Just drove mom's new '02 Mustang GT--can it compare to the celica?

[RedNOSceli]

Well, my mom just traded in here '01 Eclipse for a 02 Mustang GT 4 speed auto in Lazer Red....VERY Nice looking car....

I just snuck in a little drive while the folks were asleep and thought Id let you know....

The interior styling was a bit bland and the gauges were a bit small, also the seats were kind of lame with no real support on the sides...

Performance was very very nice, gobs of torque compared to the celica, and for an auto, the shifts were nice and hard, but could have been a little faster....It made me realize why I sold my F-Body....the three T's, Tickets, Tires, and Jack"T" up gas prices..Man I miss those days..

I only took it to about 60, but damn, it gets there fast, I dont see how these mags can post low 15's for this car, I see at least hight/mid 14's if not better...As far as handeling, well, it could use some stiffer and lower springs BAD but what do you want with 3200+lbs of american iron

Very Nice bang for the buck, oh, and the hood scoop looks just just like the big aftermarked scoops for the celica, which was cool...

So how does it compare to the celica?

Well, aside from the fact it was much more fun down low, I love the Celica more in every way, Interior, handeling, looks.

Well, there's my biased opinion...

[Baldhead_J]

Mustangs = Ugly Redneck Baby Haulers

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by Baldhead_J
Mustangs = Ugly Redneck Baby Haulers :rolleyes:

[dfess1]

Originally posted by SlasherX
:rolleyes:

:stupid: You have to have an appreciation for all cars man, and they are not just for rednecks, seems every jersey girl drives a convertable, and I'd say they are far from rednecks.

[CelicaDetective]

Mustang = fast in a straight line.

RWD = can't go punching the throttle in turns.

Interior = UGLY.

Exterior = See it everywhere you go, mostly the V6's.

Can't compare to the Celica because they are not in the same class. Camaro's and Firebird's were always better, faster muscle cars but now the 5.0 is coming for 2004, plus you've got the Mach 1 and Cobra Supercharged for 2003, which beats the Bird and Camaro

Mike

[dfess1]

Originally posted by CelicaDetective
RWD = can't go punching the throttle in turns.



I would have to disagree. Just learn how to drive a RWD car, that's all.

[Baldhead_J]

Methinks there is a mullet amongst us!

[dfess1]

Originally posted by Baldhead_J
Methinks there is a mullet amongst us!

Far from it, though you can see for yourself if you are coming to the 22nd meet in seaside.

I'm just saying that you need to have an appreciation for all cars. That's one of the things I like the most about this board, is that for the most part people do (unlike most of the bmw boards). And RWD does not automatically mean you can not get on the gas in a turn. And owning a RWD car does not imply a "Kentucky Neck Warmer" is on my head.

[donkeyponkey]

so rednosceli, why did your mom trade in the eclipse? just wondering? was there something wrong with it?

[RedNOSceli]

Originally posted by donkeyponkey
so rednosceli, why did your mom trade in the eclipse? just wondering? was there something wrong with it?

She said it had too many little problems, Sunroof not working, lousy sound system, cheapo interior, peddle vibration, no ABS, ac went out, etc etc....

[2000 XYR]

CelicaDetective said:
RWD = can't go punching the throttle in turns.
dfess1 answered:
I would have to disagree. Just learn how to drive a RWD car, that's all. I'm with dfess1. RWD is a lot more fun and CAN handle as well. Better if you know how to do it right. ;)

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by CelicaDetective
Mustang = fast in a straight line.

RWD = can't go punching the throttle in turns.

Interior = UGLY.

Exterior = See it everywhere you go, mostly the V6's.

Can't compare to the Celica because they are not in the same class. Camaro's and Firebird's were always better, faster muscle cars but now the 5.0 is coming for 2004, plus you've got the Mach 1 and Cobra Supercharged for 2003, which beats the Bird and Camaro

Mike

you don't know what you're talking about.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by Baldhead_J
Methinks there is a mullet amongst us!

Methinks there is a prick among us!

[Kry]

Mustang is Mustang.. Celica is Celica

in each of it's own.. both rulz..

[HilfigerCelica]

I wouldn't mind owning a Mustang GT right about now. Throw some Hotchkis suspension stuff on there and we're set.

[NSX_GTR_LM]

its a solid rear axle suspension, hurts the handling bad, but it is RWD which is a HUGE advantage over FWD any way you look at it. I am with slasher and dfess on this one.

