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
You say the 300C is outselling the GTO and then turn around and say the 300C is limited production. You can't have it both ways.
You say the 300C is luxurious. I don't know since I haven't checked it out. I can't get by those fender flares which look ridiculous to me. But considering the Mercedes/Chrysler combo I'm sure you are right. The 300C is a luxury car with muscle. The GTO, although I don't think you would agree, is upscale muscle. So where does that leave the Mustang? Economy muscle?
Comparing the 300C to the CTS-V would be more valid.
Claire
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
The 300C is outselling the GTO by leaps and bounds. The 300C SRT-8 is limited production, but it's outselling the GTO, too. It costs more, it's heavier, and it only has 25 more HP. But it's still coveted more than the GTO. That tells you something.
The 300C is a luxury car with muscle. The GTO, ..., is upscale muscle.
What's the difference?
So where does that leave the Mustang? Economy muscle?
Absolutely! And America wouldn't have it any other way! :shades: GTO sales are proof of that. :sick:
The GM Zeta Rear drive program is alive down under in Austraila just not for the US, that kind of stunk.
Certain people are complaining about this 2004-2005 not being a real GTO etc. Hate to tell you but the 1964 and 1974 were NOT real GTO's then either. 1964 was a rebadged Lemans and 1974 was a rebadged Ventura. Knowbody complains about the 1964 though. The 2005 is the most powerfull, fastest, best handling, best braking GTO ever MADE! I think that more then speaks for itself. Yeah it would have been nicer to have better styling, but it's not ugly. It looks like other Pontiacs, just like the 1964 and 1974 did!
The 1973 and 1974 did not sell well at all either, only about 7,000 to 10,000 each. Oh well.
Next years Mustang supposed to be fastest one every made too, the GT500.
Focusing on trucks is something both GM and Ford did way too much of. I think everyone knew that a "spike" in gas prices would hit them like it has.
Ford seems to be more willing to make the tough "cuts" where they are needed. The Jaguar X model is the latest to be cut.
Ford has done more to leverage "good platforms" against the duds.
Ford has another "hit" on their hands with the Escape Hybrid.
While I wouldn't want to be in either GM's or Ford's shoes right now, if I had to choose between what model would or would not survive between the Mustang and GTO, I feel very comfortable where the Mustang is as opposed to where the GTO is.
I thought the X Type was still carrying on with a new station wagon version that just came out? It is out as we speak. The X type was a Ford Contour platform in disguise anyway. Ford Contour, oops Jaguar. Jags sales are the toilet the last few yrs. I hope both Ford and GM can turn it around.
Just look at diesel vehicles....so popular in Europe, yet such duds in the U.S.
GM should have indeed made a ground up iteration of the GTO for this market. Such an icon deserved that type of effort. As GM always does, they tried to take the "easy" way out.....rebadge something else in their stables and foist it on the American public. That's a real shotgun approach with no real idea on how it will sell or what the public thinks. I call that GM arrogance from the days of "what's good for GM is good for America" type thinking.
I do believe that Ford "gets it". You can see how they addressed the Mustang enthusiasts for input as to what the new Mustang should be. The public response was ovewhelmingly positive....to the point that young and old, past Mustang customer or not, the Mustang struck a chord with the public. I know more people who have bought this Mustang that wouldn't even have considered a Ford before. I was one of them. GM, on the other hand, brought the Monaro to the U.S. and said....."here's the new GTO, take it or leave it". Unfortunately, the U.S. market has given GM their decision.
Never underestimate the amount of success to be enjoyed by asking the customer what they want and then giving it to them.
I do think it's a travesty that GM throws more money into SSR marketing than they do to the GTO. But, that may tell you how GM feels about the model and what the future holds for the GTO.
Also, don't be so certain there won't be some Bullitts and Machs coming along soon, either.
There are lots of different ways to go with either the 4.6L or the 5.4L.
Given that '05 Mustang GTs are all sold out and that the '06 models will be sold out, at least initially, Ford has lots of leeway in what they can do.
For now, I'm very happy with my '05 GT. Until Ford releases the GT500, I'll wait and see what else they may come up with. I don't even know if I'd be interested in the GT500 considering how the regular GT sells for MSRP and above. Dealers will, no doubt, hold to MSRP and above on the GT500.
I'd be kidding myself to think that I'd ever remotely use the performance of the GT500. Hell, I'm having a hard time finding ways to exploit the performance of the GT.
I'll be taking the 'Stang on its first road trip this weekend to the KY DERBY. That'll be fun as the weather will be perfect and the drive will be beautiful through the horse farms.
