Ford needs to offer rwd and AWD on the new Mustang!!! Changing traction via a toggle switch.

[Charlemagne]

Is that metric seconds? LOL. My stock 18 GT did the 1/4 in 11.92/118

On prepared surface right? We don't have those in Europe, I guess. I got around 13 seconds 1/4 mile too on normal road in drag mode. Comparing your best numbers on drag strips with our numbers from normal roads makes it look weird, haha. Don't think 20 hp less would make 1 sec difference. Either way it's kind of silly when any Audi with AWD beats you, that's not what this is about for me.

Sponsored

 

[Ace]

12.9sec

Don't believe anything carwow comes up with. They are absolutely clueless and just want to make some cars look bad for views. Just jump to the 4:32 when they do the rolling race and LISTEN. WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU START A 30mph ROLLING RACE IN 3RD GEAR!? you can hear the engine struggling with really low rpm and listen to how long the engine needs to actually rev. It sounds more like a really high gear to me that can't get any power down at 30mph

At this point they did two C8 videos. In the first the car they did a 0-60 and talked shit how it couldn't get the promised time. But you could easily was that the car was in the break in period below 500 miles, visable through the indicated 4000 rpm redline. You can rev the engine up but according to Chevy the torque in the first few gears in limited by around 20%.

In their 2nd video they dida drag race comparison and just used the Sportmode, not even the track mode. For full launch control you have to set the car in trackmode and set PTM (Performance Traction Control) to Race 1. They you will easily get the promised times, was able to test that multiple times at Boxberg racetrack at an Corvette event.

TLDR: Don't trust carwow, they want to make US cars look bad on purpose. Or just don't care about set up the car right

 

[shogun32]

Well they need to up there game.

so 3 wankers on a channel who can't find/pay for an actual drag strip but use an old ww2 runway now dictate sales in the isles? Seriously, who makes decisions this shallow on pointless exhibitions? grow the hell up.

 

[shogun32]

The GT500 has a 0 to 60 of 3.3 seconds, and the M3 has a 0 to 60 of 3.8 seconds. 760 hp vs 503 hp, but the M3 has a weight advantage of 310 lbs.

310lbs pencils to around 44HP. so it's 760 vs 550.

 

[IceGamer]

so 3 wankers on a channel who can't find/pay for an actual drag strip but use an old ww2 runway now dictate sales in the isles? Seriously, who makes decisions this shallow on pointless exhibitions? grow the hell up.

Seriously, who cares about a fairytale world where some magician put some sort of glue on the ground to make less well engineered cars apear to be faster than they actually are? "Grow the hell up..."

I think @Ace 's statement is something to look into but it is an undeniable fact that the current Mustang isn't really all that fast... roughly 5 seconds 0-100 without that pathetic roll out and around 13 seconds for the 1/4 mile. Can it be slightly faster in a perfect world? Yes, but in reality those are realistic numbers.

It is just sad that a Rs3 or a M240i can give the GT a run for its money...

I don't think that the Mustang needs necessarily more HP it just has to bring its power down. AWD is just superior in any way and I don't get why FORD would exclude an optional AWD setup...

 

[jrsimon27]

Seriously, who cares about a fairytale world where some magician put some sort of glue on the ground to make less well engineered cars apear to be faster than they actually are? "Grow the hell up..."

I think @Ace 's statement is something to look into but it is an undeniable fact that the current Mustang isn't really all that fast... roughly 5 seconds 0-100 without that pathetic roll out and around 13 seconds for the 1/4 mile. Can it be slightly faster in a perfect world? Yes, but in reality those are realistic numbers.

It is just sad that a Rs3 or a M240i can give the GT a run for its money...

I don't think that the Mustang needs necessarily more HP it just has to bring its power down. AWD is just superior in any way and I don't get why FORD would exclude an optional AWD setup...

Same thinking as you.

 

[jrsimon27]

On prepared surface right? We don't have those in Europe, I guess. I got around 13 seconds 1/4 mile too on normal road in drag mode. Comparing your best numbers on drag strips with our numbers from normal roads makes it look weird, haha. Don't think 20 hp less would make 1 sec difference. Either way it's kind of silly when any Audi with AWD beats you, that's not what this is about for me.

Prep surfaces only exist in the USA and certain other parts of the world the rest of us race in real world conditions.

 

[BoostRabbitGT]

Honestly, I just want AWD on a Mustang so if I ever move up north from my current location, I can have slightly more peace of mind while driving in snowy/wet conditions. That's all. I have zero ambition for track duty or drag racing...I'll keep my enjoyment observing the speed limits wherever I go in the city/suburbs/backroads.

 

[Shelbeast]

The GT500 has a 0 to 60 of 3.3 seconds, and the M3 has a 0 to 60 of 3.8 seconds. 760 hp vs 503 hp, but the M3 has a weight advantage of 310 lbs.

I saw two dudes in an M3 and each looked about 3 bills. That's 600 lbs to my 190. I beat them by 100 lbs. They may have had groceries as well.

 

[Shelbeast]

Honestly I just want an AWD Mustang so if I ever move up north from my current location, I can have slightly more peace of mind driving in snowy/wet conditions.

Mach-E AWD has entered the chat. lol

 

[BoostRabbitGT]

Mach-E AWD has entered the chat. lol

Forgot about that one, unsurprisingly. I meant to reference AWD on the coupe/convertible.

 

[BoostRabbitGT]

While it's fresh on my mind, what other non-SUV/crossover vehicles besides the WRX are 1) under $50K, 2) have AWD, and 3) have an engine that isn't a turbo I-4 (or B-4 in the case of the WRX), while qualifying for the previous two criteria?

(Update: They may be over $50K/ under $60K and only have V6s as opposed to V8s, but I am now considering either the Lexus RC300 FSport AWD or Lexus IS300 AWD as my next/last ICE car if my plans for a V8 Mustang fall through. Still gotta save up a lot of money regardless.)

 

[LSchicago]

On prepared surface right? We don't have those in Europe, I guess. I got around 13 seconds 1/4 mile too on normal road in drag mode. Comparing your best numbers on drag strips with our numbers from normal roads makes it look weird, haha. Don't think 20 hp less would make 1 sec difference. Either way it's kind of silly when any Audi with AWD beats you, that's not what this is about for me.

Really wouldn't have made much difference. Stock there was very little wheelspin. I don't see more than a tenth or two loss on a concrete road. Definitely not 13 seconds slow!

 

[LSchicago]

Mach-E AWD has entered the chat. lol

That works well until it hits 60-70, then pulls power.

 

[MidwayJ]

That one is not underpowered. Terrible loss.

No question RWD struggles to put the power down from a dig on the unprepped surface. But the supercharged Mustang still loses to the BMW in roll races? It must have been putting out far less hp than what they said it was.

Sponsored