[Brian00GTS]

Originally posted by dfess1


I would have to disagree. Just learn how to drive a RWD car, that's all.

Mmm...throttle steer. Nothing like coming out of a corner hard and straightening the car out with a punch of the gas :) Still though, yes, I like the Celica much better.

[Oo DaRk StAr oO]

Originally posted by SlasherX


Methinks there is a prick among us!

Well I reck he be down ronder. Run him over with your Hog mobile.

Agreed Slash... racial slurs belong in OT.

[silver-s]

i've never had a "american muscle car" keep up with me in the twisties. NEVER. even when my car was stock.

as far as straight line... well, i'll just say this, torque is good.

[Oo DaRk StAr oO]

Originally posted by silver-s
i've never had a "american muscle car" keep up with me in the twisties. NEVER. even when my car was stock.

as far as straight line... well, i'll just say this, torque is good.

:werd:

[dfess1]

Originally posted by silver-s
i've never had a "american muscle car" keep up with me in the twisties. NEVER. even when my car was stock.

as far as straight line... well, i'll just say this, torque is good.

Go German, you get he best of both worlds...

[valkyrie]

domestic cheap ****
people who drive a mustang usually a troublemaker on the street
think that they're fast and sooooo cool
but *cough* no .... engine is not lasting that long
enjoy while they can
adios

[dfess1]

Originally posted by valkyrie
domestic cheap ****
people who drive a mustang usually a troublemaker on the street
think that they're fast and sooooo cool
but *cough* no .... engine is not lasting that long
enjoy while they can
adios

This has to be the most idiotic thing I have ever read. You're telling me that all the little kiddies in the civics with the fart can melon launcher exhausts, that pull up next to me at a light are NOT trouble makers? They are doing just as much on the street as a mustang driver. Only thing is the mustang driver has the engine to take them (most of the time). It doesn't matter what car you drive, it's all about the personality/attitude of the driver. And yes, the engines do hold up.

[dragonglen]

I have a question that keeps on popping up. People talk about how "no car can beat me in the twisties...", but how many people have raced side by side on a twisty road? On top of that, if they can't keep up, but you know they're gonna try, then why chance it? There have been a few stories of cars spinning out of control and barely missing each other, or sometimes hitting each other. Also, if you're talking about having a car following you, or vice versa, is it really a race then? If I was in a mustang behind a celica in some tight turns and thought I wouldn't be able to keep up, I'd wait til the road straightened out to show my stuff. Racing isn't something you just do and automatically become good at, it takes practice and knowledge.

BTW, I was so glad when I heard they were bring back the Mach 1, but was sad when it was the same body style as the current mustang (with minor changes). I think it's time for a styling change.

[2000 XYR]

dragonglen said: I think it's time for a styling change. Next year is the retro, redesigned style I think. I don't like it.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by NSX_GTR_LM
its a solid rear axle suspension, hurts the handling bad, but it is RWD which is a HUGE advantage over FWD any way you look at it. I am with slasher and dfess on this one.

Every single one of any record holding race suspension Mustang has had the solid rear axle on it. It is not nearly as large a crutch as you'd believe.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by silver-s
i've never had a "american muscle car" keep up with me in the twisties. NEVER. even when my car was stock.

as far as straight line... well, i'll just say this, torque is good.

I've yet to see a car "race" me through curved public roads.

Take me to an autocross course and I have and will continue to routinely beat up on most FWD's

Trust me, it IS ALL DRIVER with the "twisties" as you put it.

Don't believe teh Hype.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by valkyrie
domestic cheap ****
people who drive a mustang usually a troublemaker on the street
think that they're fast and sooooo cool
but *cough* no .... engine is not lasting that long
enjoy while they can
adios

Toretto just called, he wants his tank top back, ya queer.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by dragonglen
I have a question that keeps on popping up. People talk about how "no car can beat me in the twisties...", but how many people have raced side by side on a twisty road? On top of that, if they can't keep up, but you know they're gonna try, then why chance it? There have been a few stories of cars spinning out of control and barely missing each other, or sometimes hitting each other. Also, if you're talking about having a car following you, or vice versa, is it really a race then? If I was in a mustang behind a celica in some tight turns and thought I wouldn't be able to keep up, I'd wait til the road straightened out to show my stuff. Racing isn't something you just do and automatically become good at, it takes practice and knowledge.

BTW, I was so glad when I heard they were bring back the Mach 1, but was sad when it was the same body style as the current mustang (with minor changes). I think it's time for a styling change.

