Ford Mustang (2005 and Newer)

graphicguy · April 2005

I'm not intending to flame. Just going through my thought process when looking at both the GTO and the Mustang.

Pricewise, my Mustang under Ford X plan was ~$25,600. Only options I didn't get was an automatic trans and the Shaker 1000 stereo (Shaker 500 is mighty fine for me). My GMS/GMO price would have been ~$30,200 for an '05 GTO 6M. That's a hefty $4,600 swing.

If you want to compare MSRP's ....My Mustang's was $28,050. GTO M6 was $33,690.....again, a hefty swing of $5,640 in the Mustang's favor.

Styling has been debated to death. I really like the Mustang's. At best, I was lukewarm about the GTO.

Steering of the Mustang was much more to my liking (being more responsive) than the GTO's. GTO brakes felt spongy to me. Shifter in the Mustang was very positive whereas the GTO's was rubbery by comparison.

Having driven both, the IRS in the GTO doesn't offer any better handling or ride quality than the solid rear of the Mustang. Ford did a wonderful job in this dept....one of the best ride/handling tradeoffs I've experienced.

Back seat wasn't an issue to me. Both are cramped, but the GTO, did indeed have a bit more room in the back.

Sales numbers for the GTO, no matter which way you slice it, have been very disappointing. True to the point that there will be no more for '07 and maybe not even an '06 MY GTO.

As has been said before, saying that the GTO's interior is the best GM offers, is not really a high complement given GM's design of interior's in the past.

I find the Mustang's interior to be every bit as nice, maybe nicer (with the aluminum IUP package) and more ergonomic that the GTO's.

Again, not flaming....just pointing out my reasoning between the two and why I chose the Mustang over the GTO. The fact that the GTO was even on my shopping list says I was interested in the car.

tayl0rd · April 2005

About the sales; you are correct that GM can only import 18,000 of the rebadged Monaros, but they can't even sell those! Whereas the Mustang's production had to be ramped up because Ford can't even keep up with the orders (GT, that is)!

jae5 · April 2005

I have a couple questions gunit, and am not trying to start something nor flame:

Why is it that whenever some makes a comment that doesn't flatter or put the GTO on a pedestal, GTO buyers get upset? I mean, myself, akirby, graphic and others just state why they like and/or bought the Mustang over the GTO, made and gave good informative info, and yet they are jumped on by yourself and other GTO owners/buyers?

Why always bring up the horsepower / rear-end thing? Yet there's never talk about the following: 5-spd versus 4-spd auto; GTO gas-guzzler; Mustangs have 300hp on unleaded versus GTO 400hp on premium; limited selection of options for GTO; confusing and somewhat non-existent marketing for GTO. It seems the horsepower, IRS is really the only thing that comes up, that and the interior. Yeah, the interior is good and an improvement, but it really doesn't represent GMNA interiors and what we've been getting in the past and continue to get. Yes, GMNA has made improvements, but v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y.

Yes, there is only capacity for 18K per year, but didn't GM reduce the number to only 12k per year. Not sure why this number was reduced but betcha it was due to the poor response to the car.

Don't really agree with the "got-to-have-it" factor. Let's just be honest, Ford listened to the buyers and current owners, but more importantly, the designers and engineers nailed it! And not only with the car, but the marketing, the packages, options, price, the whole nine. GM didn't do that with this US GTO-Monaro. But if you want to include the "got-to-have-it", what happened with the GTO, the first RWD coupe since what 1987 - 1988? Was it all the fault of the dealers, with their crazy mark-ups, snobby attitudes and the like?; was it GM's pricing of the car, lack of market presentation, was it the introduction time? As stated previously by myself and others, the car is decent. Myself and others knew of the car years ago, but it was still good and something we wanted, not as a GTO, maybe a hot Chevy (could this be the root cause of it failing?). GM had a good car, they just half-assed it and blew it.

mschmal · April 2005

Try to imagine that its 1968 and you are watching a sci-fi movie about the future and some one is driving a Mustang. Imagine if you back in 1968 imagining what a Mustang would look like in 30 years.

In my case I would think of something that looks like the 2005 Mustang. That is the reason why I think people are so excited about the styling. It isn't really retro. The PT Cruiser is retro.

What the Mustang is, is taking what everyone knows a Mustang should look like and translating it into a car for the 21st century.

What GM did with the GTO is they took a look at current Pontiacs and translated that into a 2 door coupe. Hence you have something that looks like a Pontiac Sunfire. Ford would have gotten the same look if they had styled the Mustang along the lines of the Focus or heaven forbid the Taurus.

