now my brother has a 2002 cougar v6 c2 (manual) and he had raced a "GT" (supposively) mustang and he beat it, he got a 16.6 and the mustang had gotten a 16.8 .... now how n the helll....my bro only had a exhaust and im not sure about the mustang. now i figured mustang would be faster than that.... i mean wow.... so im assuming either the mustang has misfiring problems, he had fake GT badges on his car, or his car was stick and dont no how to drive.. or misshifted or someting....Now how fast are GT mustangs of this year? i might be buying a GT 97 Automatic of this year (i do not want a stick, i like autmoatics much better lol)... any input would be greeeeat (or if people can tell me how theres runs and what they beat,etc.)
Could a 2002 Cougar V6 C2 beat a 97 GT Mustang?
- Thread starter Young D
- Start date
a 97 GT should do much better then 16.8, they should be somewhere in the mid to low 15s with some freaks in the high 14s.....
they run low 15s with a manual and mid to high 15s in an auto (the GT) so no he is not as fast as one (unless the driver REALLY sucks or the car is not running right)
i love my 98 GT, i havent raced a cougar but ive raced 03 GTs with exhaust (didnt ask mods) and my front bumper has been at their mirror the whole time. very happy and impressed with my car.
I would not compare a couger of that year to any mustang.. Unless its a V6 stang. The Gt should win without a sweat.
Young D said:
A 97 GT should not lose to a Cougar, could happen, but it's more than likely driver rather than the car.
I'm not sure if you've heard, I'm assuming you have but I'll say it anyway. The 96-98 GT's are considered the "turds" of the family. Altough I do love that body style.
Why not get a 96 or even better a 98 Cobra?
Vert auto with bald tires running bad gas. I could see it running a 16.8 then.
My wife has a 2000 V6/5 speed Cougar. Its no match for any of our other cars:
92 SHO, three CSVTs, or especially the 87 GN....
92 SHO, three CSVTs, or especially the 87 GN....
Last edited:
JVENOM said:
Not completely true... my 96 GT 5-speed ran a 14.5 @ 95 with 3.55's and exhaust (2.1 60'). It's been proven that the intake is the worst thing on the car... swap for a 99+ with adapter or an FRPP intake and you're talking low 14's, or high 13's with traction.
motoman991
Banned
i had a 92 sho, that was the quickest and fastest car i have had and it got pretty good gas mileage
Wouldnt the cougar be pretty close to a 98 contour svt (which is what I have) ? I took my car to the track and managed a 15.39 @ 90 on a hot day with partially plugged pre-cats. After knocking the pre-cats out and replacing the main cat, it feels hugely better (picked up 15hp at the wheels and nearly 10lbs of torque). Anyway so after the pre-cats gone and dynoing 176 fwhp I had a run in with a 96 GT 5 speed and I can say I had no problems beating this car on the street and it was only uglier when we got on it from a roll.
So if this cougar is a strong running car, couldnt it potentially be a good match for an earlier 2 valve GT? PS. I'm only comparing my car because I ran the 15.39 when I was minus 15 fwhp which I guess would put me close to the cougars output ...maybe??
So if this cougar is a strong running car, couldnt it potentially be a good match for an earlier 2 valve GT? PS. I'm only comparing my car because I ran the 15.39 when I was minus 15 fwhp which I guess would put me close to the cougars output ...maybe??
Your CSVT stock is at least 1/2 second faster than the Cougar. Cougars are high 15 second cars. CSVTs are low 15 second cars.
I think the 5.0 lx's are good looking cars... I would for sure run that kid. I think your car should fair well if not beat it... You have the weight advantage and even horsepower if its a 98 GT.
90_red_lx said:
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
