Ford Mustang (2005) vs. 2005 Pontiac GTO

rattlinstang · February 2006

Hey Stang22
Sorry to hear about your lemon :lemon: ... guess what?! I have one too! :lemon: I have the 05 V6 coupe premium, I've only had this for 1 yr and it's driving me crazy! I hear rattling coming from the a/c vents both left and right, my steering wheel squeaks, the brakes squeak it actually sounds like an old vehicles brakes and my drivers seat had a clicking in it that i literally felt on my back, that was fixed (twisted bracket is what they called it) but now you can still hear the clicking. And there's more to my car but enough of that, what was rattling in your car? I have taken my car in 4 times already, it has been there for more than 30 days but the techs can't seem to find or hear anything...They also claim "No other 05 mustang owners have problems" LIARS! :mad: I honestly think they(service dept)hate me now!

mikesright · February 2006

I don't recall the GTO requiring premium. Just about all cars run premium in their horsepower tests anyway to get the most power out of them and boost numbers, including Mustang.

I also know that the GTO has a much more consistant torque band than the Mustang, as it has more than 300 lb/ft torque pretty much from idle to redline.

Doesn't the GTO rev higher than Mustang anyway? And I thought that pushrods were old, ancient, and couldn't outrev any OHC motor, huh!

cobragt · February 2006

WOW 6500 RPM vs the GT's 6200 RPM redline. That must be it... wow I feel so enlightened. That 300 RPM difference must be why the GTO is faster then the GT. :P

rorr · February 2006

"Just about all cars run premium in their horsepower tests anyway to get the most power out of them and boost numbers, including Mustang."

Nope.

The only reason to run premium in a car is if the compression ratio is high enough that detonation is a concern. Premium fuel DOESN'T have any more energy content than regular, it just resists detonation better. The compression ratio on the Mustang is low enough that detonation is not a concern when running regular.

Actually, I don't believe that premium is REQUIRED for the GTO. Their website simply lists it as 'recommended'. Cars with high compression motors will typically retard the ignition a bit (thus reducing hp) when regular is used in lieu of premium. So sure, you could run the same fuel as the Mustang, you just wouldn't be getting all 400hp.

"I also know that the GTO has a much more consistant torque band than the Mustang, as it has more than 300 lb/ft torque pretty much from idle to redline."

On what do you base this? The Mustang uses variable cam timing in the V8. One of the reasons (actually, the MAIN reason) is to flatten out the torque curve. Based the fact that the Mustang utilizes variable timing and the GTO does not, I would be inclined to believe that the Mustang actually has a more consistent torque band.

"Doesn't the GTO rev higher than Mustang anyway? And I thought that pushrods were old, ancient, and couldn't outrev any OHC motor, huh!"

Yes, it revs higher. But 6.5k rpm redline for the GTO is nothing to write home about even for a pushrod motor.

In all honesty, I think that the redline in the Mustang IS too low. I would think that with a SOHC design and variable cam technology, there's no reason it couldn't be designed for a 7k redline without adversely affecting the lower rpm torque curve.

Of course, this would simply bump up the hp above the GTO's specific output.......sweeeet!

cobragt · February 2006

Flash the computer with a custume tune, remove speed and rev limiter, then hold on tight.

Trust me, I know.

rorr · February 2006

"Flash the computer with a custume tune, remove speed and rev limiter, then hold on tight."

No no no; now we're back into the realm of hashing out modified cars again. Oh, I'm sure it's a quick and easy (and highly effective) mod, it's just that discussing mods as a means to debate the relative merits of these two vehicles gets pointless pretty quick.....

cobragt · February 2006

True true, but it seems no one can leave out certain points or issues that should be left out. But, I think thats what makes this debate so fun and interesting. The things people say.

b4z · February 2006

The GTO is just as fast as the Mercedes CLK.
The Mercedes CLK is almost twice the price.
Therefore the CLK is JUNK. Pure JUNK I say!

The logic on some of these GTO vs. Mustang GTO arguments
escapes me.

vppreacher · February 2006

If the GTO is so great a car, then why have sales been so bad? Why is GM TOTALLY redesigning it? Why did they throw a great engine and interior in an Australian-made Cavalier on steroids and try to pass it off as old school American muscle?