And as for peeople who think the GTO is a better car. Well price wise the GTO isn't really in the Mustang GT class. The GTO would be more in the same class as the 2007 Ford Shelby Mustang GT 500 Cobra. With a 450 hp from the Ford GT so :P

But then its not really going to matter because by 2007, the hottest car in the Pontiac lineup will be, what? a 3.8L pushrod powered G6? With 5k in rebates?

It took Ford 14 months to sell 1 million Mustangs, It took GM about 40 years to sell 1 million Corvettes.

GM is finished, its just a matter of time.

Mark

tayl0rd · April 2005

I own an '05 Mustang GT (premium, loaded), but in defense of GM, the Corvette is much more expensive than a Mustang and is produced in far less numbers. So it stands to reason that it took longer to reach the 1 million mark.

mschmal · April 2005

http://www.autoweek.com/printwindow.cms?newsId=102047&pageType=news

Mark

jae5 · April 2005

Thanks for the article. With the mention of "SVT boss Hau Thai-Tang..." in the third paragraph, does this mean that Coletti is not the head guy of the SVT group?

mschmal · April 2005

Here is the link to the Ford Press Kit which has everything you could want to know

http://media.ford.com/products/presskit_display.cfm?vehicle_id=1269&press_subsection_id=42- 1&make_id=92

Note to Host: I think this link is available to the general public. If it is not, kindly delete this post and accept my apologies.

Mark

mschmal · April 2005

Hau Thai-Tang, director, Ford Advanced Product Creation and SVT

Not sure if that answers your question or not.

Mark

mschmal · April 2005

This might be a better link for the press kit

http://media.ford.com/products/presskit_print.cfm?vehicle_id=1269

Mark

xkss · April 2005

GM had to pay Fiat $2 Billion. That isn't going to help GM so take that into consideration.

graphicguy · April 2005

Yeah, that GM/Fiat deal was doomed from the start. I still don't know why GM made that deal. They got....well.....essentially.....nothing for their $2B.

gunit · April 2005

No problem. I'm not upset at all, Also GTO owners get jumped on by Mustang owners too! It goes both ways! Competition, LOL! Both the GTO and Mustang are very good cars. You make some valid points. I had to pay that $1300 gas guzzler tax, that stunk! The GTO only gets 2 mpg worse then Mustang. 16/21 Mustang is 18/23 Pretty close.

GM sold 16k GTO's in 2004 and they reduced production to only 12k GTO's for 2005. I agree, probably lack of sales and no promotions or advertising!

You can use regular 87 octane gas in the GTO with no problems, you will loose a little performance. Part of the reason for Premium for best perf. in GTOis because it has a higher compression ratio 10.9 vs Mustangs 9.8.

My dealer was very nice to me, no hidden markups, got the car for about $30k even. For me, the insurance was $100 more a year for the Mustang, based on the quotes/prices from my insurance company! I have good driving record. The joke is that my 2001 Infiniti I30t is the same or higher then the GTO insurance wise? Strange!!

As I said they are both good cars! I don't think the GTO is half assed in anyway.

gunit · April 2005

mschmal wrote..........What GM did with the GTO is they took a look at current Pontiacs and translated that into a 2 door coupe. Hence you have something that looks like a Pontiac Sunfire. Ford would have gotten the same look if they had styled the Mustang along the lines of the Focus or heaven forbid the Taurus.

NO, the GTO already existed as the 2 door coupe Holden Monaro in Austrailia since it's LATE 2001 introduction. They took that car and put a Pontiac front end on it, made it left hand drive and changed some things so it would meet US crash protection standards & emmissions, otherwise it is pretty much the same Austrailian designed car. The only thing that looks different on the Holden is the front end and part of the backend.

gunit · April 2005

I understand your point. I'm not flaming either... just pointing out my reason for choosing GTO over the Mustang..... In my case I have a GM employee discount, I don't have a Ford discount, so the GTO really wasn't much more $$ then a similarly equipped Mustang!! All the Mustang dealers wanted MSRP for V8 where I checked.. wasn't getting much off. The insurance was MORE on Mustang for me. For me the backseat mattered with my son & his car seat. GTO is easier to put in a Britax seat. Also there isn't many GTO on road, where as everywhere you look you see 10 mustangs. They way I look at is that I got the same 400hp Corvette drivetrain for about $30k.

In normal driving you won't see a dif between IRS or solid rear, but in harder driving or on uneven pavement, or HARD cornering, the IRS is superior to the solid rear, that is a PROVEN FACT!! Why doesn't the vette or 350z etc use solid rear? SOlid rear is BAD in car that costs $25k to $30k. cost cutting by ford. Either way, they are both good cars!

rorr · April 2005

"GM sold 16k GTO's in 2004 and they reduced production to only 12k GTO's for 2005"

Too clarify:

They certainly IMPORTED 16k of the 2004 model, but they sold no where close to 16K during the '04 calender year. From what I understand, there are STILL many, many '04 models on the lots (in April of '05?). Which is why they imported 25% fewer for '05, despite the improvements made to the car.

