Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
Ford Mustang (2005) vs. 2005 Pontiac GTO
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Because it's still heavy and lacking some key luxury options for the segment.
Seems like the GTO consistently scores like 7/10 in most categories. Like it handles competently and with the IRS, the ride is pretty good, but it doesn't have as direct or as sharp a steering response as other cars in this class. Brakes are the same way. Not bad but not great. Same with the interior. It's "nice" and has SOME good features but is still lacking key luxury features that all cars in the low $30k range have, as well as some in the high-$20k range seem to have. Styling is another 7/10 item. It's far from ugly, but didn't really "land" with a lot of people. Not the right styling for a 50k/year car of this nature.
Actually about the only thing it scores higher than a 7/10 on is the horsepower, which is partially out-weighed ( :P ) by the excessive weight.
None of this makes it "bad", but it ends up being a 70%, which is a C-. What an interesting way to explain it.
Pedal placement is slightly off on GTO for clutch as well. It's more then linkage. Based on my few test drives. Then again I have BIG size 13 feet. Big shoe to use on clutch pedal.
I said this from the beginning, since driving that 04 back in 1/04. For the MSRP, it should have included more luxury features -OR- should have been high $20k. Not low $30k with high $20k worth of features. That was the sore spot for me, more than just about anything else. Brakes were a really close 2nd place.
My only point (I think I had a point) was that for those of us who prefer manual transmissions, sometimes we can get a bit militant about it. And offering the 'advice' to someone who prefers a nice shifting manual to just 'avoid' it by getting an automatic is.....um....counterproductive.
Quite honestly, if I was in the market for a Mustang and determined that the shifter/clutch linkage in the GT was a piece of junk but the setup in the base V6 model was a jewel, I would prefer the V6. That's how much emphasis I place on good manual trannies vs. hp.
The GTO's hp to weight ratio is much better then Mustangs. 9.4 to 1, Mustangs is 11.7 to 1. Big dif!
The brakes on GTO out stop the Mustang GT by a few feet from 60 and 70mph. 167 ft GT0 Vs 170 ft GT. For the GTO's heavy weight, it handles and brakes quite well, don't you think?
As I said I cross-shopped this car to a BMW, not a mustang.
Chevy went from a 2mm hydroformed steel frame in the C6 to a 4mm hydroformed aluminum frame in the Z06 and saved 136lbs.
You can shift the Auto yourself on the GTO, it is quite responsive when you manually shift it, goes into the next gear almost immediately. When you shift GTO auto you self from 1 to 2 and 2 to 3 with some foot into throttle you chirp the gear as soon as you shift.
Not this again! I guarantee the manual is faster in most situations, other than launch. For instance, 1/4 mile trap speed will be noticably faster in the manual. This equates to faster passing times, which I actually use more often than 0-60 or 0- anything.
It really all depends on how one defines "performance".
Is "performance" PURELY about how fast one goes 0-60 or covers the 1/4?
Or should one take into account HOW the vehicle goes about doing it? Personally, I break it down into "easy performance" and "earned performance".
"Easy performance" is a big motor, massive torque, and an automatic. No need to think or plan ahead. The only finesse involved is trying to keep your tires from going up in smoke. Go fast? Easy, mash the gas. Woo hoo! Ain't no substitute for cubic inches, baby!
"Earned performance" is a smaller motor, lower torque, high rpm power and a manual transmission. You CAN go fast in these types of cars, sometimes faster than the 'easy performance' types; sometimes slower. But (IMO) I think you ultimately have more fun because you've had to work harder. And if I'm having more fun, I really don't care if the guy next to me is a few 1/10's quicker to the next stoplight. I'm secure enough with myself to not let that bother me.
Things that you (and others) will claim you don't need and add no value to the car, thus defeating my argument. But here I go anyway-
Moonroof optional
Heated seats/mirrors (does it have heated mirrors?) optional
Automatic climate control (should be STANDARD)
Navigation optional
Better stereo optional
I will say one of the things that most impressed me about the 04 I looked at was the seats. Possibly the best I have ever used.
I was really excited about the car. But it ended up being too heavy, too soft, too expensive, too under-featured. The styling was fine for me, but you could add that for others. I can at least recognize that.