If the Mustang GT is the lower of the two, than why have most professional reviewers...including CR, R&T, and C&D favored the Mustang GT? Why have sales continued to be through the roof WITHOUT incentives? So it seems that not only professionals, but the car buying public overwhelmingly prefers the Mustang GT over the GTO.

Things that make you go hmmm..... :P

pony_pirate · February 2006

From the Car and Driver review, link above, message #1702: Just the facts, ma'am:

base price: Mustang $24,995, GTO $33,500
price as tested: Mustang $28,865, GTO $33,500 (Mustang's options unrelated to performance)

braking, 70-0, feet: Mustang 170, GTO 167

0-60 mph: Mustang 5.1, GTO 4.8

1/4-mile @ mph: Mustang 13.8 @ 103, GTO 13.3 @ 107

top speed, mph: Mustang 147 (drag limited), GTO 158 (governor limited)

Mustang has a larger trunk and better MPG

Grand total of 235 points awarded by reviewers: Mustang 211, GTO 210.

(HP/weight ratio was included, contrary to what I wrote in previous post.)

Seeing as I don't plan to drive my Mustang anywhere near 140 mph, the differences between the more expensive, more powerful GTO and Mustang are, imo, negligible.

The Mustang, btw, is a street machine, not intended for European twisty roads or the race track. It handles beautifully in traffic, is quiet and comfortable, not a rough-riding, hard-to-steer pseudo race car. :shades:

Claires · February 2006

It's been awhile since this topic got a little... shall we say... heated? Everyone here is entitled to his/her opinions, but those opinions are limited to vehicles. Opinions about owners/participants in the discussion have no place here.

cobragt · February 2006

Well said Pony pirate.

Just for the record so people know, the GT is NOT drag limited to 147MPH.

My uncle is a State Trooper here in NJ, and him and I went out to some back roads way in the woods, and I had him clock me several times. The highest he clocked me at was 153MPH.

Remember though, I have no speed limiter or rev limiter. Though I wasn't quite redline anyway. Just thought that would be an interesting bit of info seeming as though the GT's are said to be drag limited at 147MPH.

sensai · February 2006

Grand total of 235 points awarded by reviewers: Mustang 211, GTO 210.

Would you care to post the point total without the got to have it factor?

sigt1 · February 2006

i got an 05 past 150 as well

sigt1 · February 2006

dunno why GTO enthus are saying their car is better; totally diff car; plz

i can get a mustang GT w/ traction, ABS, power steering, automatic locks and windows, single disc CD, 5spd manual cloth interior

basically everything i need
all the power of a fully loaded GT

for $24,000

i can't do this w/ a gto no matter how hard I try; the best i can get it for is 28000 and thats with all the haggling

i goto ford say hey i want invoice and they say here you go

jeez, GTO enthus act like its even comparable to that; totally not

for the guy who wants a cloth seat and a fast car in stick the mustang is the only choice

plz debate when a comparable car is released (possibly camaro)

thx

gto05 · February 2006

Hey
The only reason mustang people dog the GTO is because they can't keep up with it.

pony_pirate · February 2006

Driving on the road ain't about keeping up. It ain't a race. I didn't buy a car just so I could "keep up." Man, what an immature concept. Adolescents "keep up."

I enjoy driving my Mustang GT Premium not in terms of others cars, but in terms of the car itself. I like the way it drives, I like the way it feels, I like the way it shifts, I like the way it springs into action when I need power, I like the way it looks, I like the way it steers, I like the way it takes corners, I like the way it sounds. I don't give a rat's gluteus how it stacks up against anything else. I don't want anything else (even though I can easily afford a more expensive car).

All my life I've been indifferent to cars. I've looked at muscle-car enthusiasts as dumb greasers, boring jerks, guys without a clue. I couldn't care less about cars; they were just a way to get from point A to B. I bought Hondas because they were reasonably priced and rated well by Consumers Reports. If someone else wanted to take the wheel, I was more than happy sitting in the passenger's seat staring out the window. When I bought a fully loaded Honda EX and someone asked me how I "liked" the car, I didn't understand the queston. I didn't "like" the car (actually I didn't even pick, or care about, the color -- I just took what was available). I didn't have any feelings whatsoever towards it. It was just a thing, just a necessary means of transportation.

