86 vs. Mustang (v6)

[Splat]

Originally Posted by Cheddar

Go to a hertz or entrprise and see all the convertable camaros and mustangs.

Enough said. Its a rental car.

Rental car or not, it still kicks the FR-S all over the place. Also, all those rental cars make it less expensive for them to produce so many.

[roddy]

I have a V6 Mustang (supercharged) AND an FR-S and LOL'd at some of the comments in the OP. The Mustang is my summer/weekend car and usually sees about 10,000 KMs (6200ish Miles) a summer. I bought the FR-S as a daily driver and brought it home on June 28th. Since that time, I've put over 11,000KMs on the FR-S, and maybe 800 (~500 miles) on the Mustang... That should tell you something about how this "Mustang guy" feels about the ride/drive of the Mustang vs the FR-S.

[SciOnDrifTtSlIdeR]

For all of you complaining about power in the frs/brz compared to the mustang. Power can be made but putting that American pig(mustang) on a diet is impossible gl getting the mustang down from 3600 to 2750 lol btw the brz Sti is coming out next year and is to be said 300+ hp

[ML]

I'll just leave this here.

[Siberian Husky]

Originally Posted by SciOnDrifTtSlIdeR

For all of you complaining about power in the frs/brz compared to the mustang. Power can be made but putting that American pig(mustang) on a diet is impossible gl getting the mustang down from 3600 to 2750 lol btw the brz Sti is coming out next year and is to be said 300+ hp

3600 lbs is hardly "pig" territory. The live axle on the mustang has also been found to not be as debilitating to its handling as naysayers theorize. You are absolutely correct that weight is important and you get more value for every hp you put into a car that is lighter. However, the 5.0 liter coyote and even the 300hp v6 are platforms that should be respected; they have been proven to respond very well to modification and it is easier to [reliably] cultivate that motor for power gains than our little 2.0. I've been following the FI section closely and have been impressed with the gains had by some kits, but there is no replacement for displacement--period.

Also, the only numbers legitimately entertained for an STI version of a BRZ have been in the field of 230ish, with it remaining naturally aspirated; stop thinking subaru will shoot itself in the foot and provide us with a WRX turbo'd powerplant and negate their own flagship sports car.

A mustang with some minor suspension work and a tune is by far one of the best bang for buck options out there and any genuine car enthusiast would be able to both appreciate and respect that.

[Accurate Race Shop]

I know these cars are all modded but a mustang took 2nd and 4th place in formula d and the Greddy FR-S came in 8th.

[Miniata]

Originally Posted by SciOnDrifTtSlIdeR

For all of you complaining about power in the frs/brz compared to the mustang. Power can be made but putting that American pig(mustang) on a diet is impossible gl getting the mustang down from 3600 to 2750 lol btw the brz Sti is coming out next year and is to be said 300+ hp

Actually doing weight reduction on a Mustang is pretty easy, not to mention your 3600 lb weight for a V6 Mustang is inflated. A fully loaded V6 Mustang Convertible will be in the 3600 lbs range, but a base V6 Mustang Coupe starts out at a bit over 3400 lbs, and with the performance package they still come in under 3500 lbs. My V8 2008 GT came in at a curb weight of 3490 lbs, and I had several hundred pounds out of it at autocross weight.

[Cjm005]

My boss 302 weighs right at 3600 with fuel and no driver. I get tired of hearing people gripe that mustangs don't handle. With very few mods they are good track cars. Look at any HPDE or drag race and see them lined up. Best bang for your buck period.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by ML

I'll just leave this here.

What do these unidentified numbers represent... I'm trying to decipher it....

[ML]

Sorry , seconds to the column next to car types, then time difference, then diffrence from fastest.

[Jaylyons1]

I like the time postings. That's the problem with the majority of mustang drivers. They are so used to going in a strait line(where the stang actually performs decently) that they get beat out by cars they consider inferior.

[ML]

Originally Posted by Jaylyons1

I like the time postings. That's the problem with the majority of mustang drivers. They are so used to going in a strait line(where the stang actually performs decently) that they get beat out by cars they consider inferior.

and on top of it that was my first AutoX.

[Cjm005]

Most Mustangs will not do well in auto X. Actual road course will be a different story where the power becomes more important.

[Accurate Race Shop]

Originally Posted by Cjm005

Most Mustangs will not do well in auto X. Actual road course will be a different story where the power becomes more important.

I agree even though every mustang on that list was faster than him with a little more experience he will be beating them. On a track with sweeping turns that rear end and extra weight holds it to the ground where ours get a little more tail happy. I have had my old V6 Mustang on the same tracks as my FR-S and I'm still fighting to get the same times. AutoX is a different story I never really did it with my mustang but the once or twice I did it wasn't very good... Not that I'm all that good in my FR-S but at least I'm not hanging out at the bottom of the time charts.