Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Ford Mustang (2005) vs. 2005 Pontiac GTO
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Not Car and Driver, which said......With 6.0 liters of power, it won most of the performance tests as well as the fun-to-drive category,
C&D said the GTO was more fun to drive then Mustang, Nuff said.
I would imagine the '58 Chevy, since it is so desireable, would have plenty of places to get parts for.
I thought that would be true for the '65 Mustang, too. But, my sister must not be plugged into the right places.
http://www.mustangworld.com/ourpics/News/knotts05/knotts05page1.htm
Also they say you can NOT order 2005 GTO anymore, whatever comes in, comes in. They will be taking orders for the 2006 GTO in the next few months.
They said they got a bunch of preorders for the Solstice already.
Hey, I like the GTO as well, and think it deserves alot of respect. If I was to win one, I wouldn't necessarily drive straight to the Ford dealer to trade it. I mainly jumped into this discussion to defend the Mustang rather than beat up on the GTO, sorry if it sounds that way. It's just that if I was spending my money, I'd buy the Mustang. I almost had one, but unfortunately my Fiancee likes her older (1999-2004) body style better than the new one, so no deal .
here is the KICKER....My 2001 I30t luxury sedan is MORE per year to insure then the 2005 GTO, I30t is only 227 horse!, LOL! Only $10 a year, but still funny.
I just assume there are more claims on Mustangs/camaros.
It could be a "turn around" car for Pontiac or it could be another Fiero. Too early to tell. My "gut" tells me it will be a hit, if for no other reason than Lutz needs it to be. You can make a bet that the first ones off the line will be perfect. Lutz doesn't want any huge "faux pax" happening to slow down early momentum.
That being said, any improvements for the 2006 Mustang GT V8 yet?
Nothing regarding changes aside from a few color renaming schemes and I think 18" wheels being available to the '06 Mustang GT.
That's why I stick to the trade rags to get consistent and reliable perfromance numbers on cars straight out of the factory.
When I was still racing, I can't tell you the amount of times I saw drivers state they were running bone stock....only to find out on closer inspection that they had different tires from stock, different exhaust's from stock, etc. To me, that's not stock. To some, if they aren't running any sort of forced induction, they consider themselves stock. I say, if you've done anything to a car that wasn't stock, it's not bone stock.
3 weeks ago, I was at the local track. I saw a highly modded Mustang run in the 9s. I've seen '04 GTOs, modded running in the mid 12s. Conversely, I've seen Mustangs run in the 14s as well as GTOs (admittedly, none of them had very good hookups coming off the lights).
And just like your Momma said, "Consider the source"
If you are using "The enthusiasts mags" to make an informed decision, you might be in a bit of trouble. When the "mags" were given a chance to drive what would have been the 1983 Corvette, they said, when it hits the street it will be the greatest American performance car of all time....check it out....the 1983 Vette never made it to the street...too many problems in production. Ya know...I never read a retraction of any of that pap that passes for "journalism"
nuff said
Regarding the '83 corvette? I dunno, but I don't know that any mistake made by the trade rags 22 years ago means a whole lot. As it stands, the trade rags (and places like Edmunds) offer the only credible sources for performance figures. They take factory stock cars, test them and then publish the results.
You never know what you're getting when any individual reports their track numbers. Are they being truthful about the track times? Are they really running stock? Drivers are all over the map as far as experience levels. Automatics vs Manual trannys. Different track conditions will have an impact on the results too.
That's what makes the trade rags and trusted media sources what I most use to evaluate performance (plus, my personal experiences).
Aside from that, streeting a car is much different than tracking a car.
The exterior styling I would have given to the GT last year, but the new hoodscope makes the GTO my favorite this year. On interior styling I like the Red and Blue of the GTO, and believe the seats are quite nice. All retro is not great - the GT is OK.
Then we get to mod. potential. You can always do more with 6.0 than 4.6.
I also agree I'd rather drive a more exclusive car. Both are missing sunroofs or T-Tops though. Stereo advantage to the GT.
If the stock-market goes up 10% for the next 2 years maybe I'll trade in my Firebird and get the Cobra.
$28k GT with 300hp, $93 per HP
$33k GTO with 400hp $83 per HP, $33k is after the $1k mfg rebate
This is before any leftover or employee discounts etc.
The only missing part is the resale. It's probably too early to tell what either car will bring as used cars at this early juncture. I don't think the resale of an '04 GTO will be indicative of what an '05 GTO will sell for on the used market. IF GM refrains for putting huge rebates on the '05 like they did on the '04, then it may do well in holding its value.
