This is one of the non-Shelby Mustangs that I'm really interested in driving someday. The first modern 5.0 while also making more power than advertised.
Ford Mustang Boss 302 specs
Car type | Coupe |
Curb weight | 1650 kg (3638 lbs) |
Introduced | 2011 |
Origin country | United States |
Views | 51.9k |
Submitted by | phavyarden |
Lap times
Performance
0 - 60 mph | 3.9 s |
0 - 100 mph | 9.2 s |
1/4 mile | 12.3 s @ 116.2 mph |
Top speed | 250 kph (155 mph) |
Powertrain specs
Engine type | V8 |
Displacement | 5.0 l (302 ci / 4951 cc) |
Power | 450 ps (444 bhp / 331 kw) @ 7500 rpm |
Torque | 515 Nm (380 lb-ft) @ 4500 rpm |
Power / liter | 91 ps (90 hp) |
Power / weight | 273 ps (269 bhp) / t |
Torque / weight | 312 Nm (230 lb-ft) / t |
Transmission | 6-Speed |
Layout | front engine, rear wheel drive |
Mustang Boss 302 competition
Eilene Re 9y ago
Invaluable suggestions ! For my two cents , people are wanting a HSBC LC 3 DC , We edited a sample document here http://goo.gl/DbMTYA
nick 11y ago
Mustangs are only good at going fast? Funny how the gt350R beat a Ferrari 458 Italia on nurburgring and the z28 by over 5 seconds. The gtr is pathetic. They gotta twin turbo an altima to make it take off fast. Stay in your lane and do your research before u judge. The 302 wasn't made to compete with gtrs it was made to compete with the camaro which it does very well. Like all you. Chevy fanboys who put mustangs against corvettes but don't have the nerve to call out a Ford gt.
NickH 11y ago
The Boss302 Laguna Seca is one of the most rewarding track ready muscle cars you can drive. Sits nice next to my Porsche 911 C2S (my grocery getter).
Phil47F 12y ago
People stop with the fowel language and the condescending pros.
A 2012 boss 302 LS pulled a 7:38:35 at N'ring last wednesday. Driver: Berget kinzer (yes a girl) Not even a full second behind the Z-28 which has more HP and traction nanny suspension garbage then any other car out there.
So little boys hush get in your KIAs and get to work ....late for the BK window.
Dirtdickler 13y ago
Laguna Seca Time is OBVIOUSLY not at all representative of what the car can do so why put it up? I could have sworn this car posted a 1:39-1:40 or ~ 1/2 sec off the Laguna Seca version.
NIN 13y ago
@ Jeremy
If you think the laptime is fake, take it up with Motor Trend.
Jeremy 13y ago
Lol are the admins smoking crack* this pos* is four seconds slower then a gtr Google gtr laguna seca lap times even motor trend just did a test and it smoked the 660 hp Shelby... Stay in your lane mustang your good at going straight and being overweight and unbalanced and fastest lap stop posting incorrect laptop times
Jeremy 13y ago
Lol are the admins smoking cracked this post is four seconds slower then a gtr... Stay in your lane mustang and fastest lap stop posting incorrect laptop times
Fin-75 14y ago
Think this will be possible replacement for my e39 m5 in future :)
Need to test drive it 1st.
JC 14y ago
So after so many months, we have no lap times from any other tracks?
IE: VIR, Willows..
....sounds fishy....
Viking 14y ago
I just added the 12.3 second quarter mile at 115.8 mph from the Motor Trend test. Here is the link http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1102_2012_ford_mustang_boss_302_test/
FastestLaps 14y ago
Hey Dirt,
It's a bug. You can still submit performance figure if you register and log in. Then you won't be asked for verification code anywhere.
Just remember - performance data without proper reference is removed without any consideration.
Dirtdickler 14y ago
When you try to "add performance figure" it ask for "varification" of an unreadable symbol of some sorts.... WTF is this all about??
Anybody else try to "add performance figure" and not be able to due to that unreadable "verification" symbol or whatever the hell that is??
If you thought the "verification code" here is sometimes unreadable the one in the "add performance figure" is impossible.. What's the point in that?
Dirtdickler 14y ago
Yeah the correct 1/4 mile is: 12.3@115.8mph.
Motor Trend
m.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1102_2012_ford_mustang_boss_302_test/specs_test_data.html
Viking 14y ago
I also looked at EVOs on course speeds which ranged from 37 mph to roughly 109 mph. This means that the Bedford Autodrome course is a bit faster than the fastest autocross courses that I competed on. I would use third and fourth gears only. The Mustangs have enough torque that downshifting to second gear would just be a waste of time. I am absolutely certain that I would beat their best time in the Boss 302 by at least four seconds. Yeah, I might be bragging, but also I am confident enough to lay money on it.
Viking 14y ago
This EVO evaluation; thinking the Boss had too much oversteer, and the M3 has balanced handling; contrasts sharply with the pro-Racer Randy Pobst observation that the Mustangs are tuned for balanced handling, and the M3 has too much understeer. I believe that Pobst is correct, the M3 is tuned to have a bit of understeer in order to make it more comfortable for less skilled drivers, while the new Mustangs are daringly neutral and thus more pleasing for more experienced competition drivers. The bottom line is that a Boss 302 is faster on a track with experienced competition drivers, but the M3 provides enough safe understeer to get the better time with less skilled drivers. I guess that I fall into the former category because of my SCCA competition experience.
Viking 14y ago
I finally read the EVO comparison test of the BMW M3, Mercedes C63 AMG, Audi RS5, and Mustang Boss 302. It was very well written. However, I noted the problems they had with the Boss Mustang. They didn't like the brake dive and thought it made the turn in less precise. They didn't seem to find as much grip as expected, and thought it had too much oversteer in mid speed corners. This last observation is the most important. It contrasts with their belief that the M3 showed perfect balance.
Viking 14y ago
The quarter mile is 12.3 seconds according to Motor Trend. Here is the link http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1102_2012_ford_mustang_boss_302_test/