|
"John H" wrote in message ... 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 m... 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." Failure of those *minor parts* (LOL) do not belong in a fluff review. It is all about "going fast and looking good" to at least on person here when doing a review. |
"*JimH*" wrote in message ... "John H" wrote in message ... 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 om... 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." Failure of those *minor parts* (LOL) do not belong in a fluff review. It is all about "going fast and looking good" to at least one person here when doing a review. edit: "one" person. |
Jack Goff wrote:
"Don White" wrote: If every American trashed their gas guzzling SUV's and purchased a Honda Civic or smaller, that would make up for China's demand. There's no shortage of big 4x4s or SUV's in Canaduh, Don. What's in your.. oops, your mom's driveway? It's my driveway, thank you! |
Bert Robbins wrote:
The child, Don, is exerting his independence and he can't handle it yet! How about you? I posted a few notes to correct your buddy Ernie...I mean JimH, and I was waiting for you to pipe up. Since you didn't stick up for him, does this mean your 'special friendship' is over? |
Around 6/25/2005 5:56 PM, 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: 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? Of course. Ford hasn't put a carb in a car since the mid-1980s I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L to 300 hp without altering something major. Oh, heck yeah. The standard 4.6L GT (aluminum block) is good up to around 450-500 IIRC on stock internals, IIRC. You can push a 4.6L Cobra (iron block, underrated at 390) with stock internals to about 600-650 without too much trouble. Change the stock blower pulley, some custom intake and exhaust work, and a custom chip is about all it takes. -- ~/Garth - 1966 Glastron V-142 Skiflite: "Blue-Boat" "There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats." -Kenneth Grahame, The Wind in the Willows |
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:58:24 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:
"John H" wrote in message .. . 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 om... 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." Failure of those *minor parts* (LOL) do not belong in a fluff review. It is all about "going fast and looking good" to at least on person here when doing a review. With my GT, it *is* all about going fast and looking good! -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:46:48 -0400, John H
wrote: 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. I was just curious because, for a stock engine, that's a lot of horse power right out of the box. In a practical sense, with that kind of power curve, you really only have 250 horses. I can't speak to it though because I don't know what the dyno figure it. I can jack up the horsepower and torque on my pickup with a handy dandy little gizmo I bought and get about 280 hp at some ridiculous number of torque (can't remember at the moment), but that's for extreme conditions - like pulling down houses or ripping out stumps. You can do a lot with 250 horsepower with proper gearing. |
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 11:01:01 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:46:48 -0400, John H wrote: 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. I was just curious because, for a stock engine, that's a lot of horse power right out of the box. In a practical sense, with that kind of power curve, you really only have 250 horses. I can't speak to it though because I don't know what the dyno figure it. I can jack up the horsepower and torque on my pickup with a handy dandy little gizmo I bought and get about 280 hp at some ridiculous number of torque (can't remember at the moment), but that's for extreme conditions - like pulling down houses or ripping out stumps. You can do a lot with 250 horsepower with proper gearing. That *is* a lot of hp right out of the box, but that's one reason the new GT is getting all the rave reviews. -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
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? Tom, here's what I'm looking forward to in a couple years: http://www.stangnet.com/2005-Mustang...00-by-SVT.html -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
"John H" wrote in message ... On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:58:24 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote: "John H" wrote in message . .. On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:41:02 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote: "John H" wrote in message m... On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 21:10:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote: "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message news:85vrb19mapgng3gfeo3c1g2nsqqbfpgvod@4ax. com... 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." Failure of those *minor parts* (LOL) do not belong in a fluff review. It is all about "going fast and looking good" to at least on person here when doing a review. With my GT, it *is* all about going fast and looking good! -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." Don't you ruin that illusion once you get into the car? Just kidding John. ;-) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com