Ford Mustang SVT Cobra R (Mk IV) specs

The GTD of its day.

C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.7 sec
100 mph: 11.0 sec
1/4-Mile: 13.2 sec @ 110 mph
130 mph: 18.5 sec
150 mph: 29.0 sec
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.1 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 9.0 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 9.1 sec
Top Speed (drag ltd): 175 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 160 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 1.02 g

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15140269/ford-svt-mustang-cobra-r-road-test/#error

I like this car a lot. While it's definitely not the fastest Mustang anymore it really could show quite a few Vettes who's boss on the drag strip and on the track. It took the Camaro a decade to catch up to this performance, that should be saying something.

Also there was a factory supercharger option if I'm not mistaken.

I think the power output is wrong. Every single source tells me it has 385 hp, not PS

R&T April 2000 test:

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/reviews/a28487/ford-mustang-cobra-r/

Most of these stats look really suspicious for the p/w ratio. Can anyone check if it really does 0-100 in just 4.5 seconds? Cause that's almost Ferrari level.

@ milehisnk, not really. An e46M3 perhaps, but not an e92M3.
(just look at the Willow Springs laptimes...)

This car would absolutely eat alive the E92 M3, straight line and curves. That's what it was made to do

The submitter forgot to capitalize the "R" after Cobra. :P

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/ford-svt-mustang-cobra-r.pdf

@ S

Same here, it is a road legal car

Isn't this a non-street legal car?

this is the best mustang ever made I think

GM didn't have anything that could beat it in 2000. When the C5Z came around (in 01), the corvette was clearly faster. The R's supremacy was short lived, like all quick cars.

you really think GM had nothing that can beat this car http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/chevrolet_corvette_c5_z06_2001-vs-ford_mustang_svt_cobra_r.html

Also, this isn\'t the only mustang with an IRS. Educate yourself.

This car pulled over 1G in MY 2000 and ran quicker times around Waterford Hills than a C5Z, SRT10 Viper, and an E92 M3 and you people think it was no good? Wow... tough crowd.

Yes, corvettes were priced similarly (actually less), but you have to remember that GM had NOTHING that could touch this in 2000. All they had was the base C5, and that would get demolished by this. Even the C5Z could possibly barely beat it.

Fords are great cars and they found a way to make the live rear axle work while still making the Mustang affordable.

The one shot at an independent suspension, Ford is for losers.

I think the real issue is that Corvettes are $50,000+. I can't see why Corvette priced Mustangs exists when the Vette is typically superior in everyway. But those loyal to Ford have their reasons.

You have to admit, $55,000 for this isnt bad at all! and great fun here. ill admit 55K for a Mustang is pretty high, but for its Exclusivity, and dashing looks, i wouldnt mind paying that much.

"Sooo, if had a 997 911 Carrera S PDK, would you still be so confident?"

Sure, because before you got away I would simply run you off the road LOL

Sooo, if had a 997 911 Carrera S PDK, would you still be so confident?

Anonymous on top is gay and wouldn't know cars even if one bit him on the arse. I'd put this up against whatever you drive anyday

just think how much faster than an M3 this would be if you added 13psi to the equation. oh ya **** imports.

i am curious what more times this car could produce, but its so damned rare that there will prolly be damn near none, but it could prolly take the R26 on longer tracks, but tight twisty tracks...(maybe). doubt it could take the R26R though. straightline yes, round a track...hard to say! and it definetly wont take an E92 M# in a straightline or round a track, it will keep up with it, but not beat it.

this will eat a Megane R26, not an E92 M3 though.

this car is not faster the megane r26 you forget the m3

100km/h is 62mph

most likely 4.5s is a 0-60mph time not 0-100km/h time... 0-160km/h(100mph) the M3 is clearly faster by one second