The point is, the low sales numbers are NOT due to the limited supply of cars. The low sales numbers are due to low demand. The reasons for the low demand may be debated (and there are, IMO, several reasons), but the limited supply of cars should not be construed as a factor.

rorr · April 2005

"...but in harder driving or on uneven pavement, or HARD cornering, the IRS is superior to the solid rear, that is a PROVEN FACT!!"

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you. But the solid rear-end didn't seem to be much of a hindrence in the first Grand Am Cup race of the year where Mustangs finished 1-2 against their compeitition, all of whom were running IRS.

In concept, the IRS should be superior. But sometimes there is a difference between concept and execution. Sometimes IRS is used simply because of the 'old school' stigma associated with solid rear-ends.

Who could also argue that for $30+ who shouldn't have to put up with the 'old school' technology of a pushrod engine. Yet GM does pushrods engines VERY well. So, if you can accept pushrod technology, why not solid rear-ends?

akirby · April 2005

Cost cutting - sure. But that doesn't mean that a properly tuned solid rear axle can't perform just as well as an IRS setup.

Show me one negative thing that's been said about the Mustang rear suspension in any reviews or test drives. Quite the opposite in fact. One magazine said the drivers actually looked under the rear of the car to make sure nobody slipped them an IRS equipped ringer. It's that good.

tayl0rd · April 2005

[You] could also argue that for $30[K]+ [you] shouldn't have to put up with the 'old school' technology of a pushrod engine. Yet GM does pushrods engines VERY well. So, if you can accept pushrod technology, why not solid rear-ends?

touche'

Also, gunit, have you read any of the reviews on the Mustang? It's been printed several times that the solid rear of the new Mustang was designed so well that, when comparing its performance to an IRS setup, the difference was so miniscule that it didn't justify the cost of adding an IRS. And, as has been stated, with the 1-2 finish in its first Grand Am race, the solid rear works well enough to defeat IRS sprung M3s, Porsches, and their ilk.

I can see the argument from some that those cars are on older platforms, yadda, yadda... But if IRS is supposed to be so superior, that should be a moot point. Right?

graphicguy · April 2005

gunit....I'm not so certain Mustang fans are really that drawn to the GTO crowd, until someone brings the comparison up (as is done in this instance).

However, as rorr...tayl0rd and others have said, the whole IRS vs solid axle of the Mustang has proven to be a moot point. Ford did a wonderful job with the solid axle design in the Mustang that the extra complexity and cost associated with the IRS isn't needed, nor wanted. Truth is, the solid axle layout is so good, they will continue to use it for the upcoming Shelby model coming out in about 18 months.

As was pointed out, '04 GTO had production capacity of 16,000 units. The last production figures I saw was that "only" around 14,000 were produced, however. And about 500 of that "lower" 14,000 production run are still sitting on dealer's lots....even with the heavy rebating GM has done on them. About 1,300 GTOs were sold last month, but 30% of them were still '04 models (or about 400 units). So, even the 12,000 GM is scheduled to produce of the '05 models, they've sold something like 2,000-2,500 of them. '05 MY will end in August or thereabouts. That means GM has to sell 9,500-10,000 '05 GTOs in the next 5 months....that's an average of about 2,000/mo.

You can see, if sales history is any indication, not even that will happen....even with the reduced '05 GTO production schedule.

Only reason I bring this up is that it was part of my decision making process when I was looking at both cars (the Mustang and the GTO).

Truth is, even if you had decided to get a Mustang GT today, you probably would have to wait for the '06 MY to get one.....and Spring has just hit. I'd bet by the time summer rolls around, Mustang GT's will be even more scarce than they are right now. Since dealers are trying to already push their customers to '06 Mustangs, then sales for Mustangs (for the '05s and at least the beginning runs of '06 models) will continue to be very strong.

Just doing "like for like" standard equipment between the Mustang GT and similar equipment levels for the GTO nets you a Mustang GT MSRP (premium with IUP) of about $26.6K. GMS/GMO price of am '05 GTO is $30,200. That's still a $3,600 swing in the Mustang's favor.

No matter which way I did the numbers in my purchase decision, it always came out in the Mustang's favor.

My guess is, as hard as GM is trying to stay away from rebates on all their cars (not just the GTO), I don't see any way around it for them to move GTOs when push comes to shove.

