Added: 2 months ago
From: InsideLineVideo
Views: 20,373
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (212)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • sound and the chirps are awsome!!!

  • And the new 5.0 are running 12 flats lol

  • The boss actually pulls 3.9 0-60

  • Christ how about you all quit complaining about 0-60's here? They're meaningless numbers that show nothing. They're as arbitrary and subjective to so many variables that there's really no reason to have them.

  • Too much nose dive during heavy braking. Fix that and I will get one.

  • I'm looking up boss 302 vids and you guys make a 4.8 0-60? Come on!!!

  • Stock 2011 5.0 does a 12.7 flat. You posers need to learn how to drive that damn car! 0 to 60 should be around 4 secs. Its a boss!

  • I thought it would be faster only 12.9 a little doggy

  • shoulda got a chevy.. u go over 100 in these pieces of shit cars there engine blows up

  • 4.8!!! SHIT!!! SON you need to learn how to drive!!! its suppose to be somewhere around 4.1 or 4.2!!!

  • 4.8?? you guys are terrible man...

  • you guys over at InsideLine are ALWAYS off when it comes to performance numbers.. you guys SUCK

  • At least it has good brakes!

  • give me some smoke :D

  • 0-60 gtr did it in 2.9 LOL

  • @gudboyz100 and a veyron u and a turbo in 2.6 wats your point ?

  • @gudboyz100 man ur slow!

  • the 302 wouldn't be so bad, but the dealer markup is horrible. EAT SHIT!!!

  • it doesnt really look like he pushed it at all. ive seen sites with way better stats than this. INSIDE LINE, HIRE BETTER DRIVERS! i could do better than that. lol 0-60 of 4.8 is slower than a normal mustang gt. i think we know this was setup a bit.

  • @paladain55 then theres that whole 13 sec 1/4. i

  • @simpsonfan13 yeah i know! they always post bullshit times for all the mustang videos ive watched, and theyre always slower than motortrend at EVERYTHING

  • i was driving home last night and some guy tride to race me o the 605 with one of these i smoked his ass.lol

  • I have never been one to say Insideline can't drive but damn i have seen waaaaaayyyyyyyy better numbers everywhere else i mean its not even close

  • Keeps squeaking its tires om.every shift.

  • Inside line has been consistently putting out the least impressive performance figures for years. I guess the only plus side is that you know how fast these cars will with your grandma at the wheel. Sheesh... I just saw a review that had the Boss doing 0-60 in 4.0 sec flat, and without this BS "rollout" garbage

  • Whoever is the driver for these tests needs to be fired NOW. 4.5s 0-60?! The normal 5.0 hits 60 in 4.3! wtf is wrong w/ Inside line?!?!!!!

  • The actual 0-60 time on this thing is 4 seconds flat. Edmunds just has terrible drivers.

  • A bone stock 370Z does a slalom 4 mph faster

  • Ford Mustang BAWSS 302

  • Competition is the only thing keeping the muscle cars alive. If it wasn't for competition... they would've been ALL dead a long time ago....

  • hmmm im not really impressed this car has much more potential its the skid pad and slalom that really let it down... still really nice car tho

  • WHo the hell is driving this??? Or maybe they need to recalibrate their equiptment.

  • 4.8? 4.5 with rollout? I see, there must be a patch of black ice on the track. Motortrend rips it in 4.0 to 60 and 12.3 1/4

  • chirped third gear haha

  • Motortrend tested this same mustang and got a 0-60 in 4 secs flat........horrible test

  • Horrible driver imo

  • Pussiest driver ever

  • Throw a vortech supercharger on it, and will push 800 horse.

  • 0-60 in 4.8 seconds sucks!!! W.T.F!!! Where did those supposed 444-hp go. Motor Trend shaved .8 sec off that.

  • go challenger 392

  • no wheelspin... pussy ass launches lol

  • @that1AK47 A launch without wheels spin is what you want-- in other words it's called traction. Why do you think some (not this Boss) cars have LAUNCH CONTROL? Since you didn't know already-- to prevent wheel spin for a faster launch time.

