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

1525355575863

Comments

  • The 2004 GTO beat out the 2004 Cobra SVT in Road and Track July 2004 issue. GTO 1st, Cobra 2nd. The Cobra was the faster car though. http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=1368
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    dclark2, you're all over the place! It's like trying to connect the same pole of magnets! Just when you've got them touching, they FLIP AROUND on you. Why are you harping on the iron block of the GT500? Especially with that forest of pushrods rooted deep in the GTO's block. Have you already conveniently forgotten that the Mustang GT's engine is OHC and ALUMINUM?? :confuse: There are '05 GTs out there already with more than 500HP at the wheels with a blower.

    And what makes you think a high stressed NA engine is more reliable to build up than a factory forced induction engine?? Ever heard of FORGED INTERNALS? Much more reliable. ;)
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    Wouldn't dash stoking appeal be in the same boat as the "gotta have it factor?" Don't be hypocritical.
  • "dclark2, you're all over the place! It's like trying to connect the same pole of magnets! Just when you've got them touching, they FLIP AROUND on you. Why are you harping on the iron block of the GT500?"
    You need to read a bit slower and gain some comprehension in the process.
    I have said that repeatedly that the engine in the mustang is low tech.Unlike you, I, and others have given examples to back that assertion. You haven't!
    One thing I have said is that Ford can't produce a v8 motor that can put out 350hp w/o a blower. Look at their line up- see any v8 motors with 350hp? Nope. I have also said that their motors can't match the performance of an 8 year old ls1. Again, no one can dispute that. I have said that their engineering is subpar, that they can't make a competitive motor w/o a blower. The GT500 iron block supports my argument that Ford lacks the engineering to produce a modern 350hp v8.
    Did I mutter, was I unclear? The 4.6 lump in the mustang IS aluminum. So what? It only puts out 300hp! I repeat, it only puts out 300 hp!! Go ahead and throw a blower on it, watch it turn into a recycled beer can.
    As you don't care that an iron block will add 150+ lbs to the front of car, you obviously could care less about handling. Me, I'd rather have a fast car with a nice interior and good handling than a nose heavy coupe with a truck axle and the aerodynamics of a parachute. That's why I like the GTO.
    I have also said that the only way they can get 350 hp

    "Especially with that forest of pushrods rooted deep in the GTO's block. Have you already conveniently forgotten that the Mustang GT's engine is OHC and ALUMINUM?? "

    Your point? You can get a Kia compact with an ohc and aluminum motor. Power and light weight are everything. Too bad the mustang is still trying to put out enough power to beat cars made in the '90's.

    "There are '05 GTs out there already with more than 500HP at the wheels with a blower."

    Really? Have their trannies self destroyed as well?There are also GTO's with blowers out there and putting out 600hp. I guess it helps to start with a bigger, better motor.
  • "That's pretty funny. I have already shown how a comparably equipped mustang (upgraded interior, larger wheels, 1000w stereo,leather) cost only a little over a $1,000 less. You are claiming that you can get an extra 100 hp and a irs for under $2K. It is that mindset that helps Ford sell these mustangs."

    WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THOSE OPTIONS...WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BASE PERFORMANCE...
    As said before, BASE MSRP to BASE MSRP, your comparable mustang is only comparable in YOUR OPINION. We are talking PERFORMANCE, so the interior is irrelevant at this point.

    And do please, show me where I said that for under $2k I could get 100HP and an IRS. I never said that. I did say that for $1100 you could make the GT faster, I didn't say more HP. More HP doesn't always mean the car is faster.
    Get it straight.

    #2-Once again, I state that Ford made an engine over 350HP NA. Forget the car it was in, they made one..PERIOD.
  • 200 Watt

    Oh and I like the fact that you keep throwing in how to make it comparable, the GT has to have the 1000 Watt system. WHY?

    The GTO is only 200 WATTS!!!! The link above shows you.

    So its NOT comparable even by your terms, for the GT to have the Shaker 1000 system.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    ... You can get a Kia compact with an ohc and aluminum motor. Power and light weight are everything. ...

    You're absolutely correct! :) So WHY do you keep talking as though aluminum is so "high tech?" :confuse: Who cares if the GT500 has an iron block? The GM folks since they won't have anything else to talk about as they're TRAILING the GT500 around a track all day, everyday. ;) How much do you want to wager that the low tech, iron block, truck suspension, parachute aerodynamics havin' GT500 is going to SMOKE the GTO in every fashion? And I believe the leather covered dash of the concept will be optional. It'll give the dash strokin' GTO lovers more incentive to come over! :P You keep talking about the power of the LS1 and the current 4.6. Have you forgotten that the LS1 was 5.7 liters??? :surprise: The new 4.6 in the Mustang GT actually makes 320HP, BTW; just 30HP shy of that mammoth sized 5.7.