Bottom line, if you like your GTO, that's all that matters.

andys120 · April 2005

Thanks for the article. With the mention of "SVT boss Hau Thai-Tang..." in the third paragraph, does this mean that Coletti is not the head guy of the SVT group?

IIRC John Coletti has retired.

graphicguy · April 2005

You may find this interesting regarding demand and production challenges with the Mustang........

http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=102118

rorr · April 2005

From the article:

" But dealers and customers shouldn't expect the mix to swing wildly to the GT, which shares its 4.6-liter engine with other Ford vehicles - notably the F-150 pickup. The automaker isn't likely to sacrifice higher-margin F-150 sales for more Mustang GTs.

The Romeo, Mich., engine plant, which makes the V-8, is not currently on overtime."

The way I read it, the availability of the GT is tied to engine production at the Romeo plant......which isn't currently running at capacity? :confuse:

canddmeyer · April 2005

I have an acquaintance who has the GTO with the six-speed manual. He loves his $35,000 car, and has pegged it already at 155mph (so he says). Although he had reservations about it's origin, he loved that he could get Corvette performance without the Vette price and have his family along for the ride. They love it too.

For me, I'd never consider the GTO. I just cannot get used to an American badged performance car not being made in America. The former SS Impala (90's) is a car I woulda considered, but GM quit making them when I was ready to buy one. The Mustang on the other hand has USA written all over it, and looks great too. Definitely the best eye candy of any vehicle out there. The Mustang is priced well too, considering you can get the 'look' without the performance for $22,000, or fully decked out for $31,000 or so. This is why I'm considering a Stang, plus the wife has given the green light to HER future new car. Based on reviews here and the few folks I've talked to, owners are tickled to death to have one of these. I've been waiting for the end of the model year for possible financing and to read if Ford made any major boo-boo's putting it together. Other than corrected gas tank and HVAC issues it appears the car is very solid.

jae5 · April 2005

Yes, the 87 octane is useable, but performance is compromised (by how much not sure) due to the ecm dialing back so there won't be any detonating, knocking, pinging, whichever term you prefer. But using the regular defeats the purpose and those buying the neo-goat probably aren't wondered about the difference anyway. But with gas in my neck of the woods ranging from $2.26 to $2.45 for regular -within a 3 mile stretch- with premium hitting $2.68 (and that's at my new place in the burbs', higher in Chi-town), that 2mpg and $0.20+ difference can be quite a bit.

Guess the insurance is higher on the Mustang due to the insurance company assuming you going to drive it like you stole it all day, every day. Or the styling of the Mustang is not as subdued as the GTO, figuring the Mustang will attract more attention. Is strange though.

But we are in agreement that both cars are decent, but I really think as a whole GM blew it in terms of the public, meaning mainly the marketing approach, advertising, pricing, intros. It's almost as if they looked at what Ford did with the Mercury Marauder and unfortunately copied the exact same steps in these regards. The product was decent, the presentation bad.

Know this is off topic, but what do you think of the conspiracy crap-o-la that Edmunds and all the magazines are blatantly against GM and the GTO. Seems that a lot of the people on the GTO forum feels that the magazines, and Edmunds, are out to get them. Not sure if they're serious or not, but their whining is comical at best.

graphicguy · April 2005

rorr....you may be right. What I took from the article is that GT demand is much higher than Ford anticipated. In addition, the Interior Upgrade Package (aluminum dash, My Color guages, etc) demand was much higher, too.

I guess you can make all kinds of assumptions about Ford wanting to keep some of the V8 production for F-150s because of their higher margins or that Ford wants to stay out of CAFE soup by selling more Mustang V6s.

Personally, I think that Mustang GTs are selling as soon as they hit the ground whether they have the IUP or not. Although most dealers have V6s in stock, they also have more V6s they have to take from Ford for every GT they sell. My dealer, if he's to be believed, said he had to take 4 V6s for every GT he sold. That seems about right. He's sold 4 GTs (one was mine) and has had a total of 18 Mustangs, in all, so far in the '05 MY. My dealer has also said that all pending orders for GTs may or may not get built. He has already got a sizeable waiting list ready to order '06s if the '05s don't get built. Matter of fact, the dealer said if all those on the '06 waiting list do follow-through on their orders (all had to submit a $500 refundable deposit), then the first 3 months of his '06 GT allotment would be sold out, too.

Bottom line, Ford can't produce enough to meet demand, regardless of the reason.....even at elevated production capacities.

jae5 · April 2005

Thanks for the clarification. That number has been jumping around. I thought the 16k number was very high, truth be told, I didn't know 14k were produced and almost sold. I thought the unsold #s were in the thousands. It seems, and no knock gunit, that the produced/sold numbers get blurred, and the fact that some of those '05 numbers includes '04 gets totally forgotten.