  • shitty car, nice try usa * sigh*

  • Yall do understand that these tests are real world test not what the car would get when put into a computer and corrected which motortrend and alot of other mags do the same so dont be unhappy with the results cause not everyone is the best driver and can launch a car with perfect throttle so this is what normal people would prolly get when driving.

  • Here is Roadfly tv doing 0-60 in 3.93s in a bone stock Boss Mustang,

    watch?v=s5eBwqiqMPU

    and this car doesn't have TracKey and the exhaust baffles removed from the Quad exhaust.

  • ok come on im a chevy guy but, u cant test a car for shit, didnt even pull a full g and u know a boss mustang will. it out handles the bmw m3 so come on, and 0 to 60 in 4.8 a standerd ss camaro doe's 0 60 in 4.6 and a 1/4 mile time of 12.78, this boss has more power then the gt model with its intake and other modifications so judgeing by your time's a gt would do 0 60 in 5.2 sec and a 1/4 mile time of mid 13's yaaaaaaa u might wanna redo this test with a better driver,

  • 4.8? 4.8!!!!?!? your barley half a second faster then a v6 mustang!!

  • damn it.. this mustang takes less than 4.4s to get to 62! god damn.. 4.8s?? you gotta be shittin me.. that guy who launched it and did the quarter mile is utterly feckless

  • Now this is a car you can ACTUALLY TRACK TEST. Not the fucking Honda CR-V.

  • Thats cool

  • LMFAO 4.8 0-60? u didnt even launch it hard enough to get ANY wheel spin...are you serious? my grandma can drive better than that. If you wanna show average driver times then show times with over aggressive launches at least, since thats what happens when some1 gets behind the wheel of a fast car for the first time, unless they're a pussy...

  • ive now lost ALL respect for inside line.. this is THE best mustang ever, and clearly, they had a woman behind the wheel... this car does 4.0 FLAT to 60, NOT 4.8....

  • Curb weight: 3666 lb

  • Inside Line pick it up, you guys suck.

  • These times don't reflect poorly on the car, they reflect poorly on InsideLine.

  • I used to be a pony car . . . then I took an arrow to the knee.

  • So much geek kids post stupid comment these days...

  • I wonder what Inside Lines  motivation was for posting such poor numbers.

  • What the heck?!?!? What is a 500 lb man driving

  • 74 ppl dun like Ford?

  • wheel spin on third gear. me gusta.

  • LIKE A BOSS 302

  • I'm scared!!!

  • Had to say it, but your buddies at motor trend did it 0-60 in 4.0. now thats a game changer for ford.

  • @DJP444

    Why is the 0-60 time changed right now??? i also imaged 0-60 in about 4 seconds and the numbers say in 4.8 what the fuck???

  • Very good skid pad, slalom, and brakes....best part about this car is that I can work on it at home, gonna have to if I want that straight line time to go down...which I do. I saw a 2011 Volvo S60 R-design run a 12.9.....come on BOSS?

  • The Stig would get better numbers

  • If They Used Launch Control I Think They Would Of Get Better Numbers And Plus The Guy Driving Didnt Know How To Really Drive It. That Boss Should Of Do 12.3-12.5 Easy But He Wasn't Hooking That Good Eather So Better Driver And Launch Control Be Way Better Numbers

  • @SUPERBADKBOY

    I really agree with u, especially for the launch control. The pilot in that BOSS302 isn't even a real pilot if he does only skypad and some brakes test so we shouldn't take this test for real and the launch control was disabled for sure!

    C'MON INSIDELINE, WE WANT BETTER NUMBEEEEEEEEERS!! REAL NUMBERS WIT LAUNCH CONTROL TESTS AND TRACK TESTS LIKE MANY CAR MAGAZINES DID WITH THE ORANGE MONSTER!

  • Ohh wow another Mustang, woopty doo.

  • @GMisNumber1 what's with the name?

  • @GMisNumber1 Ohh wow another Mustang hater, woopty doo.

  • @GMisNumber1 What The Fuck You Doing On A Mustang Video Then?

  • @GMisNumber1 and the same goes for Porsche, Lambo, Ferrari... list goes on and on. They make new editions so the cars can constantly adorn the cover of magazines and websites for PR reasons. Smart if you ask me. Seriously though... how can you hate on the Boss 302?

