omg

Discussion in '2004 Pontiac GTO' started by 2003 ss R, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    its fair, they're close in price, same in classification. whether its blown or not. theyr STOCK.. from the factory.. its fair. to get somewhat off the subject, but speaking of fairness, i hate when people say "my (whatever) will smoke a STOCK (sumthin else)" duh..OF COURSE it has a chance.. its got a whole bunch of money and time invested into it.. unless you cant do the work yourself, then its just money.. the fastest car ive seen was a pro street '90 Mustang 5.0 bored to 347cid (roughly 5.7 liters now) with a Blower, it made 1750 hp. (remove 1000hp and u still got 750hp) and this car ran the 1/4 in 7.25sec @ 198 mph.. and remember this car was "pro street" all working lights, doors, it wasnt all fiberglassed out either, just the hood i think. go compare that with any STOCK japanese produced. does it sound fair now? i dont think so..

    "theres no replacement, for displacement"
     
  2. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    You are in idiot. What if the GTO had a turbo on it with 500+ HP, stock from the factory. Then would all of u ford (Fix Or Repair Daily) idiots still say its fair when the cobra is getting blown away. You shouldnt compare a supercharged engine's performance to a regular engines performance, and anyway the GTO's reg V8 is gonna get around 350 which is only 40 less than the cobra. The GTO is better all the way. GM is the best.
     
  3. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    I hear ya, man. GM rules! But I'm still fair in my judgement. I hate biased people.
     
  4. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    You are the one comparing both of them in another thread.
     
  5. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    What's that supposed to mean?!
     
  6. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    I hear ya, man. GM rules! But I'm still fair in my judgement. I hate biased people.

    DANVM you are the man, and i dont know what that other guy is talking about lol.
     
  7. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    I don't think Mustangs (or cobras) are on GTO category (they never were, yes since '60s).

    But IF so, Mustangs will kick this car out of stock as they did with Charger and family in '80's and with GM SS's and SSs in the '90's.


    Sorry Mustang is an american icon, a thoroughbred.

    Things that a GM lover will never understand.

    Their fate (GM and their SS birds, comrades and fellows) are to look at GM muscle car sales going DOWN year after year (since 69) while they're allways asking "why ?"...



     
  8. Re:

    A fairer comparison might be between the Mach 1 and the GTO, being as they are both retro-muscle adaptations, in which case the GTO comes out on top.

    I'm a Mustang fan all the way, but you've GOTTA love the Goat.
     
  9. Re: Re:

    Ok, First off, all of you guys who are supporting the Mustang on this one are F**king idiots!! The cobra has a supercharger in it it will obiviously have better times than the GTO without a supercharger. If you put a supercharger in the GTO it would wup its a**. And if your going to say all that shit about one is a 4.6 and the other is a 5.7 and there not fair then your also idiots. Because once you start talking about the GT40 and its 5.4 litre would be more fair then you would have to compare it to the Vette Z06 which has 405 horsepower without a supercharger, put one on and your talking about 505 horsepower and also a lighter car as well so keep it fair Found On Road Dead fans because the only way your going to win is to cheat.
     
  10. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    That's funny, Motortrend hasn'e tested a GTO, yet. I wish I could get future motortrend issues like you do.
     
  11. Re:

    14.9 With 360 lbft? **** no, this puppy's in the 13's. The Goat is BACK!! ERR!!
     
  12. Re: Re:

    I agree, the GTO would get 13 second quarter miles since its 30 more horsepower than the latest Z-28s.
     
  13. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    13 sec. ??? I don't think so....This car is gonna be pretty heavy...I'm guessin more like 14.5...14.8...
     
  14. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    This car isn't going to be any heavier than any other camaro or firebird around. Its a 2 door coupe just like the others. More around a 13.6- 13.8 quarter mile.
     
  15. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    The Grand Am Coupe, the platform which it is based off of, weighs in just over 3000 lbs, significantly less than the Camaro or Firebird, even the Corvette.

    Plus, I'm looking at that Vette LS1 with a special low-end torque cam profile. That 360 lbft should make for some slick ET's.
     
  16. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    for those bitching about the cobra, or even those that are comparing it to a gto, take a moment, step back. then raise your right hand, hold it about 1-2 feet from your face, and SMACK YOURSELF. DIFFERENT CLASS! gto-american muscle icon, but refined somewhat, and (to be honest) not as sporty as the old one. new cobra-ALMOST balls to the walls sports car...almost, still FASTER than the gto, and dont deny that, 345, from the generals mouth, and PROJECTED 14's. now i dont know what company youve been listening to, but in general when a car company says a time for there car, they overestimate. so 14.5-8 is what ill go with here, by size and power alone. but, back to the cobra. ive said it once before, if you dont like that ford supercharged a car, and its still a stock vehicle, GET OVER IT, not much you can do until chevy takes the same step. when they do...well we'll see then, but judgiong on how long it takes gm to notice trends (pony/muscle cars revived, so they pull theirs...hmmm), that may be a while
     
  17. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    this is retarded. . these cars shouldn't be compared. .its that simple. they are totally different animals!! to tell you the truth the closest thing to a gto on the market right now is the merauder. . and thats a stretch. . . i guess there are people that just don't understand. . .

    oh. .and sorry if someone else already pointed this out. . i only read a page before i decided that this topic was headed in the wrong direction. . .
     
  18. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    that moron who was talking about a 14.9 time in motor trend was reading the article where they tested a MONARO with an austrailian version of the engine. i have the issue right in front of me. . its the july 2002 issue . . page 54. . .oh. . look at that. . hp: 302 well theres the reason. .
     