As stated by you graphic and others, with only about a couple thousand '05s sold in 4 - 5? months, can 10k more be sold by September (just counting the '05s)? I don't see it w/o HEAVY discounts. Do you, or anyone else for that matter, think GM will just rebadge the unsolds as '06s, or keep going and produce an '06? And if so, how would you know that your '06 is really an '06?

Guys (and gals), again, I know this was off topic but was just curious about other thoughts on this.

graphicguy · April 2005

jae...GTO conspiracy? Am I to assume that Edmunds, Road & Track, Motor Trend, Car & Driver, et.al are all conspiring against the GTO?

I think that's ridiculous.

GTO is been a swing and a miss for GM. Reasons are as numerous as they are varied. Pick none, one or all......price, styling, marketing, handling, shifting, steering, braking, stereo, etc. as the reasons.

What's clear is, Ford will sell 160,000-180,000 Mustangs for the '05 MY. GM has struggled mightily to sell about 14,000 '04 GTOs and is struggling mightily to sell the lowered production 12,000 '05 GTOs. They've started slapping rebates on the GTOs (in fairness, GM has slapped rebates on almost everything beginning today).

It's crystal how the vast majority of the buying public have voted with their dollars who was right and who was wrong with the Mustang GT vs the GTO.

As I've stated before, it's a shame since I was looking forward to a GM vs Ford muscle car war. It's not going to happen and that's too bad.

rorr · April 2005

What I took from the article posted was Ford was unprepared for the much higher demand for the GT compared to the V6; they apparently assumed the demand would be similar to the ratio for the previous generation. The article then had the little blurb about not being able to simply up production of the V8's since the 4.6l V8 is shared with the higher margin F150.

So if the demand for the V8's is higher than expected (as you noted the dealers are practically begging Ford for more GT's), I don't understand why they haven't upped production at the Romeo plant? Parts supply problems perhaps? I'm just guessing....

mschmal · April 2005

Wasn't the former SS Impala made in Canada?

I know for sure that the former Camaro/Firebird where made in Canada? I guess GM just put out an American Made sports car other than the Corvette? hehe
'
Mark

rorr · April 2005

Man, I really don't want it to look like we're piling on the GTO in here, but sometimes it's hard.

Personally, I don't know what to make of the 'conspiracy' paranoia that seem's to be running through some of the GTO faithful. It started off(?) with some semi-veiled hints that Edmunds was intentionally changing their tune re: the GTO simply because the sales numbers were flat and they might think they had egg on their face given their positive review of the '04 model. And the C&D article where the GTO won virtually every subjective performance test but lost out (big) on the "gotta have it" factor was REALLY difficult for GTO fans to swallow.

And for the life of me I don't get the fascination with 400hp in the GTO. Okay, great the '05 has 50 more hp than the '04. But it's not like the '04 sales numbers were flat because it was a slug; the thing had 350hp for crying out loud. Why do they think that the sales would turn around with even MORE power? I mean, how many people seriously considered an '04 and thought, "I dunno, seems kinda slow. Now if it only had another 50hp.....". I've yet to see a Mustang GT just happen to end up at the same red light as a GTO, so I really don't get the theoretical advantage those guys are hanging their hat on. You would have thought GM would have learned in the Mustang/Camaro wars that a hp advantage doesn't necessarily equal sales.

The GTO is a good car; however, in this class, buyers want to be NOTICED. The GTO is (at least to my eyes) virtually invisible. I've seen 4-5 cars over the last few months and everytime I see one, I think "is that a Grand Am with some kinda body kit.....oh wait, it's a GTO".

Yeah, the lack of marketing on GM's part hasn't helped, but it's not like Ford has had to run continuous commercials for the Mustang, have they......

rorr · April 2005

Personally, if I were the type to buy purely based on country of origin, I would prefer Australian made to Canadian made. I think that ideologically, Americans are much more akin to Australians than Canadians.

Just IMO.....

graphicguy · April 2005

rorr....I took it to mean that Ford doesn't want to pay overtime to produce more V8s used in the Mustang GTs. Could be a parts supply problem. Who knows?

I think what we are seeing is the strain put on manufacturing and parts ordering/production when expected demand far outstrips expected supply/production capabilities.

I'm sure Ford isn't going to complain about the problem, but they certainly should at least be putting plans in place to fix it.

I think they may be battling years upon years of cranking out cars and trucks as fast as they could and then having to rebate them afte the fact to move the inventory. They may be a tad gunshy in going back to that sort of cranking up the plant. As it stands, they've already committed to making 20,000-30,000 more Mustangs than they originally planned. Even with that, they can't meet demand.