The Mustang GT, in used or new form, seems to be holding MSRP. '05 GTs are totally sold out since the factory will no longer accept '05 GT orders (either individual orders or dealer stock orders). You may be able to find a few here and there on dealer's lots, but they'll be scarce from this point forward. 13,000 ordered '05 Mustangs won't even get built The earliest anyone can order an '06 is mid-May. The plant will go on shutdown for a couple of weeks in July before they start-up '06 Mustang GT builds. The '06s will start hitting dealer showrooms sometime in August or Sept, depending on dealer allotment.
Don't know what that will mean for resale, but considering dealer's are still hard pressed to get Mustang GTs, I'd HOPE (and that's what it is....a hope) that they hold their value well.
What I don't know is what percentage of either model (Mustang in GT form or GTO) is out there with an automatic.
Just a guess, but I'd be willing the say that most owners opt for the manual trans versions as the typical buyer will be an enthusiast.
I would think that if the Solstice is a hit for Pontiac, that would get enthusiasts into the Pontiac showrooms to at least look at the GTOs (just like Corvettes get enthusiasts into Chevy showrooms....whether they buy or not).
2004 GTOproductionfigures
For the 2004 GTO it was pretty much a 50/50 split on Auto vs manual shift. 53.8% were Manual shift and 46.1% were automatic shift. there was 15,728 total sold for 2004l. 8,466 were 6spd manual and 7,262 were 4spd auto.
I am an enthusiast but opted for the 4spd auto, Pontiacs brochure says the Auto is 1/10th faster then Manual 0-60 and 1/4 mile. City gas mileage is same. Highway mileage is 4 better with stick. I do mostly in town driving in my area near upper NJ near NY City, rather have an automatic. The 3 GTO's that were on the lot of my dealer to chose from were ALL Automatic anyway. They sold all 3 of those the same week I bought mine. They said they won't get anymore until June and that they can NOT order 2005 anymore.
My dealer said the Solstice starsts showing up in June. If it had more pwr I might be interested. Price is nice! Pontiacs Brochure claims 7.2 seconds for manual shift Solstice. Not bad.
GTO is best quality GM car I ever had from interior/exterior fit finish, etc. 10x better interor then my GTP was. Of course, time will tell.
New 2005 Stang is the BEST quality Stang ever made too, from what I have seen and felt on test drive. Interior far better then those late 1980's and early to mid 1990's ones.
The Aurora could have been the savior for Olds. They just didn't get it right, out of the box. as you pointed out. It did become a good car towards the end, though (albeit a little too late).
I always thought that the V8 Northstar would be a good engine.
Personally, I've never had many issues with any GM car. I've owned quite a few over the years. I did buy a used Blazer a long while back. It was garbage, but I chalked that up to a poor GM service dept, more than anything else. It still had warranty left when I bought it, but the service dept acted like they'd never seen one before. That's a whole different story, though.
I'm of the mind that there isn't much difference in reliability between any of the major makes.....that includes Hondas and Toyotas. I've owned a "stinker" of a BMW as well as a Honda.
Funny thing was that the Aurora sales DOUBLED in 2001 after they introduced the cheaper V6 entry level model. But Olds itself was already on it's way out!
My friend has had lots of problems with his 2001 Accord which is supposedly the most reliable car, LOL! The 1988 528 BMW I had was used and had over 160k miles and was still going strong when I traded it. Held up very well. But maintenance was expensive.
Just looking at the GTO's 5.7 or 6.0 V8s, it's clear that with continued development they will get in the 20s for MPG and meet all EPA regs.....and that the complexity of DOHC wasn't needed. I think the main reason the Northstar wasn't used in more applications was it's complexity and cost associated with being a DOHC design.
Just take a look at where such fabled engines as the GM small blocks, Ford's 4.6 and 5.4, Chrysler's fabled Hemi, have come. Just think what they would/could have been if they had continued their R&D on them unabated over the previous 2-3 decades?
To me, GM's 3.8 V6, blown or unblown, is still one of the best V6s that ever hit the market. I think GM should continue to develop it. But, again GM probably feels it costs too much to do so.
It's good that we're still able to get the 5.7, 6.0, 4.6, 5.4, hemi V8s. There's something about OHV designs and their inherent torque characteristics that can't be duplicated with DOHC designs.
I'll probably catch some flack about this, but GM, Ford, Chrysler still makes some of the best V8 engines in the world. Look no further than your GTO to see that. I'll say the same about my Mustang's V8.
I still say long live the GTO, the Mustang GT, the Charger, etc. Hope that comes to pass. But sometimes the American car companies (all of them) can't see the forest for the trees.
They were going to put RWD back into the GP for 2007 or 2008 but with the Zeta platform being cancelled, who knows now? At least the general is dropping a 303 hp V8 into GP, but it's still hooked up to the front wheels.
I went with GTO because no more Grand Prix Coupe. It's not a much smaller. GTO is still classified the same MIDSIZE as GTP.
