I'm very well aware that the current Mustang is very loosely based on the Lincoln LS platform.
In it's T-Bird iteration, the platform was a bust. Having the Mustang engineers take a crack at it, it's a true winner.
I've only riden in a Lincoln LS. It's a nice piece.
I test drove the T-Bird when it first came out. I was drawn to the styling, but the test drive turned me off. I'm not super tall (6') but thought the head room with the top up was just short of ridiculous. Plus, it felt "sloppy" during the test drive.
Now, if someone was short and only looking for a "cruiser", then Ford may have had more buyers. But, as stated, for $40K, it didn't offer enough of anything to make me part with my cash.
The Mustang, on the other hand, offered more of everything that I expected when I test drove it. It looked great, inside and out, was built every bit as well as the Lincoln I had ridden in, and as an added bonus, was cheaper than anything else remotely close to it's performance, build, styling, handling, etc class.....not by hundreds, but by thousands of dollars.
A lot of things kept the T-bird from being a long-lasting hit.
They only came in convertible form. To remove its' hard top was a complicated two-person job (the top weighs over 100 pounds), and the top could not be stored in the car. So, if you are away from home and want to put the top down, but the hard top is on the car, tough.
Also, it was very small compared to previous T-birds. No room for anything. At least the previous generation had some kind of back seat and usable trunk.
Interesting because the 1955 to 1957 Tbird was a great SALES success back then. Easily outselling Vette of the same years. My wife's 1966 vette was a 2 person job to remove the hardtop as well, remember that. Pain!
Various posts have been removed for personal insults and attacks. If the attacks and insults continue, the offending members will lose the ability to post in this discussion.
" 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"
This is incorrect as far as the GTO is concerned. The limiting factor was factory capacity and UAW dissapproval. The Holden plant is running at FULL production capacity so they only had room to assemble 18,000 units in '04 no matter how many Pontiac may have been able to sell. This was cleary stated BEFORE the GTO was even onsale here. This is why there was so little marketing for this car and fueled the dealer ADM markups which desperately hurt the cars launch.
Now that more folks are aware of this cars existance, the 05's are selling at a faster rate so GM has extended their build year into July before switching over to the 06's. There are only a few hundred 04's left nationwide, almost all automatics. There is still hope for an 07 or 08 GTO.
graphicguy writes........For '05, GM dropped production of the GTO to 12K units. So far through March, they've sold under 3,000 '05 units......
I read that the GTO has sold 3,271 units through March which is above target. That in March alone they sold 1,375 units. On target.
They are building a 2006 GTO, production starts in August. I believe August 24th. The 2005 GTO can NO longer be ordered and ends production in June. The dealers in my area are sold out, won't get anymore until late May.
The numbers you're quoting include leftover '04 units. '04 units were about 30% of that sales number....including the monthly March sales. Based on that, '05 GTO sales are below the reduced production plan.
Hey graphicguy. I hope I don't draw the ire of the hosts, but I have to point out a number of incorrect facts, assumptions and mis-statements in your posts. I follow another GTO-related site pretty well, and there are some Pontiac insiders who post there. Here are some facts posted there (site has forums so Edmunds won't let me directly link to it):
1) Holden WANTED to make 18k cars for export. Production startup issues (they had to add a third shift to the factory to increase production) and teething issues led to them only being able to make a little over 16k cars in more than a year's worth of production time. It was production, not sales, why there were fewer cars built (the production run ran from September '03 to September '04) than planned (if sales was the reason, they would have stopped building '04's sooner).
2) Yes, Pontiac did reduce '05 production to 12k. It wasn't just about sales, though. The Elizabeth, Australia plant where the GTOs are produced needs to shut down for conversion over to Zeta (and the plant won't be able to build coupes after that conversion). That shutdown is scheduled for the end of 2005/early 2006. If they could only build 16k vehicles in a year, how many can they build in 14 more months of production?
They are TRYING to build 12k for this year. Dealer order cutoff was to be the end of March, with '05 production ending in June and '06 cranking up sometime after that. Dealer orders are still taking place, and '05 production is now scheduled well into July.
3) Yes, '05's are selling quite well, above Pontiac's expectations. They only started building cars in mid-to-late October, and they didn't start arriving at dealers in mid-January. We only have sales through March, so that's 2 1/2 months of selling (when 50% of the U.S. has cold and snowy weather = RWD sport coupes not necessarily on people's minds) and they've sold just under 3k 2005's. There are many people on "the other site" who are waiting for their cars, and some are looking but cant' find them at dealers. It's under a 60-day supply - which is considered "good" in the industry. They would sell more if dealers had more cars...
4) Posters on the other site have discussed the 2 new colors for '06 (some GM dealers found the info on-line in their order book). If that doesn't tell you the '06 is coming (other than a post from the product manager stating there WILL be an '06 GTO), I don't know what does.
5) You are right that Zeta for the U.S. is up in the air. GM knows it still needs RWD coupes and sedans, and there is some discussion/debate going on inside GM about what platform to use - a cheapened version of Caddy's Sigma, a cheaper/re-engineered Zeta, an extended Kappa (Solstice/Sky), and/or a new platform. Don't expect to see these vehicles until 2008/2009 at best, but they are not "DEAD" (is the Mustang Cobra dead because there is no 2005 version of the car?).
I respect your decision to buy a Mustang over a GTO. But you don't need to defend your decision by spouting incorrect information to "trash" the GTO.
The growth of this forum is truly amazing. No body was talking about GTO last year. Suddenly, the new Mustang has made GTO a focus of a discussion. Long live Mustang. I hope GM stops wasting time rebadging Equinox as Torrent or TrailBlazer as Ascender and starts building a new generation Camaro. GM should also stop that SS thing. Build a fantastic Camaro - don't build a dull Camaro and then later on drop a big engine in it and stick a SS badge at some odd place on the body. And, I also hate that Saturn red line mess - people can't tell from distance what's red line and what's not. Build red hot vehicles separately and don't mix them with other dull ones. OOPS! I made my point - don't build a GTO that looks like Grand Prix :-)
No offense taken.....didn't think I was "trashing" the GTO, either.
Just posting the numbers I researched.
From a business perspective and being involved in business decisions myself on a daily basis, to use a cliche, "it's all about the numbers".
Selling less than 3,000 '05 units in the first 3 months of the year is hardly what I'd call "selling well", however.
If I put myself in GM's shoes, and I'm looking for ways to cut the number of models I offer with the least chance of sales success (or revenue), I'd have to look long and hard at whether the GTO is viable. Not whether it's a good product, because I think it gives GM an offering in a space where they have scant little to give to the customer. F-Bodies are gone, leaving that space to the Mustang, and perhaps the upcoming Charger.
Once GM vacated that space, and the ensuing agreement with the Canadian gov't, GM is caught in a quandary. The market space is "hot" right now as the evidence points out with the overwhelming success of the '05 Mustang. But, GM can't bring out another Camaro....even if they started today in designing one. There's lots of talk about something along the lines of a "Zeta lite" in that space, but it won't be called a Camaro (and I doubt it will be a GTO, either).