In general, I see much less in the way of stock, on all Ford models sitting on the dealer's lots than I did even 2-3 years ago.

My dealer is medium sized. He used to have a whole back lot full of row upon row of new F-150s, Tauri, Foci, Explorers, etc sitting unsold. This year, he's got mabe a dozen F-150s, just as many 500s and Foci, few (if any) Mustangs and maybe 6-7 Escapes and as many Explorers. I've rarely seen more than two Expeditions sitting there this year and his back lot is now filled with used cars.

Not by any stretch a scientific sampling, but just an observation.

john_324 · April 2005

And note as well that rwd, high-power cars never went away in Australia the way they did here in the USA. It's amazing how many of these type cars have been available in the Aussie market, many of them made by U.S. firms. :shades:

rorr · April 2005

Noted.

I still hanker for a good Jenson Interceptor everytime I see the Road Warrior.....

rorr · April 2005

Ford also could be concerned that quality could slip a bit if they just madly cranked up production. They've fought a long hard battle to win back some public confidence on that front and wouldn't want that to slip away for some short-term gains by flooding the market while demand is hot.

Also, by keeping a lid (albiet a fairly LARGE lid if production is in the 120-130k/year range) on production, they may be able to keep the desirability level up for more than the typical 1-2 years for a new model.

Oh well, since I'll probably be buying an RX-8 sometime next year (when availability should definitely NOT be a problem) it's all moot to me anyway.

I just need to get my '66 GT fastback back on the road to scratch my Mustang itch....

jae5 · April 2005

In total agreement. I was really surprised when that nonsense got posted, that everyone in the written and online media is conspiring together to knock the GTO down. That all the mags and Edmunds got together to make a concerted effort to make the car look bad. Again, laughable at best.

Oh well, enough of that, back to the Mustang and upcoming GT500.

Do agree with you graphic, a good Ford vs GM would have been great! Don't really see a Ford vs. Chevy thing anymore except maybe Cobalt vs. Focus or something :confuse: . Don't see Chevrolet getting a version of the Sigma, (being hinted that Buick and Pontiac may get a vehicle off a version of that platform).

Knowing that there will probably be Mach 1s, possibly Bullitts, do you think there will be a 4.6 LX or a GT350 to go along with the GT500? Wonder if Ford will do a new Bosses? Or how about a k-code, hi-po 289 again (they're so close anyway @ 281c.i. - and doesn't one of the tuner's make a 289 model)? Wonder what would a GT500KR have?

rorr · April 2005

I was thinking about a new GT350 just yesterday. I think a normally aspirated version of the 4-valve 5.4 would be a natural (maybe with an aluminum block to cut back on the weight). Who knows, maybe Ford will hit 500hp with the GT500 and an easy 350hp with a GT350.

I was really hoping for a return of the 'Pony' Interior (with galloping horses across the headrest on the leather equipped models). And they could have called the upgraded gauge package the Rally Pac.

Wouldn't look for a 4.6 LX anytime soon - they can't even meet demand for GT's. No reason to offer a stripped down version.

And maybe a new Boss 302 with their cammer 5.0? Yeah, yeah, I know it's expensive but the motor in the new GT500 can't be cheap....

graphicguy · April 2005

rorr....ooohhhhh.....an RX8.....can't go wrong there. Certainly a different end of the sports car specrtum than the Mustang. Great handler, 9K RPM redline, exotic car handling, quality shifter, steering, nicely crafted....makes wonderful rotary sounds.

jae5....last article I read in MT said that with the success of the current Mustang to expect a Boss and a Bullitt. Don't know what configuration those would take. Maybe a different computer tune of the 4.6? Maybe bore and stroke the 4.6 to the legendary 5.0 moniker? Put out the 5.4 without a blower? Put a blower on the 4.6?

Cammer 5.0 would be great, but as pointed out, that's an expensive alternative.

SVT team at Ford has been revived. Those guysdo great things to cars.

In the same MT article, they said they're busy working on a new SportTrac in parallel to the Shelby. They also said to expect something north of 450 HP on the GT500, which is supposed to hit the streets almost entirely in-tact from what the showcar is.

I don't know that I'd be a customer of the Shelby GT500 if dealers do the same over-pricing as they've done on the Mustang GT. That would bring the price to 'vette levels. At $45K-$50K, the 'vette would be too tempting over the Shelby. At the projected $39K, the Shelby will be more pallatable. That said, I almost jumped into a 'vette this go round with the exception of some personal paranoia about having a fiberglass body, but hopefully, I'll get over that.