Mach 1 will be very nice, but built for the drag racer crowd. the Bullitt was built mroe for the handling crowd. All in all, Ford is indeed on the right path with this car, which is a lot mroe to say than some cars companies around here *cough* *cough*

Twisties....sounds almost as moronic arguing that as it is to say that a 1.8 can put out as much hp n/a as the 5.0 mod for mod

[Razz]

Hey Slash, where's that sig? It would fit great right now! "Domestic Thug-Don't mess with me or I'll argue with you over the internet!" :D

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by Razz
Hey Slash, where's that sig? It would fit great right now! "Domestic Thug-Don't mess with me or I'll argue with you over the internet!" :D

THIS isn't by any means me arguing :) I'm just correcting people on their errors.

[dragonglen]

I didn't realize the Mach 1 was more for dragging, I thought it was getting the better suspension and the Bullitt was going the other way. That's too bad, but I probably wouldn't buy either unless the styling did change. I'll have to do more research on the Mach1, since the last time I saw pictures of it, or perhaps it was mislabeled, but it looked just like a new GT with some very minor changes to suspension and engine.

Since I don't drag race, and hardly have ever street raced, I'll stick to a car with great handling abilities, with some power when I'd like to have a little fun. The more I drive around in my friends' cars, the more I miss torque (between the late 90's Cobra, mid 90's Firebird, hell even the 2000 VR6 had noticable torque).

I'm actually thinking about getting a new car soon, since I just tire of the same thing. I love the looks and handling of the celica, but then again, I love the power and utility of my truck. If they ever made the Toyota RSC, I may just have to get one :)

[CelicaLicious]

mustangs do run mid 14's stock, i've actually seen a few stock ones break the 13's never any above 13.8.. it takes a really good driver though..

i like the bullit though, i think i like it better than the cobra, it posts about the same number and its a SOHC.. and the new 03 cobra is a cop out i think. cant get anymore power out if that engine so they SC it..

[2000 XYR]

Hey hey hey! :mad: Nothing wrong with a little forced induction to boost up your HP about 100 or so each. ;)

[NSX_GTR_LM]

Originally posted by SlasherX


Every single one of any record holding race suspension Mustang has had the solid rear axle on it. It is not nearly as large a crutch as you'd believe.

Is that because the solid rear axle isn't so bad or because the IRS that were available sucked ass :gap:

jk dude, i know its not that big of a disadvantage, i shouldn't have put the word bad in there. The only place i can see it cause a major problem is if you hit a bump in the turn, and most professional tracks are pretty free of bumps.

Please correct me if I am wrong about the bump in the turn thing, i have little experience with solid rear axle, only basing this off intuition.

[Deftech]

Well for all of the mustang haters, I have read that the 2005 redesign is set to dramatically change the Mustang. The wheels are being moved closer to the corners, ie front axel moved forward to improve stability more behind the axel than above. Supercharged version topping the 400 hp mark. And finally 4 wheel independent suspension. I believe that all but the 400 hp will carry throughout all models.

[CelicaLicious]

i hope thats true, because the Fbody has stomped all over the stang for years.. maybe not in sales, but definately in raw power..

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by dragonglen
I didn't realize the Mach 1 was more for dragging, I thought it was getting the better suspension and the Bullitt was going the other way. That's too bad, but I probably wouldn't buy either unless the styling did change. I'll have to do more research on the Mach1, since the last time I saw pictures of it, or perhaps it was mislabeled, but it looked just like a new GT with some very minor changes to suspension and engine.

Since I don't drag race, and hardly have ever street raced, I'll stick to a car with great handling abilities, with some power when I'd like to have a little fun. The more I drive around in my friends' cars, the more I miss torque (between the late 90's Cobra, mid 90's Firebird, hell even the 2000 VR6 had noticable torque).

I'm actually thinking about getting a new car soon, since I just tire of the same thing. I love the looks and handling of the celica, but then again, I love the power and utility of my truck. If they ever made the Toyota RSC, I may just have to get one :)

It's not a GT. The Mach 1 uses the n/a 4.6 DOHC motor, mounted to the 8.8" solid rear axle out back and 3.55 gears. The car has hit high 12's at Fun Ford, but is more of a low to mid 13 second car everyday. 300+ hp. It uses the Bullitt suspension upgrades of tokico shocks, 3/4 inch lowering springs and subframes, but you have to understand that those upgrades on the mach 1 were more out of overall feel of the car, rather than to make it corner carve. the bullitt was setup better for track use with the suspension i just mentioned, cobra brakes, evened out pedals for heel-toe, a flatter engine torque curve and more linear power delivery than the GT thanks to a new upper intake manifold, and tiny changes here and there, including positioning the shifter closer to the driver.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by CelicaLicious
mustangs do run mid 14's stock, i've actually seen a few stock ones break the 13's never any above 13.8.. it takes a really good driver though..

i like the bullit though, i think i like it better than the cobra, it posts about the same number and its a SOHC.. and the new 03 cobra is a cop out i think. cant get anymore power out if that engine so they SC it..