  19. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    What times will this pull?
     
  20. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    id bet a gt is faster because it weights 100lbs less, at least as fast, and a whole lot cheaper.

    but it is never fair comparing a sports car to a 4 door family car that just happens to be somewhat fast.
     
  21. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    My god, thats interesting. I don;'t know if you are a big fan of GM, but here in Oz, a base model falcon has 182kw, from a 4 litre naturally aspirated 6, while a commodore has 171kw from a supercharged 3.8 litre V6. Quite funny isn't it? I agree is is somewhat unfair to compare a supercharged car to an N/a car, but it's also unfair to compare a 4.6 litre to a 5.7 litre. Any arguments? So then how can it be made fair? Over here, we've seen many reviews of HSV's version of the Monaro. It's an impressive car. Truth is, a commodore SS or clubsport here was compared (along with a falcon XR8) to a Mustang GT and they gboth ppretty much hammered the mustang. In performance the mustang was close to the top, but in handling, ride quality, build quality, comfort etc, it it was highly inferior. It could only compare in a straight line. This is despite the fact that both the falcon and comodore were sedans coming in at around 1600 kg. They were also around 30,000 cheaper here. (90,000 for the stang, compared to mid 40's for ford an dholden). I know the Mustang GT isnt the most powerful mustang availiable, BUT neither are the XR8 and SS/Clubsport. The falcon had 200kw at the time, the SS had 220, the Clubsport had 250. The GTO (monaro) has 300.If the Xr8 and SS were superior cars to the Mutang, then the GTO should absolutly kill it. Id liek to see the supercharged stang against the GTO and new Falcon GT when it is relased. I'm a huge ford fan, and was heartroken when i read of the Mustands below par quality. I've always loves stangs, and thought it would be the car to crush Holden. Despite being so sgtrongly a ford over holden man, id still buy a new commodore SS over a mustang ven if the 30k price advantage was not included. Id prefer a VX though, because the VY commodore is one of the ugliest things i've ever seen. I hope holden dont update the Monaro with VY looks, because quite honestly its the only decent looking car in their lineup now along with the Vectra and new Barina. I feel sorry for Holden fan's having to deal with this THING holden has released, as i supported Ford through the AU phase, and defending such ugly a car can be very difficult. Holden's got problems..i think VY is uglier then AU, if not then about equal. Only Au's interior was more classy then holdens use of 3 different materials and differenc colours for their dash, door inserts, etc. Plus that disgustign new steering wheel, and *deep breath* GREEN DIALS !! The latter are optional but still..what were they thinking. Sorry for rambling on and going off topic as i have, but for now id say the GTO all round would be a better car for sure then the stang. If Ford introduce Fords control blade IRS in the next mustang, and maintains the looks of the concept, this may change fast. IT will then be jsut up to ford to imporove the stang's build quality. The mustang's enging was said to be its only positive feature with the current model, and looking at it's appearance id hav eto agree. Not ugly, but surely not pretty.
     
  22. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    Mercedes SLK 250 Kompressor is supercharged, but stil compares always with BMW's Z3 3.2 litre. Additionally, when people compare the AMG C32 to the M3 no one complains. Why? Because honestly, the opposition have the option to do the same and havent. In one wya its not fair, in another way it's perfectly fair. NA cars always et compared to forced induction cars. Type-r vs WRX, Audi TT turbo vs S2000, etc etc. Does the mean because teh TT is turbo, and the boxterisnt, its unfair towards teh boxter to compare the two, when the boxter hammers it in every way? the difference in engine size between the TT and boxter is about equal to that between teh GTO and Mustang. Both cars have great engines. To be honest, it doesnt take the worlds most advanced engineers to get 300 kw out of near 6 litres, nor to get that kidna of power out of 4.6 litres when they are supercharged. Ferrari gets 300 kw out of 3.6 naturally aspirated litres. See, we can say the Commodore over here is unfair to compare to the falcon. The Commodore has an optional supercharged 3.8 litre V6, while the flacon has a naturally aspirated 4 litre 6, as mentioned before. They are same price give or take 1000. They are DIRECT competitors. And guess what? The flacon has mroe power, more torque, and the torque is also availiable at lower revs if i'm not mistaken, despite beign N/A and only holdgin a .2 litre advantage in size ( 12 cubic inch). It's a fact, live with it. Sorry if i contradicted my last post with this, I have the flew and my mind is abit off today. The truth is though, engine wise, u can compare the two really. A WRX 2 litre 4 cylinder turbo has 160 kw. A mercedes 3.2 litre V6 has 160 kw. There is 1.2 litres difference. Mustang has 4.6 litres. GTO has 5.7 litres. Stang is blowwn. 1.1 litres diff..similar story. Maybe if they were both 5.7 and one was blown id say ok, but the extra size probably counters for some of that forced induction. In fact, an integra type-r (2001 model) has 140 odd kw N/A, while a Golf GTi has about 100-110. Its very fair to compare really.
     
  23. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    This has 340 Naturally asparated while the Ford has 390 Forced induction if you were to put the same Supercharged on this car im sured id blow the mustang into the weeds
     
  24. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    read arguments on page one ya mongoose
     
  25. Re: It's not fair compareing the gto to a mustang cobra.

    At least the GTO doesn't sound like a sewing machine. This thing kicks ass without anything against a Cobra with a supercharger and an intercooler. Get it through your thick, fat head.

    FORD-Fixed Or Repaired Daily
    FORD-Found On Road Dead
    FUH-Q Ford <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A> <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A> <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
     

Share This Page