Ford Mustang Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Harder and harder to keep up.

3K views 30 replies 10 participants last post by  93LX5.0L5SpdCon 
#1 ·
I was doing some googling and saw that some 2018 GT's are running sub 12 second 1/4 miles, like 11.8 or so. These were 10 speed autos. The manuals were in the 12's.
Man that's fast (relatively).
We're pretty much out classed at this point. Think how much money it'll take to run that sort of time with ours. Not just how much money, but think about the "streetability" of a 79-95 that can run 11.8. With enough money we can make a race car that fast, but I'm not so sure how we'd get a relatively comfortable "street car" that runs 11.8. It gets to be a chore driving a 300 horse 302 muatang with t-5 and aftermarket gears after awhile.
Stinks.
 
#2 ·
I was doing some googling and saw that some 2018 GT's are running sub 12 second 1/4 miles, like 11.8 or so.
Man that's fast (relatively).
We're pretty much out classed at this point. Think how much money it'll take to run that sort of time with ours. Not just how much money, but think about the "streetability" of a 79-95 that can run 11.8. With enough money we can make a race car that fast, but I'm not so sure how we'd get a relatively comfortable "street car" that runs 11.8.
Stinks.
I totally agree with you, I miss my '89 GT that was totalled a day before my birthday in 2017. I had about 12K invested including the purchase of the car. I did buy another mustang but a 2014 that had 3,800 miles on it at 3 years old. I instantly fell in love during the test drive, this car pulls hard and even harder over 3,000 rpms with a 7,000 redline. Do I miss my '89? yes I do I love the foxbody mustang plus it was paid for. Doing any aftermarket on the newer mustang is at a minimum double or better than modding a foxbody. I just installed a C.A.I. and it was almost $400
 
#3 ·
I was doing some googling and saw that some 2018 GT's are running sub 12 second 1/4 miles, like 11.8 or so.
Man that's fast (relatively).
We're pretty much out classed at this point. Think how much money it'll take to run that sort of time with ours. Not just how much money, but think about the "streetability" of a 79-95 that can run 11.8. With enough money we can make a race car that fast, but I'm not so sure how we'd get a relatively comfortable "street car" that runs 11.8.
Stinks.
I totally agree with you, I miss my '89 GT that was totalled a day before my birthday in 2017. I had about 12K invested including the purchase of the car. I did buy another mustang but a 2014 that had 3,800 miles on it at 3 years old. I instantly fell in love during the test drive, this car pulls hard and even harder over 3,000 rpms with a 7,000 redline. Do I miss my '89? yes I do I love the foxbody mustang plus it was paid for. Doing any aftermarket on the newer mustang is at a minimum double or better than modding a foxbody. I just installed a C.A.I. and it was almost $400
$400!? Insane.
I think we’ve reached the apples:eek:ranges stage if we trying to compare the two generations. A new V6 Camry will out perform a ‘69 Chevelle in every which way. But people still like, and are paying big bucks for the chevelle. Not that I think a fox will ever be a $100k car, but y’all know what I’m saying. For the non-race car It’s all about the nostalgia and sound at this point.
 
#8 ·
Does the gunfighter retire before he’s killed? I haven’t been this year but in years past at test and tunes there’s usually not a whole lot of cars that I can run with. The street cars are generally all newer mustangs, camaros, etc that run low 8’s and high 7’s in the 1/8. I’m “only” making 330 rear horse and my best is a high 8 @ 82 mph. If I had a time machine I’d go back to 1995 and I’d have a pretty fast car.
Not only are they faster, but they do it with relative ease. 11.8 with a car off the showroom floor is crazy.
I know it. I think I could improve on my time a little if I drove it right up to the ragged edge of breaking something. But I would have a hard time finding the money to get it fixed. That and a set of slicks. As it is now I kinda have to drive it out of the hole or it’ll spin in one place and or most of the way down the 1/8.
 
#5 ·
Faster does not equate to quality of ride and comfort, in fact it is almost diametrically opposed to it. Faster is ok for a track day only car but for a driver, I demand high levels of comfort and ride quality as well as ergonomics and creature comforts in the surroundings.
In other words, I don't want a faster car I want a better drive. Quietness (no road or exhaust sounds) smooth ride that eliminates the small bumps and handling that feels like your on a cloud but still responsive. You keep faster and I'll keep better.
Now that doesn't mean I don't like collecting classics and restoring them, I do.
 