BTW saw a Tbird for more then $10k off MSRP, leftover 2004? Or 2005. New. Saw a leftover SSR truck for $10k off MSRP too. Good deals to be had.
:lemon:
There have been plenty of duds in autodom recently.....
--T-Bird (should have done a lot more suspension work on that one)
--Marauder (needed more motor)
--SSR (plenty of motor but was the answer to a question no one asked)
--Caddy and Lincoln pick-ups (see SSR...can't remember their names)
--Aztec (ugliest vehicle I think I've ever seen....why are they still making them?)
That GTO in '05 guise should run you about $30.3K-30.5K for GMO/GMS....then take the $1,000 "hot button" cash off of those numbers. The '04 would be about $25K less the $1000 "hot button" cash.
Caddy pickup was more successfull then the Lincoln which only lasted 1 yr. Lincoln is bringing back the pickup, looks too much like a F150 to me. Excursion is or was cancelled for dwindling sales, Suburban always outsold it.
Thanks for the info on the GTO, going tonight to do the deal.
It's going to take more then just the new Mustang to turn Ford around. The 1964 GTO didn't have the looks either... If you look at the 1964 GTO, nothing special styling wise, just a big 2 door Lemans rebadged as a GTO with bigger, V8, badges, wheels etc. Some of those 1960's GTO's don't look that great styling wise either. Musclecar concept is to shove a Big V8 with lots of horsepower into a midszied 2 door body, rear drive, manual trans option etc.
For those that say the GTO isn't a real GTO, got news for you, it's the most POWERFULL Gto ever made. Only to have 400hp. Most powerfull GTO of the 1960's/1970's only made 370hp stock and that was PRE SAE hp. Which really means about 300 instead of 370 by today's standards! Yes I am of the baby boomer generation and remember the 1960's car as a kid when they were new.
This GTO resembles the other Pontiacs just like the 1964 did! from the front! Nothing wrong with that. I can tell from far away that this GTO is a Pontiac easily with the grille, etc.
To each their own!
My 2005 mustang was a :lemon: :lemon:
Personally, I think they "heydey" of the GTO styling was the late 60s...not the mid 60s.
Something I never could understand, particularly about American car companies, why they don't use the tremendous amount of data that's available to them in the form of their millions of customers. Of course, you can say that about any business.
In the case of the Mustang, Ford went out of their way to find out what the public wanted in the new Mustang. First and foremost, people wanted a modern iteration of what the Mustang stood for styling wise....that is a long hood and short rear. It was also clear that no one wanted to give up the traditional Mustang "look". After asking the owners what they favorite design cues were, they borrowed from the most classic ones and updated the look. That's been a success. Whether you want performance or just "the Mustang look", Ford had something everyone liked because they asked what the consuner wanted. Inside and out, the look is pure Mustang. Guaging the reactions wherever I drive mine, Ford got it right with the interior and the exterior.
Then, aside from the good looks, performance is a legacy for the Mustang. They endowed it with a very good performing base model. They added the GT for the traditional performance buyer (more customers than Ford anticipated). Ford, with plain old good engineering, did a great job with the solid rear axle...to the point that IRS wasn't needed....neither was its weight or added complexity. Plus, the solid rear is sturdier (for those who would take their Mustang to the track) than an IRS set-up.
One of the biggest complaints of the Fox based Mustang was it's lack of a solid feeling. Ford took a very solid Lincoln LS base platform, then highly modified it for Mustang use. The result was a very solid automobile. They followed up with great ergonomics, a shifter/clutch that feels like it learned some lessons from Mazda, and an engine that his big HP and big torque, then they made it sound great.
Finally, Ford priced the Mustang where the vast majority of the public would find it to be worthwhile.
Compare and contrast.....GM didn't ask anyone what they thought the GTO should or should not be. In typical GM arrogance, they foisted a rebadged Australian car on their customer base and tried to market it as the "new GTO". While no one can debate the merits of the LS2 engine, everything else seemed to be "less well thought out" for the American market. I don't know if it's a weight issue or a shift/clutch issue (probably a combination of many things) but performance should have been much better, instead of almost identical to the Mustang GT. It's also clear that hanging a Pontiac nose on an Australian car does not make a GTO. Adding to the "cobbled together" feeling is the fact that the General didn't even bother to think about little things like having brake lights on both the spoiler and the rear deck, gave me the feeling that this wasn't a GTO, but something GM rushed to market.
