Is Ford lacking on performance?

[w3rkn]

I loved my leather Redline Recaros, but agree 100% they need to do something different for the Mustang or at least provide heated/cooling.

This, no matter what cost.... because it is still going to be cheaper than me ordering them aftermarket, etc.

Sponsored

 

[Fatguy]

What does it matter if the seats are heated or cooled when we talk performance. Do you guys run the a/c at the track or drag strip? :lol: :shrug:

My first 5.0 had no a/c, no power windows or power locks. Not even a radio. And I was proud of that! Built for performance and only performance.

 

[howlins550]

What does it matter if the seats are heated or cooled when we talk performance. Do you guys run the a/c at the track or drag strip? :lol: :shrug:

My first 5.0 had no a/c, no power windows or power locks. Not even a radio. And I was proud of that! Built for performance and only performance.

Because in today's world, cars are capable of having both. Look at the mustang or zl1 as a grand touring car it's comfortable, fast on a track, or down the straight. I mean having a stock car that can run the nurburg under 7:30 , hit a quarter in 11.4@125 and be comfortable to drive around town with the luxury of good radio, heated cooled seats. Why would you not love it?

And costing less than a comparable European car is huge

 

[Fatguy]

Because in today's world, cars are capable of having both. Look at the mustang or zl1 as a grand touring car it's comfortable, fast on a track, or down the straight. I mean having a stock car that can run the nurburg under 7:30 , hit a quarter in 11.4@125 and be comfortable to drive around town with the luxury of good radio, heated cooled seats. Why would you not love it?

And costing less than a comparable European car is huge

Times don’t my matter. Eras do. Also back in the day the early fox body era for the price of my V6 adjusted for inflation - you practically had the fastest car on the street! The only cars that could beat it was the current Corvette and some higher end Ferraris but was faster that the cheaper ones. Performance cars avoided us because we were faster and never declined an offer to race.


I applaud that era of no compromise. I “think” the Ferrari F40 had a cable you pulled to open the door. That is no compromise performance!

 

[Norm Peterson]

Because in today's world, cars are capable of having both.

And from a purely performance point of view, that waters down the very essence of a performance car.

Look at the mustang or zl1 as a grand touring car it's comfortable, fast on a track, or down the straight. I mean having a stock car that can run the nurburg under 7:30 , hit a quarter in 11.4@125 and be comfortable to drive around town with the luxury of good radio, heated cooled seats. Why would you not love it?

What you're actually describing there is a "gentleman's express" rather than a minimalist sports car or a bare-knuckle brawler. Try to understand that there really are people who don't want any more luxury, features, or refinement in their car than is necessary for the uses it will get. That there really are people for whom less is more when it comes to those aspects. Possibly in any car they'd choose to own.


Norm

 

[howlins550]

And from a purely performance point of view, that waters down the very essence of a performance car.



What you're actually describing there is a "gentleman's express" rather than a minimalist sports car or a bare-knuckle brawler. Try to understand that there really are people who don't want any more luxury, features, or refinement in their car than is necessary for the uses it will get. That there really are people for whom less is more when it comes to those aspects. Possibly in any car they'd choose to own.


Norm

What I'm saying is the cars today, are beating some of the track focused stripped down cars while not giving up the comfort. I am the same sometimes, but with a car that will be daily driven in complete comfort and still out perform cars that are focusing only on the track/ performance why would you not get that?

Sure, if you stripped out a car and take away a lot of the cars features it will have better performance. With today's cars tho, we're in an awesome age of not having to compromise

 

[UAmach1]

Times don’t my matter. Eras do. Also back in the day the early fox body era for the price of my V6 adjusted for inflation - you practically had the fastest car on the street! The only cars that could beat it was the current Corvette and some higher end Ferraris but was faster that the cheaper ones. Performance cars avoided us because we were faster and never declined an offer to race.


I applaud that era of no compromise. I “think” the Ferrari F40 had a cable you pulled to open the door. That is no compromise performance!

Yeah the 93 Cobra was realistically a 260-270hp 5.0, Nissan had the RB25DETT doing 320(rated 278), it was a great time for engines.

It'd not to different now. Fords got a 480hp 5.0 (bullitt), 525hp 5.2, and Nissan has the VQ30TT, 2 versions rated at 300 and 400, but dynos putting them closer to 330 and 440.

It's what I'm liking about the Q50. Automatic but with just a tune and catback and I'm passing my friends manual STG2+ STI, then driving home MUCH quieter than him and in more luxury. If I put a good set of downpipes on it I'd be making over 600wtq. Crazy great engines.

It's not that Ford is lacking performance it's that everyone seems to have things on point lately.

 

[howlins550]

That's a good way of looking at it actually, not that they are lacking but that everyone is stepping up their games.

 

[UAmach1]

And from a purely performance point of view, that waters down the very essence of a performance car.



What you're actually describing there is a "gentleman's express" rather than a minimalist sports car or a bare-knuckle brawler. Try to understand that there really are people who don't want any more luxury, features, or refinement in their car than is necessary for the uses it will get. That there really are people for whom less is more when it comes to those aspects. Possibly in any car they'd choose to own.