Probably more of interest to me would be some iteration of a new Boss or Bullitt. If they keep the price of them south of $30K. One thing's for certain, if this Mustang Mania continues for some time, like it looks like it will, any "special editions" will do nothing but enhance the already wildly successful '05 Mustang launch.

baggs32 · April 2005

And maybe a new Boss 302 with their cammer 5.0? Yeah, yeah, I know it's expensive but the motor in the new GT500 can't be cheap....

$39,500 for a new Ford GT motor at this place. They don't list one with an iron block and the GT500's supercharger, which is different from the GT's IIRC, but you're right, it can't be cheap.

dverespey · April 2005

A production line/ schedule is a complex thing to tinker with, especially after the production mix has been set for a model year.

I would think there are many factors, not just the enigine supplier, that are limiting what Ford can do to change the mix at this late date in the production year run. I would think that they are going to bump up GT production in the 06 run to some degree.

Given the current percentage(36% I think it said?) I doubt that anything more than 45% is possible with their current line configuration.

Disclaimer, I've never seen the Ford line or talked with anyone there, this is just conjecture on my part.

akirby · April 2005

I think it's also just as likely that this spike in GT sales will subside and the traditional mix of V6/V8 coupe/vert will return - the only question is how long it will take (few months to a year?).

CAFE also has to be playing a big role in the decision.

baggs32 · April 2005

Remember that the Mazda6 also shares the same "finishing" line as the Mustang. IIRC Mazda builds about 80k - 100k 6s each year. That's 80k - 100k fewer Mustang's that can be produced out of that plant running at full tilt.

I think this year and probably the first half of MY06 are/will be exceptional for the Mustang then things will taper off sometime next spring. At least that's what I hope as I'll be buying one in March of 07 and I don't want to have to wait for one!

stl_pony · April 2005

I was one of the lucky ones who was able to get an '05 GT in St. Louis. Ordered the first week of December, didn't arrive until a week ago. I was originally told 8 weeks, but then the dealership told me the hardware for altering the instrument panel lights were on back order.

Don't suppose you'd know of any Jeg's type shops in the St. Louis area?

levyrob · April 2005

At the Ford website, pricing a V6 convertible and similarly equipped V8 coupe, they are about the same. Disregarding dealer mark-ups and whatnot, which would you choose between a V6 soft-top and the V8 coupe? I priced automatics, with IUP, alarm, and Shaker 500.

graphicguy · April 2005

Well.....seems as if you're either a convertible person, or you're not. Can't make that call for you. I live in the Midwest. A convertible for me, while nice, would be of limited use. In the summer months, it's too hot (regularly in the '90s). In the winter, obviously, it's too cold.

Best I could hope for is about 4 weeks of use in the Spring and 3-4 weeks of use in the Fall.

I suppose that makes me a coupe person. You can't discount the performance of the GT. It's simply intoxicating. Have never driven a V6, though. So, don't know how they would compare (other than the GT being a scorcher on the road and having better handling). The V6 would probably ride better, though (not that the ride of the GT is bad in any way).

brushbandit · April 2005

Graphic Guy, a month or two ago you were on the GTO forum saying that if you couldn't get your Mustang in a somewhat timely fashion you would buy the GTO. You said the GTO was a fine performance automobile. Now from the looks of your posts the GTO is inferior in every catagory and a total bomb for GM. Is this the same Graphic Guy? I guess you ignore the performance catagorys and put major emphasis on the "got to have". Enjoy the Mustang. Thier both very nice performance cars.

gunit · April 2005

Wasn't the former 1994 to 1996 SS Impala made in Canada? I don't mind the GTO coming from down under, it still has an american Corvette LS2 engine and tranny in it, like you said I can still take my family along unlike a Corvette.

gunit · April 2005

I only use 92+ octane in the GTO anyway, my previous Pontiac GTP supercharged Coupe was premium gas only and my current 2001 I30t Infiniti requires premium for best performance too so no big deal. I only drive about 8k to 10k miles a year if that.

You are right, GM never really advertised the GTO, same thing with Mercury and the Marauder. Almost like they wanted the car to fail sales wise.

Insurance is strange because my 2005 GTO is almost the same price as my 2001 I30t for insurance, LOL! I30t has 227hp, GTO 400hp, LOL!

Not sure on the conspiracy, but I will say that those auto mags are biased against American cars. They are all in love with Honda & Toyota, they can do no wrong, LOL! They don't tell you about the Toyota V6 sludge problem from late '90's to early '00's or Honda's failing auto trannies on their V6 vehicles. Both companies extended their warranty on engines/trannys in those yrs to 7yr 100k. No car mfg is perfect. But these mags would have you believe otherwise. Oh well. I make my own decisions when I buy a car, not based on those auto mags.

graphicguy · April 2005

brush, I'm the same graphicguy! The GTO was always my 2nd choice. I've never thought the GTO was a bad car. But, it was still my 2nd choice.

