Mustang Evolution Forum banner

4.6 vs 3.7?

20K views 17 replies 12 participants last post by  scottydsntknow 
#1 ·
Hello.
I have a 2013 3.7 mustang and my friend has a 2001 mustang gt. He’s really convinced that he will beat me what do you think?

2013 Mustang V6:
Roush Axle back
Bbk shorty headers
Mpt race tune
Automatic


2001 Mustang Gt:
Throttle body
Catback
X pipe
4:10 gears
Bama tune
Automatic
 
#6 ·
4.6 2v are turds NA. The 3.7 is a drivers race with the 4.6 3v, stock for stock.

One thing to consider, the 4.6 2v's mods might add 10-15 hp and torque at the wheel, but it started off around 220-230, so it might be putting down 235-245 at the wheels. Yes, it has 4.10's with an auto and that is as much an advantage as it is a disadvantage.

That being said, a stock 3.7 puts down at the wheels, what the 2v was rated for at the crank (around 260 whp and 250wtq with an auto). Also, the 3.7 has 2 extra gears that the 2v doesn't, so those lower gears are more aggressive than they are on the 2v. Combine that with the exhaust and an actual good tune, things that actually add power (similar mods put down around 290 whp) and you have a recipe for a relatively easy win for the 3.7, assuming you are running a quarter mile or farther.

The only possible loss is if the 2v driver doesn't blow the tires off and just hooks, the 3.7 may have to run down the GT, but given long enough, that shouldn't be much of a problem.

One other option, is roll racing. The 2v will get multiple bus lengths put on it by the 3.7.
 
#8 ·
Mod for mod, a 2V will produce more torque, at both the crank and the wheels, than the Cyclone.
As far as quarter mile times between the two cars stock, there is a 2/10ths of a second difference between a 2V powered New Edge and a Cyclone equipped Mustang... With the advantage going to the Cyclone, of course. Nevertheless, that will be a pretty close race for a couple of cars that trap right around 100 mph...

If you plan on racing from a dig, you better not sleep on the line. I don't think that you will be able to easily run him down.
And if you guys want rolls, I recommend finding a nice bakery!
:p:
 
#9 ·
I believe the '01 GT had 260hp stock. I had a '99 Cobra with 320hp stock and I thought it was about 60hp more than the GT's at the time. I had 4.10's & 4.30's. On street tires my 60ft times were better with the stock 3.27's. Don't let your 2.73's scare you because he will most likely struggle for traction if he's on street radials and 4.10's. Your HP will take over on the top end.
 
#10 ·
I don't see any reason why you would lose :cool:
 
#12 ·
  • Like
Reactions: KATO
#13 ·
I covered this with the 05+ 3v
But you didn't, at least not explicitly.

2v and 3v are not the same, that much is obvious, one would assume.

A 2v is a mid to low 14 second car with around a 100 mph trap speed.

A 3v is a mid to high 13 second car with a 102 - 105 mph trap speed.

A 3.7 is a mid to high 13 second car at 102 - 105 mph trap speeds, same as the 3v and faster than a 2v.

Times are assuming the fastest optioned version of each car.

To make matters worse for the 2v, it doesn't respond to mods very well. The 3v does. The 3.7 responds to mods better than the 2v but not to extent that the 3v does.

You also left out the part in your video where the 4.6's stock internals let go around 400 - 500 whp and the 3.7's have done over 500+ whp repeatedly and never let go. I believe it was LPF and at one point they released a video of them putting down 740 whp and 780 wtq. I'm not sure if that's on a stock engine or with built internals but that dyno run also didn't include them hitting it with a 100 - 200 shot of nitrous.

BTW, your video could have been 4 minutes long instead of 17 boring minutes...
 
#14 ·
Quick summary of 3SSV's vlog:
If you are a better driver than your opponent, you stand a better chance of winning.
Most Cyclone owners are superior drivers compared to GT owners.
Automatic transmissions are easier to drive than manuals.
If you want good gas mileage, get a 3.7... Everyone else, buy a GT.
 
#15 ·
3.7s respond in a fairly similar way to that of a 3v. Just gotta remember the 3v also has cams and intake manifolds to fall back on. But a bolt on and tuned 3.7 can be in a similar whp range to a 3v.

Also the standard acceptable norm for a 3.7 maxed out is 600-650whp can it be pushed further? Sure. But thats the fairly accepted safe spot. Which is higher than a 3v.

Furthermore currently lpf isnt making any turbo kits for the 3.7 market. Nor do they seem to support that market.
 
#18 ·
I dunno V6 11-14 cars with low miles sell for damn near nothing now. Tune and a few mods and you've got a solid 300-320rwhp car that gets 30+ and looks great and is reliable. 3V sounds better and you can cam it but that's kinda it... Does benefit from the much better S197 chassis vs SN95.


Then again, I'm seeing some 11-14 Coyotes going for retarded cheap right now.


Don't forget about the 4V... I love my 4V, thing pulls hard to 7500 on dead nuts stock engine/cams/manifolds. And the 2V isn't super modifiable for the "bolt ons" but throw a set of MHS Stage 2 NA cams in there and properly degree them and all of a sudden the car will be making 275-285 rwhp with a 6500 redline and a way better curve.


Back on topic, 3.7 should win drivers being equal. Most ppl bragging about their 2V like the other guy in the original post probably can't drive for **** and have never been to a track except in their internet posts. From a dig the 3.7 will walk it. From a stop, depends who hooks better and can shift.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top