I don't understand this thinking at all. It's like saying DSM's are crap cuz they needed to use a turbo, or Supra's are a cop out because, hell, they needed two! don't forget all teh celica owners currently looking at hotchkis's supercharger kit, the xs turbo kit thats been rumored for twenty years now, the jackson racing superchargers availible for damn near every honda out there, etc etc etc

i fail to see a cop-out, so much as a tuning potential upgrade over what once was. Ford went with the supercharger because while they could have made more power out of the 4.6 dohc n/a (TRUST ME ON THIS, THAT ENGINE WASNT NEAR ITS FULL POTENTIAL N/A) they opted to throw the aftermarket and enthusiasts a bone by warranteeing a Vobra from teh factory basically. Adn even the LS1 guys know their place with the 4.6 DOHC and a blower.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by NSX_GTR_LM


Is that because the solid rear axle isn't so bad or because the IRS that were available sucked ass :gap:

jk dude, i know its not that big of a disadvantage, i shouldn't have put the word bad in there. The only place i can see it cause a major problem is if you hit a bump in the turn, and most professional tracks are pretty free of bumps.

Please correct me if I am wrong about the bump in the turn thing, i have little experience with solid rear axle, only basing this off intuition.

www.griggsracing.com


and no, the IRS offered isn't that bad at all, but the knowledge on how to make the 8.8" work very well is out there and doing very well.
Ford can make a good rear end, you just gotta keep in mind..these things see 300 ft lbs of torque day in, day out, and hp even higher than that..i think they do quite well within those requirements for durability, and then some.

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by CelicaLicious
i hope thats true, because the Fbody has stomped all over the stang for years.. maybe not in sales, but definately in raw power..

and look where it got them..

[Chui]

Many of you "import car guys" are full of yourselves. "Can a Mustang GT be compared to a Celica?" Let's look at it this way: "Can a Mustang GT be compared to the 'holy grail' Integra Type R? YES. Ask Josh and Company at Sport Compact Car. Amazing how so few can recall that at Willow Springs short course the Integra narrowly defeated the GT, but when the longer course was used the Mustang GT MOPPED the ITR. And we all know the outcome of matching a GT-S with an ITR on a road course. Grow up.

Slasher, I drove the Mach1 and I liked it. A lot. Well, I liked the power and the sound. There are some ergonomic issues as well as quality issues with the platform, but it's definitely a fun car. Simple upgrades to the suspension would make the car less prone to understeer. I'd take one.

[NSX_GTR_LM]

you finally came chui, thank you. People only seem to take you seriously :)

[Vroom_Vroom]

i just went to the ford dealership today and sat in a 02 stang gt 5 sp. and i felt so damn exicted my palms were sweating .. :) hey im comin from a 85 celica st and a explorer so gimme a break!

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by Chui
Many of you "import car guys" are full of yourselves. "Can a Mustang GT be compared to a Celica?" Let's look at it this way: "Can a Mustang GT be compared to the 'holy grail' Integra Type R? YES. Ask Josh and Company at Sport Compact Car. Amazing how so few can recall that at Willow Springs short course the Integra narrowly defeated the GT, but when the longer course was used the Mustang GT MOPPED the ITR. And we all know the outcome of matching a GT-S with an ITR on a road course. Grow up.

Slasher, I drove the Mach1 and I liked it. A lot. Well, I liked the power and the sound. There are some ergonomic issues as well as quality issues with the platform, but it's definitely a fun car. Simple upgrades to the suspension would make the car less prone to understeer. I'd take one.

:)

I have no doubts in my mind that that car is VERY fun to drive. slip a panhard bar on its rear suspension with some stiffer, linear spring rates matched to higher valved shocks and struts..then throw on some caster camber plates.. Done! :)

I'm glad to hear you approve of the car, Chui. I know for years the platform left a lot more to be desired to the driving enthusiast, but it does seem liek Ford has been at work improving the breed since the 80's. Thank you for making it a better car overall, instead of just stuffing in a bigger, more powerful motor*cough* GM *cough*

;)

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by NSX_GTR_LM
you finally came chui, thank you. People only seem to take you seriously :)

His credentials speak for themselves. I can only say so much about mine. I'm just an enthusiast who loves the Fairmont...er..Mustang.. A LOT.