Then I saw that first Mustang ad on TV. A silver GT in field of corn. I looked up everything I could find about it on the internet. I ogled the pictures. I poured over reviews and performance stats, carefully inspected options, studied the differences between the different models, downloaded and printed everything there was out there. I went down to my local dealer asking how I can buy one. I called dealers, haggled prices, ordered one, then found one on the lot and hardballed the dealer into selling it to me at MSRP.

Now, for the first time, I understand when someone says they "love" their car. Now, for the first time, I have an emotional attachment to a car. Other cars still look like ugly lumps of metal to me, not the Mustang.

jpiatchek · February 2006

Real nice post. I'm sure others feel the same way about their cars, whatever the make. I've been car crazy since I was three years old.

cobragt · February 2006

Well said, well said. Great post, and oh so true.

I LOVE my 05 GT Premium (Black)!!!

jae5 · February 2006

Sorry for the long delay, have been out of the country for the last two weeks on business.

Sensai, you are really funny. It is amazing how you can misconstrue something to try to justify yourself. No disrespect, but you're a bit clueless of who actually was doing the testing, and who sponsored the event, as well as the Test Drive program itself. During the testing, they were NOT using professional SCCA test drivers; here's a clue, look at what they were wearing. If they were, they needed their memberships taken. I'm not talking about the host and the drifting champ running the car around the track, nor the host running the machine down the course. I'm talking about the 0-60 & quarter-mile runs. Why do you think BOTH cars had crummy times and trap speeds (remember, BOTH did the quarter in 6+ seconds, horrible).

But really, you need to re-read my post and understand where I'm coming from. This was a Pontiac test-drive, so again, I ask you: Do you REALLY think, I mean REALLY THINK, the car was going to lose the quarter-mile race at the end? Or say anything that might be viewed as a negative? Lack of options? Small trunk space? Be honest here. It's just not the Pontiac Test Drive, hell all of the Test Drives are biased to the particular make / model they are presenting (been in a few of the vehicles that have been on the show, and for the most part, they over sold them on the program). Feel better big guy?

Second, don't need to publish/quote times, slips and the like. These are posted every other day here, why re-hash. It's all in the driver, as both cars are damn equal. For example, I can take my GNX and beat a GTO today, tomorrow or next week I may lose. Again, depends on the driver, setup, track, state of tune, temperature whatever. So keep your magazine times. Anybody who knows cars and really races them knows magazines are for entertainment, not law. Also those times published are for that car for that day, not for eternity nor meant to be EVERY car that comes off the line will hit those numbers. This is backed up due to magazines testing cars multiple times, so a vehicle they tested today at one track may not give the same results when tested at another track. Or if they test a different car, same make / model / options, on a different day, heck even the same day, the numbers may be different. Got it?

But if you need numbers that refute the GTO's win that day, and since you take what magazines publish as sacred and absolute truth, grab ANY magazine that ran an '05 Mustang; in every one it had a faster 0-60 & quarter mile time faster than the Pontiac Test Drive GTO.

Third, funny how you blew over the fact that I like both cars, have driven BOTH, spending considerable seat and passenger time in both. You always seem to forget that, so I'm talking from fact, not what I heard or read. Sorry, but my preference is for the Mustang; it just has something this car doesn't: a soul, that "it". Ford nailed it on this one, stayed true to the market. This is what the market wanted and Ford provided. Whereas GM, well, I don't know what they were thinking.

And please don't give your typical answer of "Where else can you get 400hp for $32K" line; you've posted that too many times here and other forums as a rebuttal. Yes, the Monaro is a good car, I just think GM totally misread the market and muffed their presentation of the car. Which is a doggone shame because it's a decent car, just bad market execution. Again, car good, presentation bad. Now do you understand?

pony_pirate · February 2006

what's a "GNX"?

jae5 · February 2006

1987 Buick Grand National X, the last of the GN/T-Types and last of the G-bodies (RWD MC, GP, Cutlass/442).

cobragt · February 2006

Uh hummmm...(cough) AMEN!!

