5.0's are fast :(

[wisesoul]

Originally Posted by adc

Except of course forced induction, which has exactly that effect, and it's what the OP has.

lol

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by m3alabama

I don't get this at all. They did a motor trend test and the m3 in a drag race and around a track was virtually identical. Their quarter mile time was the same in the motor trend tests. This was a non-boss. But a stock dct m3 vs. a 5.0 mustang. No way is a modded 5.0 putting down 480 at the wheels! It probably had a blower. Its still a NA car-no "chip" is going to do shit and an exhaust/intake-maybe good for 20hp. These things put down 330-360 whp stock so at most 380-390 the 5.0. Plus it is heavier than you and you put down 500 whp with an ess. Something was Way off

Nope.

Stock for stock the RWHP of a 5.0 and M3 is about the same with the 5.0 having a slight edge. However, the 5.0 takes to mods much better than the M3. So a FBO M3 will have ~380-390 RWHP while a FBO 5.0 will have 440-450 RWHP. Ford leaves a lot on the table with that 5.0 motor.

[e92_m3]

Waiting for OP's reply if the mustang had more mods than we all thought...

The new 5.0 mustangs ('11 and up) are fast. The mustang was basically head to head with the M3 when tested by Motortrend. Take a look at the 1/4 mile race vid. Basically tied every time, but the mustang had a slight edge at the end of the day and won by 0.1 of a second. 12.7 @ 111.6 MPH compared to 12.8 @ 110.9 MPH. Here's the vid:

In the track, the mustang was also head to head with the M3. After Randy Pobst drove both cars at the track, it only came down with the M3 winning by less than 1/10 of a second. M3's time being 1:27.67 compared to the mustang's 1:27.76. That's a 0.09 sec difference in lap time! Here's the vid:

That Cayote engine is something. Ford did something right with the motor this time round.

[Mikes5.0]

Great comparison and Randy Pobst was spot on when he talked about the Mustangs shocks. Best upgrade you can do to the car. I have a feeling the mustang had a little more under the hood than the owner was telling the op.

[muskamatt]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

Why? See my post above. I ran the 451 RWHP 5.0 with my 335i with only a DCI, tune, meth and dps which at the time made only 16 psi and around 400 RWHP but still managed to creep slowly on the 5.0.

The density altitude was high that day (around 80 degrees at Big Willow which is 2,300 ft above sea level) so the turbos certainly helped me on this run.

What kind of tires?

And how on earth could you avoid limp mode? I've only tracked streets so maybe big willow is a lower RPM type track?

[JRV]

Pony cars have always been fast and you said 480 hp? Why would it not be fast lol? Our cars aren't made to haul ass on a straight anyway, although ours is quick in the 1/4.

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by muskamatt

What kind of tires?

And how on earth could you avoid limp mode? I've only tracked streets so maybe big willow is a lower RPM type track?

I have Michelin PSS. Amazing tires.

Regarding limp - just the opposite. Big Willow is a much faster track than Streets of Willow so good airflow which prevents limp (definitely a high RPM track). Also, I'm running meth which allows me to run 18-19psi of boost AND it cools the intake charge dramatically so my oil temps never budge above 250. Big Willow and meth 335's were made for each other! On the back straight after turn 9, I have reeled-in cars that dyno in the 500-600 WHP range at sea level (probably has to do with the high DA's and the fact that the 335 is a turbo which is less affected by DA's than NA or even pulley-driven supercharged cars).

[LarThaL]

The newest Mustang is a real game changer in the world of performance cars. This is an undeniable fact.

It makes very high levels of performance incredibly affordable both in the light-heavyweight (GT 5.0) and super-heavyweight (Shelby GT500) car classes. Until now, this kind of stock performance only came with high end price tags.

Still, subjectively, the Mustang GT just does not feel like the refined, high-end precsion tool that is the M3. Whether that justifies a $30k price difference is a matter of opinion.

Still, when I think about buying a Shelby for $65k and putting in $30k in mods, I think about what a freakin' incredible ride I could have for under $100k.

[klammer]

Originally Posted by m3alabama

Give credit to the m3. Not only is it a car debuting 5 years earlier than the new stang but even down on horsepower (stang is undrated and is putting down more than I had thought-about 380whp v. 350 whp for m3) yet m3 still is as fast in quarter and faster around the track with only a 70 kg weight advantage. Clearly the gearing and chassis is superior on the m3 being able to take the stang with a horspower disadvantage like that. Also you get the luxury of an m3 which the stang doesnt give. If you have the money an m3 is a no brainer. If not the stang is 95 percent of the performance BUT delivering only 30 percent of the subjective 'experience" that a high revving racy m3 gives you in my view

Agreed

[JonnyM3]

I beat my friends 5.0 in a straight line run by a decent amount

[GrumpyBimmerFan]

sorry i was away on the weekend.


