Exactly what I was gonna say lol. Why would the Mach 1 be faster than the gt350?
maybe but probably not trivial- ie requires drilling holes into the case and mounting suitable sensor. And then you'd need the control logic flashed to the ECU.
This argument is so tired at this point. You do realize that Ford makes the majority of it's mustang sales with the Ecoboost right? Sales have no indication of performance.
The zl1 1le did everything it was suppose to. The ride was harsh as I expected but I still loved it. You are spot on with a gt500 to replace my 11 gt500 which I still miss so much. Im probably going to end up in a gt350 cause that's what I wanted when I got the Camaro but I let price and performance sway me.So are you actually cross shopping a Mach I anymore? Seems like a Camaro is sort of a no brainer for you, though you also said you sold your ZL1, so I guess it didn't push the right buttons[?]
Seems like you need to find a '20 GT500 to replace your '11
And chasing milliseconds on a track is no indication as to how good a car is as an overall package. The vast majority of Mustang and Camaro owners will never see a track. And none of that changes my statement. The Camaro is an awesome drivers car but misses the mark in so many areas that the Mustang resonates more on.
That's okay. I do all of my work in a straight line. My A10 has already upset quite a few guys that chose the wrong gearbox for that setup.the shift behavior of the 10R upsets the chassis. I agree the artificial distinction of 'no handling pack for you A10 people' is a bit gratuitous, but it is a "nice slap in the face" for choosing the wrong gear box.
For the A10 to work on a road circuit you'd have to put it into M mode or at least specify tuning parameters as to where to draw the line on shift points and how G-loading tempers the engagement point. Say you're in a Monza arc and need to shift twice before corner exit - you'd likely end up in the wall with how the A10 shifts in Track mode.
Now what would be really cool would be a GPS-assisted 'learn the track mode' that could replicate manual shift inputs in fully auto mode - ie, hold a gear instead of shifting up only to shift down 3 for the corner 100 yards away.
I disagree. To me the 5.2 is just a marketing/sales gimmick. It's a 4% bump in displacement. Ford needs to increase displacement by at least 10% to get a good power increase. 20-30% would be better.
I think a Boss 351 would be a better choice than another 302 only a few years later. Do something a little different. And if you went up to 5.7 liters you could easily hit a higher power target. Most Mustang buyers want more performance as an incentive to buy. Displacement is an easy way to do it. And a high revving 5.7 could be an absolute monster engine. Lots and lots of Mustang owners would flock to the dealers to buy that.Oh yeah, that 5.2 thing was sort of an afterthought (for pursuing GT350 level output), but you are so right, I guess a Boss without a 302 would like a Mustang with an electric motor ... oh wait ...
Dang, yeah, it would be tight to squeeze a Boss into production by MY22, though that assumes that MY23 target holds. Hell, I can see the Mustang sales staying solid, or even an uptick motivating Ford to slide the S650 back a MY, and milk the S500 platform for another year.
