Insane 0-60

[dfwford]

We need a NSIS tag / subforum on here for shitposts like this...

Sponsored

 

[dfwford]

OP is either a troll or very young and ignorant, either way post needs deleted and banned if remade.

It can be both...

 

[dfwford]

Maybe this is because I'm newer, but how did this post turn so toxic? Sure the guy may have been going down a slope, or had weight reduction, or something else to make this insane time, but why can't everyone just say cool and move on? We know these cars are not this fast stock, just let the guy enjoy his new car

An unfortunate fact of life is that you can't police how people will react when you say stuff in a public forum.

But that aside, the reason folks are reacting negatively is because the post doesn't really cotnribute anything of value. And even if it were a joke, it's a pretty low effort one.

 

[Mazman]

 

[Zig]

It can be both...

What makes fords ‘dragy’ less accurate than a third party accessory?

 

[dfwford]

What makes fords ‘dragy’ less accurate than a third party accessory?

Tha's a fair question. But IMO, it doesn't even have to get that deep for this thread.

1. If 2.7 seconds 0-60 were possible, trust & believe Ford would already be marketing the hell out of it (they did a *TON* of testing after all).

2. StangMode and other influencers would have made a ton of videos trying to beat or match it.

3. The OP only shared a poor quality picture with limited context. We don't know what conditions helped him achieve those numbers since we weren't there to see it with our own eyes, assuming the picture wasn't actually photoshopped.

 

[Zig]

Tha's a fair question. But IMO, it doesn't even have to get that deep for this thread.

1. If 2.7 seconds 0-60 were possible, trust & believe Ford would already be marketing the hell out of it (they did a *TON* of testing after all).

2. StangMode and other influencers would have made a ton of videos trying to beat or match it.

3. The OP only shared a poor quality picture with limited context. We don't know what conditions helped him achieve those numbers since we weren't there to see it with our own eyes, assuming the picture wasn't actually photoshopped.

Agreed wholeheartedly with #1, 2, and 3.

if we are able to identify the scenarios that would cause such anomalies it may be helpful for those that would otherwise claim such in error.

 

[ElektroSmokes]

Maybe this is because I'm newer, but how did this post turn so toxic? Sure the guy may have been going down a slope, or had weight reduction, or something else to make this insane time, but why can't everyone just say cool and move on? We know these cars are not this fast stock, just let the guy enjoy his new car

No. It's foolish, and it drags this forum down as a whole to have such foolish posts.

 

[marcekb]

OP is either a troll or very young and ignorant, either way post needs deleted and banned if remade.

We need a NSIS tag / subforum on here for shitposts like this...

But that aside, the reason folks are reacting negatively is because the post doesn't really cotnribute anything of value. And even if it were a joke, it's a pretty low effort one.

I'd prefer to assume better of the OP. It looks like a genuine claim that we agree is impossible. Why not entertain the idea to figure out what went wrong? His only two replies indicate he wasn't joking or trying to mislead anyone. How does he or anyone else who uses the track app report the problem if everyone jumps on him and shuts the discussion down?

Maybe this is because I'm newer, but how did this post turn so toxic? Sure the guy may have been going down a slope, or had weight reduction, or something else to make this insane time, but why can't everyone just say cool and move on? We know these cars are not this fast stock, just let the guy enjoy his new car

Agreed. Toxicity and overt negativity here just isn't right. Even @Dena was at least trying to help make it a productive discussion. I haven't tried the track app yet, but might be interesting to see if Ford has a bigger problem with the computer.

If it's shown the OP was trolling or joking to get a reaction, then roll the complaints and calls for removing the thread or worse a ban.

 

[Upacurb]

OK so here is the RIGHT way to make a thread like this.....

According to his car....he ran a 9 SECOND QUARTER MILE 100% BONE STOCK

(70) How Accurate are the Track App Times | Mustang7G - 2024+ S650 Mustang Forum (Hybrid, GT, EcoBoost, GT350, GT500, Bullitt, Mach 1)

He admits this cant be right- and doesnt seem accurate - and is questioning things looking for help.....not trying to brag

So no..... the car doesnt go 0-60 in 2.7 and run a 9 second quarter mile......

I was trying to read up on how Ford calculates the acceleration times when this first guy posted- and the speedometer is based on wheel speed...not ground speed

So you could do a HUGE burn out and get your wheels up to 60 MPH before your car was up to 60MPH

I also read it uses the accelerometer and does a calculation between that and time to try and calculate

All I know is there was a guy on the S550 forum who got a 3.0 0-60 on a stock 2015 automatic (6 speed) on stock tires and immediately thought it was BS

So here are 2 other examples where Ford computer was simply wrong.....

Waiting for someone to post that maybe once broken in we will see more people running 9 second quarter miles lol

 

[Zig]

(70) How Accurate are the Track App Times | Mustang7G - 2024+ S650 Mustang Forum (Hybrid, GT, EcoBoost, GT350, GT500, Bullitt, Mach 1)




So no..... the car doesnt go 0-60 in 2.7 and run a 9 second quarter mile......

I was trying to read up on how Ford calculates the acceleration times when this first guy posted- and the speedometer is based on wheel speed...not ground speed

So you could do a HUGE burn out and get your wheels up to 60 MPH before your car was up to 60MPH

I also read it uses the accelerometer and does a calculation between that and time to try and calculate
So here are 2 other examples where Ford computer was simply wrong.....

9 second quarter miles lol

Yes, knowing how it calculates and what can / may make it wrong is paramount.

using just numbers it’s easy to show/claim: (round 9 up to 10 and there are 4 quarters - 10 times 4 - lol)

 

[dfwford]

I'd prefer to assume better of the OP. It looks like a genuine claim that we agree is impossible. Why not entertain the idea to figure out what went wrong? His only two replies indicate he wasn't joking or trying to mislead anyone. How does he or anyone else who uses the track app report the problem if everyone jumps on him and shuts the discussion down?



Agreed. Toxicity and overt negativity here just isn't right. Even @Dena was at least trying to help make it a productive discussion. I haven't tried the track app yet, but might be interesting to see if Ford has a bigger problem with the computer.

If it's shown the OP was trolling or joking to get a reaction, then roll the complaints and calls for removing the thread or worse a ban.

I'm relunctant to give the OP the benefit of the doubt for a number of reasons.

They have a track record on this forum of being smug/combative/pedantic. Even in this thread, in posts replying to comments questioning the legitimacy of his OP, he was very flippant/sarcastic (and maybe that's just his personality type, but it's still not a good look from a credibility standpoint).

But also, they've been MIA for almost 2 days instead of providing more evidence besides "Trust Me Bro!!!"

That said, as my recent thread about the screens prove, I can admit when I'm wrong if the OP proves what they say to be real.

 

[marcekb]

Much nicer. I agree with all three of you @Upacurb , @Zig and @dfwford.

 

[SoggyBottomBoy]

The problem isn't with the post, the problem is with how OP takes offense when someone says it's impossible for the car to legitimately hit that time

 

[marcekb]

The problem isn't with the post, the problem is with how OP takes offense when someone says it's impossible for the car to legitimately hit that time

For sure. However, and I think others have shown the same in this thread, it's easy to understand why he might have felt bad that people didn't take him seriously. Everyone wants the car to be this fast, and if you'd seen that number yourself, it would have been pretty exciting.

Most of us would have questioned it, though, and I would have rerun it repeatedly to see if I could get close to that result again. I wondered why he only ran it once.

Sponsored