  • @GMisNumber1 wanna hear a joke? GM

  • @2012boracho Nah, the funny thing is how ford fanboys get thier panties in a knot because someone coments about a Mustang. Grow the F up!

  • @GMisNumber1 Awww. Still smarting over the 2013 GT500 announcement? LOL. And did Camaro make Car & Driver's 2012 10 Best like?

  • @dfwmichael2003 do not like the Camaro nither...

  • i love gt-r and supras

    but i got to tell you that the sound from the 302 is orgasmic

  • Always such garbage numbers from here...

  • This is something that needs to have a track test video. Not a freaking CRV. Fuckin Inside Line trying to get rich off of youtube money...

  • c'mon ppl read the info this is the test track on Mount Everest

  • i guess it's closer to real world data lol

  • Lol, why would you pay more for this model when the StockGT is faster? Stupid Ford.

  • @select20 na they just got shitty numbers.

  • What is the DA for this strip?.. because 12.9 is dastardly slow. I hope this isn't at a low altitude because that shows a damn lot about the driver you guys have. 12.9 is LS1 F Body territory... 14 year old motor, even older engine design, extremely unsophisticated suspension... I could go on about how F Body's are at a disadvantage to the Boss 302. Something doesn't add up for a car with this much 'technology' let alone power, to run a 12.9

  • GT (lower version) does it in 4.4 secs, so how on earth can this be slower?? dude, get a better driver testing, this should be at 4.0 seconds or lower

  • Slower then the hpe550 camaro imagine the zl1 tht has more hp then the hpe550!

  • @cholodesanfe87 The boss 302 wasn't solely designed to do the 1/4 in the fastest time possible. It's design was more circuit oriented. Not to mention Ford has always focused on making the Mustang fast around the track, not just the strip. This shouldn't be compared to the ZL1, that's the GT500's job. The GT500 has more power, but who knows what GM has up their sleeve for the ZL1 besides a new motor. Oh yea, and the guys at Inside Line, CAN'T drive so don't base your facts off their videos lol.

  • it should be 0 60 in 4 seconds flat

  • @KManX1011

    this is probably without the launch control! so i think next time they should use the launch control for the track tests.

  • Maybe they didn't use the track key

  • @legendaryspartan92 hey makes sense!

  • DAM, IT DID THE TEST LIKE A BOSS!

  • This thing sounds

    BOSS

  • inside line always puts up the correct numbers. ha ha!

  • It'd be 11.9's if he wouldn't shift like my grandmother

  • This car is obviously faster than the test results............I assume that Inside Line got a chance to test the car with some conditions, probably instructed not to speed shift or bounce off the rev limiter. That way Ford lets then test the next new car.

    Live Axle or not, this thing is fast and can handle, congrats Ford, this is a nice effort.

  • Holy Torque

  • this is funny.

  • They either had a 500 pound man testing the car.. Or they were pulling a trailer behind it when they did the tests?

  • @starksy17 just your average size american. so 500lbs sounds about right.

  • @starksy17 not a laguna seca package...ford sucks :

  • @samsaleh22 It doesn't need to be the laguna seca package.. the Stock GT does faster EVERYTHING then what they show here, this car can run 12 flats and below... you suck

  • @starksy17 "2012 Boss 302 Laguna Seca 11.9 sec. @ 124 mph 1/4 Mile Run"....thats a youtube video, watch it. and thats posted by a company that wants you to bring your boss to them to get modded, are they intentionally running it slow too...only .1 seconds faster than you claim a stock one runs with and extra 200hp and being a laguna seca package...tell me how that makes sense and i will shut up...ppl running 12 flat are on slicks and radials and skinnys not stock pirelli's dipshit...you suck :)

  • @starksy17 WoW even my grand mother knows that the track IL test their cars on is sometimes very dusty. Check the 911 vs the R8 video. Dust everywhere. And good morning btw.