Here are some more details. The guy said he has 480 at the crank. No, he does not have a blower (i've seen under the hood). We are both manual 6spd (No, I didn't granny shift, and if anything i shifted better than him). I did pull on him, but barely, started with 3rd at around 90mph, and by 140 I was maaaybe 2 cars ahead.
He has some optional gearing in the diff (not sure what kind, but he said it's for better 1/4mile).

We were heading to the ring, and I rode with him one lap(as did he)... the mustang is a completely different beast. As we both agreed the M3 sticks a LOT better, and stays more composed through the corners. Mustang tended to get the rear out, or spin the tires (the rear felt very unstable).

Another example, there was C63 black series on the track (had one passenger, while i had 2 heavy weight passengers(maybe extra 350pds)), and on the straight that C63 raped me.


Reading all the comments, I am concerned. I will desparetly look for a dyno to make sure i'm putting the correct power down. From my dyno butt, the car is A LOT faster than what I had before....

[GrumpyBimmerFan]

here is supposedly ESS 600 with full exhaust vs z06... doesn't seem right.

Here is my run against one... (sorry for vid quality).

[GrumpyBimmerFan]

ran him again... he has 4.10 gears btw.

same result I shift well.

[GrumpyBimmerFan]

here is the recorded run

you think i have a boost leak???

[DiavelM3]

Originally Posted by m3alabama

Give credit to the m3. Not only is it a car debuting 5 years earlier than the new stang but even down on horsepower (stang is undrated and is putting down more than I had thought-about 380whp v. 350 whp for m3) yet m3 still is as fast in quarter and faster around the track with only a 70 kg weight advantage. Clearly the gearing and chassis is superior on the m3 being able to take the stang with a horspower disadvantage like that. Also you get the luxury of an m3 which the stang doesnt give. If you have the money an m3 is a no brainer. If not the stang is 95 percent of the performance BUT delivering only 30 percent of the subjective 'experience" that a high revving racy m3 gives you in my view

[fusionchicken]

Your car is definitely not running correctly, do you have a boost gauge so you can monitor the boost you're hitting? Any data logging software?

480chp 5.0 is basically a basic bolt-ons 5.0 and they trap no more than 120mph

[e92_m3]

Originally Posted by kotik

here is the recorded run

you think i have a boost leak???

Your not shitting us are you? From 0:31 on, you accelerated so quickly that you left his ass behind. Your definitely a lot faster than the mustang.

[SamS]

Originally Posted by e92_m3

Waiting for OP's reply if the mustang had more mods than we all thought...

The new 5.0 mustangs ('11 and up) are fast. The mustang was basically head to head with the M3 when tested by Motortrend. Take a look at the 1/4 mile race vid. Basically tied every time, but the mustang had a slight edge at the end of the day and won by 0.1 of a second. 12.7 @ 111.6 MPH compared to 12.8 @ 110.9 MPH. Here's the vid:

No doubt the Mustang is fast. I would have preferred to see a DCT M3 vs. either the automatic Mustang or their manual. I personally think the M3 would have come out ahead in the DCT guise.

[GIdriver]

Originally Posted by e92_m3

Your not shitting us are you? From 0:31 on, you accelerated so quickly that you left his ass behind. Your definitely a lot faster than the mustang.

[RedBarron]

Get your car dynoed and see what it is putting down.

With bolt on he should be 400+rwhp and 370+rwtq. What dyno numbers does a VT575 put down?

Edit:

Just looked for a VT2-575 dyno sheet from another car and it put down 519RWHP and 342RWTQ. From a roll it seems as if you should walk away.

[Sakred]

Originally Posted by e92_m3

Your not shitting us are you? From 0:31 on, you accelerated so quickly that you left his ass behind. Your definitely a lot faster than the mustang.

Umm are we watching the same video? All I saw was the mustang stay at the M3s rear bumper for what seemed like speeds into the triple digits. 520whp VS 400 whp does not look like that.

Hammad

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by e92_m3

Your not shitting us are you? From 0:31 on, you accelerated so quickly that you left his ass behind. Your definitely a lot faster than the mustang.

Obviously the Mustang slowed to avoid hitting the big rig that was coming up quickly.