That leaves the GTO to carry that banner in that market space. '04 sales were disappointing for no other reason than GM couldn't sell the 18K they had planned to produce. They ended up producing around 16K based on that fact. They lowered sales goals to 12K for the '05 model year. Maybe sales will hit that reduced number, maybe they won't. Personally, I think it's too early to tell, yet.
If, as you say, they couldn't get the '05 GTO to the market until January (which I think was done on purpose to help clear out the '04 leftovers), then GM has even bigger issues with the model than just sales.
But, as you point out, even if GM was able to sell every GTO they were capable of producing, it's still a niche model. GM isn't set up to make a profit by selling niche models. They are nice to have for "image" sake, but that's about it.
But, GM's business model is built on volume. They got a little lost by trying to put some "niche" models in their line-up (same as Ford did with the T-Bird). Along with the SSR, the GTO would probably be in the same category as a niche model. I view it as a "test model" for GM. It didn't test well as far as sales. Although, from what I can tell, those that actually bought a GTO, like it. Regardless of the GTO legacy debate, where it's made, its content, etc, the two things I think have hurt the GTO most were its styling and its pricing.
We can debate the merits (or demerits) of the model all we want or why it isn't the sales success GM had hoped for. If the GTO had sold all 18K of the '04 models with little to no rebates, I'm certain GM would have found a way to up production for the '05 model. Instead, they scaled back.
I don't see much in the way of GM doing anything to support the GTO, either (which they probably would have done more of if the '04 had sold well). That fact alone tells me that they have no plans to bring a new one out (thinking '07, here). It just stands to reason that if they aren't going to support current product, then there's little reason to believe they'll support bringing out a new model. My best guess is that GM is looking at the Chrysler 300 as to where their RWD platform will be heading and the volume is....not in the coupe market. They also seem to have the same debacle as Ford in that they want to sell more trucks, where the margins are higher.
When I was in the market, I debated with myself whether a GTO would make a good car buying decision. One of the key factors (among many others) was the fact that GM wasn't doing much to support the GTO and the prospect of them doing so in the future was, at best, cloudy.
Of all the makes I've bought in my lifetime, I'd say Pontiac and Toyota scored with me the most. Matter of fact, my current Mustang is the first "new" Ford I've ever bought (have had some used ones, though).
Selling less than 3,000 '05 units in the first 3 months of the year is hardly what I'd call "selling well", however.
To repeat and emphasize a point I made in my previous post, the GTO DID NOT ARRIVE AT DEALERSHIPS UNTIL MID-JANUARY. So 3000 is in 2 1/2 months, NOT 3. And it was WINTER here - some parts of the country (Michigan, Ohio) are still seeing snow - not exactly what makes people want to go out and buy a RWD sports coupe. You may look on GM BuyPower and see 2005 GTO's at your dealerships, but, if you went to an actual dealer, you'd find few '05's on the lots (they show up on BuyPower when they hit the U.S., not when the dealer actually gets the car).
Normal new-car production in Australia starts in September (unlike July/August in the U.S.). Remember, it's winter down there in June/July/August, and summer starting in December.
Also remember it takes 2 to 2 1/2 months for the cars to get built, checked out, get enought to fill a boat, load it, sail over here, unload it, check the cars out, put spoilers on, get them on rail cars to Kansas City, get them to regional GM distribution centers, and then truck them to dealers.
But I guess you won't take GM employee "LFP" posting that the GTO is selling above expectation to mean anything. Fine, ignore the facts, believe what you want to believe. I am done trying to explain facts to you. Enjoy your Mustang, and I'll enjoy my GTO.
I don't know who "LFP" is. Is that someone from GM marketing?
True.......Sports Coupes always sell less in the winter climates during the winter months. I live in the OH area. That's why I said it's probably still too early to make any concrete judgements....only what is known up until this point. I suspect that sales have picked up somewhat based on the GM $1,000 "hot button" rebates.
Using your time frames, GTO production started in Aus in Sept. Given 2-2.5 months to get built, shipped, prepped and delivered to dealers would have put them on the ground at dealerships here somewhere in the end of November/first part of December time frame.
Around OH, you can find just about any GTO color combo you could want if you do a dealer search or take a trip to the dealer lots.
Mustang GTs are practically non-existent for all intents and purposes in the same geographic area and have been that way since they began arriving at the dealerships (around the first part of November around here).
I think I might be ill after reading that write up. O.K., lets sum it up, the old Fox platform Bullitt was a great bargain and a great success for $27K, it makes you feel like Steve McQueen. Ford pushed the Bullitt as some collectors piece with numbers and all. Personally, If I got lured into buying a Bullitt Mustang I'd be an unhappy Camper at this point.. Carroll Shelby likes the Mustang. Wow, thats a news flash. Yeah, the Mustang "got to have" factor, that was certainly covered in the write up. Criticism of the Camaro was you couldn't tell the Z-28 from the RS. I hate to break the news to Mustang owners but you can't tell the GT apart from the Hertz Rent a Car V-6. Oh yeah, the GT has fog lights in the grill, I forgot. That article didn't say a whole lot except that people are willing to buy the lesser performing of the 2 cars because of the "got to have" factor. Just like they "had to have" the T-bird which is coincidentally built on the same platform. And I keep hearing about this 300 HP for 25K with the GT. Who actually paid 25K for thier GT.
I just thought that article segued well into what we were discussing regarding GM's mis-steps in recent years regarding the demise of their V8 coupes.
Matter of fact, there were some errors in the article. Ford had planned to sell 150,000 '05 Mustangs (not 100,000). Of those, 50,000 were to be GT versions. Even though they upped production to 190,000 + units, they still can't keep up with demand.
The article only made a passing reference to the GTO (admittedly, it wasn't flattering).
It just points out the failures of GM's stragegy vs Ford's strategy with the Mustang.
The public didn't buy the idea of a Monte Carlo SS with a V6 engine. The public didn't buy the idea of a Corvette engine in a heavy, mundane body.
The Mustang, on the other hand, put a great performing machine under a sexy body and priced it right. I know of two people who bought stripped Mustang GTs (which really aren't stripped at all since they come standard with so much) for $25K. I personally bought mine totally loaded for $25.5K (granted, those prices were paid in the dead of winter before it was clear what a sales hit the '05s would become).
Still, Ford hit the price point dead right. Even at MSRP, with Mustang GTs you get as good or better performance (short of a Corvette) than anything else in GM's stables for thousands of dollars less.
Interestingly, the article alludes to both GM and Ford losing the market for a while to the Japanese marks. While those cars are good in their own right (sexy body over a performance platform), they can't say the Mustang can't play in that sandbox anymore.
GM has a ways to go. The coupe market is just one of those areas that need attention. What we don't know is where what they plan on doing now. They've got to notice the runaway success of the Mustang. They don't have anything to really counter it currently on the market. A new Camaro/Firebird is nowhere on the horizon. Everything they've tried to put on the market as a counterpoint to the Mustang has been a disappointment. The single platform that could be competitive has been "put on ice" (Zeta) for North America.
So what does GM do?
There's talk of "Zeta lite" for something that might resemble a new Camaro (but certainly wouldn't be called a Camaro). They could turn the Bowling Green plant lose to build something off of the Corvette platform (other than the Caddy), but that would dilute their halo performance car.
They could do something with the Solstice/Sky platform, but that might be impossible since the Solstice/Sky wasn't conceived to allow a V8 under the hood.