elias · February 2006

those GNXs were awesome and remain so.
hey, any goat or mustang people here noticing that the new Charger SRT and Challenger appear to open a can of whup-[non-permissible content removed] on both GTO & mustang? is there a "mopar kicks both GTO & mustang butt" thread here yet? too bad those mopar people forgot about manual transmissions.

sensai · February 2006

Well congratulations for the long post, but I fail to find a point in it. Are you trying to refute that the GTO is a better performance car than the Mustang? If so, where is the proof? Are you trying to claim the GTO won the 1/4 mile at the end because it was a Pontiac test drive? And not because the car is simply more powerful? I just don't see what you are trying to prove. Did I ever say the Mustang is a bad car? The answer is no. But it does not outperform the GTO, period. And yes I have plenty of seat time in the new Mustang too. Again not a bad car, at least not until I hit the curve on I-94 between Wisconsin and Illinois that is full of bumps and potholes, where the solid axle really hampers the car.

sigt1 · February 2006

eh

i drove a lot on that highway system when I had my 05 GT and i would not say "the solid axle really hampers the car" you do experience some shaking at certain speeds/rpms but thats fine; and since youve had so much road time w/ the GT you know how nice the manual transmission feels;

as for potholes, you really should be avoiding those

the argument here is that the mustang's 4.6 performace is almost identical to the gto 5.7 and close to the gto 6.0; and this performance can be had at 25K with a pretty nice package that includes traction, 17 inchers, dual window auto up and down, good stock stereo, great 5 speed tranny, abs, pretty big trunk, and all around cool look...

again ive driven that highway manytimes and do no think in that case "the solid axle really hampers the car"

carlots101 · February 2006

13.8 second Mustang 1/4 mile is not nearly identical to a 13.3 second GTO 1/4 mile. Been to the track many times. Seen stock ones hit as low as 13.1. Stock GTO's always outrun the stock Mustangs.

Leftover 2005 GTO's now have a $2,000 or $2,500 rebate and can be had as low as $27,500 out the door, pretty impressive. That includes , programable headlights, locking fuel tank door, hood struts-no prop rod, trip computer, IRS axle, 6spd manual, dual power seats and more. Items you can't get on the Mustang at any price. As for looks, they are subjective. I like both cars looks. The Mustang trunk while definitely bigger then the GTO trunk is still not a big trunk. Dont' forget the optional Shaker takes up a noticeable chunk of the trunk.

Here in NY-NJ where I live the roads are far from smooth and there is no way that a solid axle will out perform a IRS on the streets. I've driven the Mustang GT and the GTO on the streets here and hit the same bumps, RXR tracks and the GTO is a way better handler & more civil for everyday use PERIOD. It's IRS gives a more controlled, much tighter feeling. The Stang felt like my old 1999 Z28 did, twitchy around corners which were not smooth. Even C&D magazine said that on the same roads the Stang solid rear did step out on imperfect pavement and had slightly disconcerting hop when encountering midcorner bumps. where as the GTO IRS exhibited no such spasms over same roads.

tayl0rd · February 2006

... Leftover 2005 GTO's now have a $2,000 or $2,500 rebate and can be had as low as $27,500 out the door, pretty impressive. That includes , programable headlights, locking fuel tank door, hood struts-no prop rod, trip computer, IRS axle, 6spd manual, dual power seats and more. Items you can't get on the Mustang at any price. ...

Leftover 2005 GTOs??? :surprise: Anybody know of any "leftover" 2005 Mustang GTs?

FYI, the GT has a MUCH better trip computer than the GTO. And that impressive "roster" of options :P is certainly not worth the $4K+ MSRP premium over the Mustang GT.

Programmable headlights? :confuse: The GTO has a feature that not even a Maybach has! What are "programmable headlights?" :confuse: Do you mean automatic headlights? Whoopdy-do! Lord knows it's a wrenching task to have to reach all the way beside the steering wheel and twist that knob two clicks! :sick:

pony_pirate · February 2006

I still feel like you guys are splitting hairs. Yes, the solid rear axle is a bit controversial. From an engineering point of view, as far as I understand such stuff, the plus side is that a solid rear axle affords better acceleration, better rear traction on take off; the negative is a bit bumpier ride. So be it.