[Deftech]

Ford is definitly about to step things up in all markets. Look at what they are considering for the escort, The special edition Mustangs and for the upper crust the pending revival of the GT40. They have realized the benefits of a sport car craze and will put there hat in the ring regardless of the domestic/import feelings. And they will be able to compete. While I love my celica, I have to give respect to any car manufactuer who is developing there lines. Toyota well they sure are getting better at economy. Lets hope they wake up before too long.

[Pure Racer]

Originally posted by Baldhead_J
Methinks there is a mullet amongst us!

Forgive my ignorance, what's a mullet?

[CelicaLicious]

Originally posted by SlasherX


and look where it got them..

touche or however you spell it..

and as for my reasoning with the SC being a cop-out is, i fully understand that the 4.6L has yet to be brought to it full potential in stock form. but when i say its a cop-out i mean compared to Fbodies... yes they are discontinuing them, but the mustang is suppose to be an american "muscle car" and most of the muscle cars that i know of make huge power without the help of a blower. yes the idea of a Vobra is badass. but i think that 390HP from a 4.6L DOHC with a blower is a little low.. i mean this is suppose to be Fords flagship performance car, and all they could pull out was 390 with the addition of a blower... if i'm not mistaken the camaro SS has more HP or close to it and its NA.. yes its a bigger motor by about 1 liter, but you get the point.

but either way i just hope that ford doesnt screw this one up..

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by CelicaLicious


touche or however you spell it..

and as for my reasoning with the SC being a cop-out is, i fully understand that the 4.6L has yet to be brought to it full potential in stock form. but when i say its a cop-out i mean compared to Fbodies... yes they are discontinuing them, but the mustang is suppose to be an american "muscle car" and most of the muscle cars that i know of make huge power without the help of a blower. yes the idea of a Vobra is badass. but i think that 390HP from a 4.6L DOHC with a blower is a little low.. i mean this is suppose to be Fords flagship performance car, and all they could pull out was 390 with the addition of a blower... if i'm not mistaken the camaro SS has more HP or close to it and its NA.. yes its a bigger motor by about 1 liter, but you get the point.

but either way i just hope that ford doesnt screw this one up..

Couple points:

1. N/A to N/a you can not make up cubic inches when it comes down to HP production. VTEC, VVTL-i, etc are expensive gimmicks used to try to simulate power output from a larger engine, but even they are indeed limited. Ford could have made the 4.6 rev even higher, and make more peak hp, but at what cost? The cost being a linear powerband, somethign these valvetrain tricked motors do not have.

2. Now, on to the actual LS1...take any 5.0, or 5.8 liter Windsor mill and throw on a higher compression ratio, aluminum high flow heads, and a cam matched to it and suddenly the LT-1's and LS-1's of the world become much more commonplace. Add in factory tolerances, etc. and its a match. GM did nothign special with those blocks.

3. OK, we've established that cubic inches are king n/a, and that the GM blocks aren't handed down from a deity by any means. Now on to the reason why Ford went with a blower. Number one reason is COST. when you are producing a mass market car with as many yearly sales, and as much appeal as the Mustang, you try to keep the prices of the car relatively low for the market, and try to make it an excellent bang for the buck..which is the TRUE origins of any "muscle car". It's long been known how well the 4.6 DOHC takes to boost..over 400rwhp is the normal at just 8 psi for many upon many of them. Now what is cheaper and mroe benficial to Fords bottom line? A blower slapped onto a block that they're very aware of its capabilities (6 bolt main, rumored 1200hp potential) or open the block up, try to throw in a wilder cam, or a vtec like mechanism more radical than the valve lift the car currently has, maybe design all new heads(like they did already in 99) design new intakes, maybe bore it out, etc etc. Obviously the blower is the route to go. Now we can argue back and forth which way is better..5.7 vs. boosted 4.6 all day long and to no conclusion, but thats carr talk. obvioulsy the larger mtor wasnt the better way to go otehrwise GM would have an 03 F-body.