Or, as they seem to be doing now, concede the space to the Mustang and continue bringing out more truck models.
I think the answer for Pontiac is to use a current platform. The Grand Prix will get a V8 (with the multi-displacement engine). They can spread their development costs over many different iterations (V6, blown V6, or V8), but that's still not a coupe. Plus, it's still FWD (which should be interesting in how it handles with a V8 under the hood). But even that piece will be priced well over $30K with the V8.
"(short of a Corvette)" - or heavy, Corvette-engined coupe.
I had no allegiance to either car prior to buying a 2004 GTO, (actually never owned a GM product before, couple of Fords). It was just clearly a more powerful, slightly faster car than the GT, with a nicer interior and a bigger back seat. How many other people buy it or the GT makes not one bit of difference to me. If it did, I'd have bought an SUV.
I'm just happy that we have some compelling choices considering when I first started driving, the number of "hot performance" cars was, at best, dismal.
Those are the same reasons I bought the GTO over stang too. Likewise I don't care how many people buy a Mustang either, BIg deal. Doesn't faze my life one way or the other. Buy what you like. I drove both cars and liked GTO better and could afford the extra $$ it cost. My opinion & choice. Very happy and satisfied with my GTO. I would buy another. Both cars are good choices for dif. reasons. To each their own.
I think you and I both have gone over inch, feature, cost, bennefit, wart, beauty mark, performance, design, engineering parameter, color, market niche, intention, etc that either the Mustang or GTO can possibly put forth (or detract from).
I think we can agree that the tires on both cars are black, can't we?
Graphic Guy, by your own admission in previous posts you stated that you go by the car rags to determine performance. This weeds out driver skill, unstated mods, etc. The Car and driver comparo of the 05 GTO vs. Mustang GT had the GTO the clear winner in overall performance. They made the GT the winner because of the "GTH" factor, this earned them the most negative response they've ever recieved in mail etc. This makes it hard to understand how you have dismissed the GTO as being too Buick like to compare to your Mustang. To make it even more bewildering is that you have elevated your Mustang to Corvette status??? Your Mustang may have been cheaper, but to insist it outperforms the same year GTO is simply ignoring the facts.
GM's Holden subsidiary in Australia will continue to develop the Rear Drive Zeta platform. Hopefully they some how ressurrect it here. Otherewise the Aussies get the cool Rear drive cars again that we don't, LOL!
Both the GTO, and the Mustang GT, are (IMO) "fast". They are BOTH certainly quicker and more driveable that anything affordable and available to most people 10 years ago. So I guess we have to ask ourselves (or at least, I've asked myself), just how "fast" is "fast enough" for my primary automobile?
I don't want to speak for gguy, but I'll certainly concede that in any hypothetical stoplight dragrace between a GTO and a Mustang GT, the GTO will certainly hold the mechanical advantage (given equal drivers and equal launches, the GTO certainly should win).
Is this the reason why you've plunked down roughly $30k for a new car? I don't want to sound too judgemental, but isn't that a bit juvenille?
The GTO is not very common. Some folks here have posted that this very 'exclusivity' is one of the GTO selling points. But what this means is that the odds that gguy will happen to line up with somebody in their '05 GTO at a stoplight on any kind of a regular basis are essentially nil. So why should he, or any other potential owner of a Mustang have to 'worry' about what happens if they encounter a GTO? For that matter, the odds are much HIGHER that he'll line up with somebody in a modified Fox-body Mustang who is capable of sucking his headlights out and who spent substantially under $25k in the process. Does this mean that the purchase of an '05 Mustang GT was a bad decision? Only if you still wear a mullet.
The last generation Camaro had it all over the Mustang in performance. It....didn't....matter. The F-bodies are DEAD and they sold many, many more units than the GTO. When will you GM fanatics get it through your heads that performance IN AND OF ITSELF does not equal success in this market? Yes, the GTO has 400 hp. Great. Super. Will a stock GTO do 0-60 or the 1/4 a few 1/10's faster than the Mustang? Yes. Sure. Whatever. And so long as that is all you guys can talk about, then it'll be RIP GTO after the '06 models.
Direct comparison between the '05 Mustang GT and '05 GTO.
Steering: The GTO’s steering, while fine on its own, felt hugely lumbering and slow compared to the Mustang’s.......In other words, where the GTO’s steering wheel—and everything it’s connected to—felt heavy, muddy, even numb, the Mustang’s had a sharp, immediate turn-in feel and bristled with visceral sensations of the road at every turn.
Braking: The Mustang’s brakes felt better, too, even though both cars required 128 feet to stop from 60 mph. After several deceleration runs the GTO’s brakes started to shimmy on application, indicating a warp or other negative wear pattern; the Mustang’s felt fine.
Overall handling: Overall, the difference with the Mustang mechanicals was you could actually feel what they were doing; the GTO, in the immortal words of one staffer, felt like it was wearing an auto-condom.
...there's some good quotes in there, that sum up my points thus far:
"For our tastes, in the end, pure might doesn’t necessarily prove right. For all the GTO’s brute power—its liter-and-a-half, 100-horse advantage, its quarter-second-quicker 0-to-60-mph time, three-tenths- quicker quarter-mile time—not to mention the car’s hefty price premium, it simply cannot match the Mustang for feel, style or value.
Overall, the Mustang backs up its looks with a handling performance that puts to shame the GTO’s. Any minor shortfall at the strip was worth how brightly the Mustang took on the cones. Sound the bell, it’s no contest: The winner is the Mustang GT."
Straight-line performance - Both are good, GTO is a bit quicker. Handling - Both are good, Mustang is a bit better. Steering - Both are good, Mustang is a bit more responsive. Braking - Have essentially the same stopping distances, Mustang has better pedal feel. Mileage - these are not economy cars..... Room - both are coupes, GTO has more rear seat space. Comfort - highly subjective. Trunk - both are small, Mustang is larger Price - Mustang has MSRP advantage but street prices are probably close. Style - highly subjective. Exclusivity - GTO clearly ahead. Fun to drive - obviously, "fun" varies from driver to driver, highly subjective
Everyone has different criteria for choosing which car is "best" for them. Everyone places different emphasis on different aspects. For me, if I HAD to choose between these two cars, and these two cars only, it would have to be the GTO. Why? I need to haul around a couple of kids and the rear-seat room is better in the GTO. Fortunately, my options are not limited to just these two cars. If rear-seat room was not an issue, for ME, I would chose the Mustang simply because I value handling/style above pure straightline performance. But this doesn't make the Mustang better for EVERYONE, just for me.
Motor trend on the $70k Mercedes CLK 55 vs the 350hp 2004 $35k Pontiac GTO.
..........The Pontiac GTO provides perhaps 85 to 90 percent of the goodness-for less than 50 percent of the cost. It isn't that this odd-duck matchup says anything disparaging about the CLK55. It just shows the praiseworthiness of the GTO. Proff Positive that, depending on your tase and budget, LESS can sometimes BE MORE..........
Pretty impressive to even be compared to a car like this. Mustang was never compared to cars like this.
Good points.. I only disagree with you on the Comfort, from my driving, the GTO is the more comfortable better riding car, esp for long trips. Felt like more of a luxury car then Mustang. Seats felt better too. My opinion. For me I have a kid, so the GTO worked out better, more room back there. Both cars make good choices. Depends what you want.
