Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Ford Mustang (2005) vs. 2005 Pontiac GTO

1474850525363

Comments

  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    Well, given the displacement disparity, it's actually missing about 2/3 of it's engine. It only SOUNDS like it's missing 1/2.

    Actually, it's sounds pretty good over 6k rpm. :) It's just the 0-6k part that blows.... :cry:
  • eliaselias Posts: 1,903
    ok, the reports weren't really on the net. a coworker made up the whole thing and posted it to the company "cartalk" newsgroup because he was annoyed with the never-ending hybrid/diesel/gas-guzzler debates. apparently this guy is even more calendar-challenged than me. oh well, it was funny, sort of. on the serious side, honda has in fact started the tradition of using hybrids to increase performance rather than necessarily increasing mpg: honda accord hybrid.

    and i think it is a serious question, whether ford or gm will get a serious hybrid to market first - and which will get hybrid-tech into a muscle-car first. i bet it WILL happen. PEACE !
  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 7,135
    rorr....what did you decide to buy? Mustang GT? RX8?
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    Well, when gas hit $3 a gallon, I decided to keep driving my Celica for a bit longer. For all intents and purposes, both the Mustang and the RX8 would probably be about equal in terms of mileage.

    Haven't driven the Mustang yet, but after my drive in the RX8.....well, it was nice and handled sweet but I think I'd like a bit more oomph off the line, particularly for the amount of gas I'd be burning.

    The kids may just have to learn how to get in/out of the back of the Mustang. Besides, I hear Ford may issue a new Bullitt edition next year in my favorite color. It would look nice in the garage next to my Ivy Green '66 Fastback. :shades:
  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 7,135
    rorr...totally understand. For what it's worth, the Mustang GT only burns "regular". I'm getting about 22-24 MPG on the highway and about 17-18 MPG "in town". Not Prius terriroty, but not bad considering what the car can do.
  • kbobe67kbobe67 Posts: 23
    Damn, it's good to have two (maybe three with the Charger) American cars in the modern marketplace that inspire heated rivalries. How long has it been since Ford guys and GM guys had anything worth arguing about. Do you think there's a searing battle going on between the Camry owners and the Accord owners? Doubtful.

    I have an 05 GTO. The Mustang wasn't on the shopping list for me. Without a doubt the 'Stang can look good, particularly in the right color and in full performance trim, but there's too many secretaries and college girls buzzing around in the skinny six cylinder jobs to make the car something special. For me it dilutes the brand. Probably why you can't buy a watered down Corvette. The Mustang also strikes me as a very "safe" choice, which is not always good. It takes major cajones to lay down 30 large for a quirky, limited production Aussie import. Maybe it takes cajones to buy a Mustang. I just think they're probably smaller, less impressive cajones,

    Now, in fairness, I didn't begin this quest looking for an American muscle car. My criteria was simply that the car had to get me in the gut. I figured there'd be four years of payments, and I didn't want to be bored with the thing by Year Two. I tried a $50,000 Acura RL, a nice TL, the TSX, the RX-8, Mazda 6, the BMW 3 series. Nada. The only car that really got to me was the GTO.

    Once I realized I was destined for a mid-life crisis car, I did briefly flirt with the idea of checking out the Mustang, since the cars so clearly compete with one another, but the interior for me was a deal-breaker. The dash seemed like Mattel's version of what a retro Mustang interior would look like. Overall I like the body, especially the nose. The rear lamps seem a little oversized but generally I think the Mustang is a good looking car. Obviously the motoring public thinks so too, which is why there's six of them at every intersection. I'm sure the GT is powerful and fast, and if that car had pushed any of my buttons I'm sure I'd be thrilled to death to own and drive one. The GTO just got to me first.

    I guess the only way to know for sure is to have somebody drop off an 05 GT and an 05 GTO and leave them both for six months. At the end of the six months check the odometers and see which one spent more time parked. I'd bet you'd see some defections on both sides.
  • ....especially to those whose attention I don't want!
  • considering buying a gto for the same reasons you mentioned.
    how have you enjoyed it since you purchased it?
    would you buy it again?
  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    Wanted to give you guys that are considering a GTO my 1 year update.
    Bought my '04 Quicksilver M6 11/30/04 exactly 1 year ago today.

    So far I have put the '05 hood on and installed Ronal R41 18" wheels with BFG KDW tires.
    The tires really transform the car allowing quicker turn in and the ability to hammer it off the line without as much wheel spin.