Norm

To me that is a great description of what I always felt the 2003-2004 Mach1 was. You could do minor things then run it at the strip and set good times all day. You could pick up a Mach1 for 5-6K less than the Terminator(not counting the Markup the Termi had, luckily the Mach1 seems to have had less of that), put on a full exhaust, set of gears, a tune and roll mid-low 12's all night I was doing 12.7 with just good street tires, intake, catback and 4.10 rear. Headers, better driver and a 4.30 would likely being doing 12.3-4, keeping it under the 5K difference. The most fancy thing about it was a CD player.

Sure the Termi was easier/cheaper to mod and had higher limits, but with the same price invested in both cars you were playing catch up first. The mach1 guy could spend 5k to go faster in a line which if creative enough could have been a mild turbo setup, or even an eaton swap(I priced this out before, if I did it myself it would have been about 2600, leaving 1400 for tuning + other stuff), or spend 5k on the suspension.

 

[Norm Peterson]

What I'm saying is the cars today, are beating some of the track focused stripped down cars while not giving up the comfort. I am the same sometimes, but with a car that will be daily driven in complete comfort and still out perform cars that are focusing only on the track/ performance why would you not get that?

Because I neither need nor want "complete comfort". The short version is that it's the driving part itself that matters.

Sure, if you stripped out a car and take away a lot of the cars features it will have better performance. With today's cars tho, we're in an awesome age of not having to compromise

Not having to compromise [very much] to get luxury or to satisfy some gotta-have-it-all vanity isn't the same as actively not wanting the luxury-oriented stuff in the first place.


Norm

 

[jake_zx2]

Last thing i would like to add to this debate/ complaint is the Recaro seats, the ZL1 has alcantara/leather recaros that have heat and cooling as well as power adjustability. You opt for the leather in the mustang and you lose that function, along with power seats

IMO, the Camaro Recaros are a joke. They are just the standard Camaro seats with a TINY bit extra bolstering and the Recaro name. If you ask me, Ford does it right... we offer the standard seat, which offers acceptable bolstering and great comfort, or we offer the Recaro (a REAL recaro, not just a lick and stick brand name) with aggressive bolstering and harness pull-throughs (yes, because the Camaro Recaros don't even have anywhere to put a harness). It may not be the most comfortable on a day-to-day basis, but that's not what you buy a Recaro seat for

 

[martinjlm]

What does it matter if the seats are heated or cooled when we talk performance. Do you guys run the a/c at the track or drag strip? :lol: :shrug:

My first 5.0 had no a/c, no power windows or power locks. Not even a radio. And I was proud of that! Built for performance and only performance.

When people say "the Camaro is the better track car" the response is always "yeah, but Mustang is a better everyday driver". So now when people say "I want comfort options in my car" the response is "you don't need that stuff at the track" :shrug: even though the "track only" car has them for people who want to drive their "track only" car whenever they feel like it? Ok.

 

[jake_zx2]

When people say "the Camaro is the better track car" the response is always "yeah, but Mustang is a better everyday driver". So now when people say "I want comfort options in my car" the response is "you don't need that stuff at the track" :shrug: even though the "track only" car has them for people who want to drive their "track only" car whenever they feel like it? Ok.

I think that is more in regards to offerings... The Camaro's only "comfort" package offering is akin to the GT's "performance pack level 1". The mustang has more comfort-oriented package offerings.

However, wanting more "comfort" in the racing seats is akin to people wanting a 1LE or PP2 to be more "streetable", which I know some people (usually fanboys) do say, but it seems the majority opinion is that you're intentionally looking to buy an all out, no compromise track package, you should be prepared to sacrifice some creature comforts. Requesting things like extra weight via heating, cooling, and electric adjustability in a seat specifically purchased for light-weighting or like less bolstering in a seat specifically purchased for additional bolstering is absolutely absurd to me

 

[UAmach1]

What does it matter if the seats are heated or cooled when we talk performance. Do you guys run the a/c at the track or drag strip? :lol: :shrug:

My first 5.0 had no a/c, no power windows or power locks. Not even a radio. And I was proud of that! Built for performance and only performance.

No, but people do on the way home.

And you got maybe 1/10th faster do to that. Not everyone wants to daily a strped car just to get .1 faster than the guy with AC in that one rare chance you may race. In the 80's and maybe 90's weight of options matteted. Now, not so much. If you're fretting if you should get nice seats because you may go a fraction of a second slower then you shouldn't get a new car. You should get a roller.

 

[jake_zx2]

Not everyone wants to daily a strped car just to get .1 faster than the guy with AC in that one rare chance you may race.

Having a completely stripped ZX2 without A/C or PS, I have to say, I will NEVER do that to one of my mustangs unless it's an all out track-only car. Only reason I did it on the ZX2 was because its such a low power car that it thrives on lightweighting. With a car like a mustang, you don't really need that as much

Sponsored