Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Ford Mustang (2005) vs. 2005 Pontiac GTO
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
BTW....didn't see one Mustang on the rental lot. There were a few Tauri and many Foci, but many more Impalas & Cobalts.
On the road, I saw my very first Charger with manufacturer tags on I 94. Much better looking than the pics I had seen, but still not something I'd pay money for.
By the way...bone stock mustang GT.
Here's some video...
These were just time trials... But I ran a 13.69 @ 97 mph
Here's medium size for broad band:
http://www.maglocks.com/_personal/Barracuda_trials_med.wmv
Here's small size for dial up:
http://www.maglocks.com/_personal/Barracuda_trials.wmv
Hope you all enjoy it!
Road & Track tester, Matt DeLorenzo stated about the entire chasis/suspension....
"The design is similar to that used on the legendary BMW M3. As BMW has proven time and again, executing a simple design deftly can work as well or better than more complex and costly bits. It's a lesson the Mustang team has taken to heart......
NO, the last time I checked the BMW M3 has an IRS just like the GTO does, LOL! GTO has been compared to the M3, not the Mustang.
Everyones insurance is different, for me GTO was $100 CHEAPER then Stang to insure. I have perfect record, Here near NY City everyone pays alot , LOL!
Car and Driver said it BEST....The Mustang's rear end did occasionally step out on imperfect pavement. Despite Ford's best efforts, the convulsions from under the back seat haven't been completely cured, and there's a slightly disconcerting hop when you encounter a midcorner bump. It's not likely to send you spinning off into someone's geraniums, but the GTO's independent rear end exhibited no such spasms over the same roads. EXACTLY... those symptoms above are TYPICAL of a solid rear axle car like Stang. With an IRS those problems would be fixed!
This was funny..... Although the Mustang is not something you'd choose to travel in after having those pesky hemorrhoids removed
I guess old Shelby was capable of some hyperbole himself. King of the Road? I don't think so. In '68 it was possible to get a GT with a factory installed 427. It doesn't say which one but it was downtuned to 390hp. Quite potent even at that rating. I'd personally go with that over the GT500.
And finally, all 427 Cobra's had the 427 in them. The nameplate on the side says it all. " 427 COBRA "
Don't forget that the Automatic 4 on the GTO is actually faster 0-60 by 1/10th. All the magazines have only tested M6 GTo's.
another reason I bought automatic faster and no shifting. Esp in the traffic around here.
Motor-Trend tested a 1967 automatic tranny GTO to run in 13.36 at the 1/4 mile, pretty good.
manual ran in as fast as 13.10 or 13.20
The Mustang has always been an affordable car built to a certain price point. Nothing wrong with that, every car is built to a price point. I'm not going to debate which is better, no question I'd rather have an IRS.
If the solid axle really helped Ford keep the car under a certain price and hasn't hampered performance by much, which seems to be the case, it's not a problem. It's selling lot hot cakes, so Ford made the right decision, they need to make money. Something GM has forgotten how to do.
Unless your a complete moron, you can't deny the Mustang is a bargain for what you get. I guess you can say the same for the GTO since the fire sales are still going on strong here.
This debate will be over in year or two anyway when the current imposter GTO is either dropped or replaced by a car worthy of the GTO name.
I think the Monaro is a great car, but simply rebadging it and shipping it over here doesn't make it a GTO.
It's RWD, it's a coupe (sorry Charger fans), and it wears the Pontiac badge. It looks like other Pontiacs in the family. Has a huge motor and great performance. Seems like just the formula for a "REAL GTO" to me.
Respectfully suggest you put your butt in one and take a test drive. Your attitude may change.
No fire sales going on for the '05's - there is a genuine shortage of them in many areas - that's constraining sales right now more than anything. Holden will be building them into July to try to meet demand (as posted by a Pontiac insider "LFP" on another forum)...
