# 2005 Mustang v. 1970 Mustang: Which wins? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 26, 2005, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942 "2005-10-26T02:47:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Carnac\_the\_Magnificent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Carnac\_the\_Magnificent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carnac_the_Magnificent)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/1 "2005-10-26T02:47:17Z")
I recently borrowed a 2005 Mustang and was impressed by the neck-snapping acceleration. I also vaguely remember driving a 1970 Mustang (then in about 1984) owned by a friend. Had a 400-something cubic-inch engine with giant Holley’s. Very fast. How would these two muscle cars compare in a quarter mile? I guess we should compare the fastest of both models. No superchargers or nitrous, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/2 "2005-10-26T03:01:41Z")
If the 1970 car comes with stock tires, I think the 2005 car will win easily. ---
**Author:** ![cstamets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/958977/32.png) [@cstamets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cstamets)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/3 "2005-10-26T03:02:40Z")
[2005 Mustang GT](http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/05fordmustang.html) ``` 13.9 sec @ 104 mph ``` [1970 Ford Mustang Boss 429](http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/fordboss429.html) ``` 14.0 sec @ 103 mph ``` Stats for the 2005 Shelby Cobra GT weren’t available on that site. I would expect it to be a little quicker, but maybe not. ---
**Author:** ![LiveOnAPlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3d9bf3/32.png) [@LiveOnAPlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LiveOnAPlane)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/4 "2005-10-26T03:07:02Z")
Your friend’s 1970 Mustang could not have had any bigger engine than a 351 Cleveland or a 428 Cobra Jet, unless it was a Boss 429. Could have been some kind of ane ngine swap, or a boraed-and-stroked something or other. But, since you did not say a Boss 429, I must asume it was not so. So, 351 Cleveland, and not a Boss 351 which came to be in 1971., or a 428 CJ. And not the Boss 302 of 1969-1970, though these would not qualify anyway, the years and cubic inches being wrong. Now, as to the 2005 Mustang, you have some superior engines, for sure. And, I am 35 or so years out of this loop. But my understanding of what this model is that it has some engine options, which you have not denoted here. Are you talking of the 300 horsepower V-8 or the 200 horsepower V-6? I will assume (yeah, I know the danger thereof) you are talking of the V-8s. And I will assume you are talking of the 1970 428 Cj and the 2005 GT. Comparing these two, I can only direct you, sorry, to more current info than I have. I will give you the stats on the 1970 CJ…most car mags had it doing the quarter mile in 13.8 to 13.9 seconds. If you can find some current specs on the quarter mile times of the 2005 GT, then you will be able to sorta-properly compare the two. I hope this helps. ---
**Author:** ![cstamets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/958977/32.png) [@cstamets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cstamets)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/5 "2005-10-26T03:12:39Z")
And then there’s the [1994 Ford SVT 10.0L Boss Mustang](http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/fordbossmustang.html) . It says this was a concept car. I hope I’m not being whooshed or something with this. 0-60 mph: 1.9 sec 0-100 mph: 5.5 sec Quarter Mile: 10.55 sec @ 135 mph ---
**Author:** ![cstamets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/958977/32.png) [@cstamets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cstamets)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/6 "2005-10-26T03:16:11Z")
Just so we have some stats on a Cobra Jet, [1969 Ford Mustang Mach 1](http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/69fordmach1.html) . They don’t have the quarter-mile stats or the '70, but it looks like the same engine. ``` 13.9 sec @ 103 mph ``` ---
**Author:** ![LiveOnAPlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3d9bf3/32.png) [@LiveOnAPlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LiveOnAPlane)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/7 "2005-10-26T03:17:10Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > If the 1970 car comes with stock tires, I think the 2005 car will win easily. Actualy, the tires do play a big part in this. The 1970 tires franlkly sucked compared with what we have available today. But since tires are replaceable items, you gotta think what would the case be if one shod the 1970 Mustang with today’s tires? ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/8 "2005-10-26T03:33:09Z")
> [@cstamets](#): > > And then there’s the [1994 Ford SVT 10.0L Boss Mustang](http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/fordbossmustang.html) . > > It says this was a concept car. I hope I’m not being whooshed or something with this. In general, the SVT models are very exclusive, expensive, and performance-tuned. For instance, they had a 2000 Ford SVT Mustang Cobra R that did a quarter mile in 3.2 seconds at 110 mph. OTOH, this one is probably a one-off with a custom engine for an auto show. ---
**Author:** ![LiveOnAPlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3d9bf3/32.png) [@LiveOnAPlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LiveOnAPlane)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/9 "2005-10-26T03:38:32Z")
OK, I’m gonna try this one again. The last post got somehow lost. Let me try again… * * * I have avoided mention of Google ads, but this is too much: Supercharge Any Mustang Up to 35 HP for any Mustang. Only $69.95. Lifetime Warranty. First, folks, this is bullshit. No other word for it. Just pure BS. I won’t waste my time taking this especially stupid Google ad apart. Shame on the SD board. What’s next? Ngerian multi-million dollar scams? I can tolerate the general ads no problem, but you really don’t need to assume those of us who post here are absolute morons, fer cryin’ out loud. Actually, I take it back. I’m gonna call these buttheads, and see if I can get a supercharger for for $69.95. I’ll report back to you on the results… ---
**Author:** ![LiveOnAPlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3d9bf3/32.png) [@LiveOnAPlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LiveOnAPlane)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/10 "2005-10-26T03:51:52Z")
OK, here’s the story. First it isn’t supercharger. And it isn’t a turbocharger. It’s some piece of shit you put in your air filter (As best as I can undertand). Ad starts RRd by DOCTOR Brian Coyle! It must be right, right? Dude’s a DOCTOR…RRRRRRRRRRRaaaaaaaaaaaaaaWWWWWWWWWWWWrrrrrrrrr Then more ad-crap… “Guaranteed, Yes SIR!!!” But we have an a DOCTOR BRIAN COYLE who not only got one, but ordered more for his brothers. Damn I cannot wait. Gotta talk to this dude for establishing their bona fides. OK, now I’m on hold. I’ll get thru to them in just a minute, and get his number and then we’ll get a good cite. OOps, they cut me off. Guess they don’t want any questions. That’s right sports fans, they terminated the call. You CAN NOT speak to them. Going to Google to report this scam from these dumb asses. I thin Cecil shoud do a colum ont heir claims…if he can get them to talk. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/11 "2005-10-26T03:56:23Z")
> [@SmackFu](#): > > For instance, they had a 2000 Ford SVT Mustang Cobra R that did a quarter mile in 3.2 seconds at 110 mph. 3.2 for the quarter mile? I’m a little skeptical. 3.2 for the quarter mile @110mph? That’s physically impossible. ---
**Author:** ![Enola\_Straight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dec6dc/32.png) [@Enola\_Straight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enola_Straight)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/12 "2005-10-26T04:04:16Z")
> [@cstamets](#): > > And then there’s the [1994 Ford SVT 10.0L Boss Mustang](http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/fordbossmustang.html) . > > It says this was a concept car. I hope I’m not being whooshed or something with this. > > 0-60 mph: 1.9 sec > 0-100 mph: 5.5 sec > Quarter Mile: 10.55 sec @ 135 mph I remember when Car& Driver (?) had a shootout with this Mustang vs a Chevy Camaro with an equally massive Big Block and a Manual tranny. The 10.0 utterly liquefied the 3sp shushbox, iirc. ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/13 "2005-10-26T04:19:00Z")
> [@](#): > > 3.2 for the quarter mile? I’m a little skeptical. D’oh! 13.2, not 3.2. ---
**Author:** ![Carnac\_the\_Magnificent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Carnac\_the\_Magnificent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carnac_the_Magnificent)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/14 "2005-10-26T13:29:08Z")
> [@LiveOnAPlane](#): > > OK, now I’m on hold. I’ll get thru to them in just a minute, and get his number and then we’ll get a good cite. > OOps, they cut me off. Guess they don’t want any questions. That’s right sports fans, they terminated the call. You CAN NOT speak to them. > > Going to Google to report this scam from these dumb asses. I thin Cecil shoud do a colum ont heir claims…if he can get them to talk. Many thanks for your information, but I’m really interested in the shoot-out as described in the OP. Yes, the 1970 Mustang had a 400-something cubic inch engine. The owner said it was quite rare. Can’t recall anything else. ---
**Author:** ![SuperNelson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@SuperNelson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuperNelson)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/15 "2005-10-26T14:39:45Z")
> [@Carnac the Magnificent!](#): > > No superchargers or nitrous, of course. Do you mean no superchargers, or no aftermarket superchargers? As I recall, the current Cobra version comes with a factory installed supercharger, and is even faster. Also, I know you’re focusing on the straight line accelleration of the quarter mile, but if you plan to stop or turn, the '70 can’t touch the '05. As much as I loved my '73, the thing didn’t race so much as hurtle. ---
**Author:** ![Dag\_Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@Dag\_Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dag_Otto)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/16 "2005-10-26T16:01:28Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > 3.2 for the quarter mile @110mph? That’s physically impossible. It’s _practically_ impossible, given the state of cars and drivetrains used for drag racing today, and it’s physically _improbable_ considering the way drag races are run, but I don’t think that it’s physically impossible. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/17 "2005-10-26T16:31:55Z")
Off to IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Markus76](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@Markus76](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markus76)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/18 "2005-10-26T16:32:05Z")
> [@Dag Otto](#): > > It’s _practically_ impossible, given the state of cars and drivetrains used for drag racing today, and it’s physically _improbable_ considering the way drag races are run, but I don’t think that it’s physically impossible. It’s pretty close to physically impossible. To complete a 1/4-mile in 3.2 seconds, you’d have to have an average speed of 281 mph over the course of a 1/4-mile. So you’ve got to have a car that can start from zero, get up to around 600mph at the 3/4-mile point, and then slam on the otherworldly brakes to cross the finish line at 110. ---
**Author:** ![Dag\_Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@Dag\_Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dag_Otto)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/19 "2005-10-26T17:51:59Z")
> [@Markus76](#): > > It’s pretty close to physically impossible. I’ll let it go, now that this is no longer in GQ. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2005, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942/20 "2005-10-26T18:37:41Z")
> [@Dag Otto](#): > > It’s _practically_ impossible, given the state of cars and drivetrains used for drag racing today, and it’s physically _improbable_ considering the way drag races are run, but I don’t think that it’s physically impossible. Well, i was basing my accusation of impossibility on the fact that the car is generally still accelerating at the end of the quarter mile. So, the speed at the end of the quarter is the _highest_ speed that the car had attained. If the highest speed you attain is 110mph, it is physically impossible to go a quarter mile in 3.2 seconds. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2005-mustang-v-1970-mustang-which-wins/327942.md?page=2)