  • @sspope haha yeah, the R8 vs 911 vid showed that those cars are slower then a stang :P

  • @starksy17 or its just slow, and Ford needs to come up with something new, besides a box on wheels they've been building since the 60s. Maybe the Focus RS from Europe + awd instead of fwd, to compete with the rest of the hot hatch market in the US. Woulddd be cool!

  • @trlalli92 It's quite obviously not slow. Watch motortrend's test video. they can run 4.4 second 0-60 and 12.7 1/4 mile in the normal GT 5.0. they run 4 seconds flat and 12 second quarter miles. Also, when you said ford needs somthing new, You must have forgotten about the fact, that the Motor in this mustang is about a year a a half old, makes more HP then a Camaro, which has a WAY bigger motor, and did i mention it, is a year a a half old. If you want more, new ford facts, check ALL EcoBoost's

  • @starksy17 It's a cool car... I want something new from Ford. Not a remake of a classic car. The 60s Mustangs have all my respect but this one just doesn't. And like all modern Ford products it will probably have a fatal flaw at some point...The new Explorer has barely enough power to move itself according to reviews. The F150 Raptor snaps in half when people use it as it is advertised. Whats next? Ford needs a game changer, and this tuned Mustang just won't do it.

  • @starksy17

    Here's some FACTS for you. Motortrend is inherently Ford biased and always has been as they are the only one posting up faster times than every other mag.

    The 5.0 has 3 more cams, 16 more valves, variable cam timing, and a higher compression ratio. Why can't Ford make more than 16HP over the Camaro in BOSS trim?

    Once the LS3 builds an aftermarket like all GM smallblocks, the 5.0 is going to be destroyed, just as it was in the 80s. The 5.0 can barely take LS1s lmao

  • @prowler10393 Want to here a real fact? every chevy fan boy that Just HAS to defend thier brand. has ALWAYS said, just wait until the next model, you'll see. And guess what, we waited for the ZL1 specs.. and it was MADLY outdone power-wise right after.. quit with the, ''wait until the next camaro.'' bullshit, makes you look like a bunch of little bitches

  • @starksy17

    I'm far from a Chevy fanboy, I own a GM, Mopar, and Ford. 2 Mustang GTs to be exact. There is no "waiting" for GM. And matter of fact, if you want to get technical, every engine in Top Fuel is a HEMI design so that makes Mopar the winner.

    I'm not saying wait till the next Camaro. I'm saying that you can't beat the SBC. It's been the center of hotrodding for 50+ years.

    GT500=Spin much? What makes you think the 2013 is going to be better with a bigger blower and engine

  • @prowler10393 I would like to make it very clear its much more then a bigger blower and bored out engine, MUCH more.

    Check out motortrends first look and in depth Over-View of the GT500.. Its gained much more then that.. it's had much more transmission fine tuning, it's gained launch controll, the suspension Squats the rear at launch and lowers the whole car at high speed, the car itself if 33% more stable, even at 160MPH, it has the same tires as the ZO6/Z07 Centenial package. I could go on

  • @starksy17

    I'll refrain from watching anything Motortrend. But anyway if you want to consider the launch control they have in the Mustangs to be state of the art, that's like saying the traction control on the F-bodies worked perfectly.

    They can throw all the aero upgrades at the Stang they want, it's still a brick at those speeds. If Ford wanted to make the 500 a winner, drop $5k-$10k off the price of the last generation 500. I can imagine the price on the 2013..Vette Territory..lmao

  • @prowler10393 Its going to be 60k.. a 3k increase, Whats the ZL1 going to be? Technically they are both in vette territory, do you know the starting price? anywho, say all ya want.. we dont know what either car is capable of. so this little argument is reletivly useles..

  • @starksy17

    I thought the previous 500s were priced at $49k starting.I mean that's the argument I always heard when people compared them to the SRT...But anyway the ZL1 was like $54k starting +/-. I guess the 392 is the cheapest of the 3 at $43k. I don't know about you, but these high end pony cars are rip offs when you can get great power out of the SS, R/T, and GT lineup. The first brand to offer a stripped V8 for $25k will win the muscle car war. Crank windows and rubber mats lol

  • @prowler10393 hahahahaha.. cloth seats, plastic wheel, and 8-track, beauty

  • @starksy17

    Trust me man, if Detroit offered stripped cars people would buy them in a hurry. All i want is good performance and looks. A/C delete, power steering delete...LOL. The closest thing we got to them are bare bones R/T, SS, GT models but all those come standard which a bunch of garbage. Imagine how much weight you can save by getting rid of power windows, power seats, navigation, big subwoofers, etc. But the managment has to keep profits up so i doubt we'll ever see that.

  • @prowler10393 I'm with on everything except the AC delete but hell manual windows seats and all the sync and nav crap they got does seem pointless my phone does a better job with all that anyway

  • @prowler10393 Capitalism at its best... big profits. But to your comment, all the weight is in the body structure. About 300-500 lbs worth. Power windows are actually lighter than manual.

  • @TheArfdog

    What cars do you know of that have heavier power windows than crank? I do collision work, so gutting doors is pretty common. Once you take out the electric motors and the glass, there is alot of weight out right there. Speakers are bad for weight too. Doors themselves are pretty light as well as the panel.

    I know structure is the majority of weight, but there is plenty of weight to be saved on interior. I wouldn't want structural support to be taken out. I like living lol

  • @prowler10393 None, that's what i'm saying, power windows are lighter. So you get the most for your money with power windows. Anyway, you can't have a road car without windows that go up and down, or without a stereo (which doesn't weigh that much), so scratch that. I can see omitting AC. All that steel structure should be replaced with aluminum or composite.

  • @TheArfdog

    Your car also has to be pass federal safety standards for the year it was made...And if something goes wrong at 100+mph I want to walk away. I can see replacing the body panels, hood, fenders, but as far as frame and structural support...I'll pass.

  • @prowler10393 Don't mind power windows/mirrors and all that electronic crap deleted but I'll keep A/C and power steering lol.

  • @prowler10393 ya fuck that i want a radio, power windows, locks, steering and A/c..driving wouldnt be the same without those.....but ya they can keep power seats, subs, and navigation....u really dont need any of those

  • @prowler10393 Ranting about Vette prices and brick like aero on the current Mustangs? Hmm....I hope you aren't going to follow that up by gushing all over the upcoming ZL-1...talk about irony there.

  • @razorfett147

    Where was I ranting about the price of the Corvette? All I said was the 2013 GT500 is going to be in vette price territory. Which that is a high probability. For the money, the vette is the better all around performer.

    No what I'm saying is if you pay $50k+ for a mustang you're stupid. The price of these cars is not justified. Even if you convert the price of the current pony cars over to what it was in the 60s and 70s you'll see they're overpriced.

  • @prowler10393 The Motor Trend "Ford biased" part isn't even close to a fact. Plus they post faster Camaro Challenger and Vette times too.

    You list the 5.0s tech advantages over the LS3. But why can't the LS3 make more power than a 5.0 when it has 76 more cubes? An extra 1.2 liters should be a huge advantage. If the BOSS had an extra 1.2 liters with the same HP per cube it would make around 550 HP. Better hope Ford doesn't make a 5.8 TiVC BOSS 351.

  • @331Grabber

    Are you on crack? How about the time they pitted stocked SRT8s against modded GT500s and SS Camaros? Or how about the 2011 5.0 vs 2010 SRT8 and SS? If you don't think that is biased then you're biased as well.

    The only place the 5.0 makes more power is in Boss trim where it has free flowing intake+exhaust and different cams. You put intake/exhaust on an LS3 and it's easily more than the 5.0. Hell an LS1 with intake and exhaust will match a 5.0

  • @prowler10393 It wasn't against a GT500 it was a GT350 and yes that was a stupid comparison. If you go on that page you will find me saying just that. The 2011 GT vs. the 2010 SRT8 and SS was because the two 2010 models were supposed to be carry overs. Dodge hadn't announced the change to the 392 yet.

    The regular 5.0 makes as much power at the wheels as the LS3. And yes, we all know mods make power. 5.0s respond just as readily to them.