--Robert
I don't know why people have such a cow about the GTO not being "real". It is true to the GTO name, in being a RWD performance coupe that resembles other vehicles in the Pontiac lineup at the time. Charger fans have more to gripe about, with the resurrected vehicle being a sedan. Of course, the Grand Prix has offered a sedan since 1990, and it's been sedan-only since the 2004 redesign.
If the car was FWD and/or had maybe 240 hp, I'd agree with you and say it's not a "REAL" GTO. This is just getting silly.
By the way, I also meen no disrespect to the original chevyII Nova. I grew up in the back seat of a '70 4 door Nova w/307. Blue bottom w/white top to be exact. My 2nd car was a '71 Nova with a much fun 427 up front. It also had a predator carb. as well. It handled like a dump truck but man it was fast in the staights.
One of the first things that struck me about the Mustang GT when I drove it was how well it rode....even over bumpy surfaces.
Taken as a whole (which is what you need to do), the Mustang does handle and ride quite well. It certainly handled better than the GTO. But, that's also a function of the added weight the GTO is carrying around (and another reason that the performance numbers between the GTO vs the Mustang GT are so close to be insignificant).
IRS added complexity and weight doesn't translate into better handling or ride quality, by any stretch, when comparing these two.
I won't get into the automatic vs manual trannys. I prefer mine to have manual trannys. That's a personal preference, though. The shifter/clutch in the Mustang are one of the better ones I've ever used (the best being the Mazda RX8). The Mustang's shifter/clutch action is certainly smoother, more positive than what I experienced during my GTO test drives.....yet another reason I chose the Mustang over the GTO.
I've yet to see any independent tests done on a GTO with an automatic. I can't say that I'd consider the performance figures GM puts out to be unbiased.
My interest in the video posted was more about that 'cuda running a 10 sec 1/4. That was wicked. But, a bone stock (including stock M&S tires) Mustang GT running a 13.69 sec 1/4 isn't anything to sneeze at, either. Plus, the Mustang owner could drive it home right from the track. I'm sure that the 'cuda would not be a good daily driver (probably trailered to the track).
And pretty good times considering the weight it was dragging around.
Here is the 1974 GTO, rebadged Pontiac Ventura, based on the Chevy Nova. 250 horsepower 350 V8, 5.7L. 0-60 was was 9.4 seconds, LOL! SLOWEST production GTO ever made.
In my test drives, the GTO road more like a Mercedes, more luxurious then Mustang. Smoother/better. In my opinion. However the new mustang road MUCH NICER Then the 1999 to 2004 generation it replaced based on the old FOx 1978 chassis. Extra wheelbase helps, old one was only 101 inches and new Stang 107?
That was a WILD video of the Cuda running 10 secondds. I have seen mid 1980's Grand Nationals running similar times. I'm sure that was not a streetable car or fun to drive on regular streets, LOL! Nice anyway.
Ford isn't doing too much better then GM, they are losing $$ and market share as a whole too. Their stocks are in the flusher too.
Since when is the current GTO an impostor or not worthy of the GTO name? LOL!? What do you think the original 1964 GTO was? it was a performance OPTION on the 1964 Pontiac Lemans A body 2 dr coupe with a big V8. LOL! 40yrs later GM borrows a car from it's holden division and does same thing, midsized 2 door coupe with a big 6 liter V8. Same thing. BTW....the 2005 GTO is the FASTEST MOST POWERFULL GTO ever MADE!! No GTO ever offered 400hp from factory. I think highest was 370hp on the 1969 Judge. Remember those ratings are PRE SAE, so you really have to take about 20% away from them.
If you want to go that route we could argue that the 1974 GTO, the SLOWEST production GTO ever made was a rebadge and not worthy of the GTO name on it's Pontiac Ventura ala Chevy Nova chassis. 9.4 seconds time! It was still a GTO.
Or we could argue that the NEW Mustang is NOT a real mustang because it was based off the 2000 Lincoln LS chassis, Tbird, Jag S chassis, right? Big upgrade over the old 27 yr old Fox 1978 Chassis. But I consider it to be a real mustang.