"But this doesn't make the Mustang better for EVERYONE, just for me."
Right on!
If you want a true "sleeper" that will win at the strip and can still take some turns, and need a bit more room inside, pick the GTO.
If you want to be seen, and would glady trade excess horses for increased handling, and you don't plan on doing much with the backseat, pick the Mustang.
Brushbandit writes...... I hate to break the news to Mustang owners but you can't tell the GT apart from the Hertz Rent a Car V-6. Oh yeah, the GT has fog lights in the grill, I forgot......
LOL! Speaking of that the Hertz Rental car place by me that I just passed at lunchtime has three 2005 Mustangs in it's lot for rental, all V6 hardtops. I wonder how many of the Mustangs are fleet/rental sales?
Yes and No, CLK55 is TWICE the price of GTO. GTO is NOT twice the price or that much more $$ then comparable equipped Mustang. $5k dif to avg buyer, maybe less
So for me the GTO with my GM employee discount, $1k rebate, Gm credit card points etc and $1k internet pricing was not much more then a loaded Mustang V8 which goes for about $28k to $29k. Pretty close in price. So to me the GTO was the better buy. Too bad I don't have a Ford discount.
If you can still find or get one you can get a 2004 Leftover 350hp GTO for $25k or less. I have heard as low as $23k. So in reality the GTO could be considered the better buy. At least to me. All the Ford dealers by me are getting MSRP or higher on the GT's.
Sounds like there is a lot of reliability problems with the NEW 2005 Mustang or at least the early ones from what I saw on the Ford Mustang 2005 Problems and Solutions boards..... WAY MORE then GTO. I don't see many on GTO here on edmunds. Then again I would NEVER buy a first year car anyway new. I have done that and learned the hard way. 1995 Aurora V8 and 1997 GTP.
Some excerpts.......detracting from what is supposed to be a cool car. I'm advising others to wait before purchasing a 'stang until all the kinks are worked out. In my case, it looks like I've got awhile to go before the pony runs like I know it can!.....
.....I think WE ALL need to ask Ford to extend our warranties since WE ALL have so many problems!! If Ford don't we will be in deep caca!!.....
.... The Service Manager said according to a Ford Rep he spoke with, the clunk we hear when shifting from P to R is characteristic between the transmission & the driveshaft....
Numerous CD player, rear axle, GAS TANK problems, dash rattles, brakes etc. Many other ones I'm sure there are Mustangs that are fine too, but this sounds like alot of issues.
You have to remember, the GTO has been around for a few years as the Manaro in Australia so all the kinks certainly SHOULD be worked out on the GTO. Also, a lot more Mustangs have been sold here than GTO's (I thinked we've discussed that to death), so I'm not surprised that one would see more posts about quality issues.
To me, when it comes to American V-8 RWD musclecars, the straight line performance is what matters most. I want 1/4 mile, stoplight to stoplight, power. That's what muscle cars have always been about and will always be about. Don't get me wrong, I want a car that handles well and stops well and the GTO does both. Maybe I'm old school but I put an emphasis on American, cam in block, V-8 muscle. To me the GTO is the winner hands down. The GTO stealth looks are icing on the cake. I'm 43 and would feel a little rediculous in the Mustang GT. I get enough mid life crisis comments from the GTO.
I agree, I was just checking it out. Alot of unhappy campers over in the Mustang problem thread. Looks like their might be trouble in paradise. Graphic Guy Is posting around over there trying to put the fires out. Does the Mustang GT come with a fire pumper option?
True....I do use trade rag numbers to get a general idea of what any car will do before I buy it. In this instance, I looked at all the majors....Edmunds, R&T, MT & C&D. All of them had the '05 GTO about 1/10th of a sec quicker than the Mustang GT in 0-60. All of them had the '05 GTO 2/10ths quicker in the 1/4 ('04 GTOs were all a little slower than the Mustang GT). That's insignificant. Even though the '05 GTO had 100HP more than the Mustang GT, that didn't translate into any significant advantage over the Mustang GT primiarily because the GTO weighs more. I do think some of the lack of performance difference stems from the shifter in the GTO being less precise than the Mustang's, too.
I decided to drive the GTO (twice, one '04 and one '05). My "seat of the pants" told me what the numbers bear out....there was no noticeable difference in accleration. Someone suggested I look at some track results (which can be all over the map because of driver experience). Didn't see any clear cut differences there either. So, I called it a draw.
That's high praise for both cars because they are both very fast.
The real differences came when comparing steering, clutch, shifter, etc comparisons. That's where the Mustang pulled ahead. The GTO just felt "heavy" in all my drives compared to the Mustang. IIRC, someone actually said that the GTO felt like it was wearing an "auto condom" when compared to the Mustang. I concur.
They are both coupes. As such, the back seat will be hard to get in and out of in either. I opted for the much more useable trunk of the Mustang over that of the little one in the GTO.
Styling, interior, etc are all going to be subjective. Clearly, the marketplace has spoken on what the public likes. Based on the fact that GM has had a problem selling 16K (down from 18K originally slated) '04s and the fact that '05s are being rebated to sell a reduced production number (12K) tells me the GTO isn't the success that GM had hoped for. I heard someone actually say that the GTO was "sales proof". Future of the model is, at best, dicey. Mustang was slated to sell 150K units. It's popularity caused Ford to up production to 190K units (of which almost 50K will be Mustang GTs). The marketplace decides what is a success and what isn't. Clearly, the Mustang has been an overwhelming success. The GTO is in sales purgatory. History won't remember it kindly, IMHO.
Pricing has been a bone of contention. When I ordered mine, the price differential was about $4,800 in favor of the Mustang. Since the Mustang has only gained in popularity, it's clear that they bring MSRP. My MSRP was $28K (not what I bought it for). GTO's, with no employee plan are selling for $31.8 with the rebate (according to Edmunds in my zip code). That's still a $3,800 difference in the Mustang's favor. Unfortunately, you can't even get an '05 Mustang GT right now as they are pretty much sold out (with a few around here and there).
While mine has been one of the best new car purchases from a quality perspective that I've ever made, I've seen some minor issues with other's cars that were built early on. Apparently, some of the early builds had slow filling issues when refueling. Ford issued a TSB for those. Someone had some kind of sound in their automatic tranny car when shifting. Dealer will have to diagnose it as I don't have an automatic tranny. Some people had an issue with their stereo skipping tracks when playing burned CDs. Ford is replacing those with an updated CD player. That's all that I'm aware of. As said, mine was built in March and have none of those issues. I'm just trying to help other Mustang enthusiasts. None of that would be what I'd consider putting out any fires.
Considering GM being....well....GM.....let's not take some minor early issues with the Mustang and make them out to be something more than they are.
If you check on other forums you'll find out the GTO has its own problems. Some might argue more problems than the Mustang based on far fewer sales proportionally. For example:
- Paint (thin, blotches, mismatched panels) - Interior & Exterior Trim (peeling, bubbling, mismatched 5.7 & 6.0 badges) - Fit & Finish (rubbing exterior panels, rattling seats, power window issues)
The three above are the kiss of death on a $30K + vehicle IMO.
