Racing my friends Mustang. - Page 6

bjones71087 · 06-14-2009, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Your friend is right, a Mustang would win hands down. Problem is, when he opted to get a V6, he opted NOT to get a real Mustang!

even though its a v6, its still a "real" mustang just not a "real" car...it isn't counterfeit. even the v8 sucks. i mean when did they break a 15 in the 1/4, in 99 when they bearly broke 300hp. (or did they) i dont know... point is, mustangs suck, even if one was faster than the jeep, its going to die a horrible death soon anyways.

SuperStreetJeep · 06-15-2009, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bjones71087

even though its a v6, its still a "real" mustang just not a "real" car...it isn't counterfeit. even the v8 sucks. i mean when did they break a 15 in the 1/4, in 99 when they bearly broke 300hp. (or did they) i dont know... point is, mustangs suck, even if one was faster than the jeep, its going to die a horrible death soon anyways.

got some false info dont we....

stock 99 mustang gts are in the high 13's...

hell even my old fox body when it was bone stock hit bottom 14's

the slowest gt mustangs were first generation of the SN-95's. and even they were high 14's.

bjones71087 · 06-16-2009, 08:43 AM

tell me, can you do simple math? is high 13 less than 15? although not much less, it in fact is less. i did give it credit there.
high 14s is still a 15. that would be the difference between an experienced and inexperienced driver.
a v8 coupe should not be this slow.
i just dont see the point, slow, overpriced, unreliable. why?

SuperStreetJeep · 06-20-2009, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bjones71087

tell me, can you do simple math? is high 13 less than 15? although not much less, it in fact is less. i did give it credit there.
high 14s is still a 15. that would be the difference between an experienced and inexperienced driver.
a v8 coupe should not be this slow.
i just dont see the point, slow, overpriced, unreliable. why?

lol...its a mild low compression motor. just made to have a fun car. and no high 14's are still 14's, you dont round up just because of ****ty drivers. hell, ive watched c5 Z06's run high 14's before because of the driver, does that make them 14 second cars? and any of the GT's are just a few bolt-ons away from becoming very quick cars.

overpriced? obviously not. the mustangs dominated their market in sales.

i personally have owned and known many mustangs still on the stock drivetrains with over 200k on them. i wouldnt call that unreliable.

you're an F-body fan boy arent you?

SoloCamo · 06-20-2009, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperStreetJeep

you're an F-body fan boy arent you?

I am

But I still give credit where credit's due. The Mustang GT is a very respectable car for what it is. Not the fastest, not the best handling, but damn fun and in the end that's whats important.

Hell, I've driven much faster and better handling vehicles than my jeep, and yet somehow my Jeep is always more fun hence why I always come back to it.

Numbers aren't everything

SuperStreetJeep · 06-20-2009, 02:28 PM

nothin wrong with fbodys... just the fanboys who hate everything else

bjones71087 · 06-21-2009, 03:12 PM

Quote:

lol...its a mild low compression motor. just made to have a fun car. and no high 14's are still 14's, you dont round up just because of ****ty drivers. hell, ive watched c5 Z06's run high 14's before because of the driver, does that make them 14 second cars? and any of the GT's are just a few bolt-ons away from becoming very quick cars.

You're right, i am sorry i forgot that bolt on exhaust and intake instantly adds 300 horse to a mustang (hence the name right?)

and if fun to you is driving a blocky car with bodylean comprable to a jeep then so be it.

Quote:

i personally have owned and known many mustangs still on the stock drivetrains with over 200k on them. i wouldnt call that unreliable.

true, but any car can last 200k, thats not a big milestone, i have a friend who drives a geo metro with 250k and another who was a kia with 270k. its not about the mileage, its about how much money and time that goes in to keeping a car on the road that long. The GTs i admit are a bit more reliable, but i have never personally seen a 3.8 with over 140k.

I'm not into the whole argument, was not ment to be started, just a conflict of opinion, i believe the origional topic of this thread had to do with a 3.8 v6 mustang vs. a 4.7 Grand cherokee, and hands down, i think even you would agree, there is no competition between the Jeep destroying the mustang.

a GT has a better chance, not a guaranteed win, but if it did beat the 4.7 jeep, then whatever, the mustang is SUPPOSED to be a "muscle" car.

2006_Sport · 06-29-2009, 05:58 PM

Why would you even bother racing a jeep against the mustang? My TJ is faster than a 3.8 liter v6 mustang (this has been proven from liight to light.) big ****ing woop. Race a GT with 300 hp and see if you win that one...you wont.

SuperStreetJeep · 07-12-2009, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bjones71087

You're right, i am sorry i forgot that bolt on exhaust and intake instantly adds 300 horse to a mustang (hence the name right?)

yes, thats exactly what i said...

