"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.


http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...05/244450.html

http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/05fordmustang.html

And you can push it to 500 hp

http://www.tuningnews.net/news/04110...g-projects.php

In some engines you can obtain a higher horsepower by inserting a bigger
micro chip. I know they do this on the big rigs via the ecm. Dont know if
this is how ford does it or not. Back in the old days you would have to get
a bigger cam, run solid lifters and machine the head to obtain that kind of
horsepower.

Ed
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:56:10 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.

Jim beat me to it, but yeah, with a couple or three or four thousand dollars,
the thing can be taken to 500 or so hp without too much trouble. Of course, the
warranty may not be worth much.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:10:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.


http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...05/244450.html

http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/05fordmustang.html

And you can push it to 500 hp

http://www.tuningnews.net/news/04110...g-projects.php


Thanks for the URL's, Jim. All that good news fluff makes me feel better about
spending the bucks on my toy!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:00:59 -0400, "Bert Robbins" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

My baby blue '72 Stang with a 2 bbl 302 V8 with a C4 running bias-ply tires
with a few lines going down the middle wiould easily do 110. I really miss
her!


Hell, my pickup would get pretty close to 110, and my old, 1989 Moto Guzzi will
also, but neither can do it in third gear well before redlining!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:25:37 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:56:10 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.

Jim beat me to it, but yeah, with a couple or three or four thousand dollars,
the thing can be taken to 500 or so hp without too much trouble. Of course, the
warranty may not be worth much.

Well, it's rated at 300 hp at 6000 - I'm not sure how much of that 300
is usable.

My truck develops 500 ft lb of torgue at 1600 rpm with 235 hp stock.
Of course, it's not stock. :)

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:10:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.


http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...05/244450.html

http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/05fordmustang.html

And you can push it to 500 hp

http://www.tuningnews.net/news/04110...g-projects.php


Thanks for the URL's, Jim. All that good news fluff makes me feel better
about
spending the bucks on my toy!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

The fluff did it's job! Not a bad word to say about the Mustang. I am sure
you would agree that there are absolutely no down sides to the car to report
to would be buyers. Heck, it is all about "looking good and going
fast".......sort of like a certain *review* on a SeaRay posted here. ;-)

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:00:59 -0400, "Bert Robbins" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

My baby blue '72 Stang with a 2 bbl 302 V8 with a C4 running bias-ply
tires
with a few lines going down the middle wiould easily do 110. I really miss
her!


Hell, my pickup would get pretty close to 110, and my old, 1989 Moto Guzzi
will
also, but neither can do it in third gear well before redlining!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

They all must have been red cars as they always go faster.....that is why
fire engines are painted red. ;-)

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 01:40:17 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:25:37 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:56:10 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.

Jim beat me to it, but yeah, with a couple or three or four thousand dollars,
the thing can be taken to 500 or so hp without too much trouble. Of course, the
warranty may not be worth much.

Well, it's rated at 300 hp at 6000 - I'm not sure how much of that 300
is usable.

My truck develops 500 ft lb of torgue at 1600 rpm with 235 hp stock.
Of course, it's not stock. :)

The folks on the Mustang sites who put the thing on dynamometers (sp?) say it's
only about 280 hp at the rear wheels. But that's still plenty for a car that
size.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:41:02 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:10:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.


http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...05/244450.html

http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/05fordmustang.html

And you can push it to 500 hp

http://www.tuningnews.net/news/04110...g-projects.php


Thanks for the URL's, Jim. All that good news fluff makes me feel better
about
spending the bucks on my toy!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

The fluff did it's job! Not a bad word to say about the Mustang. I am sure
you would agree that there are absolutely no down sides to the car to report
to would be buyers. Heck, it is all about "looking good and going
fast".......sort of like a certain *review* on a SeaRay posted here. ;-)


Well, I have had a new transmission and a new gas tank put in the thing. But
that's minor, and the dealer gave me no squawk about it.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."