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

17810121338

Comments

  • ClairesClaires Member Posts: 1,222
    A number of posts were deleted this morning as a few people were shouting and/or attacking each other.

    Stay on topic and stay civil or you will be removed from the Forums.

    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

  • corsicachevycorsicachevy Member Posts: 316
    Sensai - When you say "race", what do you mean? I can't imagine a reputable organization actually putting these cars on the same track, like a Willow Springs or Road America, at the same time and actually racing. That would be completely insane without fitting the cars with full roll cages and multipoint harnesses. Most orgainizations don't have the budget to make that sort of investment for a one-off event.

    I doubt it will happen.

    If it did, the 05 GTO would beat an 05 Mustang GT. That really isn't debatable. Even so, I would much prefer to OWN an 05 Mustang - blue with white stripes and Bullit wheels, please.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    Actually, that is debatable. If I recall, the Mustang handles better than the GTO, and having a near 50/50 (51/49) weight distribution has to count for something. Keep in mind that the GT rides on 235/55 flexi-wall 17's whereas the GTO is on low profile(245/45, I think) 18's, and the GTO barely out slaloms the GT. Given a track with enough tight curves, the GTO would lose. Or, even better, put the GT on some 245/45's.
  • sensaisensai Member Posts: 129
    I believe they race the cars one at a time, but on the same track with the same driver, and compare the results from that. I am not sure though until they post more information about it.

    As far as which handles better, there is still not enough evidence to prove either one. The Mustang does seem to pull better slalom/skidpad numbers, at least against the 17" tire equipped GTO (those tires are hardly performance tires), although those measurements are hardly an indicated of true handling. Interestingly I was reading a R&T over the weekend and the GTO pulled a better number on their figure 8 test, which looked to be a small tightly wound track where I would of though the lighter Mustang would have had the advantage. Of course, the GTO is still way faster, has better breaks, better interior, and is much more solidly built.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    Of course, the GTO is still way faster, has better breaks, better interior, and is much more solidly built.

    Those last to points are highly subjective. The Mustang is very solid and whether or not an interior is better is totally up to individual taste.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    The Mustang edged out the GTO in Handling. Mustang and GTO weight distrubution is almost identical! Mustang was 52.5/47.5 and the GTO was 53.8/46.2. GTO has P245/45-17 inch from the factory with 18 inch Optional. All the tests have been with 17" on GTO.

    True you could put the GT on a better tire, but the same could be said for the GTO too, test it with it's optional 18 inchers.

    As for the interiors, Consumer Reports in their latest June review of the Mustang Convertible said the interior feels cheap. Much of the interior is covered in thin, hard plastic that has a cheap feel and look. As per CR magazine. New Mustang is much nicer then previous generations interior. It's all subjective.
  • corsicachevycorsicachevy Member Posts: 316
    This comparison reminds me of the Ford GT vs 911 GT3 comparison. The GT3 sliced through the twisties faster than the GT, but corner exit acceleration and straight line speed handed the overall advantage to the GT. I see the GTO vs GT comparison in a similar light.

    I have driven an 05 Mustang V6 and have to wonder if Consumer Reports even drove the car. Cheap interior? To me, the interior is solidly above average.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    I disagree with CR on the Mustang interior too, I thought it was pretty decent myself. Consumer Reports is almost always biased against American cars, so it was no surprise what they wrote. They always praise the foreign, especially the Japanese cars. Of course they rated the Solara convertible over the Mustang V6 convertible.
  • graphicguygraphicguy Member Posts: 13,665
    I don't consider CR a credible source for testing cars. It's widely known that they put more emphasis on cup holders than performance. Plus, they've shown time and again, their obvious bias towards Toyota and Honda.

    While I've not spent time in the standard interior of the Mustang, the Iterior Upgrade Package, and all the aluminum is, to me, stunningly good. I just returned from my Mustang's first road trip. The car felt like it was built from a solid piece of steel.

    Performance? I've posted some track numbers here (amatuer ran a 13.6 1/4) as well as the numbers from independent tests from the trade rags. In short, there isn't enough difference in performance between the GTO and the Mustang GT to claim one is substantiall faster than the other. GTO's weight is probably the biggest culprit.
    2023 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    I agree that CR is biased, they love Honda & toyota. I think CR only tested the standard interior of the Mustang?

    As for Performance, the GTO is faster then GT, maybe not by much, but it is. GTO 13.3 1/4 mile vs GT 13.8 1/4 mile in January Car & Driver. Half a second faster.