    ... There are also GTO's with blowers out there and putting out 600hp. ...

    Really? Have their blocks exploded or trannies self destr[ucted] or that IRS snapped as well?

    ... I guess it helps to start with a bigger, better motor.

    It sure does! So I wish you'd stop acting as though the Mustang GT has the same sized engine! :sick:
  • Hypocritical? Because I wanted a car with a nice interior, comfort, seats and good performance all at the same time? What does that have to do with Gotta have it factor? Yeah ok.
  • The Mustang 4.6 does NOT make 320hp, it makes 300hp.

    The GTO engine despite it' bigger size, still makes more horsepower per liter or per cubic inch then ford 4.6.
  • Actually the new 450 to 475hp $45k GT500 isn't much faster then the $32k GTO. It's numbers aren't much better then a GTO. Road and Track's January article link.... http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=6&article_id=3086

    GT500 is 4.5 seconds 0-60, GTO is 4.6 by GM
    GT500 is 12.9 in the 1/4 mile, GTO is 13.0 by GM
    GT500 top spd is 155 mph, GTO is 158mph

    GT500 is 3900 lbs as a coupe and 4050 lbs as a convertible, pretty heavy.

    For $45k MSRP you can get a base Corvette that will beat the GT500.
  • The shaker had problems in the 2005 Mustang with skipping and not playing CD's correctly. Ford had to replace it with a B version or revision. It didn't effect everyone, just early build dates. That said, the Mustang GT optional Shaker 1000 is BETTER sounding then the GTO's Blaupunkt. But the Shaker 1000 is a $1,770 option and takes up part of the trunk with it's 2 subwoofers.

    The std radio in the Mustang GT is only 160 watts -4 speaker only single Disc
  • And the standard radio is much closer then to a "COMPARABLE" GTO radio of 200 Watts.
    Lets not forget that there is also the Shaker 500, which is 500 Watts, and doesn't hinder the trunk space.

    That link you provided, those numbers are estimates, or claims, if you read the article, they weren't even sure of the actual HP yet. You can't go by those numbers.

    The 2003/04 SVT Cobra's stock proven 1/4 mile time was 12.9. Trust me, the GT500 will spank the old Cobras. I'm sure the 1/4 mile time will be better.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    The hypocritical statement was because of that article you posted. The GTO won because it had more dash stroking appeal. How is that different from the "gotta have it factor?" You guys are QUICK to cry foul when the Mustang wins a comparo just because it looks better! Why can't we cry foul when a GTO wins a comparo just because it has the dash stroker appeal?? :confuse:

    The Mustang 4.6 does NOT make 320hp, it makes 300hp. ...

    There are plenty of dynographs on the 'net that prove otherwise.

    The GTO engine despite it' bigger size, still makes more horsepower per liter or per cubic inch then ford 4.6.

    This isn't a Honda discussion! You should be embarrassed for saying that. :sick:

    GT500 is 4.5 seconds 0-60, GTO is 4.6 by GM
    GT500 is 12.9 in the 1/4 mile, GTO is 13.0 by GM
    GT500 top spd is 155 mph, GTO is 158mph


    Let me know when you find an independent test that shows the GTO making those numbers; otherwise, I think the rest of us will dismiss the GM propaganda numbers. Not ONE independent, non-GM affiliated/biased test has gotten those numbers. ;) Whereas the GT500 numbers have actually been achieved by an independent source.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    ... the Shaker 1000 is a $1,770 option and takes up part of the trunk with it's 2 subwoofers.

    Did they increase the price for '06? It was a $1,235 option on my '05. And even with the two subs in the trunk, there's still more space leftover than the GTO has at all.
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "Just to name a few Performance V6 engines of 2004 that made the same 260hp or more then the V8 Mustang GT.....

    G35 with 260 - 280hp on 3.5L V6
    350Z 280hp on 3.5L V6
    Maxima 265hp on 3.5L V6
    Grand Prix GTP 260hp on 3.8L V6 "


    You realize, of course, that the first 3 engines you listed we ALL THE SAME NISSAN VQ MOTOR! I'm surprised you didn't list all the other applications where Nissan uses that same motor.