    Just rolled over 16,000 miles a couple of days ago.
    So far I have had the clutch pedal busing greased due to a really annoying squeak and the all 4 rotors turned because they were warped at about 11,000 miles.
    I have also had the speedometer do the 200 mph thing while stopped and a false coolant light come on 2-3 of times.
    Turning the car off and on again will clear this.

    I absolutley love this car. it is the best GM car I have owned and along with my '04 cadillac SRX has had the fewest problems.

    It feels well screwed together with no creaks after 16,000 miles and that is with 40 series tires on 18" rims.
    The leather is very high quality and the seats are extremely comfortable.

    This is really a great car. I feel like I am driving a car that is much greater than the sum of it's parts.
    If I could afford it I would be another one and keep my '04.
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    ...will supposedly feature a new sport coupe based on GM's Zeta-lite chassis with a Corvette drivetrain to compete more directly with the Mustang. Though it can't use the "Camaro" name, apparantly the styling would evoke 1st gen. Camaro (or possible the late '60s Chevelle).

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=108247

    Comments?
  • jae5jae5 Posts: 1,205
    Know this is off-topic for this board, but do you, or anyone else here, think GM is more likely to make this uopcoming Zeta-lite car now that the Challenger seems to be a go? If there wasn't going to be a Challenger do you think this Zeta-lite concept would be just that, a concept?

    And what does this spell for the U.S. Monaro / GTO? Will this car move upmarket to truly compete with the BMW M3, G35s and such, or be as it is now: not really competing with the Mustang but kind of; not really competing with the M3, G35, but not really?
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    Personally, I think GM was a surprised at the huge success of a retro-styled Mustang and wants a (bigger) slice of the pie. No, I don't think the Challenger was the kick in the pants GM needed since (apparently) the Challenger concept will be unveiled at the SAME TIME as the new GM concept.

    Interesting question though regarding the future of the GTO and (perhaps) it moving up market to the $33-35k niche with a potential Zeta-lite coupe in the $25-30k spot. I think this is a definite possibility (and also to distance itself from some of it's own stablemates).

    A side question: would a Zeta-lite coupe (perhaps weighing 300lbs less than a GTO) use a Corvette drivetrain since this would canabalize sales from the GTO? Would a Zeta-lite coupe NEED the Corvette drivetrain to compete with either the Mustang or upcoming Challenger?
  • jae5jae5 Posts: 1,205
    True, GM may not have needed the Challenger kick in the pants to have the Zeta-lite concept. But I do think with the Challenger being announced to come out in the '08 - '09 time frame, this may have been a kick to GM to get something going on an actual vehicle.

    A side question: would a Zeta-lite coupe (perhaps weighing 300lbs less than a GTO) use a Corvette drivetrain since this would canabalize sales from the GTO? Would a Zeta-lite coupe NEED the Corvette drivetrain to compete with either the Mustang or upcoming Challenger?

    I think it should have a Corvette drivetrain, maybe as an option. It's pretty much the same thing Chevy did with the F-Body, A-bodies, B-bodies, giving them either a detuned or same version of the Corvette mills. I think it would need the LS2 engine to compete with the GT500 (which the convert is a freakin' tank. You see the weight on that thing, damn near 4K lbs., check out latest MT) and the Challenger Hemi. But I think it should have at least the 5.3L. OR they could go with the 4.8L/5.3L. I mean the 4.8L would be ok, if they pump it up a little. But definitely at least 5.3L. Kind of like the 283/327 or 305/350 days.

    I'm not sure if it would cannibalize Monaro/GTO sales, since most buyers seem to like the attributes of the vehicle: somewhat large size, weight, back seat, idie rear. Especially if the vehicle moves up into the mid-$30K niche and GM actually markets the car to that segment, not just saying once or twice that's the buyers they're going after.

    Which leads to a question to you and the board. With so much to-do in past posts about the indie rear in the Monaro/GTO is automatically superior and Ford's use of a solid-rear axle in the Mustang makes it somehow less of a car, how would you feel if GM used a solid rear in the zeta-lite? Would that be a negative to the vehicle? :confuse:
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    Corvette drivetrain as on option (perhaps as a 'SS' edition). Personally, I think the use of the 5.3L would be ideal for the 'base' V8 edition.

    Hmmmmm, the old IRS vs. solid rear debate again.....

