Sponsored

Interesting drag race

MyStang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Threads
42
Messages
476
Reaction score
713
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2015 GT
Sponsored

 

Less Weight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Threads
27
Messages
430
Reaction score
154
Location
East Coast
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Honestly, I'm not surprised. Since the S550 debuted in 2015, the GT's performance has remained pretty constant. You could even say stagnated. Whether it's 435 horsepower or 480 something, any power increases have been negated by weight gain. Hell, you could go back even further; the S197 with the 412 horsepower Coyote was about as fast as either the S550 and S650 GT's.

The power plant and transmissions are just fine and more than ample. Those aren't the problems. It's weight and lack of rear end sophistication.

In order for the Mustang to enter into the next level of performance, Ford needs to start with a clean sheet. A 9/10th's sized Mustang. The current car and the S550 before it are simply to large. A Mustang weighing a good 400 pounds less than the current one with a rear architecture devoid of all the slop and crudeness would elevate the GT to another level.

Until Ford takes those steps, no one should expect any meaningful gains. There's a reason that I still have my 2016 GT. Trading up for the "latest and greatest" is simply a sideways move. An exercise in wasteful spending.
 

robvas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2023
Threads
2
Messages
569
Reaction score
438
Location
MI
Vehicle(s)
2003
Interesting that the old one was a little faster...but:

Both cars were sticks

No actual timing etc

Would like to see them at a 1/4 mile track with alternating drivers and actual timeslips

And of course the 2015 isn't stock, and a 2018+ would be a better comparison

But that is a pretty typical used mustang that might roll up on a brand new one o the street.
 

Crew4991

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2020
Threads
12
Messages
843
Reaction score
1,710
Location
Denver Colorado
First Name
Crew
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang, 2006 Viper
Honestly, I'm not surprised. Since the S550 debuted in 2015, the GT's performance has remained pretty constant. You could even say stagnated. Whether it's 435 horsepower or 480 something, any power increases have been negated by weight gain. Hell, you could go back even further; the S197 with the 412 horsepower Coyote was about as fast as either the S550 and S650 GT's.

The power plant and transmissions are just fine and more than ample. Those aren't the problems. It's weight and lack of rear end sophistication.

In order for the Mustang to enter into the next level of performance, Ford needs to start with a clean sheet. A 9/10th's sized Mustang. The current car and the S550 before it are simply to large. A Mustang weighing a good 400 pounds less than the current one with a rear architecture devoid of all the slop and crudeness would elevate the GT to another level.

Until Ford takes those steps, no one should expect any meaningful gains. There's a reason that I still have my 2016 GT. Trading up for the "latest and greatest" is simply a sideways move. An exercise in wasteful spending.
Agreed. Until there is a substantial difference and a real desire to 'upgrade' my 2016 big booty convertible isn't going anywhere.

Would recommend the S650 to anyone that wants to upgrade from the S197 gen or the SN94 gen. That will feel like a pretty big upgrade but to me the S550 and S650 gens do not feel all that much different. The interior is basically the same except for the ipad dash and the exterior really looks like a refresh of our generation. I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade from the S550 but that is simply my opinion.
 

Trap

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Threads
5
Messages
178
Reaction score
199
Location
Alberta
Vehicle(s)
2013 Boss 302
I know with the tighter gearing in the MT-82 on my 13 Boss 302, it is definitely faster the my 2020 GT PP1 with the MT and the wider gearing in the transmission. So the results do not surprise me at all.
 

Sponsored

robvas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2023
Threads
2
Messages
569
Reaction score
438
Location
MI
Vehicle(s)
2003
Clutch and X pipe are adding how much power again? 3, 4 hp?
 

EFI

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 19, 2015
Threads
62
Messages
4,873
Reaction score
4,222
Location
Masshole central
Vehicle(s)
5.Br0
In order for the Mustang to enter into the next level of performance, Ford needs to start with a clean sheet. A 9/10th's sized Mustang. The current car and the S550 before it are simply to large. A Mustang weighing a good 400 pounds less than the current one with a rear architecture devoid of all the slop and crudeness would elevate the GT to another level.
The GT doesn't need to be on "another level", the other levels are taken up by the higher trim Machs and DHs.

It's better to have choice (especially financially) rather than make the base model a world class car and then price it out of most people's budgets. We already have $60k+ GTs, we don't need the GT to be on another level and have it cost $100k. For those that want the basic cheap fun, you get the EB or base GT. For those with money that want their Mustang to be on another level like you said they step up to the Mach or DH or GTD.
 

NGOT8R

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Threads
124
Messages
6,500
Reaction score
4,546
Location
Florida
First Name
Adrian
Vehicle(s)
2019 Bullitt
I know with the tighter gearing in the MT-82 on my 13 Boss 302, it is definitely faster the my 2020 GT PP1 with the MT and the wider gearing in the transmission. So the results do not surprise me at all.
^^This^^. That MT82-D4‘s gearing is no match for the MT82‘s gearing.
 

Sponsored

CrackedHorn

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Threads
25
Messages
263
Reaction score
252
Location
Kansas
Vehicle(s)
09 Mustang GT/CS; 15 Mustang GT
Idk why they'd even make the vid tbh, the Gen 2 S550 has a tune, an xpipe, clutch....They're both manuals, no timers. Just a waste of time tbh lol
I would normally agree here. However, the S650 can't be tuned yet and mods can void the warranty.

If a tune is all it takes for a ,basically, 10 year old GT to keep up with the new $55k version, then we start to see why this is a decent comparison.
 

Torinate

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Threads
85
Messages
1,957
Reaction score
881
Location
Ontario
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT Convertible
Yea. No surprise. How they decided on S650 is beyond me - same basic car really.

But my god, is that back end on the yellow car HIDEOUS! Amazing, seeing the “outdated” 2016 and how much nicer it looks than the styling fiasco of the 24. The front may even be worse. It just blends in like all the other brands. Only thing that says it’s a mustang is the horse emblem. Take that off and it could be a Chevy Dodge or Honda even.

So for 24, you get a car that performs almost the exact same except looks like a complete disaster. For how many more thousands for that “privilege”?

Rant over.
 

Less Weight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Threads
27
Messages
430
Reaction score
154
Location
East Coast
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
The GT doesn't need to be on "another level", the other levels are taken up by the higher trim Machs and DHs.

It's better to have choice (especially financially) rather than make the base model a world class car and then price it out of most people's budgets. We already have $60k+ GTs, we don't need the GT to be on another level and have it cost $100k. For those that want the basic cheap fun, you get the EB or base GT. For those with money that want their Mustang to be on another level like you said they step up to the Mach or DH or GTD.
Negative. You missed my point. What I’m trying to say is that the GT has stagnated in isolation. Not talking about other models of the Mustang.

Case in point. The standard, base model of the C7 Corvette was what? A zero-to-sixty of around 3.9 seconds? Then came the base model C8 which lopped a whole second off with a 2.9.

Those were base model, run of the mill Corvettes which remained in the same price point (adjusted for inflation)

The GT in those same years has not made that type of progress.
 
 




Top