type r is still slower 0-60.

"Don't use 0-60, use the one I want to use"

 

[robvas]

They don't make a performance package on the Ecoboost mustang.... So it's $32k...

"Don't use 0-60, use the one I want to use"

"high performance package", sorry. And without it the EcoBoost loses all of its handling and braking which is what those dorks seem to love so much. So it would get destroyed even more around a track.

don't use 0-60 because it doesn't jack, gets measured differently by every source, relies too much on the driver, surface, etc

It's for nerds that want to argue about tenth of a second to 60 when the car is two car lengths behind by 100mph

 

[robvas]

Another solid data point...

Car and Driver tested both the Dark Horse and the 392 Durango to both run a 4.1 second 0-60

but we all know the Dark Horse is a way faster car (it will put a bus length on it after 60)

 

[Mustang1987]

"high performance package", sorry. And without it the EcoBoost loses all of its handling and braking which is what those dorks seem to love so much. So it would get destroyed even more around a track.

don't use 0-60 because it doesn't jack, gets measured differently by every source, relies too much on the driver, surface, etc

It's for nerds that want to argue about tenth of a second to 60 when the car is two car lengths behind by 100mph

The high performance package isn't offered on Ecoboosts.

So for $32k, you can get a four cylinder that has a better 0-60 than a $46k type r lol For it to even be comparable is astonishing since it's $15k cheaper.

That we're even having this conversation is a win for the car that's $15k cheaper.

 

[robvas]

The high performance package isn't offered on Ecoboosts.

They don't? You sure about that?

Where did I get that screenshot of the "2.3l High Performance Package" then? Certainly not from the "build an EcoBoost fastback" on Fords website

Enjoy talking about 0-60's kid...

Sponsored