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

1808183858694

Comments

  • 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?
  • Hey Stang22
    Sorry to hear about your lemon :lemon: ... guess what?! I have one too! :lemon: I have the 05 V6 coupe premium, I've only had this for 1 yr and it's driving me crazy! I hear rattling coming from the a/c vents both left and right, my steering wheel squeaks, the brakes squeak it actually sounds like an old vehicles brakes and my drivers seat had a clicking in it that i literally felt on my back, that was fixed (twisted bracket is what they called it) but now you can still hear the clicking. And there's more to my car but enough of that, what was rattling in your car? I have taken my car in 4 times already, it has been there for more than 30 days but the techs can't seem to find or hear anything...They also claim "No other 05 mustang owners have problems" LIARS! :mad: I honestly think they(service dept)hate me now!
  • I don't recall the GTO requiring premium. Just about all cars run premium in their horsepower tests anyway to get the most power out of them and boost numbers, including Mustang.

    I also know that the GTO has a much more consistant torque band than the Mustang, as it has more than 300 lb/ft torque pretty much from idle to redline.

    Doesn't the GTO rev higher than Mustang anyway? And I thought that pushrods were old, ancient, and couldn't outrev any OHC motor, huh! :)
  • WOW 6500 RPM vs the GT's 6200 RPM redline. That must be it... wow I feel so enlightened. That 300 RPM difference must be why the GTO is faster then the GT. :P
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "Just about all cars run premium in their horsepower tests anyway to get the most power out of them and boost numbers, including Mustang."

    Nope.

    The only reason to run premium in a car is if the compression ratio is high enough that detonation is a concern. Premium fuel DOESN'T have any more energy content than regular, it just resists detonation better. The compression ratio on the Mustang is low enough that detonation is not a concern when running regular.

    Actually, I don't believe that premium is REQUIRED for the GTO. Their website simply lists it as 'recommended'. Cars with high compression motors will typically retard the ignition a bit (thus reducing hp) when regular is used in lieu of premium. So sure, you could run the same fuel as the Mustang, you just wouldn't be getting all 400hp.

    "I also know that the GTO has a much more consistant torque band than the Mustang, as it has more than 300 lb/ft torque pretty much from idle to redline."

    On what do you base this? The Mustang uses variable cam timing in the V8. One of the reasons (actually, the MAIN reason) is to flatten out the torque curve. Based the fact that the Mustang utilizes variable timing and the GTO does not, I would be inclined to believe that the Mustang actually has a more consistent torque band.

    "Doesn't the GTO rev higher than Mustang anyway? And I thought that pushrods were old, ancient, and couldn't outrev any OHC motor, huh!"

    Yes, it revs higher. But 6.5k rpm redline for the GTO is nothing to write home about even for a pushrod motor.

    In all honesty, I think that the redline in the Mustang IS too low. I would think that with a SOHC design and variable cam technology, there's no reason it couldn't be designed for a 7k redline without adversely affecting the lower rpm torque curve.

    Of course, this would simply bump up the hp above the GTO's specific output.......sweeeet!
  • Flash the computer with a custume tune, remove speed and rev limiter, then hold on tight.

    Trust me, I know. :D
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "Flash the computer with a custume tune, remove speed and rev limiter, then hold on tight."

    No no no; now we're back into the realm of hashing out modified cars again. Oh, I'm sure it's a quick and easy (and highly effective) mod, it's just that discussing mods as a means to debate the relative merits of these two vehicles gets pointless pretty quick.....
  • True true, but it seems no one can leave out certain points or issues that should be left out. But, I think thats what makes this debate so fun and interesting. The things people say.
  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    The GTO is just as fast as the Mercedes CLK.
    The Mercedes CLK is almost twice the price.
    Therefore the CLK is JUNK. Pure JUNK I say!

    The logic on some of these GTO vs. Mustang GTO arguments
    escapes me.
  • If the GTO is so great a car, then why have sales been so bad? Why is GM TOTALLY redesigning it? Why did they throw a great engine and interior in an Australian-made Cavalier on steroids and try to pass it off as old school American muscle?

    If the Mustang GT is the lower of the two, than why have most professional reviewers...including CR, R&T, and C&D favored the Mustang GT? Why have sales continued to be through the roof WITHOUT incentives? So it seems that not only professionals, but the car buying public overwhelmingly prefers the Mustang GT over the GTO.

    Things that make you go hmmm..... :P
  • From the Car and Driver review, link above, message #1702: Just the facts, ma'am:

    base price: Mustang $24,995, GTO $33,500
    price as tested: Mustang $28,865, GTO $33,500 (Mustang's options unrelated to performance)

    braking, 70-0, feet: Mustang 170, GTO 167

    0-60 mph: Mustang 5.1, GTO 4.8

    1/4-mile @ mph: Mustang 13.8 @ 103, GTO 13.3 @ 107

    top speed, mph: Mustang 147 (drag limited), GTO 158 (governor limited)

    Mustang has a larger trunk and better MPG

    Grand total of 235 points awarded by reviewers: Mustang 211, GTO 210.

    (HP/weight ratio was included, contrary to what I wrote in previous post.)

    Seeing as I don't plan to drive my Mustang anywhere near 140 mph, the differences between the more expensive, more powerful GTO and Mustang are, imo, negligible.

    The Mustang, btw, is a street machine, not intended for European twisty roads or the race track. It handles beautifully in traffic, is quiet and comfortable, not a rough-riding, hard-to-steer pseudo race car. :shades:
This discussion has been closed.