- Electronics (issues that seem to go way beyond a weak/dead battery) - Premature Clutch Failures - Tranny Whine - Leaking Freeze Plugs
And maybe my favorite of all, the front tires rubbing on the strut towers causing premature wear/replacement. Seems Pontiac increased the width of the tires by 10mm for export but didn't adjust the front suspension accordingly. LOL
You're right also. The Mustang and GTO are in different markets. Not that they don't compete. Especially out on the street. The GTO is about somewhat upscale performance. The Mustang is never considered upscale. This year the Mustang was seriously upgraded and for that you guys should be thankful. At least now you have a little class with your performance.
If only that were true out here in the Bay Area. There only only a couple per dealer and they are moving. I know, I've been checking periodically and there is new stock every time. And the only incentive is that $1K. I even got a GM card in case that incentive comes around again but it's not happening.
Just some observations in my area....The GTO is a more upscale car then Mustang. A bunch of GTO owners were former BMW owners if you read some of the GTO forums. Pretty interesting. One of my friends with a BMW 540 is going to trarde it in soon on GTO. His 3yr lease is coming up. That same crowd isn't trading in their BMW's on Mustangs. When asked he would never consider reantacarstang is what he said. His words not mine. He would neve consider a Pontiac either except GTO since it's not made here, LOL! Dash-etc, far superior then any of the other Pontiac cars or most of what GM sells. That is why it starts at $33K+. Mustang starts at $19k big dif. in demographics. Based on what I have seen, in my area more upscale wealthier people are buying GTO vs Mustang. In my area alot of the V6 stangs are driven by 17yr old high school students already, just saw 4 in the High school parking lot.
I think you are mistaken the GTO for the 2005 Mustang's electrical problems.. Post from Ford Trouble section for 2005 Mustangs....
........Help! I have a '05 mustang purchased in Jan 05. In March on a rainy morning the complete electrical system failed on the interstate. Was able to coast out of traffic without incident. Four days at the dealership they were unable to find a problem or recreate the incident. Two weeks later the problem occurred again at night in the rain and fog in Friday night traffic. Dealer is still unable to find problem after extensive water testing and says we should take the car back and let them know if we have any problems. Any ideas or suggestions...I am a little afraid of hitting the streets again. My luck may run out.......
Kind of funny that edmunds has a Forum called 2005 Mustang, Problems and solutions and it's ALREADY up to 59+ posts, yet there is NO problems and soultion for GTO on edmunds, might tell you something. From what I read on that Mustang forum, sounds pretty bad.
At least I can put gas in my GTO unlike certain Mustangs that have to be fixed or new gas tank, LOL! That is a KISS of DEATH on any car at any price. TSB on it, so Ford knows it's a problem. Pretty embarassing wouldn't you say?
Sounds like some of the Ford dealers can't Even fix the problems on the 2005 Mustang yet, LOL!
Just got my 2nd Shaker Cd put in & now none of the buttons light up night & the speed control volume doesn't work. Still have the "thunk". Service guy says he hears it, but doesn't know how to fix it
Yes, I have a 05 V6. The front end sounds like a 40 year old car that has bad bushings. And, it makes a ping or snapping sound on occation like a bracket of some sort is snapping back and forth. The dealership drove it and said Ford is aware of the problem and is working on a universal repair that should be announced at the beginning of May. It will require new suspension parts, possible new control arms. They are not announcing the problem for some reason. Probably because not all cars are having the problem.
Comments
In it's T-Bird iteration, the platform was a bust. Having the Mustang engineers take a crack at it, it's a true winner.
I've only riden in a Lincoln LS. It's a nice piece.
I test drove the T-Bird when it first came out. I was drawn to the styling, but the test drive turned me off. I'm not super tall (6') but thought the head room with the top up was just short of ridiculous. Plus, it felt "sloppy" during the test drive.
Now, if someone was short and only looking for a "cruiser", then Ford may have had more buyers. But, as stated, for $40K, it didn't offer enough of anything to make me part with my cash.
The Mustang, on the other hand, offered more of everything that I expected when I test drove it. It looked great, inside and out, was built every bit as well as the Lincoln I had ridden in, and as an added bonus, was cheaper than anything else remotely close to it's performance, build, styling, handling, etc class.....not by hundreds, but by thousands of dollars.
They only came in convertible form. To remove its' hard top was a complicated two-person job (the top weighs over 100 pounds), and the top could not be stored in the car. So, if you are away from home and want to put the top down, but the hard top is on the car, tough.
Also, it was very small compared to previous T-birds. No room for anything. At least the previous generation had some kind of back seat and usable trunk.
Personally, I'm not aware of most people using Consumer's Guide as a source to look to for rating cars.
LOL, I am not aware of anyone using magazines as the ultimate measure of a cars performance, but that sure has not stopped you
Thank you.
This is incorrect as far as the GTO is concerned. The limiting factor was factory capacity and UAW dissapproval. The Holden plant is running at FULL production capacity so they only had room to assemble 18,000 units in '04 no matter how many Pontiac may have been able to sell. This was cleary stated BEFORE the GTO was even onsale here. This is why there was so little marketing for this car and fueled the dealer ADM markups which desperately hurt the cars launch.
Now that more folks are aware of this cars existance, the 05's are selling at a faster rate so GM has extended their build year into July before switching over to the 06's. There are only a few hundred 04's left nationwide, almost all automatics. There is still hope for an 07 or 08 GTO.
For '05, GM dropped production of the GTO to 12K units. So far through March, they've sold under 3,000 '05 units.
So, they still aren't hitting even the reduced number for sales.
Zeta platform, which the '07 GTO was to be based has been put on ice for North America. That means no updated GTO past '06 (if they build an '06 GTO).
I guess you can call that "limited run" if you want. But, it's for the wrong reasons.
I read that the GTO has sold 3,271 units through March which is above target. That in March alone they sold 1,375 units. On target.
They are building a 2006 GTO, production starts in August. I believe August 24th. The 2005 GTO can NO longer be ordered and ends production in June. The dealers in my area are sold out, won't get anymore until late May.
I hope GM actually brings out '06 GTOs.
About 48 to 50 GTO's were destroyed/damaged. It happend out in Blairstown, IA in middle April. Bummer!
....."You didn't order a yellow GTO, did you?" Sheriff Randy Forsyth said. "We saw one of those.".... One of the quotes from the story!
I hope someone has good insurance....either GM or the rail carrier.
1) Holden WANTED to make 18k cars for export. Production startup issues (they had to add a third shift to the factory to increase production) and teething issues led to them only being able to make a little over 16k cars in more than a year's worth of production time. It was production, not sales, why there were fewer cars built (the production run ran from September '03 to September '04) than planned (if sales was the reason, they would have stopped building '04's sooner).
2) Yes, Pontiac did reduce '05 production to 12k. It wasn't just about sales, though. The Elizabeth, Australia plant where the GTOs are produced needs to shut down for conversion over to Zeta (and the plant won't be able to build coupes after that conversion). That shutdown is scheduled for the end of 2005/early 2006. If they could only build 16k vehicles in a year, how many can they build in 14 more months of production?