    Oh yeah, and you do realize that 260hp for the Grand Prix GTP is for a BLOWN motor. So, apparently, GM can't produce anywhere NEAR the output of those wily Japanese (despite starting with a BIGGER motor) without resorting to forced induction..... :P
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "See, iron is a metal, a very, very heavy metal. Now, it is bad to have too much weight in any car, especially the front- bad, bad, bad!"

    Yepper, too much weight in any car is bad; particularly for a performance car. Bad, bad, bad!

    So, why is the GTO such a pig?
  • "Who cares if the GT500 has an iron block?"
    Anyone who wants a good handling car cars. Not everyone drives in a straight line. I guess you don't understand the importance of weight distribution. Just because you don't know doesn't mean that it isn't important.

    The GM folks since they won't have anything else to talk about as they're TRAILING the GT500 around a track all day, everyday. How much do you want to wager that the low tech, iron block, truck suspension, parachute aerodynamics havin' GT500 is going to SMOKE the GTO in every fashion? "
    I don't know what you mean by "every fashion", but the GT is already a poorer handler. Can you explain how adding an extra 150+ lbs to the front of the car to throw off the balance will make this car a better handler ('cause it won't!).

    "And I believe the leather covered dash of the concept will be optional. It'll give the dash strokin' GTO lovers more incentive to come over! You keep talking about the power of the LS1 and the current 4.6. Have you forgotten that the LS1 was 5.7 liters??? The new 4.6 in the Mustang GT actually makes 320HP, BTW; just 30HP shy of that mammoth sized 5.7. "

    That's great, keep recognizing how inferior the mustang is. Yes, the mustang has a motor that still can't keep up with an old camaro, much less a new GTO. Yes, Ford is incapable of producing a high output n/a V8. Yes, the new GT500 with the boat anchor motor in conjuction with the soldi rear, will make it an awful handling car. Yes, Mustang owners don't do their homework.
  • Why doesn't Ford change the rating on their 4.6 to 320hp if this is true? The 2005 Rousch stage 1 Mustang which only adds a better free flowing exhaust doesn't even rate at 320hp, and costs $38k+.

    I wasn't discussing Honda's, not sure what you are talking about? :confuse: If you shrunk the GM 2 valve pushrod 6.0 liter motor down to 4.6 it would still be making slightly more hp then the Ford 3 valve ohc motor. Fact.

    I have seen stock GTO's run as fast as 12.9 in the 1/4 at the track, the same as the GT500 will run as reported in that January article. If you don't believe that, check the LS1GTO forums. The fastest stock guys have broken the 13 mark. On the other hand some GTO guys are as high as mid to upper 13's. Depends on driver, track conditions, temp etc.

    GTO was tested at 4.8 seconds by C&D, very close to GT500's 4.5. As for GM's times of 4.6 seconds, and 13.0 seconds 1/4 mile on the 2005 and 2006 GTO, it's in all of their adds BTW. Wouldn't that be false advertising if they were wrong? We all know how Ford mis-stated the hp rating in the late 1990's on the stang.
  • The GT500 will be much worse of a pig then the GTO.

    GTO is 3750 lbs, GT500 will be 3900 lbs coupe and 4050 lbs convertible and still doesn't have an IRS which is heavier then a solid rear axle :P
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    ... I wasn't discussing Honda's, not sure what you are talking about? If you shrunk the GM 2 valve pushrod 6.0 liter motor down to 4.6 it would still be making slightly more hp then the Ford 3 valve ohc motor.

    I'm talking about the infamous "HP / liter" comment you made. Apparently you're new to the automotive world (or at least American muscle) if you don't see what I was getting at. I imagine you're the only one who DIDN'T get it.

    GM did/does have a "shrunken" 6L. It's the 4.3L V6 that never made more than 200HP NA. Then there's also the notorious 305cid V8 that couldn't even make, what, 200HP to 250HP.

    dclark2, you're without reason or rationale. Even with the Mustang GT's horrible (in your opinion only) 53/47 weight distribution, it still outhandles the GTO. Isn't the GTO 54/46 or worse? :confuse: How will the GT500 be better? Try bigger wheels/tires, more beefy suspension, better aero, and bigger brakes.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    ... That's great, keep recognizing how inferior the mustang is. Yes, the mustang has a [smaller] motor that still can't keep up with an old camaro [wrong], much less a new GTO. ...