    I have seen amatuer's run as FAST as 13.1 1/4 miles on Stock GTO's including the stock BF goodrich tires. The avg seems to be 13.1 to 13.4 if you know how to drive.
  • graphicguygraphicguy Member Posts: 13,665
    I've not seen those numbers. I saw numbers that generally say the GTO is faster 0-60 by about 1/10th sec and 2/10ths in the 1/4. That's nearly identical.

    Fastest amatuer track time I saw was 13.8 secs in the 1/4 for the GTO and 13.6 secs for the Mustang (posted a video of the run between the Mustang and a highly modded 10 sec 'Cuda. GTO and Mustang were bone stock....including tires.

    Those results will vary widely, though given the different experience levels of their respective drivers and track conditions.
    2023 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    Car and driver January 2005 issue has GTO as HALF second faster then Mustang. 13.3 vs 13.8 Thats a noticeable difference! At the closest track to me I have seen Stock GTO run a 13.1, most seem to be closer to 13.3 - 13.4. GM's own advertising/brochure has GTO at 13.0 Automatic and 13.1 manual. Which is possible depening on conditions driver!
  • graphicguygraphicguy Member Posts: 13,665
    Guess I'm looking at different numbers. I don't have the issues in front of me, but I looked at the specs from MT (in the back where they post all their test highlights). The last Mustang GT and GTO tests I saw from C&D or R&T, had them about a tenth or two apart.

    When I was shopping, I had the GTO brochure and saw what GM said the car would do. But, I consider them biased (since they make the car) and discounted what they posted. I've yet to see a GTO run a 13.1 stock (also have yet to see a Mustang GT run 13.5 stock...which is what the trade rags were getting). I did see video of the Mustang GT run the 13.6, though.

    In either case, both would be driver dependent they are so close.
    2023 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    I used to download a whole lot of drag strip and street race videos from Kazaa and Lime Wire; many of them were pretty good.

    We've seen a GT run 13.6;

    Can anybody find a video of the GTO running a half-second better (13.1)?

    Or, perhaps even a couple good videos of GT vs. GTO? It has to have happened by now!
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    ......The last Mustang GT and GTO tests I saw from C&D or R&T, had them about a tenth or two apart.... ...

    No, both Car&Driver and Motor Trend got the 2005 GTO to run a 13.3 1/4 mile. That was FIVE tenths or HALF second faster then Mustang GT which was rated at 13.8 in car and Driver.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    The 4 spd Automatic Tranny GTO is faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile by one tenth of a second over the 6spd manual. Both transmissions share the same 3.46 rear axle gear.

    Where as in the Mustang I believe the 5spd manual is faster, it has 3.55 axle, Automatic is 3.31 axle. Can't get 3.55 axle with automatic.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    The Holden Monaro was originally introduced in 1968 and was immediately lauded as the ultimate high-performance coupe. It was the first all-Australian sports coupe of its type.

    Strong public sentiment led Holden officials to bring back the Monaro name for its all-new 2001 coupe.

    Monaro became an instant classic when it was released in Australia last October and has become the most high profile, sought-after car on Australian roads today.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    13.186 @ 106.34 mph, Cecil county Dragway in Maryland. Stock 2005 GTO. No mods. Stock tires. No weight removed from car.
  • buddhabmanbuddhabman Member Posts: 252
    It is gonna be great racing once GM gets the GTO program going in the GT TRANS-AM series. Then we will see. If you get a chance to see the Monaro's run V8 Supercars of Australia, the Ford Stang GT people might not be so confident. :P
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    Someone might have posted this a while back....