    Weeeeeeellll, like the Mustang (and the GTO for that matter) it's all in the execution. Would the solid-rear be cheaper? Sure, and that would be a benefit to keep the car in the $25-$30k market. Would it be a detriment? Well, like the Mustang, I think it all has to do with how well executed the design is. I think if GM could bring a reasonably quick, good handling 300hp classically styled V8 coupe to the market for $25k, buyers won't give a rats if it has an IRS or not.

    Just my take.
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    Well, if Nissan could make a sporty rear driver for like 15 grand in 1989 (240SX/Slivia with multilink IRS) why can't GM make one for 25 grand 15 years later?? And the 350Z for 27 grand now? :lemon:
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "...with multilink IRS) why can't GM make one for 25 grand 15 years later??"

    I don't see any reason why GM COULDN'T do it (offer a 300hp retro-styled coupe for $25k with IRS). All I'm saying is that, IMO, it is unnecessary for that market.

    Compare the number of folks who didn't buy a Mustang simply because it had a solid rear with the number of folks who either don't care or who felt that the Mustang handled and drove quite well despite the solid rear. Personally, I don't think that the beancounters with Ford regret making their decision to go with a solid rear end.

    That being said, IF GM were able to bring a 300+hp RWD coupe styled after a '68 Camaro AND an IRS to market for $25k, they would certainly steal a bunch of sales from Ford. I just don't see (IMO) an IRS as being a necessity to sell a ton of units.
  • jae5jae5 Posts: 1,205
    Exactly the same thinking here on all points:

    LS2 6.0 for SS,
    5.3L for the base V8,
    maybe the 3.6HF for a base model,
    execute the rear end well and it doesn't matter
    5 spd auto/man, 6 spd for an "SS", or 6 spd man for both V8s

    Think that should cover everything in terms of drivetrain.
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    Yeah, GM should just hire us..... :P :blush:
  • jae5jae5 Posts: 1,205
    Naw, I don't think they would...we make too much sense! ;)
  • I think that the 2005 gto is a good looking car. Pontiac could of made the car more "muscle car looking", but i like the car. The Gto will beat a 05 mustang..the new msuatngs are too big and too pricey.
  • hey can anyone answer my question? Who many miles a gallon does the 05 gto get "in town", for anyone that ones a gto..? Thanks..
  • I'm getting about 15. With only about 300 miles on the car, it's not broken in yet, and I'm going easy on it.
  • hammen2hammen2 Posts: 1,313
    The GTO is dead after the 2006 model year. Pontiac's main focus is on a RWD sedan to take the place of the current Grand Prix (which dies after 2008 MY) and compete better against the Charger (I know of two former GTP owners who just bought Chargers, one an R/T, the other an SRT-8). Pontiac may see a RWD coupe in 2009 or 2010, but with all that's going on at GM, nothing is set in stone.

    The new Camaro "concept" that will be shown at NAIAS (leaked pictures of a prototype are out there) will have IRS, so no need to debate if it's necessary - it will have it (so, supposedly, will the Mustang, by MY2009). Speculation says the base engine will be the 240 hp 3.9L engine (as found in the G6 GTP and Impala LTZ, among others), with 5.3L and 6.2L mills as the rumored V8 options. Don't expect it to be the LS2 as that engine goes bye-bye around 2008 as the St. Catharine's engine plant is scheduled to close...

    GM has fast-tracked their RWD vehicles (much like they did their trucks earlier this year), and, unless public reaction to the Camaro concept is negative, it's a shoo-in for production. Expect it to fit into the 22-32k market, depending on engine and options - more closely competing with the Mustang. Also expect it to have a more Mustang-sized back seat than the larger GTO.

    Chevy is having several hundred Camaro enthusiasts at the press introduction event... a sign of what is to come. Also, this project has been in the works for years (GM has wanted a RWD sports coupe since the death of the Camaro/Firebird, the Monaro/GTO was just a stopgap for Pontiac) - if anything, the success of the Mustang pushed this to the front burner.

    There is still some debate about what platform the production car will be on... the protoype looks like Sigma from the leaked CAD drawings, but the rumor is that the production car will be on the Aussie VE/Zeta platform (which does use some Sigma suspension components). I guess we'll find out in a couple of years...