GTP was 99 cu ft
GTO was 95 cu ft as per Car and driver.
Stang was 83 cu ft as per car and driver
Total inside cu ft, minus trunk.
It's not so much that we think the GTO looks EXACTLY like a Grand Prix. However, it is my contention that the GTO looks more like a Grand Prix coupe than the 2005 Mustang looks like a 1960's Mustang. Clearly, the Mustangs' styling is fitting with the '60s era, but it also manages to look very modern and unique (a lot of major differences between the older models and the new). The GTO's styling is obviously fitting with the '90s GP. You have to admit, there are an awful lot of similarities in the general styling (except from rear angles).
As I have said before: I'd rather have a brand new car that looks like a true classic, than a brand new car that looks ten years old.
Yeah, kinda like the difference between parachute pants and a classic pair of Ray-Bans....
Well, everyone here is beating up on the Mustang because it is "slower" than the GTO. But the GTO costs roughly $5,000 more than a GT. I could quote the same (it should be faster for that price) back to you.
A Mustang does NOT compete with a Corvette. Never really has! 2 dif cars. Vette competes more with a Viper. 2 seats, no backseats. Mustang is nice, and I'm sure the GT500 will rock but is not worth a $40k+ tag in my opinion. Not when someone can buy the base for $19k. or V8 base for $25k
The Fact is that the GTO is faster then the Stang, won all the perf. contests in Car and Driver over stang, offers 100 more hp, independent rear axle, better interior etc and that is why it's $5k more! nuff said.
as previously posted here the GTO actually offers more bang for the buck then Stang. 400hp for $34k is cheaper then 300hp for $28k!!! Do the math! GTO is $85 per HP, Stang is $93 per hp. I am not beating up on the Stang, just stating the facts. Stang is a good car too.
I could have bought a Stang, bought GTO, that is what I liked and wanted. BTW, I did NOT pay $34k for my GTO. With rebates and employee discount only paid about $2k more then a Stang. Didn't have a Ford discount.
With that said ,at our local tracks on test and tune nights I have never seen a stock GTO outrun a stock v8 mustang.
To me, the GTO is nearly a GP clone from a styling perspective.
That's not the reason I bought the Mustang GT over the GTO, however. I've stipulated, more than once, my thought process that brought me to my "buy" decision. NO need to go through the same excersise again.
You're being facetious (I hope)!!!!!!???????
Yes... and the GT500 will be faster than the GTO, will win all the performance contests, will offer at least 50 more hp and torque and at lower RPMs, will handle better... and that is why it will be $5k more than the GTO.
I'm sure the GT500 will rock but is not worth a $40k+ tag in my opinion. Not when someone can buy the base for $19k. or V8 base for $25k
Well, if (as you say) the average person can tell a GTO from a Grand Prix, they will be able to easily differentiate between the various levels of the Mustang (V6/GT/Cobra/GT500), especially the SVT Cobra and Shelby GT500 variants. And if those variants offer that much more than a GTO, it will be worth the extra price.
The GT500 also uses a supercharger to make that power, the GTO is normally aspirated! That said I could put a blower on my GTO and match or exceed the GT500 and wait, My car would still cost less then GT500 including the supercharger! For me the 400hp stock is good enough.
If Pontiac made a $40k+ GTO I wouldnt' buy it either. Same with a $40k+ Mustang, not worth it to me.
While the Mustang interior is ok to good for a $19k to $28k car, it is NOT good in a $40k+ car. I hope they are improving it for GT500.
It would be cool if POntiac put the new 7 Liter Z06 500hp motor in a version of the GTO, but then I'm sure they would charge way too much, LOL!
6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET. Drop by for live chat with other members. Hope you can join us!
kirstie_h
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
At least the GTO won't be confused for a cheaper dumbed down version of itself, ala $19k V6 stang vs a $40k GT500 by your avg non car enthusaist.
18,000 GTO's vs 180,000 Mustangs. Big difference and more exclustivity with GTO. At least you can't rent a GTO, You can rent 2005 Stangs all over the place. Just saw 3 on the rental car lot near here. As I said, Mustang, Camry, Accord, Taurus, F150, all the same a dime a dozen. One on every block and 20 in every parking lot, LOL! That is why I would never buy a car like that. I want something somebody else doesn't have, but that is just me.
Not everyone is beating up on the Mustang, there are others beating up on the GTO also. It's 50/50. Why you would defend a car, the 2005 Mustang, that you told me you don't even OWN is besides me, LOL! Kind of hillarious.
I would be like me defending the 2005 Vette, even though I don't own one, LOL! I would never do, unless I owned it. To each their own. Funny though! Final comments on this thread, it's getting old. Sick and tired of repeating myself.