Makes sense, though. The car is 530 lbs lighter than my 4001 lb R/T, and the tires are huge and must stick like flypaper off the lines - 255-40-19. And you know they are sticky tires though, because the car pulls nearly a full G in average cornering force. And it has almost as much horsepower in V-6 form as the standard V-8 GT.
The R/T is hands down faster above 60 mph, where traction is no longer a consideration, air-drag becomes predominant over curb weight in determining acceleration, and raw horsepower is king.
My car does 70 to 100 mph in 5.7 seconds, vs 6.4 for the V-6 'Stang, and 4.2 seconds vs 4.6 seconds 80-100 mph. Or, the R/T is 11% faster in acceleration from 70 to 100 mph.
It also looks to me like the V-6 starts to run out of acceleration at 100 mph. 0-100 mph takes 13.1 seconds. However, the trap speed at the quarter after 13.7 seconds is 102 mph. It took the car 0.6 seconds then to accelerate from 100 to 102 mph. I think above 100 mph you'd really start to see the R/T dominate the V-6 Mustang. Of course, ONLY on a racetrack - of course.
However, the V-8 will probably destroy the R-T, and the SRT8 - wasn't there a leaked dyno test of the V-8 pulling over 410 wheel horsepower? That's 50-60 more wheel horsepower than an SRT8, and the car will likely be 400-500 lbs lighter than an SRT8.
2010 Challenger R/T Classic 6-speed - Plum Crazy Pearlcoat
EVIC and Super Track Pack are the only options
Mods: white Katzkin leather interior, Hurst shifter, Mopar WAI, Solo Performance exhaust, 85 mm TB, 180 stat, Hemifever tune, BT bling, custom painted engine and fuse box covers
It's all fun and games til the flying monkeys arrive
Any chance the Mustangs submitted for that review were "ringers"? It happened before with the GT-R, right?
255 wide tires seems to be the ticket, though. The bright side is that 0-60 mph @ 5.1 sec is probably not a hard number for the RT, either, once you swap out the 235 wide oem tires.
Also bear in mind that high-wringing v6's don't get along so well with the torque converter in an automatic. A torque converter needs to be fed low end torque to get properly energized to do the best in whatever else happens afterward (if the torque output of the engine is tepid, that is a recipe for the unresponsive "slushbox" perception that has plagued automatics). So an RT will probably get an easy jump and keep that jump on an auto Mustang v6, in that context. For the manual Mustang v6, I guess you'll have to watch out for them, and hopefully the driver isn't a master shifter/clutcher on top of that.
It's not that I really needed 370 hp...but having 150+ hp riding shotgun at a moment's bidding w/o a 6000 rpm moonshot is what makes me feel like I'm in the right car for me. The roar of a v8 seals the deal!
The Google keyword is "ethanol-free gas". The truth is coming to light. Check out http://pure-gas.org/
Last edited by randycat99; 03-29-2010 at 09:14 PM.
Ya a good driver in one of those V6's could beat a bad driver in a RT in a 1/4 mile is possible. It would probably loose bad in a mile though. It sounds like it handles well and that mile may need to be in a staight line. On the down side it is still a Mustang.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.