    But that pig isn't much faster, though, despite 100HP surplus. ;)
  • The Ford website shows $1,770 for the shaker. The Mustang trunk is bigger because of the gas tank relocation on the GTO for US safety stds. Previous Mustang, 2004 the gas tank is right at the bumper. The GTO is the larger roomier car overall then the Mustang. Compact vs Subcompact by EPA ratings. GTO 95 cu ft interior, Mustang 83 cu ft interior.
  • It's a full 6 seconds+ faster to 130mph and 1/2 a second faster in the 1/4 mile.. pretty big dif to me. All the magazines have only tested the manual shift GTO. The Automatic GTO is slightly faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile with 2 less gears, pretty impressive. Waiting for an automatic test, but probably will never happen. I have the stick, so it doesnt' matter to me.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    ... The GTO is the larger roomier car overall then the Mustang. Compact vs Subcompact by EPA ratings. GTO 95 cu ft interior, Mustang 83 cu ft interior.

    Yes, that's because Mustang buyers aren't looking for a family car, which it seems the GTO buyers are.
  • Not all GTO owners are looking for family cars. But the advantage is that the room is there if I need it and I can actually carry 4 adults comfortably, unlike the Mustang. With any coupe it's hard to get in and out of the back, but once there the GTO has the same or more room then many midsized 4 door sedans I have been in. It's rear leg room is a full 6 inches more then Mustang and is same or more then the 4 door Grand Prix sedan. To each their own.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    ... To each their own.

    Amen!
  • Actually I'm far from new to the automotive world. Hat to break it to you, but the Mustang is NOT a muscle car, it's a pony car. the GTO is a muscle car, many refer to it as the ORIGINAL muscle car.

    The 4.3L V6 is NOT a shrunken 6 Liter V8, It's a V6 motor, not a V8 motor. As stated before, Ford still has the weakest V8 engines around the 4.6L V8 in the Crown Vic with only 224hp. IN the town car it struggles to make 239hp or 240hp.

    MPH magazine had the GTO outhandling the Mustang. In Car and driver it was very close. I can put bigger wheels, brakes, tires and upgradaed suspension on my GTO too for much less $$ then the GT500 will cost IN the end, the GT500 is still a Mustang, it's a $50k mustang. way too much $$ for one. I wouldn't never spend that much for a speciality version of the GTO either, not worth it.

    Ever hear of the Holden Monaro HSV? It competes with the M3 BMW in terms of handling. Often called the poor mans M3, too bad we can't get that HSV edition here in the states.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Posts: 1,938
    Yep, you're new. :blush: The 4.3L V6 is, literally, a GM smallblock with the back two cylinders chopped off. I know plenty about that motor as I had two versions of it in two different S10s.

    And you're not breaking anything to me. I don't think a single Mustang guy here has called the Mustang a muscle car. We all know it's a pony car. The ORIGINAL pony car! You know, the one that prompted such cars as the Camaro, Firebird, Challenger, 'Cuda, AMX, etc. ;)

    And the GTO is arguably the original muscle car. The actual original muscle car was the 1954 (or was it 57) Chrysler C300 (yes, C300; not 300C). You know, of the famous Chrysler 300 Letter Cars.
  • In road and track recently, they track-tested a GTO at 4.7 seconds.

    While the 4.3L motor is a small-block with cylinders cut off of it, it is based off of a previous version of the small block (Gen I or II, I forget though).
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    I'm trying to figure out why the better hp/diplacement for the GTO guys is such a big deal? (400hp/6.0l = 66.7hp/l vs. 300hp/4.6l = 65.2hp/l) Big whop. 1.5hp/l more specific output.

    Why not consider torque? As in ft-lbs/l?

    GTO has 400ft-lbs/6.0l = 66.7ft-lbs/l
    GT has 320ft-lbs/4.6l = 69.6ft-lbs/l

    Amazing that the pushrod motor (which is supposedly better for grunt than an OHC design) is actually DOWN on specific torque output compared to the 'low-tech'(?) Ford motor? Despite the fact that the GTO runs a higher compression ratio (10.9:1 requiring premium vs. 9.8:1 requiring regular), the GTO is still DOWN to the Mustang on specific torque output?

    And one last thing: yes, the GTO makes more specific hp than the Mustang. Of course, the hp peak occurs at 6k rpm vs. only 5750rpm for the Mustang. I'd be willing to bet that the Mustang would have a hp specific output advantage over the GTO measured at the same rpm.

    So, how do you suppose that the 'low-tech' Ford motor makes more specific torque and (probably) more specific hp at the same rpm as the GTO, despite the fact that the GTO is running a higher compression motor requiring premium? Hmmmm?
This discussion has been closed.