2007 Mustang....thats 300hp and 300 ft lb torque? a bit disappointed

[twobone]

So I took an 07' Mustang GT for a test drive today while in a search for a possible replacement for my turbo miata. Thought I would look for a change.

I was expecting to have my mind blown away by the v8 power. I guess it comes back to power to weight. The car sounded great, but there was no "holy-bajesus" torquey kick in the pants.

I have a new found respect for what 190-200HP via a turbo can do.

I really wanted to get my mind blown by the Stang and fall in love with a new toy!

Oh well...sometimes reality is a b*tch

[masraum]

Originally Posted by twobone

So I took an 07' Mustang GT for a test drive today while in a search for a possible replacement for my turbo miata. Thought I would look for a change.

I was expecting to have my mind blown away by the v8 power. I guess it comes back to power to weight. The car sounded great, but there was no "holy-bajesus" torquey kick in the pants.

I have a new found respect for what 190-200HP via a turbo can do.

I really wanted to get my mind blown by the Stang and fall in love with a new toy!

Oh well...sometimes reality is a b*tch

300 hp isn't a ton for such a big car. My Boxster, that's probably a couple of hundred pounds lighter than a mustang has 300hp. I think the "holy moly" reaction would come in more from a 450 or 500+ hp V-8 whatever.

I previously had a NA/NA miata with 133hp, certainly not impressive. Then I had an '04 MSM with just slightly tweaked boost. That one wasn't mind bending, but was fun.


If you're looking for mind bending, find a V-8 swap miata or a later model higher hp V-8 pony car.
300 hp is just a nice tool about tool hp, especially in a vehicle that's up around 3500#.

[1990C4S]

What is the 0-60 time? I see a lot of conflicting numbers when I google it.

[aschen]

its not a fast car when you think about it having a big v8, but it is a fast car in the context of a reliable car than can be bought for less than 10 k. It is fast/fun compared to say a similarly priced camry.

Also if you can slap a turbo on a mustang you can certainly slap one on a mustang!

300hp hasn't been omg fast since the 3.3 930s were new.

[rammstein]

You want the Coyote Mustang.

[widebody911]

[ledhedsymbols]

Originally Posted by twobone

So I took an 07' Mustang GT for a test drive today while in a search for a possible replacement for my turbo miata. Thought I would look for a change.

I was expecting to have my mind blown away by the v8 power. I guess it comes back to power to weight. The car sounded great, but there was no "holy-bajesus" torquey kick in the pants.

I have a new found respect for what 190-200HP via a turbo can do.

I really wanted to get my mind blown by the Stang and fall in love with a new toy!

Oh well...sometimes reality is a b*tch

That was exactly my experience, and why I bought a newer V6 car as a daily driver. The 5.0 Coyote motor is a different animal entirely, but I made my choice based on lower cost and my intended use. The V6 just made sense for me. I do miss the sexy V8 sounds though!

[Jim Bremner]

Auto or manual trans?

Want to wake up the car? add 4:10 rear gears it sounds steep but with the overdrive trans you should be in the 2,600 rpm zone on the highway

It's a car put out for the masses and with lawyers and epa/café standards there needs to be some work to the cars to get them where you want to go.

I do miss my 3,100 pound 364 rear wheel hp mustang every now and then.

[Reg]

Originally Posted by rammstein

You want the Coyote Mustang.

This. Ask me how I know

[Dantilla]

Same experience here.

After having a 220 hp 944 Turbo, I expected a 300 hp car to be quick.
I still really like the 2005-2009 Mustangs, but it sure isn't the hot rod I expected.

I still have an NA Miata. Perfect for the curvy, hilly roads around here.

[nota]

the new 4 with a turbo makes 310hp
the dI v6 makes 300 or 305

progress

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by twobone

So I took an 07' Mustang GT for a test drive today while in a search for a possible replacement for my turbo miata. Thought I would look for a change.

I was expecting to have my mind blown away by the v8 power. I guess it comes back to power to weight. The car sounded great, but there was no "holy-bajesus" torquey kick in the pants.

I have a new found respect for what 190-200HP via a turbo can do.

I really wanted to get my mind blown by the Stang and fall in love with a new toy!

Oh well...sometimes reality is a b*tch

I bet the Mustang can do better burnouts than the Miata!

My first car was a 1960 36 HP VW bug. My second car was a 1973 VW bug and it felt like a rocket compared to the 60 model.

[DanielDudley]

Originally Posted by Jim Bremner

Auto or manual trans?

Want to wake up the car? add 4:10 rear gears it sounds steep but with the overdrive trans you should be in the 2,600 rpm zone on the highway

It's a car put out for the masses and with lawyers and epa/café standards there needs to be some work to the cars to get them where you want to go.