4. Why is Ford only producing 390bhp you ask? Well, I've personally seen a couple dynosheets and read many a report on the car and from what I gather, Ford is severely underrating this car. My bets on are two things. One being the Insurance factor..insuring a car with well over 400hp isnt easy these days, and two, to be weary of the Corvette. I don't believe Ford wants to openly advertise their Corvette killer at 35k in the Mustang Cobra, with the GT-40 down the pipeline, and the next generation Mustangs set to come out in two years.

Basically..boost is good, boost is warranteed..the car is going to haul major ass past the LS1's stock for stock(despite al the **** talking youll see from both sides, its the plain truth)

Reliability wise, Ford built this block very strong, so we'll see..I'm personally hoping that it doen't turn into another '99 Cobra fiasco with the press and sheeple blowing it WAY WAY out of proportion. But, we'll see

[Iwannagofast]

I am sorry to burst your bubble Slasher X. But have you ever seen an LS1 head off the car? take a look at them and tell me they are nothing special. I am so sick of people sayin that the only reason that the camaros are faster is because they got more motor. Just look at the weight diff. there is just a little over 500 lbs diff. The camaros are much heaver. Oh and what does the new cobras run? My 2000 Camaro SS ran a 12.92 stock other than a K&N filter on street tires. It dynoed at 312 rwhp. There seems to be something wrong with this picture here. The new mustangs have alot more power than the LS1, but that little diff. in times and the major weight diff. on both cars doens't make sense on why the LS1 guys are laughing there ass off at these for guys for getting what they think is a LS1 killer. Oh and one thing too The Ls1's are good motors to be boosted. There is a guy around here that has a 2001 WS6 with a procharger kit on it running 10's on the stock bottom end...My pick between the Rustang and the f-body is still f-body (even though GM needs to grow some balls and quit killing all there bad ass performance cars i.e. 454 SS, Impala SS,89 turbo TA, GNX and so on). Trust me I would get rid of my celica in a heartbeat if I could afford insurance on another f-body. Don't get me wrong I love me celica but damn going from 300+ hp at the wheels to 180 isn't something that you can get used to.

[Tronix]

I just drove a school bus, how does it compare to a mini-van?

-Tronix(being a smartass)GT

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by Iwannagofast
I am sorry to burst your bubble Slasher X. But have you ever seen an LS1 head off the car? take a look at them and tell me they are nothing special. I am so sick of people sayin that the only reason that the camaros are faster is because they got more motor. Just look at the weight diff. there is just a little over 500 lbs diff. The camaros are much heaver. Oh and what does the new cobras run? My 2000 Camaro SS ran a 12.92 stock other than a K&N filter on street tires. It dynoed at 312 rwhp. There seems to be something wrong with this picture here. The new mustangs have alot more power than the LS1, but that little diff. in times and the major weight diff. on both cars doens't make sense on why the LS1 guys are laughing there ass off at these for guys for getting what they think is a LS1 killer. Oh and one thing too The Ls1's are good motors to be boosted. There is a guy around here that has a 2001 WS6 with a procharger kit on it running 10's on the stock bottom end...My pick between the Rustang and the f-body is still f-body (even though GM needs to grow some balls and quit killing all there bad ass performance cars i.e. 454 SS, Impala SS,89 turbo TA, GNX and so on). Trust me I would get rid of my celica in a heartbeat if I could afford insurance on another f-body. Don't get me wrong I love me celica but damn going from 300+ hp at the wheels to 180 isn't something that you can get used to.

Blah blah blah blah

[Chui]

The difference is the power difference across the engine operating range multiplied by the gear ratios. It's a function of engine displacement. Peak power wise the 'Stang may have an advantage, but peak numbers don't tell the entire story.

[Vroom_Vroom]

did u not listen to what slasher just said?????

[CelicaLicious]

ok i'm done.. this is an on going argument thats been going on for decades.. but keep talking this is cool =)

[SlasherX]

Originally posted by Chui
The difference is the power difference across the engine operating range multiplied by the gear ratios. It's a function of engine displacement. Peak power wise the 'Stang may have an advantage, but peak numbers don't tell the entire story.

Exactly. By goign with the roots supercharger over a centrifugal, the motor will have a more linear and torquier "feel" to it though..so its about as sensicle a setup for the v8 torque lovers out there that you can have with the 4.6...

[Vroom_Vroom]

this is where i get confused..a roots type blower is the supercharger found in the saleen mustangs am i right!? and the centrifugal blowers are the ones such as the vortech v2sq "s" trim charger right? but the thing is what is the difference!? i know the roots type is belt driven but what about the centrifugal ones? and while im at it hehe whats a twin screw???? thanks for any info