Just looking at the Car & Driver stats, never having driven a GTO, it strikes me that for a more expensive car with 100 more horses, that's a full 33% more power than the Mustang, the GTO should be a lot faster, should outperform the Mustang by a wider margin. I interpret the stats to mean the Mustang does more with its power than the GTO, that it's better designed than the GTO. I've read every review I could find of the new Pony GT and the critical concensus seems to confirm the impression that the new Mustang design is a winner, both stylistically and performance-wise.

Finally, going to the bottom line, I challenge anyone to find a dealer giving any kind of rebate on '06 GT's. There's just no question that the new V8 Mustang is selling better than the GTO. People vote with their dollars.

jae5 · February 2006

Really, hmmmmm. I94 is in my backyard (I'm from Chi-town remember) and seems that the GTO doesn't glide over them potholes either. Nothing does!! So what's your point?

Did you say the Mustang was a bad car? You're kidding right? Actually you did, when you first started posting. Remember, that was during the period when you had a GTO, an '05 I believe even though they weren't out yet, then you didn't, then you said you had a car & was heavily modified (almost 450 - 500hp IIRC), then you admitted you never drove one, then you left for awhile, then you came back. But I degress...

My point is simply this, which again you won't get because if you haven't figured it out by now, you never will and becuase you simply don't know. You're implying here, as well as in the past, that just because the GT has a solid rear, it's less of a car. Or becuase it has only 300 instead of 400hp. Because it's not the GTO. Blah, blah, blah. I am here to tell you, as others have as well, that a properly setup solid rear can hold it's own and/or out-perform a car with an IRS. Also a car with a good power/weight ratio but less hp/torque can and will beat a car that is off-balance, front-heavy, or just an overall pig (and no tough guy, not saying these things about the GTO/Monaro. I can hear your shorts riding up). So higher horsepower/torque doesn't mean squat if it can't be planted (that means make it to the ground), or has to haul a huge weight around, or bad driver skill. Got it? I know you don't but had to ask anyway. Good going back and forth but I'm bored. Let's move on shall we?

But I'll tell you what, next time you're going to be here during the weekend and the weather's nice, bring you GTO to Joliet, Cordova, the test/tune and other events at some of the local tracks in Southern IL. or the "other" places (like off from the Bishop Ford near the Ford plant and industrial park) and we'll run, or you can run anyone else that's there. There's usually a couple of Cobras there too, but one's got a swapped in solid rear (the indie broke twice), so you should automatically beat him too. And you should beat me since you have higher hp, an indie rear, a wing on the decklid, leather all over the seats, etc. etc. etc. :P

sensai · February 2006

Great memory, but you are forgetting the post where I stated I had posted a link to this thread not knowing that URL contains my encrypted login, and therefore those post were not mine.

So your point is a well setup car can perform as well or better than a more powerful one that is not? Yes, that is correct. Problem is, the Mustang does not outperform the GTO. This has been proven over and over, but for some reason you guys cannot admit that. Yes the GTO costs more, because once again, it is the better performing and better built car. And yes you can not like the looks of the GTO, just like I think the new Mustang looks like a bad ripoff of my 68 Mustang, but that doesn't change the facts of which one has better performance and quality.

Anyways, yes I do plan on tracking the car this year when it gets warmer. I'll be checking forums occasionally to see when get togethers and events are taking place. I am sure we will be seeing a few friendly Mustang vs GTO events this year all over the country.

carlots101 · February 2006

Plenty of leftover 2005 Mustangs in my neck of the wood. One dealer over the NY state border here has about 15 lined up in front. They have been sitting there like that for nearly 2 months now. :P

There is a 2005 Mustang V6 convertible that was painted in the NY Yankee pin striped uniform style that has been sitting since July. Still there as of this morning.

cobragt · February 2006

I wouldn't take a V6 if someone gave it to me, let alone a NY Yankee pin striped one! No wonder its still sitting there. :surprise:

tayl0rd · February 2006

I said Mustang GT. There's probably goo-gobs of V6s leftover.

carlots101 · February 2006

"Just looking at the Car & Driver stats, never having driven a GTO, it strikes me that for a more expensive car with 100 more horses, that's a full 33% more power than the Mustang, the GTO should be a lot faster, should outperform the Mustang by a wider margin"

Same thing with the new GT500. It has 475hp, which is nearly 20% more hp then GTO's 400 and it's only 2/10ths faster to 60mph. Very close drivers race.