    http://www.jdpower.com/awards/industry/winners.asp?StudyID=909

    GTO was named as MOST APPEALING SPORTY CAR by JD power

    2004 Automotive Performance, Execution and Layout (APEAL) Study Summary

    The 2004 APEAL Study is based on responses from 102,951 new-vehicle owners who were surveyed during the first 90 days of ownership. The study, now in its ninth year, is based on eight categories of vehicle performance and design: engine/transmission; ride, handling and braking; comfort/convenience; seats; cockpit/instrument panel; heating, ventilation and cooling; sound system; and styling/exterior.
  • stang22stang22 Member Posts: 36
    JD powers love imports,and they really need glasses or have laser surgery,because the new gto, amoung forums members all over the net,including myself,is possibly the homliest so-called muscle car I have ever seen!! An IMPORT body with a Cran-am front end!! The '05 Mustang gt blows away the gto in all ways!!! Wait,then comes the new Shelby Mustang---Forget about it!!! Game over!!!
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    I would have to say the 1974 to 1978 Mustang 2 based on the Pinto chassis was the homliest so-called muscle car. Esp the 1977 and 1978 Cobra. Best engine was only 139 horsepower 302 V8 in those years and that was Cobra
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    But how powerful was the competition?
  • sensaisensai Member Posts: 129
    Sorry, but looks are subjective, and the Mustang is starting to look uglier every day to me. In every other category - performance, build quality, ride quality, comfort, etc. - the GTO blows away the Mustang. I wish you Mustang guys would admit the GTO cost more because it is a better car. The Shelby may be a better car than the GTO (let's wait until a production car is out to determine that), which is why it will also cost more.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    I agree, the GTO is more livable car, more comfortable.luxury like etc. The Shelby should be a faster car, better performer then GTO but as you said will cost $5k to $10k more and is still on the same $19k Mustang V6 chassis and will still inherit the same build quality etc. I would never pay $40k to $50k for a Mustang, but to each their own. I would never pay $40k to $50k for GTO either. Can't wait to see a road test of Shelby/GT500, should be nice.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    what about the lights in the grille of the V8 GT Mustang? I have heard there are some problems with legal issues in some states. Some people getting tickets. Same thing happened back in 1967 or 1968 with the Shelby, the lights in the grille were too far together and they had to be spaced out further? I know some states /towns can't have lights in the grille unless they are parking or signal lights.

    Personally I think it looks better on the V6 Stang with NO lights in the grille, but just my opinion. But I would be curious to see the laws on that.
  • sputterguysputterguy Member Posts: 383
    50,000 addditional units year over year is significant. I'd have to call that a success. I'm glad we finally got that straightened out.
  • sputterguysputterguy Member Posts: 383
    The best Ford performance cars from the past, ie. Cobra, GT40, and I don't know about the new GT, were foreign bodies with wonderful Ford engines in them. There were also cars like the Pantera which were actual foreign cars but with wonderful Ford engines. With the '05 Mustang all you got is an old looking Mustang. The new GTO could be the sleekest muscle car of all time. You better hope the Zeta platform is really cancelled.
  • sputterguysputterguy Member Posts: 383
    What? The Mustang beat out the Mini Cooper! Stop the presses.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    To clarify - the lights in the grille of the new Mustang GT are foglights and are just to the inside of the headlight assembly. The lights in the grille of the old '67 Shelby's which had a problem from a legal standpoint were only about a foot apart, and they were very bright driving lights. When they were moved further out close to the headlight (similar to the location on the '05s), they were fine.

    I don't know about any reported incidents involving tickets. Sounds like a web rumor to me. I'm sure it's possible; I'm sure if I search long enough I could find reported incidents of people getting tickets for the factory exhaust being too loud. If I were to receive such ticket, I would assert that such law was specifically regarding driving lights added by on owner, not standard equipment foglights from the manufacturer. I wonder how many Harley's have exhaust systems which violate noise ordinances? If the worry about foglight placement would keep someone out of a GT, they probably have no business being in the car in the first place.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "I wish you Mustang guys would admit the GTO cost more because it is a better car."

    The GTO cost more because, duh, it has more expensive mechanicals. In 50 words or less, define "BETTER".

    Is the GTO or the Mustang the "better" car? Gee, doesn't that kind of depend on what criteria you chose? I wish you GTO guys would admit that for SOME people, the Mustang is the "better" car........
  • stang22stang22 Member Posts: 36
    That's until the NEW GTO came out,which is NOW the reigning champ for the BUTT UGLIEST CAR OF ALL TIME!! Even the poll taken at edmunds knows the new mustang wins hands down--look it up, you might learn something!!!
  • stang22stang22 Member Posts: 36
    "We can see why," said the site's editors. "It delivers huge bang for the buck along with unmistakable retro styling and a solid performance. Not only can you score a V-8-powered GT for just $25,000, it's as long on features as it is on performance. Heck, even the base models get a strong-running V-6 and a sweet set of wheels. Ford needed a home run, and it got one in the 2005 Mustang."