#6 ·
Not only are they faster, but they do it with relative ease. 11.8 with a car off the showroom floor is crazy.
 
#10 ·
My foxbody runs mid 12's. Is it streetable? Yes. Is it comfortable, No. The 1 hour drive to the strip is exhausting. When I get there, I need 15 minutes to recuperate. No A/C, no tunes, and I feel every little imperfection in the road. I love my Foxbody, but for my daily driving, I have a C5 'Vette.
 
#11 ·
Don't feel too bad - electric cars will soon be dusting the new gas cars (but they won't replace the fun of modding), along with unrivaled performance, road manners, over-the-air upgrades, and lower total cost of ownership.
Tesla's already been doing it for a number of years for luxury car $, now the M3 does 0-60 in 3.2 and 11.8 quarter mile in the $45k range.
 
#12 ·
Don't feel too bad - electric cars will soon be dusting the new gas cars (but they won't replace the fun of modding), along with unrivaled performance, road manners, over-the-air upgradqes, and lower total cost of ownership.
Tesla's already been doing it for a number of years for luxury car $, now the M3 does 0-60 in 3.2 and 11.8 quarter mile in the $45k range.
Expensive novelty commuter cars. They’re not practical enough yet for the masses as far as distances they can travel, places to charge, and time it takes to do so. What will the apartment dwellers do? We’ll start seeing two miles of extension cord hanging out of bedroom every bedrood window running to the parking lot.
I think the gas is here to stay for a while longer.
 
#14 ·
Spend $40K+ on your Fox body and you have a good chance of making it better in almost every aspect.

A good looking classic always gets more attention than anything new. It doesn't take much to sign the loan papers and drive something new.
 
#23 ·
"In Houston, the largest city in TX there are 259 charging stations. In the rural town where I grew up there are none.
How far can most EV's go on a charge, 300 miles? It takes 20 minutes to an hour to fully charge. Dallas to Houston is 259 miles. Are the charging stations free?"

Houston to Dallas is no problem, see the image attached. For the full interactive map of Tesla's charging infrastructure (just Tesla's, there are other charging networks already in place as well...), go here: https://www.tesla.com/findus?v=2&bo...-138.959166169387&filters=supercharger&zoom=4

Very much like gasoline, owners have the option to charge for less time and not fully "top off". The charging rates are faster at the beginning so this is a very realistic option. Very much unlike lost gas cars, Teslas also "do the math" for owners and plan the trip and charging stops.

Of course they're not free (well, except for many early adopters who do get free lifetime supercharging... Tesla also offers incentives in the form of free charging) - but the cost per mile is significantly lower than the national average gas prices and fossil fuel mileage.
 

Attachments

#24 ·
"A '95 Geo Metro had a 10.6 gallon gas tank and it was rated at 40 mpg combined city/hwy. I could buy a whole slew of '95 metro's for the price of one tesla. How is the tesla better bang for my buck? Because they're quicker? People buying electric aren't buying for performance. They're trying to save money on gas and to save the planet. But I imagine their monthly payments are higher than what the gas savings come out to be. Plus they can't go very far. How is that a win?"

How did we get from 11.8sec 1/4 mile cars to a 25 year old Geo Metro...? I guess that's how far one must reach to try to slam Tesla (and still fail...lol).
Props to the Geos though, in the 90's a buddy and I went from D.C. to Montana and back like bats out of hell in his, still got close to 45mpg rolling over 90mph both ways and with the car stuffed full of camping gear and whatnot.

Total cost of ownership is significantly lower than gas cars, even without the tax credit. See attached, from this article:
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/06/2...-tesla-model-3-cost-comparisons-over-5-years/
So you're right about that point - Tesla owners are saving lots and lots of money.

The performance of Teslas (including the Model 3) is unrivaled in all but the highest-end performance cars. Keep in mind the batteries are between you and the road, so the center of gravity is really low, leading to great handling. If anyone can show me one person who doesn't like driving their Tesla I can show you 10's if not 100's of thousands of Tesla owners who will never go back to gas.
 

Attachments

#25 ·
Ok guys. This is a Mustang site, not a Tesla site.
 
#27 ·
Very true, the comment I was making in response to "harder to keep up" was supposed to point out that technology marches on and keeping up sure won't get any easier.
Make of that whatever you want, but I didn't mean to highjack the thread. If I should apologize for correcting blatantly untrue disinformation then so be it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top