Quote:

and if fun to you is driving a blocky car with bodylean comprable to a jeep then so be it.

suspension mods are cheap on the foxbodys, and the looks is all personal opinion

Quote:

true, but any car can last 200k, thats not a big milestone, i have a friend who drives a geo metro with 250k and another who was a kia with 270k. its not about the mileage, its about how much money and time that goes in to keeping a car on the road that long. The GTs i admit are a bit more reliable, but i have never personally seen a 3.8 with over 140k.

i would think 200k would be a milestone for something that you claim to be sooo unreliable. just because you havnt seen a 3.8 like that really doesnt mean anything. i work on cars for a living, ive seen plenty like that.

and the maintenence was nothing different than normal wear and tear stuff.

Quote:

I'm not into the whole argument, was not ment to be started, just a conflict of opinion, i believe the origional topic of this thread had to do with a 3.8 v6 mustang vs. a 4.7 Grand cherokee, and hands down, i think even you would agree, there is no competition between the Jeep destroying the mustang.

that would be what i said at the beggining of the thread

Quote:

a GT has a better chance, not a guaranteed win, but if it did beat the 4.7 jeep, then whatever, the mustang is SUPPOSED to be a "muscle" car.

pony car, not muscle car...there is a difference

SuperStreetJeep · 07-12-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2006sport

Race a GT with 300 hp and see if you win that one...you wont.

i know a certain 4.0 XJ that did that a few times...and won

RavenCorax · 07-12-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RavenCorax

around here mustangs are fodder
its like its required to beat one to be a true ricer.
i shouldnt admit to this but i have reaced a few and ive annihilated em v6 v8 dont matter. 4.0 5 speed 4.10 gears on 31's make for hellacious torque launch at idle shift at 4500 roast em going to second get sideways shift at 4500 chirp into third sideways 4500 4th and chirp. look back ry to find the car put it in 5th coast slow down count to 10 and watch as the ricer gives you a flyby.

jeeps are nasty down low when i raced if i didnt beat em by 60 it was over and usually by the time i was in 2nd i was a few car lengths ahead

i take that back i was doing a locker found out i had 4.56 rear gears. just because your guy's jeeps arent fast doesnt mean they cant be fast. a few mods here and there. half a dozen tricks outrageous gearing. it can be done. the guy in the svt cobra i raced said i even pulled the front right tire off the ground 2 inches. at 80 my bumper was at his fender/door twice same race within a foot he had my by 1/4 car each time

ive got 33's and i dont even need 1st gear. the 2 years ive owned my jeep ive barely ever used first cept for wheeling and emberassing at stoplights. its to short to fast

oh ya i broke a rear u joint going into 3rd at 4700 rpms that was fun course i had 400 pounds of books in the back and actually got traction

**turtlerace** · 07-12-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RavenCorax

i take that back i was doing a locker found out i had 4.56 rear gears. just because your guy's jeeps arent fast doesnt mean they cant be fast. a few mods here and there. half a dozen tricks outrageous gearing. it can be done. the guy in the svt cobra i raced said i even pulled the front right tire off the ground 2 inches. at 80 my bumper was at his fender/door twice same race within a foot he had my by 1/4 car each time

ive got 33's and i dont even need 1st gear. the 2 years ive owned my jeep ive barely ever used first cept for wheeling and emberassing at stoplights. its to short to fast

oh ya i broke a rear u joint going into 3rd at 4700 rpms that was fun course i had 400 pounds of books in the back and actually got traction

It is amazing how full of **** some people in this thread are.

SuperStreetJeep · 07-13-2009, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RavenCorax

i take that back i was doing a locker found out i had 4.56 rear gears. just because your guy's jeeps arent fast doesnt mean they cant be fast. a few mods here and there. half a dozen tricks outrageous gearing. it can be done. the guy in the svt cobra i raced said i even pulled the front right tire off the ground 2 inches. at 80 my bumper was at his fender/door twice same race within a foot he had my by 1/4 car each time

ive got 33's and i dont even need 1st gear. the 2 years ive owned my jeep ive barely ever used first cept for wheeling and emberassing at stoplights. its to short to fast

oh ya i broke a rear u joint going into 3rd at 4700 rpms that was fun course i had 400 pounds of books in the back and actually got traction

you didnt pull a tire, and a naturally aspirated 4.0 jeep is not going to be fast. especially on 33's.

and ive actually had a few quick jeep cherokees. and im almost willing to guarantee that the last one i had was faster than any other 4.0 based jeep on this forum.

i dont know why some of you feel the need to lie, but you sir, are a godd@mn liar.

**86JeepCJ7** · 07-23-2009, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon2

A worked V6 mustang might be 15.2.

I raced a turbo'd V6 and beat it. I ran a 14.7 in a 240sx. V6 Mustang = Chicks Mustang.

Not to bad mouth the mustang - BUT, I outran my brothers "worked' V-6 mustnag with my wife's Honda Accord... - three runs straight, it really pissed him off... - now he owns a pathfinder.....

scjeep47HO · 07-23-2009, 01:25 PM

Dollar for dollar the mustang will be faster.. it's the nature of the beast, But that doesn't mean you can't beat some of the mustangs. I know I have spanked a few myself. With the build I am doing at this time, it will embarress some of the mustangs.