GT500 did 0-60mph in 4.5 seconds. GTO just did 0-60mph in 4.7 seconds in the December Motor Trend issue. GTO is nearly $10k cheaper then GT500 :P

carlots101 · February 2006

That V6 Yankee car is at a dealer in hackensack, NJ. I have seen it brought to a few car shows with the dealer window stickers on it last summer. Imagine parking that car somewhere in Boston?

pony_pirate · February 2006

Read more carefully, carlots. I said GT's are not being rebated. For every 4-6 V6's, dealers get around 1 GT, so yes, V6's may be sitting on the lots, as well they might, being nice cars, but not sought-after rockets like the GT's.

Also check out the other thread here about Mustang buying experiences: some people are tickled pink to be able to get their hands on a GT at a mere $400 over MSRP. A lot of posters are having to order the GT and wait long periods of time.

Me? I'm still keeping an eye out to get a first-hand glimpse of this supposedly superbad car, the GTO. Doesn't seem to be all that popular, even with rebates.

carlots101 · February 2006

Don't forget, people were paying MSRP and over to get the first 2004 GTO's too, which was crazy. Some were marked up $5k+ over MSRP. People were also "tickled pink" buying Honda Odyssey's in 2003, paying MSRP+ and waiting as long as 6 months for it. Personally I have never and will never pay MSRP for a car or wait for it, IMHO. Also ford didn't know that the V8 model would be that popular in 2005. historically it's been 63% V6 and 37% V8

They only made 11,069 GTO in 2005 vs nearly 200,000 Mustang in 2005. You chances of seeing a GTO will be quite slim. 18 Mustangs on the road for every 1 GTO. I don't see many GTO either. Most of the Mustangs are V6 that I see.

sigt1 · February 2006

just a hunch but im pretty sure the GT500 is going to run 4s - low 4s for the 60s

just a hunch

carlots101 · February 2006

I think someone else posted this link further back

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=6&article_id=3086

Pricing will start at $40k for the coupe and $44k for the convertible, you know the dealers are really going to mark this one up over MSRP. They are planning on selling 10,000 of them.

pony_pirate · February 2006

carlots, the Mustang GT has been out for over a year and demand still exceeds supply. Ford simply can't build them fast enough.

Won't pay MSRP or wait for delivery of a car? I guess you won't be driving a Mustang GT (or Corvette, for that matter). :shades:

carlots101 · February 2006

It depends on your area of the country. As said, there are plenty of V6 mustangs sitting on lots by me, some of them for a long time, so sure looks to me like Ford Miscalculated the demand of the V8 model.

Sorry but you can buy a Vette for under MSRP and the 3 dealers by me have 2 to 3 on their lots. Not a problem. 1 of the dealers, which is the 2nd largest in NJ has at least 10 in stock. That dealer that I mentioned who has 15+ mustangs over the NY border.. 3 or 4 of them are the V8 models. Since this is the middle of winter in the Northeast with 6 to 12 inches of snow forecast for Sat. night, i'm sure they won't be moving anytime soon :P

sigt1 · February 2006

there are plenty of 06 GTs on the lot here; most are auto; deluxes are rare, as are sticks, but as for GTS there are plenty

look around even in your area Im sure you'll find at least a few

carlots101 · February 2006

Yes, there are plenty of GTO's on the lot too. My dealer has about 5. Those will be sitting too with this weather coming up.

pony_pirate · February 2006

Here in Calif:

Vettes: take one month to order. Only the rare dealer willing to sell at MSRP. Don't see them on dealer lots (tho I don't go looking specifically for them). Source: associate of mine who just bought a new C06.

Mustang GT Premiums w/ manual tranny: generally have to be special ordered to get MSRP, taking 8-12 weeks (2 to 3 times longer than the Vette). Those few on lots are almost invariably marked up and gone within a week. Dealers are tricking up some, with add-on custom wheels, for instance, in order to charge even more. My local dealer hasn't had a GT on the lot for at least 6-8 weeks -- I know because he always parks it out front with balloons attached to the antenna when he has one, and I happen to drive by around every 7-10 days. (Have noticed the Rousch's stick around longer.)