Heated seats/mirrors (does it have heated mirrors?) optional - heated seats would be nice although more people won't be driving the car in the winter (and it can be added aftermarket for about $100 a seat), I don't know of many cars that have heated mirrors
Automatic climate control (should be STANDARD) - they could not get the Monaro one recalibrated in time, but is it really that hard to twist a knob once in a while?
Navigation optional - this is the most overrated piece of equipment ever invented
Better stereo optional - than what? the 10 speaker stereo with a little tuning is more than adequate for most people
I just don't get this line of thinking. Add all those options to a G35 or 330i and your paying what, mid to high 30s? And neither of those offer anywhere near the power of the GTO.
LOL :shades:
I like the ride, luxury like, yet still firm enough. Some may say too soft, I like it. Not the feel every crack in the road and rattle your teeth ride of say a WRX-STI. Stereo is good for me, at least it doesn't take up trunk space like Shaker Mustang. Instead we have our gas tank taking up part of the trunk.
A dealer by me had the OEM Websto sunroof installed, but they were asking $2k for it. Ripoff.
BTW the top of the line F body's were going for $30k to $35k range in 2002, clearly an inferior/unrefined car to the GTO, yet knowone complains about that. The interiors were pretty poor, no room, hard to see from driver seat. The harsh-punishing ride as well. GTO really isn't overpriced in comparison
I priced out and cross shopped the 330i coupe which starts at $34k MSRP and is nearly $40k MSRP fully loaded. 3 liter 6 with 235 or 255hp. Also the G35 was $5k+ more then my GTO. I went with GTO.
If you like automatic trannys and softer suspensions, you should take a test drive of the Charger. Rode in one two days ago. Not my cup of tea, but not bad at all. Plus, it stickered right at $30K.....$29,500 with a rebate. Stylish on the outside (although I still think it should be a coupe). The interior is straight out of the 300C....very nicely done.
That gets us back to styling being one of the issues with the GTO, as well as the price of its competition (Mustang GT and now, the Charger with a hemi).
Shaker 500 doesn't take up any space in the trunk of the Mustang....only when you add the subwoofer of the Shaker 1000 (not needed) will you get trunk intrusion.
There's rebates on Chargers? Already?
That can't be good......
I wasn't ready for what I experienced. It's really a nice car. Chrysler has come a long way with their fit, finish and materials based on some of the stuff I'd driven from them in the past.
It's biggest bugaboo is its weight (no surprise). It's got the big motor, but it's lugging around a lot of mass. That said, for as big as it is, it handles well. It would be a terrific car if it dropped a few hundred poinds. As it is, it's a GOOD car. Seats are comfy. Handling is tight. Materials are good on the inside. It's a little slow on the steering. But, it's got one of the best automatic trannys I've ever driven.
I was polite and told him how much I liked it. He asked if I'd trade my Mustang for it. Well, we all know the answer to that.
Why does that old Queen song keep going through my head......? You know, the one about girls with large posteriors.... :surprise: :P
I like a European luxury suspension Mercedes and that is what GTO reminds me of. Firm but not too firm/harsh. In between balance. I would NOT call GTO SOFT at all. To me the GTO tranny has better more firm/crisp shifts then the Chrysler auto. I like the 2 tone interiors better on Stang-GTO over 300C/Charger.
BTW the Charger is not selling well, thus the rebate, only the Mustang is going like hotcakes now.
Quite exceptional for a car that weighs 250 lbs more then stang.
Don't forget the Convertible Stang is almost same weight as GTO, only 75 lbs lighter. I know the Queen song you are talking about
Challenger is going to be based on that same BIG-HEAVY LX chassis for '08, If you think the GTO is heavy, look at the LX cars..
Finally the exhaust note was rather poor on the Charger, not even remotely as sweet sounding as Mustang or GTO exhaust. It is not selling well from what I have seen and now a REBATE. The grille looks like it came right from their pickup truck line. I would still add one to my collection If I won the lottery though.
The 426 Hemi made 425 horsepower using the old gross rating system. In 1971, when the industry went to the new SAE hp system the 426 Hemi’s output was re-listed at 350hp SAE. New SRT 6.1L hemi makes 425hp SAE.
The old Hemi might make more torque. Not sure on that one.
this GM goat guy says mustangs are way cool, way nice, i think there's just no denying that. and i'm still fascinated by skyline, especially whatever tweeked models there are for that car.
The std 2005 V6 Mustang does have smallish P215-65/16 tires.
The GTO offers 18" wheels optional, don't think Mustang does! GTO comes with 17" std.