They are TRYING to build 12k for this year. Dealer order cutoff was to be the end of March, with '05 production ending in June and '06 cranking up sometime after that. Dealer orders are still taking place, and '05 production is now scheduled well into July.
3) Yes, '05's are selling quite well, above Pontiac's expectations. They only started building cars in mid-to-late October, and they didn't start arriving at dealers in mid-January. We only have sales through March, so that's 2 1/2 months of selling (when 50% of the U.S. has cold and snowy weather = RWD sport coupes not necessarily on people's minds) and they've sold just under 3k 2005's. There are many people on "the other site" who are waiting for their cars, and some are looking but cant' find them at dealers. It's under a 60-day supply - which is considered "good" in the industry. They would sell more if dealers had more cars...
4) Posters on the other site have discussed the 2 new colors for '06 (some GM dealers found the info on-line in their order book). If that doesn't tell you the '06 is coming (other than a post from the product manager stating there WILL be an '06 GTO), I don't know what does.
5) You are right that Zeta for the U.S. is up in the air. GM knows it still needs RWD coupes and sedans, and there is some discussion/debate going on inside GM about what platform to use - a cheapened version of Caddy's Sigma, a cheaper/re-engineered Zeta, an extended Kappa (Solstice/Sky), and/or a new platform. Don't expect to see these vehicles until 2008/2009 at best, but they are not "DEAD" (is the Mustang Cobra dead because there is no 2005 version of the car?).
I respect your decision to buy a Mustang over a GTO. But you don't need to defend your decision by spouting incorrect information to "trash" the GTO.
Respectfully submitted,
--Robert
Just posting the numbers I researched.
From a business perspective and being involved in business decisions myself on a daily basis, to use a cliche, "it's all about the numbers".
Selling less than 3,000 '05 units in the first 3 months of the year is hardly what I'd call "selling well", however.
If I put myself in GM's shoes, and I'm looking for ways to cut the number of models I offer with the least chance of sales success (or revenue), I'd have to look long and hard at whether the GTO is viable. Not whether it's a good product, because I think it gives GM an offering in a space where they have scant little to give to the customer. F-Bodies are gone, leaving that space to the Mustang, and perhaps the upcoming Charger.
Once GM vacated that space, and the ensuing agreement with the Canadian gov't, GM is caught in a quandary. The market space is "hot" right now as the evidence points out with the overwhelming success of the '05 Mustang. But, GM can't bring out another Camaro....even if they started today in designing one. There's lots of talk about something along the lines of a "Zeta lite" in that space, but it won't be called a Camaro (and I doubt it will be a GTO, either).
That leaves the GTO to carry that banner in that market space. '04 sales were disappointing for no other reason than GM couldn't sell the 18K they had planned to produce. They ended up producing around 16K based on that fact. They lowered sales goals to 12K for the '05 model year. Maybe sales will hit that reduced number, maybe they won't. Personally, I think it's too early to tell, yet.
If, as you say, they couldn't get the '05 GTO to the market until January (which I think was done on purpose to help clear out the '04 leftovers), then GM has even bigger issues with the model than just sales.
But, as you point out, even if GM was able to sell every GTO they were capable of producing, it's still a niche model. GM isn't set up to make a profit by selling niche models. They are nice to have for "image" sake, but that's about it.
But, GM's business model is built on volume. They got a little lost by trying to put some "niche" models in their line-up (same as Ford did with the T-Bird). Along with the SSR, the GTO would probably be in the same category as a niche model. I view it as a "test model" for GM. It didn't test well as far as sales. Although, from what I can tell, those that actually bought a GTO, like it. Regardless of the GTO legacy debate, where it's made, its content, etc, the two things I think have hurt the GTO most were its styling and its pricing.
We can debate the merits (or demerits) of the model all we want or why it isn't the sales success GM had hoped for. If the GTO had sold all 18K of the '04 models with little to no rebates, I'm certain GM would have found a way to up production for the '05 model. Instead, they scaled back.
I don't see much in the way of GM doing anything to support the GTO, either (which they probably would have done more of if the '04 had sold well). That fact alone tells me that they have no plans to bring a new one out (thinking '07, here). It just stands to reason that if they aren't going to support current product, then there's little reason to believe they'll support bringing out a new model. My best guess is that GM is looking at the Chrysler 300 as to where their RWD platform will be heading and the volume is....not in the coupe market. They also seem to have the same debacle as Ford in that they want to sell more trucks, where the margins are higher.
When I was in the market, I debated with myself whether a GTO would make a good car buying decision. One of the key factors (among many others) was the fact that GM wasn't doing much to support the GTO and the prospect of them doing so in the future was, at best, cloudy.
Of all the makes I've bought in my lifetime, I'd say Pontiac and Toyota scored with me the most. Matter of fact, my current Mustang is the first "new" Ford I've ever bought (have had some used ones, though).
To repeat and emphasize a point I made in my previous post, the GTO DID NOT ARRIVE AT DEALERSHIPS UNTIL MID-JANUARY. So 3000 is in 2 1/2 months, NOT 3. And it was WINTER here - some parts of the country (Michigan, Ohio) are still seeing snow - not exactly what makes people want to go out and buy a RWD sports coupe. You may look on GM BuyPower and see 2005 GTO's at your dealerships, but, if you went to an actual dealer, you'd find few '05's on the lots (they show up on BuyPower when they hit the U.S., not when the dealer actually gets the car).
Normal new-car production in Australia starts in September (unlike July/August in the U.S.). Remember, it's winter down there in June/July/August, and summer starting in December.
Also remember it takes 2 to 2 1/2 months for the cars to get built, checked out, get enought to fill a boat, load it, sail over here, unload it, check the cars out, put spoilers on, get them on rail cars to Kansas City, get them to regional GM distribution centers, and then truck them to dealers.
But I guess you won't take GM employee "LFP" posting that the GTO is selling above expectation to mean anything. Fine, ignore the facts, believe what you want to believe. I am done trying to explain facts to you. Enjoy your Mustang, and I'll enjoy my GTO.
Outta here,
--Robert
True.......Sports Coupes always sell less in the winter climates during the winter months. I live in the OH area. That's why I said it's probably still too early to make any concrete judgements....only what is known up until this point. I suspect that sales have picked up somewhat based on the GM $1,000 "hot button" rebates.
Using your time frames, GTO production started in Aus in Sept. Given 2-2.5 months to get built, shipped, prepped and delivered to dealers would have put them on the ground at dealerships here somewhere in the end of November/first part of December time frame.
Around OH, you can find just about any GTO color combo you could want if you do a dealer search or take a trip to the dealer lots.
Mustang GTs are practically non-existent for all intents and purposes in the same geographic area and have been that way since they began arriving at the dealerships (around the first part of November around here).
Matter of fact, there were some errors in the article. Ford had planned to sell 150,000 '05 Mustangs (not 100,000). Of those, 50,000 were to be GT versions. Even though they upped production to 190,000 + units, they still can't keep up with demand.
The article only made a passing reference to the GTO (admittedly, it wasn't flattering).
It just points out the failures of GM's stragegy vs Ford's strategy with the Mustang.
The public didn't buy the idea of a Monte Carlo SS with a V6 engine. The public didn't buy the idea of a Corvette engine in a heavy, mundane body.