    --Robert
  • If the 06 is the last of the GT0's be darn glad that you have one. This can only mean it will increase in value in the future. A collectors item for sure.
    There is not a regular US production performance car on the road for the money any quicker or better made than the 400hp GTO including the SRT-8 Charger at this point in time.
  • jae5jae5 Posts: 1,205
    Guess GM was looking at my and rorr's back and forth a few posts back. :P

    Thanks for the update hammen2
  • While I agree the GTO is a great car, I take issue that "there is not a regular US production performance car on the road for the money any quicker or better made than the 400hp GTO including the SRT-8 Charger at this point in time." Most of the magazine reviews have been very close between the S197 Mustang GT and the Pontiac GTO. I will definitely say the GTO bests the Mustang in interior styling, back seat room, and acceleration (just barely though). The Stang, however, has the lead in exterior styling, transmission performance, and handling and trades rear seat room for trunk space.

    Based on Edmund's average cost numbers when I bought my Mustang GT, I saved $6,000+ over a similarly apportioned GTO. Granted the GTO has 100 more hp, but it's greater curb weight negates most of that power. With the extra money I saved, I've spruced up the interior and added extensive Eibach and Vortech upgrades which well exceed a stock GTO.

    I'm not saying the Mustang is the unequivocal winner. The GTO and Mustang are both great cars for very different reasons. The "sleeper" GTO is definitely more stealthy and more collectible/less desired, but it is by no means the end all, be all of US production performance cars.
  • After you have had a little "break in" period I would suppose you should see around 17+ MPG in the city.
  • vxr04vxr04 Posts: 1
    got an 04a4 gto no mod all stock except superchips killed the governer raced with a ninja hit 166mph without a sweat heavy car won't fly as you stated. I've noticed at those speeds the steering wheel stiffens witch is good. control is very reliable and with its stealthy design it cuts thru air like rocket and I kept pulling. no BS just a happy costumer
  • My 10 cents...

    I own a 2001 Mustang GT 121,000 miles...And while I love the power. It is not the most reliable car I ever had. It is in the shop right now. It has had three trannies in it, two front racks, the leather ripped at 60,000 miles....ect.

    Still, I like the car. Even looked at the 05's just the other day. Took one for a drive and liked it. Seemed light and very fast. The interior looked cheap. Not terribly cheap, but not really nice either. The upgrade made it look better, but not much.

    Good points...Well it looks kinda cool. Its pretty fast and FELT fast. Its about 25,000 fully loaded for me.

    Bad points...Well it looks cool, but so did my 2001 and I am sick of seeing 3 at almost every stop light. I think the new body style will suffer the same fate. Also, it looks pretty much the same as the v6...Yes, I know that YOU & I can tell the difference, but the average idiot on the block cannot. I had to explain to my parents and a few of my friends the differences...One guy thought I had the "Cobra" version. The average idiot cop also seems to like the look of the new GT.

    I almost can give the nod to the Mustang GT for my personal driveability.

    I also drove the GTO. It seemed heavier, and not as "quick". It did seem MUCH nicer inside and out. I think it is a higher class of car. I think some of the folks on here saying its like a BMW, or Benz...Might not have ever been in a BMW or Benz. Its nicer than the Mustang, but not nearly as nice as any 325 I have been in for fit and finish.

    Good points...Well its a much more "Adult" car. It is refined and if I buy it I will not have 18 year olds driving 19k dollar V6 versions of it slapping "Cobra" emblems all over it acting like an idiot making cops and insurance companies look at me. Also it seems according to the numbers to be about the same speed as a Stang, and with the same economy.

    Bad points...Well working the numbers both ways, it will cost me more. I am looking at a new 2005 GTO for about 28K vs a 2006 Mustang for 25K.

    The Mustang "feels" faster, but the numbers say the GTO actually gets the performance nod. And the GTO is above the Mustang in the "Comfort" factor and the knowledge that while it may not turn heads....I will not see one at every stop light.

    Most reviewers give the nod to the Mustang based on "Style"....Well thats great, but I think the style fades with so many out there and with so many of those being V6's it makes me give the nod to the GTO.

    Two questions remain.

    I HATE the over 70 warning on the GTO, and the two hour "Rest" chime sucks. Can I turn those off?

    Does the GTO need high test vs the Stangs regular?
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    It has had three trannies in it, ...

    Who you ride around in it is no indication of your Mustang's reliability. :surprise:

    Does the GTO need high test vs the Stangs regular?

    Yes.
This discussion has been closed.