Probably the best handling/ride trade-off I've ever experienced was in a BMW 3 series I owned (it had all sorts of other issues that would preclude me from buying another, though).
From an evolution stand point, trying to compare cars from their forefathers, from any generation, is really an excercise in futility. So many things have changed over the decades.
I have mentioned that my sister has a '65 Mustang with a 289. It's also a manual tranny. Driving mine and driving hers is more akin to hers being similar to driving a bus compared to driving mine. Technology and engineering have changed so much over the last 4 decades.
Same would be true of driving a '60s era GTO when compared to a current one.
A '60s era Shelby wouldn't be any picnic to drive either.
Cars from that era (in comparison to any current car) would have sloppy steering, crude and unrefined suspensions, brakes that could be compared to a Flintstone mobile.
When I was a tyke, I remember my father allowing me to drive his '70s era Chrysler New Yorker up and down roads on a farm he owned. The thing had a big 440 V8 with a big 4 bbl carb. I remember tromping it. It would squat down when the 2 extra barrels opened up and would blast off. It had NO steering feel. It seemed like every time I hit the brakes, they transitioned from no braking, to locking up.....with nothing in between. Had to turn the steering wheel 3-4 inches before anything would happen. My memory of those experiences tells me I'd have a hard time keeping that monster on the road today.
How people kept any of those '60s era cars on the road, when the speed limit was 75 MPH on ALL interstates is a mystery to me. Guess it had more to do with what you were used to.
I got a few feathers ruffled. I re-read my post today and I came across harder than I intended to. The long necks where going down smooth last night and I was getting sick of seeing all of the IRS posts so I lashed out more harshly than I normally would.
I will stick to my belief that GM should have done something different besides rebadging the Murano, the GTO faithful on this board may disagree, but that is how I feel.
Yes, no doubt about the current GTO's performance, I never have or will dispute that point. The car is on the heavy side, but it seems to have enough power & suspension to compensate.
I guess I can't get over the fact that GM basically used the Murano as a fill-in until something home grown could be developed. I've looked at Holden's website and the GTO is so similar in looks it's frightning, inside and out.
Other than convert it to a left hand drive model, stuff the vette motor in it, and slap on a Pontiac front end, what did GM design on this car? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm seriously asking 'cause I don't know.
My 1958 Chevy which has manual steering, manual brakes and a 3spd manual on the column, boy does that have a hard clutch/shift feel to it. Very hard to turn wheel when nearly stopped, good upper arm workout, LOL! The V8 in it more then keeps up with modern traffic. Yes you can turn the wheel 2 inches + before it starts to turn, LOL! Braking from the 4 drums is actually decent. Not as good as modern car. Really have to hit brakes, "Manual" The ride is actually quite nice.. soaks up bumps quite well, and huge trunk-backseat. Handling is horrendous. The best corners that car handles are at a 4 way stop sign, LOL! That cars gives me a good upper and lowe workout after driving.
For 2007 GM was supposed to have an all new GTO as well as other midsized rear drive cars based on the rear drive ZETA platform which was just cancelled cited as too costly. Not sure what will be done for 2007 if anything! 2006 might be it for the GTO.
Look at the Grand Prix, only a 4 door sedan today. Real Grand prixes were always 2 door & rear drive from 1962 to 1988
LOL is Laughing Out Loud
I never buy a car anymore when it's first, wait for prices to drop and 2nd yr to fix bugs or add features/power.
J.D. Power APEAL Top Cars
Segment Top car
Compact car MINI Cooper
Entry midsize car Chevrolet Malibu
Premium midsize car Volvo S40
Entry luxury car Chrysler 300
Mid-level luxury car BMW 5-series
Premium luxury car BMW 7-series
Sporty car Pontiac GTO
Premium sports car Porsche Boxster
Looking for an all out American performance car, one is either looking at a Corvette or a Mustang GT. That's quite a bit different than slapping a big V8 in a coupe (GTO) or sedan (Chrysler 300C).