The Mustang, on the other hand, put a great performing machine under a sexy body and priced it right. I know of two people who bought stripped Mustang GTs (which really aren't stripped at all since they come standard with so much) for $25K. I personally bought mine totally loaded for $25.5K (granted, those prices were paid in the dead of winter before it was clear what a sales hit the '05s would become).
Still, Ford hit the price point dead right. Even at MSRP, with Mustang GTs you get as good or better performance (short of a Corvette) than anything else in GM's stables for thousands of dollars less.
Interestingly, the article alludes to both GM and Ford losing the market for a while to the Japanese marks. While those cars are good in their own right (sexy body over a performance platform), they can't say the Mustang can't play in that sandbox anymore.
GM has a ways to go. The coupe market is just one of those areas that need attention.
What we don't know is where what they plan on doing now. They've got to notice the runaway success of the Mustang. They don't have anything to really counter it currently on the market. A new Camaro/Firebird is nowhere on the horizon. Everything they've tried to put on the market as a counterpoint to the Mustang has been a disappointment. The single platform that could be competitive has been "put on ice" (Zeta) for North America.
So what does GM do?
There's talk of "Zeta lite" for something that might resemble a new Camaro (but certainly wouldn't be called a Camaro). They could turn the Bowling Green plant lose to build something off of the Corvette platform (other than the Caddy), but that would dilute their halo performance car.
They could do something with the Solstice/Sky platform, but that might be impossible since the Solstice/Sky wasn't conceived to allow a V8 under the hood.
Or, as they seem to be doing now, concede the space to the Mustang and continue bringing out more truck models.
I think the answer for Pontiac is to use a current platform. The Grand Prix will get a V8 (with the multi-displacement engine). They can spread their development costs over many different iterations (V6, blown V6, or V8), but that's still not a coupe. Plus, it's still FWD (which should be interesting in how it handles with a V8 under the hood). But even that piece will be priced well over $30K with the V8.
I had no allegiance to either car prior to buying a 2004 GTO, (actually never owned a GM product before, couple of Fords). It was just clearly a more powerful, slightly faster car than the GT, with a nicer interior and a bigger back seat. How many other people buy it or the GT makes not one bit of difference to me. If it did, I'd have bought an SUV.
I'm just happy that we have some compelling choices considering when I first started driving, the number of "hot performance" cars was, at best, dismal.
I think we can agree that the tires on both cars are black, can't we?
There's nothing we left on the table, is there?
The Car and driver comparo of the 05 GTO vs. Mustang GT had the GTO the clear winner in overall performance. They made the GT the winner because of the "GTH" factor, this earned them the most negative response they've ever recieved in mail etc.
This makes it hard to understand how you have dismissed the GTO as being too Buick like to compare to your Mustang. To make it even more bewildering is that you have elevated your Mustang to Corvette status??? Your Mustang may have been cheaper, but to insist it outperforms the same year GTO is simply ignoring the facts.
http://www.cars.com/go/news/Story.j...r=&aff=national
Now the Solstice is delayed until Fall now, geez! Apparently the assembly plant is having problems with the front facia and the convertable top.
Good article in Autoweek about the GTO.
I don't want to speak for gguy, but I'll certainly concede that in any hypothetical stoplight dragrace between a GTO and a Mustang GT, the GTO will certainly hold the mechanical advantage (given equal drivers and equal launches, the GTO certainly should win).
Is this the reason why you've plunked down roughly $30k for a new car? I don't want to sound too judgemental, but isn't that a bit juvenille?
The GTO is not very common. Some folks here have posted that this very 'exclusivity' is one of the GTO selling points. But what this means is that the odds that gguy will happen to line up with somebody in their '05 GTO at a stoplight on any kind of a regular basis are essentially nil. So why should he, or any other potential owner of a Mustang have to 'worry' about what happens if they encounter a GTO? For that matter, the odds are much HIGHER that he'll line up with somebody in a modified Fox-body Mustang who is capable of sucking his headlights out and who spent substantially under $25k in the process. Does this mean that the purchase of an '05 Mustang GT was a bad decision? Only if you still wear a mullet.
The last generation Camaro had it all over the Mustang in performance. It....didn't....matter. The F-bodies are DEAD and they sold many, many more units than the GTO. When will you GM fanatics get it through your heads that performance IN AND OF ITSELF does not equal success in this market? Yes, the GTO has 400 hp. Great. Super. Will a stock GTO do 0-60 or the 1/4 a few 1/10's faster than the Mustang? Yes. Sure. Whatever. And so long as that is all you guys can talk about, then it'll be RIP GTO after the '06 models.
Direct comparison between the '05 Mustang GT and '05 GTO.
Steering: The GTO’s steering, while fine on its own, felt hugely lumbering and slow compared to the Mustang’s.......In other words, where the GTO’s steering wheel—and everything it’s connected to—felt heavy, muddy, even numb, the Mustang’s had a sharp, immediate turn-in feel and bristled with visceral sensations of the road at every turn.
Braking: The Mustang’s brakes felt better, too, even though both cars required 128 feet to stop from 60 mph. After several deceleration runs the GTO’s brakes started to shimmy on application, indicating a warp or other negative wear pattern; the Mustang’s felt fine.
Overall handling: Overall, the difference with the Mustang mechanicals was you could actually feel what they were doing; the GTO, in the immortal words of one staffer, felt like it was wearing an auto-condom.
I could go on, but it just gets worse.....
"For our tastes, in the end, pure might doesn’t necessarily prove right. For all the GTO’s brute power—its liter-and-a-half, 100-horse advantage, its quarter-second-quicker 0-to-60-mph time, three-tenths- quicker quarter-mile time—not to mention the car’s hefty price premium, it simply cannot match the Mustang for feel, style or value.
Overall, the Mustang backs up its looks with a handling performance that puts to shame the GTO’s. Any minor shortfall at the strip was worth how brightly the Mustang took on the cones. Sound the bell, it’s no contest: The winner is the Mustang GT."
Straight-line performance - Both are good, GTO is a bit quicker.
Handling - Both are good, Mustang is a bit better.
Steering - Both are good, Mustang is a bit more responsive.
Braking - Have essentially the same stopping distances, Mustang has better pedal feel.
Mileage - these are not economy cars.....
Room - both are coupes, GTO has more rear seat space.
Comfort - highly subjective.
Trunk - both are small, Mustang is larger
Price - Mustang has MSRP advantage but street prices are probably close.
Style - highly subjective.
Exclusivity - GTO clearly ahead.
Fun to drive - obviously, "fun" varies from driver to driver, highly subjective
Everyone has different criteria for choosing which car is "best" for them. Everyone places different emphasis on different aspects. For me, if I HAD to choose between these two cars, and these two cars only, it would have to be the GTO. Why? I need to haul around a couple of kids and the rear-seat room is better in the GTO. Fortunately, my options are not limited to just these two cars. If rear-seat room was not an issue, for ME, I would chose the Mustang simply because I value handling/style above pure straightline performance. But this doesn't make the Mustang better for EVERYONE, just for me.
..........The Pontiac GTO provides perhaps 85 to 90 percent of the goodness-for less than 50 percent of the cost. It isn't that this odd-duck matchup says anything disparaging about the CLK55. It just shows the praiseworthiness of the GTO. Proff Positive that, depending on your tase and budget, LESS can sometimes BE MORE..........