    The Mustang also took top honors in the "under $25,000 coupe" segment, gathering twice as many votes as the runner up in the category, the Mini Cooper. On the overall favorites list, the Chrysler 300 sedan came in second and the new Chevy Corvette was third.

    yeah baby-mustang wins again!!!!! gto didn't even make the list-because its butt ugly
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    I wouldn't worry about it, just pointing out the legaility of it. Most cops might not notice, but there will be one that does.

    I believe in the state of NJ and many other states, it's illegal to have any other lights lit above your bumper unless they are your headliights or parking/signal lights. Those foglights in the grille of the 2005 Stang may be illegal! if turned on! The laws very by state etc.

    As for exhaust systems the GTO's was made to be 80 decibels or less which just meets the 50 states laws on exhaust. Like you said, I have had cars with much louder exhaust and the cops never bothered me.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    Actually the GTO offers the same bang for the buck or more. 400hp car for $33k. Mustang is 300hp for $25k. Do the math. The GTO is the same price per horsepower or CHEAPER. 400hp cars usually start at $45k and up. Don't forget leftover 2004 350hp GTO can be had for under $25k, quite the bargain!

    BTW Consumer Reports picked the Toyota Solara Convertible over the Mustang V6 convertible in the June issue!
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    Re: bang for the buck - certainly agree that leftover GTO's at $25k are a helluva deal. But how much performance any individual 'needs' (desires) varies substantially. Consider a V8 vs. V6 Mustang. For virtually everyone in THIS thread, the GT would be the 'better' Mustang. But for someone who only 'needs' decent performance, good handling, wrapped in 'nice' styling, the V6 would be a better deal and they may feel that the $5k saved would be better spent on other things.

    Likewise between a Mustang GT and a GTO. Is the GTO faster in a straightline? I'll step up and say 'yes'. How much faster is debateable (apparently, endlessly). Is a tenth or so (or a half second or so) really that important? The Mustang is no slug and most of us won't be dragracing the car (or randomly happening upon a GTO at a stoplight) on any regular basis. For those who do, the cars will probably be modded somewhat and then ALL points of debate pertinent to this thread go right out the window. Are they both fun to drive? Are they both quick? Are they both decent handlers? Are they both well constructed/reliable/luxurious/stylish/etc.etc. I say leave that up to individual buyers to determine since many of these things are somewhat subjective.

    RE: Consumer Reports - ummmmm, consider the audience who uses CR as a major basis to chose automobiles. Now, would it really make sense to these types of buyers for the editors to chose the Mustang over the Solara? BTW, why should GTO fans even CARE which V6 convertible was favored? When shopping for a V6 convertible (as opposed to a V8 'vert), the buyer is obviously more interested in cruising/creature comforts/style than they are pure performance. The type of buyer who would cross shop a Solara convertible and Mustang V6 convertible wouldn't be caught dead in a Pontiac showroom looking at a GTO; and vice versa.
  • stang22stang22 Member Posts: 36
    Yeah,but the gto is still butt ugly,no matter if it had rocket engines or turbines in it,it still loses!!!Go Mustang GT,you win yet but again!!!!!!! :) You sure your title wasn't suppose to be Most Appauling Sporty Car,GTO---- Now ,most people on the web and in society would understand that Title, for gto to be king of!!!! :lemon:
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    Actually the Mustang GT is the better bang for the buck car, 300hp V8 for $25k, vs 210hp V6 for $19k. Do the math! More HP for the $$ with the V8 model. I would never consider a V6 stang. A car like that requires/needs the V8. The V6 model is crude and unrefined when you nail the gas, old Ford Explorer V6, rented one in Vegas.

    As for CR... they have always been biased against American cars, so it was no surprise they liked the Solara better. They always go for the Toyota/Honda cars.
  • sputterguysputterguy Member Posts: 383
    OK, I'll admit it. For some people, the Mustang is the better car. Specifically the people that can't afford a GTO.
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    OK, I'll admit it. For some people, the Mustang is the better car. Specifically the people that can't afford a GTO.

    Just because someone bought a Mustang over a GTO does not mean they did so because they could not afford the GTO!

    Among the many unique attributes we have already discussed, Mustang buyers might like the styling better than the GTO, or just think the GTO is too bland. Maybe they like the way it handles as in a slalom, maybe the shifter feels better to them... etc, etc.

    Maybe they are afraid that after a year or two they will get tired of answering the question "They didn't make those for very long, did they?"

    Oh, and also, all the advertising about the big rebates and GM card cash towards GTOs kind of undermine your "unaffordable", "price premium" argument. I saw a LOT more information about how much of a discount I could get on a GTO than I did for the car itself.

    Hey, that's another question Mustang buyers won't hear... "They had trouble selling those, didn't they?"
  • sensaisensai Member Posts: 129
    LOL, I would rather have those questions then "Hey, I have one too, what color is yours?", since almost everyone on the block will own one.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    ......LOL, I would rather have those questions then "Hey, I have one too, what color is yours?", since almost everyone on the block will own one........

    I agree, and for every 1 GTO sold there are nearly 17 Mustangs sold. If I were to buy a Mustang I would have to have it uniquely customized to differentiate it from the others. I prefer the exclusitivity of the GTO. Only 12,000 this yr vs 200,000 Mustangs
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "Actually the Mustang GT is the better bang for the buck car, 300hp V8 for $25k, vs 210hp V6 for $19k. Do the math!"

    Personally, I agree. Simply because, all else being equal I prefer more hp. But I could certainly empathize with someone who would rather spend the $6k on something else, like maybe flying lessons.

    Just because someone doesn't spend upto the $25-$28k for a Mustang GT (or a bit more for a GTO), doesn't mean they're UNABLE to. They just have different priorities.

    Peace.
  • sputterguysputterguy Member Posts: 383
    I had an original 65 GT with the fog lights and it was my understanding they were illegal, at least in California. I tried them in the fog and they didn't seem any different than the headlights, so I never used them. Pretty cool looking but basically useless.

    I got two tickets with the stock GT exhaust which were basically glass packs. Sounded pretty cool I must say. The first one I fought and lost and had to pay a fine. The second one was a fixit ticket and I took off the chrome tips and put in steel wool. I guess I put in too much cause it wouldn't go over 45mph with all the back pressure. It was quiet though and I got it signed off.
  • sputterguysputterguy Member Posts: 383
    That was a joke, son.

    The new Mustang is a fine car. I've always said that. I'm surprised Ford did such a good job the first year with its new platform.

    The problem is I just can't stand Mustangs anymore. On the same day this week I saw a 35th Anniversary Edition and a 40th Anniversary Edition. What Ford won't do to sell these cars. They should have been called the 27th and the 32th Anniversary of the tired old Fox Body. Actually the 35th looked nice with a nice leather interior. But the 40th had a weird black cloth interior with a cheap looking light colored plastic dash and doors. They even cheapened an Anniversary Edition. But isn't that what Ford is about. Mass producing cheap cars for the masses.
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    LOL, I would rather have those questions then "Hey, I have one too, what color is yours?", since almost everyone on the block will own one

    Umm... Doesn't the GTO come only one way. So wouldn't it stand to reason that GTO owners are just as likely, if not more so, to encounter that same question? :confuse: The only thing that differentiates the GTOs from each other is the color. At least with the Mustangs, you can have different interior options as well as interior color, and so on.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    http://www.gmfleet.com/us/acquiring...Truck_Guide.pdf

    Only 3 minor changes and 2 new colors for 2006 GTO. They are getting rid of Yellow and Midnight Blue and replacing that with Spice Red and Brazen Orange.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "I had an original 65 GT with the fog lights..."

    Hey, small world. I currently own a 66 GT FB (non-hipo 289 :cry: ). I've replaced the clear lens foglights in the grill with amber; looks pretty good with the dark ivy green metallic paintjob. Re: the tickets for the stock exhaust (glasspacks) - I imagine that was years and years ago. I can't see a cop in todays age giving a noise violation ticket for that sound. If one did, I would acuse him (justly) of having no soul.
  • 442man442man Member Posts: 210
    "..........Umm... Doesn't the GTO come only one way. So wouldn't it stand to reason that GTO owners are just as likely, if not more so, to encounter that same question?........."

    Yes, but NOT as likely, 12,000 GTO's or 200,000 Mustangs. Much less likely to see another GTO. There is the SAP, Sport Apperance Package on GTO and 18" wheels option.


    ".........At least with the Mustangs, you can have different interior options as well as interior color, and so on........"

    You have different color interiors on the GTO as well. Black is std, but Red and Blue interiors are NO cost options.
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    But isn't that what Ford is about. Mass producing cheap cars for the masses.

    LOL, and GM isn't?

    The 2004 Mustang we just bought was a 40th Anniversary. I actually like the dual-colored interior better than the all one color interior of her 2001. But, once again, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
This discussion has been closed.