Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ok so my friends and I were having a debate on this topic some time ago. My mate is a through n through Mustangs man and brought up the fact that the new Mustang could beat the R35 GTR in both quarter mile and circuit. Me being a Nissans man, totally objected to this and so the debate began...

In all the discussion other mates started joining into the conversation although they weren't on my side. It got to a point where it actually started to get heated, LOL.

Anyways they were saying how Nissans are shit and the Mustang could totally crap on the GTR and blah blah blah, one of them actually even said "In Tokyo Drift the guy won the race in his Mustang against that Asian guy driving the 350Z",my son of rajab he failed so bad when I told him the Mustang had a RB26DETT from a GTR haha.

So whaddaya guys think? 2010 Mustang or GTR?

post-74314-1289390890_thumb.jpg

post-74314-1289391586_thumb.jpg

Edited by AAARGH 33
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/343853-r35-gtr-vs-2010-mustang/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

If any one brings up a fictional movie such as fast and the furious to bring their point across about a particular car that is so far from relevent it aint even funny, is an idiot.

Your friends are idiots and know nothing about cars. How old are they?

Gtr all the way. But unfortunatly when I looked into the cars in tokyo drift for the racing scenes they did use the v8 mustang engine because the rb26 just didn't have the low end needed. Looked good for the movie though

Not that I want to take this down the road of a Tokyo Drift discussion, but Rhys Millen commented on numerous occasions what a pig the Mustang was to drive and that the best car out of the lot to drift was the RWD converted EVO.

Also obviously they wouldn't use the RB26 Mustang in the racing scenes. That car was simply used for all the still shots since it was a unique car and the stunt cars used for all the driving and crashing were V8 powered.

Hence in all the Fast and Furious movies you see mistakes such as cars looking different from scene to scene (ie the second one the R34 GTR was used for all the still shots and R34 GTT's were used for a lot of the racing scenes and you notice it due to pedals going from rubber to aluminium in different scenes).

This is because they need multiple copies of each car in case they write one off or when they need to damage it. They have one "pretty" car with all the mods on it that they use for the still shots and then copies that usually aren't the real deal (like the GTT playing the GTR role) that they can afford to wreck.

Any way back on topic; your friends are idiots.

Edited by PM-R33
Ok so my friends and I were having a debate on this topic some time ago. My mate is a through n through Mustangs man and brought up the fact that the new Mustang could beat the R35 GTR in both quarter mile and circuit. Me being a Nissans man, totally objected to this and so the debate began...

In all the discussion other mates started joining into the conversation although they weren't on my side. It got to a point where it actually started to get heated, LOL.

Anyways they were saying how Nissans are shit and the Mustang could totally crap on the GTR and blah blah blah, one of them actually even said "In Tokyo Drift the guy won the race in his Mustang against that Asian guy driving the 350Z",my son of rajab he failed so bad when I told him the Mustang had a RB26DETT from a GTR haha.

So whaddaya guys think? 2010 Mustang or GTR?

I think your friend is a moron and even associating with him may make you dumber :D

2011 Mustang GT 1/4 mile 12.8s

2008 Nissan GTR 1/4 mile 11.5s

Willow Springs Raceway, USA

2011 Mustang GT 1:37.60

2008 Nissan GTR 1:31.23

And Willow Springs is a power circut with long sweeping bends not tight corners.

I think your friend is a moron and even associating with him may make you dumber ;)

2011 Mustang GT 1/4 mile 12.8s

2008 Nissan GTR 1/4 mile 11.5s

Willow Springs Raceway, USA

2011 Mustang GT 1:37.60

2008 Nissan GTR 1:31.23

And Willow Springs is a power circut with long sweeping bends not tight corners.

I was expecting the Mustang to be faster down the drags... I mean isn't this what its designed for?

Edited by Mayuri Krab

You'd be surprised how well American sports cars handle these days. But the Mustang GT and R35 are not direct market competitors...I'm pretty sure the latter is over twice the price of the former.

You'd be surprised how well American sports cars handle these days. But the Mustang GT and R35 are not direct market competitors...I'm pretty sure the latter is over twice the price of the former.

+1

Most of the New American sports cars are pretty good handling wise; gone are the day when there were just considered to be cheap, straight line heros... just take a look at the Covette ZR1 burning the R35 GTR on the Nurburgring !!!! and any of the Cadillac CTS V series

But sadly Mustang was not one of those cars.. ; even the new iteration i think is preety basic suspension wise

Can i ask;why on earth would anyone compare GTR Vs Mustang; there just so so so so different Cars ;)

The ACR Viper (which holds a faster lap time than the ZR1) surprises me more than any of them...it is still a truck engine in a chassis that is designed to be offensively sexy. That's a tough base to build anything functional upon. When I was a kid, these cars had a reputation for handling like a tractor!

The ACR Viper (which holds a faster lap time than the ZR1) surprises me more than any of them...it is still a truck engine in a chassis that is designed to be offensively sexy. That's a tough base to build anything functional upon. When I was a kid, these cars had a reputation for handling like a tractor!

That was including the refill at the petrol station half way round too!

I was expecting the Mustang to be faster down the drags... I mean isn't this what its designed for?

set of sticky tyres and it would be. bet you can nearly buy all 4 standard tyres for the mustang for the price of 1 tyre for the GTR. this is why there is little point going off times of stock cars run by either car companies or even car mags. unless they fit the same tyres to both cars, it isn't really a true indication of the cars performance.

Not that I want to take this down the road of a Tokyo Drift discussion, but Rhys Millen commented on numerous occasions what a pig the Mustang was to drive and that the best car out of the lot to drift was the RWD converted EVO.

Also obviously they wouldn't use the RB26 Mustang in the racing scenes. That car was simply used for all the still shots since it was a unique car and the stunt cars used for all the driving and crashing were V8 powered.

Hence in all the Fast and Furious movies you see mistakes such as cars looking different from scene to scene (ie the second one the R34 GTR was used for all the still shots and R34 GTT's were used for a lot of the racing scenes and you notice it due to pedals going from rubber to aluminium in different scenes).

This is because they need multiple copies of each car in case they write one off or when they need to damage it. They have one "pretty" car with all the mods on it that they use for the still shots and then copies that usually aren't the real deal (like the GTT playing the GTR role) that they can afford to wreck.

Any way back on topic; your friends are idiots.

they had 11 dummy r34's in that movie which i believe they totalled.

looking at the fordfourums.com the mustang engine fitted with a supercharger is realing off approx 325rwkw. This is in the current ford GT, which is a family 4 dr. With a mild tune it gets 355rwkw. Put this in the mustang and the engine will match the R35s, but not much else.

set of sticky tyres and it would be. bet you can nearly buy all 4 standard tyres for the mustang for the price of 1 tyre for the GTR. this is why there is little point going off times of stock cars run by either car companies or even car mags. unless they fit the same tyres to both cars, it isn't really a true indication of the cars performance.

... and then it's not a stock car anymore.

Sure, if the manufacturer offers (for example) different tyre options test it with the best of them.

If you're going to permit nonstandard modification to the stock platform, why stop at tyres?

Cheers,

SW

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...