I do miss my 3,100 pound 364 rear wheel hp mustang every now and then.

My 928 has a Euro ring and pinion. Makes a big difference.

[HardDrive]

Drop a Kenne Bell supercharger on it and report back.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by 1990C4S

What is the 0-60 time? I see a lot of conflicting numbers when I google it.

I was curious so checked out the '08 and '09 Bullitt mustang last night, 315hp V-8, supposed to give a 5.0 or 5.1 0-60 which isn't OMG fast, but is still pretty darn fast.

Originally Posted by aschen

its not a fast car when you think about it having a big v8, but it is a fast car in the context of a reliable car than can be bought for less than 10 k. It is fast/fun compared to say a similarly priced camry.

Also if you can slap a turbo on a mustang you can certainly slap one on a mustang!

300hp hasn't been omg fast since the 3.3 930s were new.

But as above, a 5-flat 0-60 is pretty quick.

Originally Posted by Dantilla

Same experience here.

After having a 220 hp 944 Turbo, I expected a 300 hp car to be quick.
I still really like the 2005-2009 Mustangs, but it sure isn't the hot rod I expected.

I still have an NA Miata. Perfect for the curvy, hilly roads around here.

I'm betting that part of the difference is power delivery. A car with a wide flat power curve usually doesn't feel as fast as something peaky like a turbo or my old '88 911 (not tons of power, but fairly peaky delivery) Feeling the power build as the revs build pretty much always feels faster to me. Of course, in practice, the wider power curve is usually faster.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by nota

the new 4 with a turbo makes 310hp
the dI v6 makes 300 or 305

progress

The '08 and '09 Bullitt had 315.
Crazy, ain't.

This is a similar revelation with the new turbo-4 Porsche Coxsters
https://www.pca.org/news/2016-04-12/2017-porsche-718-boxster-and-boxster-s-first-drives

There is, however, a massive silver lining: While the engine may not be a match for the previous flat sixes for sound or ultimate smoothness, the offset — as expected — is torque. The advantage is big, not only in terms of peak torque (+35% in the Boxster and +17% in the Boxster S) but especially in terms of usable torque at lower revs, where the turbo fours shred the normally-aspirated sixes. Over the road, around an autocross, and on a track, older Boxsters will have a tough time staying with the new cars. How fast is the new Boxster S? With the right options, it’s 16 seconds faster than its predecessor around the Nürburgring’s North Loop — and six seconds faster than a 997.1 GT3.

That's crazy!!

Of course, it's not like they could replace them with something slower.

[ckelly78z]

After driving my 160HP N/A 944, my new to me, 2004 GT with 260 HP feels like a rocketship, even with an auto trans.

I can't wait to go with 3.73 gears, underdrive pulleys, and a better tune......this will be a mid-high 13 second car with little effort.....some subframe conectors, a strut tower brace, and some replaced bushings, it will ride tight and true.

[pwd72s]

The Bullitt came with a 3:73 limited slip rear end...essentially the same rear end as the GT500 of the same year. Lower rear end ratio than the GT. Different cams than the GT, giving it another 500 revs before redline. An adaptive tune, lets you run regular, or get a power boost with premium. 2500 on the tach when cruising at 80.

Cindy loves the seats for comfort. She complained of the sports seats in the old '72 911S giving her a backache. The Bullitt seating is leather, also the same seats as the GT500.

So, the Bullitt is "basically" a GT, but it has enough added goodies to make it unique from a GT beyond it's sleeper looks.

As I said on another thread, it's probably my last car. I was sorely tempted by the new GT350, but for the driving I do these days, the Bullitt does all I need. That, combined with Ford dealers asking 5 figures additional markup helped me decide I didn't need one.

Of course, no Mustang could be considered as cool or as fast as a well set up 944.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Someone said Bullitt and activated the Paul signal.......

300 HP in a 3600 lb car isn't going to be OMG fast by modern standards. If you want that response, go drive a GT500 or Stage 3 Roush. I've owned both, they are giggle inducing. Probably my favorite Mustang was a 2008 GT500 with some suspension and performance bolt-on goodies. Second favorite was a 2008 Roush 427R. I love that bodystyle of Mustang, and they feel much smaller than the newer models.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I suspect a lot of the horsepower / torque on the base model is simply driven by marketing - enough to keep the reputation of "yes, it's a Mustang" alive but also making the prospective buyer wanting a little more ("hey, over here we have a Shelby model that's got more power...") All car manufacturers do this, I'm sure Ford is no different.

FWIW I had an '83 GT years ago. Loads of fun and probably weighed 1/2 to 2/3 what today's pigs do. And to be fair the Mustang is small compared to the new Camaro which by all rights should be a pickup truck. They've both gotten really, really fat and hulkish and bloated IMHO.