I wanted something that handled well, good speed, good build, very nice inside and a great body. The Mustang filled the bill on all counts (whereas neither the GTO nor the 300C did not).
As a side advantage, the Mustang was less expensive than either the GTO or the 300C by thousands of dollars. But, even if the 300C (hemi) or the GTO were priced the same as the Mustang GT, I still would have chosen the Mustang solely on looks.
Big problem with the T-Bird was not the styling (although the headroom in that car was a joke), but the way it drove. It was creaky and sloppy in its handling. You spend $40K on a car and it better excell in looks, performance and/or handling. The T-Bird had the "looks" part down, but little else.
For ~$26K, the Mustang GT has the looks, the perfomance and the handling. That's why it is such a hit.
Me too, that is why I bought the GTO. I would have considered the Stang, except I didn't want to look like the other 200,000+ that will be on the road, more exclusitivity and the backseat was near useless on stang. Very hard to secure a rear facing child seat, I actually brought the car seat to the dealer. After you installed it, basically hugging the steering wheel. Where as GTO I had much more room in driver seat with rear facing car seat behind me. Bigger backseat on GTO. Notice Consumer Reports said same thing on Stang, Very difficult to install a rear facing child seat! For me that matters, but for some it doesn't.
BTW....The JD Power survey is done 90 days after the owner buys the car. Both GTO and Mustang and other sporty car owners were questioned. The GTO was more appealing then the other sporty cars to their owners under their report guidelines.
Believe me, if the GTO hit it's sales numbers in '04 and '05, GM would have extended its life in one form or another. When car manufacturer's say that a particular model only had a "limited production run" that usually means that they didn't sell well to begin with.
While, I hope GM has cleared out most of the leftover '04s, if you subtract out what the '04 sales from total sales this year, the '05s aren't selling all that well either. Last I checked, Pontiac had sold substantially fewer than 3,000 '05 GTOs through March.
Just looking at the inventory of the 4 Pontiac dealers I pass every week in my 'burg, none of them have sold any of the 15 GTOs they have sitting in their new car lots in the last month (they still have the same original stock I looked at a month ago before I took delivery of my Mustang). Doing a quick search via GM BUYPOWER (which says it updates every 24 hours) none of the 50 or so GTOs within a 50 mile radius of me in OH have sold......even with the $1,000 rebate.
My preferred Pontiac dealer has the same 3 '05s that they had two months ago (silver, red, blue). They still have a leftover '04 (silver) that has been there for at least 3, probably 4 months ago.
Don't get me wrong. I wanted the GTO to be a success for GM so they would come out with an updated one, but that's not to be.
Mustang GT's are sold out for the '05 model year at every Ford dealer near me. They already have a substantial line for the '06 models when they begin taking orders next month. My Ford dealer will be totally sold out of the first 3 months of GT allotment they get (probably closer to 4 months allotment now since he told me this a month ago when I took delivery of mine). They have deposits on their '06 GTs, even though they don't have final pricing on them, yet.
GTO rated as a BEST BUY, value in class 9
Mustang was Recommended Buy, value in class 7
GTO 57 points, Mustang 50 points High for class was 58, GTo just missed that.
2007 GTO was going to be an ALL NEW CAR on the Zeta midsized rear drive chassis that other GM cars would have been based off of like Grand Prix, etc. GM cancelled Zeta for now. Time will tell. Hopefully they come out with another GTO, otherwise it's just the vette in GM's lineup or the CTS-V, both $44k+
BTW.. my preffered Pontiac dealer has been sold out of his GTO allottment until late May.
Personally, I'm not aware of most people using Consumer's Guide as a source to look to for rating cars.
You do realize the new Mustang is loosely based on the same architecture/fLincoln LS frame as the Tbird? Yes there were modifications/improvements but still same starting point. At least the LS chassis is a big improvement over that FOX 1978 chassis they used up until last year, LOL!