See lots of new Vettes on the road. See very few GT's, some V6's. Have yet to notice a GTO, maybe because they look like insects. :shades:

carlots101 · February 2006

The Z06 vette usually has to be ordered and is MSRP or higher. Regular Vettes is what I meant by being plenty available here and under MSRP.

The GTO is a far more rare car then the Vette, 11,000 sold vs 40,000 Vettes sold. In my area the Vette is fairly common. I see some GTO's. As for looking like an insect? Thats a new one. More original then the usual grand-am or bloated Cavalier comments the bashers come up with .

I like telling people, (not car people) my Cavalier has a 400hp V8 Corvette engine in it. The look on their face is priceless. :P

jtaco · February 2006

On the main www.pontiac.com/gto
website, if you click on 'Click to
see how we beat the competition',
they say that the GTO did 0 to 60 (2005) in 6.0
seconds -- that doesn't seem so fast.

But in their pdf file at
www.pontiac.com/pdf/06Pontiac_GTO.pdf, they clearly state that the Pontiac GTO does 0 to 60 in a mere
4.6 seconds (the automatic). That
is a HUGE difference in performance.

So which number is closer to being
correct? How did they get the 4.6
number? on a track? Which number should we believe?

I'm trying to decide on a GTO or GT, and want to get to the bottom of this.

Thanks for your replies.

John

carlots101 · February 2006

Motor Trend duplicated that same GM 4.7 second time in their December issue when they compared it to the Charger SRT8. BTW, the GTO was faster then the SRT8. So I would say GM's number is correct. For some reasons all the cars in that how we beat the competition drive were slow. Mustang GT was over 6 seconds.

As far as I know, no magazine has ever test driven an Automatic GTO, only 6spd manuals.

The fastest times I have seen at the track for a Stock GTO are with the automatic trans in it.

pony_pirate · February 2006

Carlots, you gotta be nuts to think the Pontiac is even in the same ballpark as the limited-production '07 Shelby Mustang GT 500. Please, tell me, I'm all ears, how guys are lining up to buy the GTO, sight unseen, plunking down $1000 non-refundable deposits, like they're doing for the GT 500. Please, tell me, I'm all ears, how a GTO recently got, or could ever get, $700,000 at a Barret-Jackson auction, like the GT 500 just did (charity auction).

Performance comparisons between the 2 vehicles is totally hypothetical, in as much as the GT500 hasn't even been produced yet. It's MSRP has yet to be determined and there isn't even a stat sheet for the car. Even the HP is up in the air, quoted as somewhere between 450 and 500. All we have to go on is the prototype.

Frankly, carlots, the more you go on about how vastly superior your car is, the less credibility you have. For instance, how do you know what the availibility of the Mustang GT is? Do you go shopping for them in your free time, even tho you're not going to buy one? In contrast, I base my statements on my own recent buying experience and the fact that I was at a Ford dealer ~2 weeks ago to discuss ordering a GT 500.

carlots101 · February 2006

The limited production GT500 is slated to sell about 10,000 units, close to what the GTO sold in 2005. Not so limited is it? I never said guys are lining up buying GTO's unseen, thats your post. If you watched Barret-Jackson you will know that a GM (Chevy) muscle car got the highest sale price of nearly $1.2 million ! Not a Ford.

MSRP has been established for the GT500, you need to check the latest ford news. $40k Coupe, $44k Convertible. That is before the highly anticipated dealer markups and bidding wars. This was also published in Motor Trend who just test drove the Convertible. As for performance, so far the GT500 is at 4.5 seconds, not too impressive for a 475hp+ car , when the GTO does 4.7 seconds with 400hp.

I NEVER said how vastly superior my car is or do I keep going on about it. Questioning my credibilty? Let's stick to the topic, not each other's creditbility.

I base my statements on the availabilty of the mustang on the 4 dif. Ford dealers by my house and their inventory I see out in front on my commute everyday. There are plenty of both V6 and V8 Mustangs sitting there now for quite some time in my area of the country. Your area may be different. I think the gotta have factor is starting wear off in my area! They are both good cars. I prefer the GTO, you prefer the Mustang, thats what this debate is about.

Ford Mustang (2005) vs. 2005 Pontiac GTO

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles