From the July 2001 issue of Car and Driver.
We always thought we knew what Mustangs were all about: reasonably quick coupes that, despite being slower and less sure-footed then Camaros, still outsold the Chevy pony car by a margin of four to one. How could this be? Some say the Mustang looks better, or that the Camaro’s bulked-up body turns off potential buyers.
Even though Ford is clearly killing Chevy at the showrooms, the Dearborn automaker made a variety of refinements to its SVT Mustang Cobra that it hoped would finally produce a Mustang that equaled a Camaro’s quickness and agility. The Cobra’s crude solid rear axle was replaced with an independent rear suspension in 1999, and the engine’s output was boosted by 15 horses to 320—the same as in the killer 1998 Camaro Z28SS.
But Ford’s hoped-for glory never materialized because, oddly enough, the enhanced horsepower didn’t make the Cobra any quicker. The 1999 Cobra needed 5.5 seconds to get to 60 mph, about a half-second slower than the Camaro. We figured that although the Cobra had equal horsepower, the 5.7-liter pushrod Chevy V-8’s significant torque advantage (345 pound-feet versus 317) over that of the revvy 32-valve DOHC Cobra V-8 gave the Camaro an edge at the drag strip.
It turns out that many of the Cobra’s 15 new horses had jumped the fence—and it wasn’t just our test car. About midway through the 1999 model year, Cobra owners, who thought their cars just didn’t feel 320 horses strong, started taking their cars to dynos and testing them. Some Cobras were missing as much as 20 of the advertised horsepower. These guys were miffed. And they got on the horn in big numbers and began howling, “Where’s the beef?”
By the time Ford discovered its horses weren’t where its mouth was, then figured out a fix for each of the cars already sold and also designed new parts for production cars, there wasn’t enough time to get the new parts into 2000 Cobras. As a result, Ford did not produce any for that model year. Ford now says 2001 is the first production year that all Cobras make 320 horsepower.
As you can imagine, we were quite eager to get into the latest Cobra model. We received the Mineral Gray 2001 model pictured here. The car felt strong, but it still didn’t seem to have Camaro punch. Perhaps 320 horses was still optimistic.
Then we strapped on the test gear and made a few runs at the track. The results were staggering—the Cobra’s acceleration time matched a Camaro SS’s. The Cobra scooted to 60 mph in only 4.8 seconds and through the quarter in 13.5 seconds at 105 mph. Our last Z28SS (a particularly quick model we tested in October 1998) hit 60 mph in 4.9 seconds and did the quarter in 13.5 seconds at 107 mph.
“Must be a ringer,” somebody offered. Had Ford slipped us an especially strong one? We asked for a second Cobra, and soon a white convertible arrived. We quietly drove both cars to the chassis dyno at Automotive Performance Engineering (APE) of Clinton Township, Michigan (810-954-3181; www.ap-engineering. com).
The technicians at APE strapped our gray coupe onto the dyno rolls and recorded 272 horsepower at the rear wheels. If you correct for driveline losses (about 15 percent), the rear-wheel dyno number correlates to 320 crankshaft horsepower, exactly as advertised. We then put the white convertible Cobra onto the dyno, and although we expected to see some typical production variation, we did not. It too made 272 rear-wheel horsepower. So you can take it from us: At least two 2001 Cobras produced the advertised 320 horsepower.
The newfound quickness and consistent engine performance are only part of the story as the Cobra has left its crude pony-car roots and joined the ranks of competent sports coupes. The floaty, not-sure-what-the-tires-are-doing feeling that has plagued Mustangs is gone. Now you can point the Cobra exactly where you want and assume it will go there. The car feels appropriately firm without being harsh, and it never bounces off bumps or potholes.
You can thank the independent rear suspension for the Cobra’s buttoned-down, confidence-inspiring behavior. According to Art Hyde, chief program engineer for the Mustang, the new independent rear suspension achieved three significant things: It slashed unsprung weight by 100 pounds, reduced lateral compliance, and allowed an inch more of wheel travel.
The result is nothing short of a Cobra transformation that, along with some of the other 1999 detail changes (new seats and an inch more of front legroom) and the always alluring exhaust snarl, has turned the Cobra into a car that’s a superb all-arounder. There’s really nothing the Cobra can’t do either well or extremely well. It’s quick, it stops from 70 mph in 179 feet, and it claws at the pavement with 0.86 g of lateral grip (the Camaro Z28SS stops in 174 feet and pulls 0.85 g on the skidpad).
Matching a Z28SS’s quickness will cost you, however, as our well-equipped Cobra (power driver’s seat, in-dash CD changer, traction control, anti-lock brakes, and leather trim are all standard) stickered at $29,600. A Camaro SS, which now has 325 horsepower, starts at $26,400.
Even so, we’re glad to know that once the Camaro leaves us next year, the last pony car left standing won’t be the slowest one.
Counterpoint
It is somewhat irritating to know that a standard Mustang can be had for about 18 grand, but to get one that is going to get your blood in motion, you have to ante up another 10 large. Once I enter the realm where the price tags even approach 30 grand, the word Mustang is no longer on my mind—I’m thinking Audi and BMW, and could I possibly swing the payments for a C-class Mercedes? Call me cheap. And although I’ll admit that this is an exceptionally handsome paint job and a superb new color, and the seats are a huge improvement over the standard chairs, count me out. Even a full-second edge to 60 mph wont entice me. —Steve Spence
This Cobra is probably as good as this generation of Mustang is going to get. It’s really quick. It sounds tremendous. And sans rear wing and painted a tasteful color, this is a pretty good-looking car. But the Cobra is going to cost you. Am I greedy to think that I should be able to get a Mustang GT that feels like this for six grand less? And although SVT changed the rear fascia to read “Cobra” instead of the 1999 Cobra’s fascia that read “Mustang,” its origins can’t be hidden. There is a limit to what even 320 horsepower and an independent rear suspension can do. This Cobra feels slightly heavy and ponderous as do all Mustangs —Daniel Pund
Lots of snort here, and I’m sure the SVT people are sleeping better as the product finally measures up to the 320-hp promise. Now they should get busy and fix the elements that really need fixing. This or any other Mustang is out of step with the times in terms of chassis, comfort, and control layout. Specifically, the relationships among the wheel, seat, and foot pedals just don’t work for taller drivers. There’s not enough fore-and-aft seat travel, and the seats rate a B-minus at best. The plain truth is that the Mustang is rapidly becoming antique. A fast antique, for sure. But antique nonetheless. —Tony Swan
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io
Source: Reviews - aranddriver.com