At the time, my previous car had been totalled. I was in need of a car. I was weighing my need for a car immediately against getting the car I thought was better from my stand point. I love sports cars. Have owned many. The mere fact that the GTO was my 2nd choice (or even on my shopping list) can be considered praise.

That said, the reason I waited two months to get the Mustang as opposed to buying any of the readily available GTOs locally says only that I felt the Mustang was more to my liking than the GTO.

As I've said previously, I thought the shifter, brakes, handling, steering were better in the Mustang compared to the GTO. Performance between the two were almost identical (if 0-60 is your only criteria)....within a tenth or two of each other. The trunk is much more useable in the Mustang, too.

Much has been said regarding the IRS in the GTO vs the solid rear axle in the Mustang. I found that to be a total non-issue, however. Ford did a whale of a job with massaging the solid rear axle to the point that there were no ride or handling advantages with the more complex IRS in the GTO.

Personally, I think the optional aluminum interior is drop dead gorgeous in the Mustang...particularly with my red/black interior. Build quality of the Mustang is equal to any car I've seen in the same price range.

In the GTOs favor, I liked the seats a little better. The back seat has a little more room (but, that wasn't a big issue to me since it's still hard to get back there in either car). While true, the GTO's interior is one of the better ones the General has ever offered, GM's cars have never been known for nice interiors. So, the bar set for GM interior design was set low to begin with.

From a sales perspective, the GTO has indeed been a dud for GM. In the first 4 months of '05, Pontiac as sold about 3,200 GTOs, IIRC. 1/3 of those (around 1,000 of them) have been left over '04s (with huge incentives). GM wanted to sell 18,000 '04s. They only produced around 16,000 of them since they weren't selling...and they still have some of those still lingering on the lots. Then GM reduced production goals to 12,000 for the '05s. Take away the leftover '04 sales from the '05 total and Pontiac has sold about 2,200 '05 GTOs in the first 4 months of this year. For all intents and purposes, the current model year will be over in Sept, when the '06s will start hitting showrooms. That means that in the next 5 months, Pontiac has to sell 9,000 + GTOs to hit even their reduced 12,000 unit production plans. The figures don't look good from that perspective. Add to that, GM has at least delayed, if not cancelled the Zeta platform (which '07 GTOs were going to be based on) and the future isn't good for GTOs. Since '04s were slow sellers, and they were rebated heavily to begin with, doesn't make for much confidence that these cars will do well on the used market (thinking resale, here).

It's a hard sell for any used '04 with even moderately decent resale value when new '04s still sitting on the dealer's lots are selling at invoice less around $5K-$6K GM incentives slapped on them. So, if new '04s will sell for around $24K-$25K (with incentives), it's reasonable (maybe hopeful) to think that a used '04 could sell for high teens. That's a whopping $12K-$14K depriciation one model year to the next from MSRP. Based on that history, the '05 resale probably won't be much better (if better, at all).

That entered into my thinking, too.

Don't know about the "gotta have it" factor with the Mustang. I don't "gotta have" any car (OK, maybe the upcoming Bugatti). But, considering Mustang GTs and convertibles are selling at the dealers for MSRP or above, and that many dealers are already dipping into their order bank for '06 models to meet customer demand, I'd say the prospect of resale value for Mustangs is quite good. Even used GTs and convertibles are selling for MSRP. New ones have been known to sell above MSRP....and the dealers still can't keep them on the lots.....even though Ford will produce somewhere around 175,000 Mustangs, ~65,000 of those will be GTs, which are pretty much sold out for the '05 model year.

For the record, I qualify for GMO discounts. I could have bought a new '04 GTO for just under $25K (today, that would have been just under $24K with the new $1K GM incentive). I didn't pull the trigger then. I could have bought an '05 GTO for about $29.3 K if I were to buy today. I didn't pull the trigger on the '05 GTO either.

I also qualified for Ford X plan. I bought my totally loaded Mustang GT for ~$25.5K. That's a big $4K+ price difference in the Mustang GT's favor.

If you could even get an '05 Mustang GT right now, mine would have stickered at around $28K. MSRP comparisons still put the Mustang GT, totally loaded (without automatic) about $4,000 less than a GTO MSRP (including the current rebate).

To me, the choice was obvious based on all the above. The GTO came in a distant 2nd in my thinking. Not that anyone thinks the same way, nor should they.

Ford Mustang (2005 and Newer)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles