93 NSX vs 03 Mustang Mach 1

My stupid mustang friend always wants to race me. His brother has an 03 Mach 1 which has the 305HP v8 in it.

From what I can see in magazines, they look pretty close, but he told me his brother has already run 108 in the 1/4. There is no way my car will run near that.

But, I am thinking in a race to say 140, I should beat it.

Any thoughts?

:Note: I have no plans of actually doing this.

IMO I think you will beat him slightly. I also don't believe his quarter is that fast.

Obviously when cars are this close it depends a lot on the driver and his ability to run consistently. Meaning driver A drives his NSX perfect every day, then screws up a shift during a race with a Rustang. That would be bad


I just checked on-line....
2003 Mach I quarter mile 14.0 sec @ 103 mph

http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/03fordmach1.html

Well, that is my disadvantage. All these clowns do is dragstrips. I am not sure they even know how to turn the wheel...

I NEVER drag race my car. So, that would be a big plus for them.

Maybe form a roll?

Here's an interesting one....

A woman who works in my building owns a 2004 Mustang Cobra SVT. It's stock but she races in at English Town (1/4 track). I have been wondering if her car would beat my 1998 NSX?????

I think so, but again it would be close.

2004 Mustang Cobra SVT quarter mile 12.6 sec @ 112 mph

.90g on the skidpad, I think I got her there

I've driven several Mach 1's and yes its a muscle car but Fords intention for this car was to be a "Road Car" rather than a quarter mile car. In fact Mach 1's posted faster lap times than its supercharged brother (the SVT Cobra). (Tested by Ford).

Im confident the NSX can take it either way.

Good luck

jadkar said:

Here's an interesting one....

A woman who works in my building owns a 2004 Mustang Cobra SVT. It's stock but she races in at English Town (1/4 track). I have been wondering if her car would beat my 1998 NSX?????

I think so, but again it would be close.

2004 Mustang Cobra SVT quarter mile 12.6 sec @ 112 mph

.90g on the skidpad, I think I got her there

Click to expand...

Jadkar, the SVT is an animal (I've driven that as well). If she can launch then your toast

New Cobra is damn fast ... I've read the road test in magazine, which the 0~60 is about 4 sec ...

I worry i f I can use my X to beat Cobra ...

12.6?!?! i had NO idea they were that quick!!!

as far as .90g on the skidpad, that just tells you it had sticky tires, it doesn't tell you a thing about handling. i dont know why magazines even bother with that test.

as far as .90g on the skidpad, that just tells you it had sticky tires, it doesn't tell you a thing about handling. i dont know why magazines even bother with that test.

Click to expand...

So not true. I wouldn't say it's the "end all be all" of tests, however it does give you some interesting data. It does have something to do with tires but only a small part. For example, throw sticky tires on my Honda element and it still won't pull .90g

A google search turned this up in a FAQ (which I now just lost the link to) which concurs with what we were told by the engineering director at yesterday's event at the Consumer Reports vehicle testing facility when we were taken for a ride around the skidpad there.

Q: What do the numbers for skidpad in the Auto Magazines really mean? May they be compared?

A: In short, 1) not as much as the magazines want you to believe, and 2) almost never.


Skidpads vary, and even if they didn't, skidpad figures are really
only tests of the stickiness of the stock tires; they change radically when tire compounds change. DO NOT make any assumptions about the comparative handling of, say, two sports sedans based on skidpad numbers.

This is not to suggest that skidpads are without value, however. Skidpads are an excellent educational tool at driving schools. They are simply of limited value in the comparison of anything except tires.