  • @331Grabber

    The video I watched was the Speefactory SRT8 vs Supersnake vs Hennessy Camaro or some bull like that, and the industry rumors about the 392 were pretty much comfirmed by Allpar before MT did their test but they went ahead and did it anyway. Comparing old model years to new Fords and then taking $70k cars against a more or less bolt on SRT8. Yeah they aren't biased....But who cares, any real enthusiast knows the truth.

  • @trlalli92 Go to ford.com

  • i think motortrend have better driver then inside line.

  • Do you people at inside line even bother to check other numbers to see if yours is within the ballpark? Let me answer for you, NO.

  • Insideline has said time and time again that their numbers are abit off because they dont beat the hell out of the cars like motortrend and other mags. They also test from a standing start and with a foot of rollout. Other mags only use rollout but hey lets not let facts get in the way of a good bashing.

  • @aieljose hahaah well said my friend..

  • i have this same boss it does 0-60 in 3.9. BS

  • @ralderhali

    'coz u use launch control right or not???

  • Still would rather have a Challenger SRT8 Mustang are just way to common.

  • @royme55 If it wasn't for the Mustangs success, you wouldn't be seeing the Challenger or the Camaro around. Lets be happy that we have the big three producing muscles cars once again. The more competition, the better these beauties will get.

  • @sdlausen I agree and Mustang would be my second choice. I just can't get a like on for the Camaro, I don't mind the rear or sides but that front end is crap. I took a long hard look at one in a show room one day and figured out why I hate it. The way the center is drooped down gives it a weird look. If they had cut it straight across like the 68-69's it would have been a lot better.

  • @sdlausen Truer words were never spoken... Right on dude!!!

  • After I get another car, this will be it not some silly subaslow

  • 4.8?

  • 2011 stang has better numbers than this

  • ya redo this test that is bullshit that is slower than the stock gt. Inside line this is very disappointing. did you use the track key at all or the launch control. I expected better. :(

  • New drivers, they need new drivers!

  • boner

  • awesome braking

  • !eenk eht ot worra na koot i neht tub...

  • Learn how to drive.

    Didn't you get the GT running 12.8 against the M3?

  • Amateur driver, amateur blog..making ammeter assumptions. Drive the car YOURSELF and make a proper decision. Thats all that needs to be said!

  • If only they had a guy who could properly handle a ford

  • You can see at 1:32 if you pause the rear right tire in the air, taking it as Ford still haven't learned about fully independent suspension present on $15k cars like their Focus. No, we insist torsion beam

  • @Bulgdoom This is a live rear axle...not a torsion beam...and a Boss302 kicks the shit out of an M3 with it's "advanced independent suspension"...so explain that smart ass

  • Who the hell is the driver??? He's killing that shift into 2nd.

  • my favorite part was 1:39

  • finally... i video telling the truth behind fake numbers... 4.8 sec sounds right to me

  • @Freeker fuck you!

  • was grandma driving? that 0-60 didnt sound like it was revved over 3k.

  • learn how to fucking drive!!! shitty numbers...

  • What happened to le 0-60 in 4 flat? Slow shifting too.

  • Numbers can be all over the map with cars, depending on how happy the ECU is, the atmosphere, the gas quality, and the air temperature. Also the driver has ALOT to do with it.

  • @ethosflux Hopefully the idiots that watch this video read your comment! It just goes to show how many people have never been in a REAL track situation. Xbox/ps3 doesn't count.

  • To all those people flaming this video, it sounds to me that the driver is really hesitant in driving this car. Off the line it sounds as if he isn't even revving the engine much as it appears to be a difficult car to drive. And wheel chirping in 3rd isn't a good sign either, maybe, just maybe this car has too much power for the car to put down...

  • Poor insideline. You guys do such a great job, and you frequently explain how you test and what rollout is but you remain cursed with the dumbest readers. I pretty much add a second to C&D and MT times, two seconds to road & track :-) or just look at the street start 5-60 time. Much closer to reality.

  • Agreed..4.0 sec. to 60, 1/4 in 12.4 @117..

  • Oh Christ they're just numbers you morons. They mean absolutely nothing. They're going to be different in every magazine and the best ones you faggots think are so awesome, are taken from at least ten attempts anyways. You people are so fucking stupid I'm actually embarrassed.