I wish Ford made the dual exhaust on the GT more prominent, like the duals on the previous 2004 or like 2005 GTO with big chromed tips. That can easily be changed aftermarket.
Hearing Freddy Mercury sing that seems a bit hollow, though given his orientation.
I totally agree with you. The 17" tires that come stock on Mustang GTs are extremely small looking. The 18" Bullets look much better, but I decided on some 18" Konig Beyonds with 255 front and 285 back width. While I know Ford did it to accomodate those that want to put chains on their Mustangs, the wheelwell gaps are huge as well. A 2005 with 18"ers and an Eibach Pro-Kit drop is much more old school Mustang and better looking to boot!
I picked the Mustang over the GTO so I would have the extra money to do all the serious performance mods. I knew I'd sacrifice a decent backseat and a more plush interior, but the price difference from what I paid for my Mustang and what Edmund's says the average GTO price is will pay for my supercharger and Eibach kit.
As for gargantuan glutes making the globe go around, I believe Sir Mix-A-Lot also expressed his love of "junk in the trunk" as well. My favorite line was:
"36-24-36......Only if she's 5'3"
Well, back then, I thought bell bottoms were so cool. That's all I ever wore. Now though, I would never wear them. Ever!
Regarding wheels....the only think I'd like instead of the Bullitts would be the chrome bullitts. Those would run about $1,500, though and probably would be too much "bling" (still like them, though).
That said, I'll stick with the Bullitts I already have. I like them just fine.
Had another offer on my car today. This from a person I kind of know. He wants to buy it for his girlfriend. Nice guy. He offered $500 less than MSRP. That's still more than I paid, but I know it would take me months to get another one (he's been trying to order one for a month and doesn't hope to get one before the end of winter).
http://www.saleen.com/2005_s281.htm
Last I heard, C&D estimated 4 second 0-60.......92 on the skidpad.
It's supposed to hit next June.
Most of the original GT500 were Auto tranny, not stick. Go figure? Can't wait to see a road test.
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=19&article_id=9638&page_number=4
It's only ironic if those complaining about the GTO weight say the weight of the GT500 is okay.
It's not.
A curbweight uncomfortably close to 2 tons is NOT okay regardless of the emblem on the trunklid or the hp at the wheels. 2 tons is 2 tons is 2 tons. I care about power/weight ratios as much as the next guy. But I prefer to increase my ratio by decreasing the weight, not simply upping the power. Because you fight mass ALL the time, not just while accelerating.
"Most of the original GT500 were Auto tranny, not stick. Go figure?"
That's because most of the GT500 buyers (first available in '67) were (IMO) poseurs more interested in straight-line grunt, cruising, and looking good in their Shelby. Whereas most of the GT350s were sold with 4-speed toploaders (except for the Hertz GT350 cars in '66 which were predominately automatics). And in the GT350's first year ('65), they were available ONLY with a 4-speed.
I noticed that this weekend, too. And came to the same conclusion as you, on why the GT appears un-GT-like. Edmunds says the GT comes with 235/55ZR17 tires, which I agree is a wimpy size. I think the GTO comes with 245s. It seems to handle fine on them, though.
The G35 only has a 298hp V6 and useless backseat , interior is so-so. Bose stereo is part of a $2500 ooption pkge! I cross-shopped it and found the GTO better for me.
Do any of these cars in the GTO's price range have a 400hp V8 engine and sub 5 second 0-60 times? Sonata, no matter how many gadgets they throw in, isn't a GTO, not close, not to mention POOR hyundai resale.
Remember that the BEST F body cars in 2002 were about the same price as the GTO now. F body's don't even come close to GTO's refinement/interior/build quality.
i bet the GT stangs look way nice with beefier treads. 255 fronts & 285 back, yow.
i miss freddie mercury. he helped the world go 'round too.
You know what's funny about that? GM sold 72,467 2002 F-Bodies. Before you say "most were V6," a full 62.8% of them were the V8. What does this say about the GTO? Remember, I'm a GM guy and have defended the GTO before but....
Sonata, no matter how many gadgets they throw in, isn't a GTO, not close, not to mention POOR hyundai resale
I think a lot of the things I am talking about would have made the GTO sell more. But, here's the thing - I think GTO owners don't give a squat if more people didn't buy their car! That's the difference between a GTO owner and like....almost any other given car model enthusiast. It's a compliment, guys.