Pretty impressive to even be compared to a car like this. Mustang was never compared to cars like this.
Like I said in my earlier post, comfort is subjective.
Re: comparison to CLK55 "depending on your tase and budget, LESS can sometimes BE MORE.......... "
Couldn't the same be said in a comparison between the Mustang and GTO?
Right on!
If you want a true "sleeper" that will win at the strip and can still take some turns, and need a bit more room inside, pick the GTO.
If you want to be seen, and would glady trade excess horses for increased handling, and you don't plan on doing much with the backseat, pick the Mustang.
Enjoy your ride either way!
LOL! Speaking of that the Hertz Rental car place by me that I just passed at lunchtime has three 2005 Mustangs in it's lot for rental, all V6 hardtops. I wonder how many of the Mustangs are fleet/rental sales?
So for me the GTO with my GM employee discount, $1k rebate, Gm credit card points etc and $1k internet pricing was not much more then a loaded Mustang V8 which goes for about $28k to $29k. Pretty close in price. So to me the GTO was the better buy. Too bad I don't have a Ford discount.
If you can still find or get one you can get a 2004 Leftover 350hp GTO for $25k or less. I have heard as low as $23k. So in reality the GTO could be considered the better buy. At least to me. All the Ford dealers by me are getting MSRP or higher on the GT's.
Some excerpts.......detracting from what is supposed to be a cool car. I'm advising others to wait before purchasing a 'stang until all the kinks are worked out. In my case, it looks like I've got awhile to go before the pony runs like I know it can!.....
.....I think WE ALL need to ask Ford to extend our warranties since WE ALL have so many problems!! If Ford don't we will be in deep caca!!.....
.... The Service Manager said according to a Ford Rep he spoke with, the clunk we hear when shifting from P to R is characteristic between the transmission & the driveshaft....
Numerous CD player, rear axle, GAS TANK problems, dash rattles, brakes etc. Many other ones I'm sure there are Mustangs that are fine too, but this sounds like alot of issues.
As they say, you get what you pay for.
True....I do use trade rag numbers to get a general idea of what any car will do before I buy it. In this instance, I looked at all the majors....Edmunds, R&T, MT & C&D. All of them had the '05 GTO about 1/10th of a sec quicker than the Mustang GT in 0-60. All of them had the '05 GTO 2/10ths quicker in the 1/4 ('04 GTOs were all a little slower than the Mustang GT). That's insignificant. Even though the '05 GTO had 100HP more than the Mustang GT, that didn't translate into any significant advantage over the Mustang GT primiarily because the GTO weighs more. I do think some of the lack of performance difference stems from the shifter in the GTO being less precise than the Mustang's, too.
I decided to drive the GTO (twice, one '04 and one '05). My "seat of the pants" told me what the numbers bear out....there was no noticeable difference in accleration. Someone suggested I look at some track results (which can be all over the map because of driver experience). Didn't see any clear cut differences there either. So, I called it a draw.
That's high praise for both cars because they are both very fast.
The real differences came when comparing steering, clutch, shifter, etc comparisons. That's where the Mustang pulled ahead. The GTO just felt "heavy" in all my drives compared to the Mustang. IIRC, someone actually said that the GTO felt like it was wearing an "auto condom" when compared to the Mustang. I concur.
They are both coupes. As such, the back seat will be hard to get in and out of in either. I opted for the much more useable trunk of the Mustang over that of the little one in the GTO.
Styling, interior, etc are all going to be subjective. Clearly, the marketplace has spoken on what the public likes. Based on the fact that GM has had a problem selling 16K (down from 18K originally slated) '04s and the fact that '05s are being rebated to sell a reduced production number (12K) tells me the GTO isn't the success that GM had hoped for. I heard someone actually say that the GTO was "sales proof". Future of the model is, at best, dicey. Mustang was slated to sell 150K units. It's popularity caused Ford to up production to 190K units (of which almost 50K will be Mustang GTs). The marketplace decides what is a success and what isn't. Clearly, the Mustang has been an overwhelming success. The GTO is in sales purgatory. History won't remember it kindly, IMHO.
Pricing has been a bone of contention. When I ordered mine, the price differential was about $4,800 in favor of the Mustang. Since the Mustang has only gained in popularity, it's clear that they bring MSRP. My MSRP was $28K (not what I bought it for). GTO's, with no employee plan are selling for $31.8 with the rebate (according to Edmunds in my zip code). That's still a $3,800 difference in the Mustang's favor. Unfortunately, you can't even get an '05 Mustang GT right now as they are pretty much sold out (with a few around here and there).
While mine has been one of the best new car purchases from a quality perspective that I've ever made, I've seen some minor issues with other's cars that were built early on. Apparently, some of the early builds had slow filling issues when refueling. Ford issued a TSB for those. Someone had some kind of sound in their automatic tranny car when shifting. Dealer will have to diagnose it as I don't have an automatic tranny. Some people had an issue with their stereo skipping tracks when playing burned CDs. Ford is replacing those with an updated CD player. That's all that I'm aware of. As said, mine was built in March and have none of those issues. I'm just trying to help other Mustang enthusiasts. None of that would be what I'd consider putting out any fires.
Considering GM being....well....GM.....let's not take some minor early issues with the Mustang and make them out to be something more than they are.
- Paint (thin, blotches, mismatched panels)
- Interior & Exterior Trim (peeling, bubbling, mismatched 5.7 & 6.0 badges)
- Fit & Finish (rubbing exterior panels, rattling seats, power window issues)
The three above are the kiss of death on a $30K + vehicle IMO.
- Electronics (issues that seem to go way beyond a weak/dead battery)
- Premature Clutch Failures
- Tranny Whine
- Leaking Freeze Plugs
And maybe my favorite of all, the front tires rubbing on the strut towers causing premature wear/replacement. Seems Pontiac increased the width of the tires by 10mm for export but didn't adjust the front suspension accordingly. LOL
........Help! I have a '05 mustang purchased in Jan 05. In March on a rainy morning the complete electrical system failed on the interstate. Was able to coast out of traffic without incident. Four days at the dealership they were unable to find a problem or recreate the incident. Two weeks later the problem occurred again at night in the rain and fog in Friday night traffic. Dealer is still unable to find problem after extensive water testing and says we should take the car back and let them know if we have any problems. Any ideas or suggestions...I am a little afraid of hitting the streets again. My luck may run out.......
At least I can put gas in my GTO unlike certain Mustangs that have to be fixed or new gas tank, LOL! That is a KISS of DEATH on any car at any price. TSB on it, so Ford knows it's a problem. Pretty embarassing wouldn't you say?
Just got my 2nd Shaker Cd put in & now none of the buttons light up night & the speed control volume doesn't work. Still have the "thunk". Service guy says he hears it, but doesn't know how to fix it
Yes, I have a 05 V6. The front end sounds like a 40 year old car that has bad bushings. And, it makes a ping or snapping sound on occation like a bracket of some sort is snapping back and forth. The dealership drove it and said Ford is aware of the problem and is working on a universal repair that should be announced at the beginning of May. It will require new suspension parts, possible new control arms. They are not announcing the problem for some reason. Probably because not all cars are having the problem.