More Mustang stuff....GT vs M3

Michael Westerfield · **Posted:** Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:00 pm

JamesShort wrote:

Did I see a blue 2011 GT at the meeting tonight!?!

EDIT: Hold on, Michael is that why you are selling your exhaust?

EDIT2: By the way, I saw *no* chicks hanging around it either.

Yep,

The chicks showed up right after you cleared out

... Right after the bologna sandwiches came out and the burnouts started.

JamesShort · **Posted:** Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:15 pm

Very nice. What final drive ratio did you get?

Michael Westerfield · **Posted:** Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:49 pm

3.31

Autocross and MPG friendly.

So far it has returned 26mpg all highway and 19.7 mixed on 87oct.

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:36 am

That's purdy.

--Donnie

JamesShort · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:49 am

Correct me if I'm wrong, so on a stock sized tire with 3.31s in 2nd at 7k rpms, you'll be going 70.5mph

let's say you run a 275/35/18 A6 (not sure what size you ran on the other GT), you'd get 66.3mph in the same scenario (if you had 3.55 you'd be 61.8mph). So I guess the 3.31 makes a lot of sense. When I saw that Sam Strano was running the 3:31s I was surprised, but on the 6spd manual, the 1st and 2nd gear are much closer than on the outgoing 5 spds.

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:51 am

NICE!!!

FYI if you use a tire trailer Hitch-web shows a hitch now for the 11's.

Chuck Branscomb · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:55 am

Beautiful! Time to update the forum sig? Is it coming to the next autox?

Michael Westerfield · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 9:16 am

Thanks for the kind words everyone. I like it alot.

JamesShort wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, so on a stock sized tire with 3.31s in 2nd at 7k rpms, you'll be going 70.5mph

let's say you run a 275/35/18 A6 (not sure what size you ran on the other GT), you'd get 66.3mph in the same scenario (if you had 3.55 you'd be 61.8mph). So I guess the 3.31 makes a lot of sense. When I saw that Sam Strano was running the 3:31s I was surprised, but on the 6spd manual, the 1st and 2nd gear are much closer than on the outgoing 5 spds.

If I used the 285/30/18 that I ran on my 08 GT my second gear with the 3.31s will top out at 62.1 by my calculations. That seems about right.

I believe Sam ran A6s on the Shelby GT, but not sure what he is running now that he has a 19x9 to work with b/c of the brembo pack. I think I will be restricted to a 18x8, 19x8.5, or 20.8.5 due to my package options for stock class. I wanted the brembo pack, but couldn't justify the cost. I see track time in my future with car, but I imagine the 13" rotors I have now should be plenty for a while.

Michael Westerfield · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 9:17 am

Chuck Branscomb wrote:

Beautiful! Time to update the forum sig? Is it coming to the next autox?

We'll see, I do plan to have it at the NCAC and event #8. Should be a good time. It is a beast at 7k.

Michael Westerfield · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 9:19 am

DickRasmussen wrote:

NICE!!!

FYI if you use a tire trailer Hitch-web shows a hitch now for the 11's.

Good to know. My lack of tire trailer skills will probably have me stuffing them in the trunk though.

Matt McGrain · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 10:21 am

Whoa! Congrats on the 5.0 Mike!!!! Can't wait to hear it in Sanford.

Chuck Branscomb · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:07 am

Kind of coming full circle in this thread...so, does this mean that the SCCA should move the M3 to F-stock? If not, why not? Similar weight, power, less torque, actually harder to keep the thing cooking on an autox course since it depends on major revs with 295 lb-ft to make its power, etc... Oh, and totally crap front camber situation for autox compared to the Mustang.

JamesShort · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:39 am

Chuck Branscomb wrote:

Kind of coming full circle in this thread...so, does this mean that the SCCA should move the M3 to F-stock? If not, why not? Similar weight, power, less torque, actually harder to keep the thing cooking on an autox course since it depends on major revs with 295 lb-ft to make its power, etc... Oh, and totally crap front camber situation for autox compared to the Mustang.

Well it is RWD and has a V8, so why not?

Michael Westerfield · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:40 am

Chuck Branscomb wrote:

Kind of coming full circle in this thread...so, does this mean that the SCCA should move the M3 to F-stock? If not, why not? Similar weight, power, less torque, actually harder to keep the thing cooking on an autox course since it depends on major revs with 295 lb-ft to make its power, etc... Oh, and totally crap front camber situation for autox compared to the Mustang.

Good question. I don't have an opinion though.

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:49 am

Chuck Branscomb wrote:

Kind of coming full circle in this thread...so, does this mean that the SCCA should move the M3 to F-stock? If not, why not? Similar weight, power, less torque, actually harder to keep the thing cooking on an autox course since it depends on major revs with 295 lb-ft to make its power, etc... Oh, and totally crap front camber situation for autox compared to the Mustang.

Not unless you want to kill FS. While the car has no camber and will eat front tires like no tomorrow, it's going to be faster on an autocross course when fully prepped. - AB

THSCC Forums

More Mustang stuff....GT vs M3

Who is online