2011 Mustang V6 quick review w/ dyno numbers.
 

2011 mustang v6 dyno numbers, what are your thoughs? I say "about time ford" , it took them 5 yrs with the crappy 4.0 v6 that makes 210hp to realize that they could make more for less....good job ford.

duel exhaust? i like

5.1 0-60!!!! $hit

1/4 in 13.7 @ 102 not bad. I wonder how it will do with the performance package?

Great now the V6 owners who always had little man syndrome with the motors can back themselves up :ugh2:

Now all the older GT owners who talked **** on the V6s are going to get theirs. I had an '02 3.8L V6 at one point in my life... 193 hp and a 16 second quarter mile. Didn't help that it was a 4 speed auto.

We are definitely faster than this car and should be compared to the V8, but I'm sure plenty of good V6 Mustang drivers are going to be whooping on the less than capable drivers among our ranks. :D

i cant see a 300hp car that weighs 3500 lbs doing 0-60 in 5.1 seconds, sounds like somebody is paying up to hype this car beyond its actual capabilities.

I guess we will have to see others try it out, maybe its because of the ancient live rear axle? I'm no expert, just stating what other people who have had mustangs say when it comes to drag racing.

Traction, that's how.

EDIT: Double post

The numbers sound feasible. It all depends on how well it hooks up.

Ditto the evo x is 3500 pounds rated @291 does it in 4.9

The bad news is the new 5.0 GT & GT Premium cost about the same as our cars!!
!!Build one online if you have time!! 412HP 390lb-ft torque
2011 Ford Mustang | Official Site of the Ford Mustang | FordVehicles.com

No biggie, though. As long as we're all happy with what we've got, everything's golden. :tup:

Wow. I had a '98 GT convertible. Quite possibly the most disappointing V8 of all time. Something like 220hp, 0-60 in 7.5 seconds and a 16 second quarter mile, I think. The engine sounded pretty cool though! :driving:

Nice improvement Ford.

:icon18: Yeah... the 96-98 GTs were huurrrttting!

I had a 2007 GT and this think has more HP haha but way less torque

That 2011 V6 reported 305 HP is BHP and not at the wheels. The V6 is putting down about 267 RWHP.

Nothing was more disappointing than the 1994 Cobra Mustang that had a
5.0L (302 ci) engine:

240 BHP
285 lb tq

At the dyno its rear wheels put down:

210 RWHP
247 RWTQ

As someone described it: The guys at Ford took too much crack when tuning the 94-95 cobra's....it had the worst EEC of any 5.0 Cobra Mustang!

I your gonna buy a Mustang, get the V8.

the amount of power American cars get out of a larger displacement engine is dissapointing. only recently is it actually coming up to snuff.

Yep for comparison...

Camaro 6.2 liter for 422 hp - 68.3 hp per liter

2010 Ford 4.6 liter for 315 - 68.4 hp per liter

<new>2011 Ford 5.0 liter for 412 hp - 82.4 hp per liter

370z 3.7 liter for 332 hp - 89.7 hp per liter

Ford has taken a huge step here.

The hp per litre stuff isn't really that big of a deal for big NA V8s. Basically, they don't need to work as hard as an engine like ours to produce big power.

It is good to see Ford step it up and pump out some more power from the factory, though.

Remember torque is what really makes the vehicle move! ;)

Err ... no ?

Yea but its the upper-end HP still peaking when the torque curve drops off that can save you in a close race to the flag.

Indeed. It is also nice to have a big, flat curve that helps you pull out of corners and really makes the entire rpm range very useable.

The point is that's it's still a Mustang... Fail

:gtfo2:

Matt farah drove one with a glass roof. does anyone know if it comes standard?

Glass roof is not standard.

:inoutroflpuke: hahahahaha :tup:

Glad to see you have a sense of humor. :tiphat:

I know this is great news for the Mustang peeps. I just haven't been a fan of the Mustang since the years of the Fox body. Good to see Ford making some positive changes tho...

I'd rather push a Ford than drive a Chevy! Glad to see Ford stepping it up, hopefully their new V6 and Five-OH will be as the 3.8, 4.0 and 4.6

:iagree:

I still thought the 193hp, 225lb-ft 3.8L pushrod V6 I had in my first Mustang was a great engine as far as reliabililty goes. That was one tough puppy!

Everything else about it sucked balls, though.

Couldn't kill that 3.8 friend of mine had 260,000 miles on hers about 2 years ago and shes still driving it. Origonal engine second trans. I let mine sit for a year didn't move it with 13 month old quarter tank of gas in it, charged the battery and the thing turned right over, didn't blow smoke idle high or anything, it was like I was just running it the day before. Excellent car, excellent engine, didn't have a world of power but it had enough to have some fun with! My 97' had less power than yours stock 150HP, 212 LbFt