That's not to say the GTO doesn't have its merits. From my test drives, I found it fast and comfortable (shifter, clutch, steering aside). Driving the GTO and the Mustang GT told me volumes about how Ford listened to their customers and GM just gave the GTO a "take it or leave it" short shrift. As most said, GM didn't do anything to help the cause by leaving the GTO out there to dangle when it came to marketing it, either.
And while I am at it, the GTO doesn't look like a cavalier. That's a tired old putdown. If you are going to insult the GTO, at least come up with something fresh. Besides, the GTO looks just like the Grand Prix. And that's according to none other than the gguy and a few others. Yep, it's just a generic looking Pontiac. I own both cars so as soon as I find someone with a scanner, I will post pictures of the GTO and Grand Prix side by side so you guys will be able to tell the difference.
One thing for certain however; the whole style issue has been beat into the ground. You know, you could turn this whole 'style' issue to your favor by theorizing that GTO buyers are more interested in substance over style and Mustang buyers are more interested in style over substance. I don't necessarily subscribe to that theory, but it is apparent that some posters appear to be locked in on 'style' to the exclusion of virtually all else.
What's wrong with offering the public another fast car? Especially one that offers about the best $/hp ratio on the market. If all GM cars were as well put together as the GTO, they wouldn't be struggling with the crappy quality reputation they have.
One cannot make general statements based on only part of the story. Compare and contrast as you like but just choosing two examples to make a general statement about how a company listens to its customers is misleading. Post #460 sums up why the GTO is here; I suppose some here just wish it never came over. Well, that would leave the happy buyers of the GTO without. Remember, Hammen2 had a lemon GTO, but got another one and seems to be happy. What more could Pontiac ask of its customers?
No, I don't think that's the real problem. I think the problem is that people had some fixed notion in their head of what a current "GTO" is and the Holden wasn't it. Maybe if they had just called it what it LOOKED like to the U.S. market (a really good looking Grand Prix Coupe), there wouldn't be this problem.
Actually, to be honest, I don't know WHY there seems to be such animosity towards the GTO. I myself sometimes go on a little rant against the car but in truth it is more against some of the (previous) posters ranting against the Mustang for what seems (to me anyway) to be silly issues. So then I'd go off about some minor little thing on the GTO. None of that (on either side) was very constructive; just misc. grenades thrown from the opposing trenches. It gets old.
They are both good cars. It's just that they will each appeal to a slightly different type of buyer and I think it's unfortunate when people seem to think that just because THEY don't like one, that anyone who does must be some kind of an idiot.
Substance over style. That is very well put. Thank you.
Of course, with a Mustang you would get style AND substance!! :P
The GTO and Mustang are good cars. It's good to have a little 'friendly' rivalry though, just to keep it interesting.
We found the V8 powered Mustang GT with a manual transmission to be FAST and FUN, but in V6 guise with an automatic transmission oru convertible isn't as Exciting. The engine is COARSE and NOISY. Handling is secure but borders on mundane. The interior feels CHEAP. Much of the interior is covered in thin, hard plastic that has a cheap feel and look. But then at the same time they say the chrome highlights looks good. More american car bias as usual from CR. They said the body is very rigid and good front seats ec Yet they praise the Toyota Solara Convertible and rank it above the Mustang, but say it's body quivers and shakes? Go figure? I would rather have the more rigid body.
on the spot. The thing kicks [non-permissible content removed] and has a very refined chassis
to boot. I will be retiring a '99 Z28 that has 160k on it with next to
no problems (p.s. pump just went - first problem). Incredibly solid
and sound vehicle with an apropriate degree of subtlety with which
I have been trashing everything that has been stupid enough to try to
take me on over the last six years.
Ordered the goat w/o the hood scoops, but added the 18" wheels.
Can't wait to get my hands on it and spend the summer wringing it
out on the roads of upstate NY.
As for the mustang's appearance, I've seen a couple dozen on the
roads and I'm bored already - looks too much like too many old
rustbuckets. Give me the subtlety of the goat anyday, at least
until they decide to market a Judge model.
almost forgot... SCREAM SCREAM SCREAM SCREAM SCREAM!
(isn't that what you're obligated to do around here?)
The only part of cancelling the zeta model that bothers me is there won't be a platform for the LS7. That would have been the logical choice and what better to call it than the....Judge. Oh well.
But wait, someone is buying 28,000,000,000 shares of GM stock. Could there be light at the end of the tunnel?
'05 Mustang sales = ~190,000 units. Over 1/3 of those will be of the GT variety (or ~63,000+). Those numbers would have been higher and were limited only by capacity to produce them.
While an understatement, I'd say it's been a success.