Mustang Kicks GTO Butt - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Ford Forum Ford Forum

» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
» Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Fordforums Community > USENET NewsGroups > rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Register Home Forum Active Topics Photo Gallery Auto Loans Garage Mark Forums Read Auto EscrowInsurance

FordForums.com is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-15-2005, 20:01   #1 (permalink)
NoOption5L@aol.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

Score for the Mustang!

----
NATALIE NEFF
Published Date: 1/10/05

Pontiac likes to lay claim to the title of original muscle car with its
GTO, and while that first 1964 model was more a big-engined Tempest
than a pure Goat, we're hardly one to quibble over the finer points.
What is definitive to our minds, however, is this: It would be at least
a year before the diminutive Ford Mustang, which bowed that same year,
would even come close to the midsize Pontiac's performance, and at
least four years before a Mustang had any chance of out-and-out beating
one. That first year, however, was no contest.

In its top-end form, a stock '64 GTO with a 348-hp (at the flywheel),
389-cid V8 was good for 6.6 seconds to 60 mph and under-15 in the
quarter-mile. Not until the GT350 debuted the following year would a
Mustang get close, and even then it still fell shy of the Pontiac-by
then up to 360 horses-by nearly three-quarters of a second.

Yet today when we think of muscle cars, it's the Mustang's paradigm
that persists, that of the pony car, the little car with the big heart.
The intermediate has long since disappeared, a point driven further by
the fact that today the GTO is not even two inches longer than a
Mustang GT.

So as we approach three years without a Chevrolet Camaro to throw down
with the Mustang GT, we thought it would be fun to pit the Pontiac
against the de facto reigning pony car champ, to see which has more of
what it takes to gallop home the winner.

The GTO may wear the Pontiac shield, but as we all know by now, behind
that kidney-shaped grille breathes an Aussie beast. No worries; its
V8-powered, rear-drive, two-door design gives it all the street cred we
require for a legitimate showdown with the best out of Dearborn.

When last we visited with the GTO, the brute from Down Under was
pounding out a dust cloud raising 350 horses and 365 lb-ft of torque,
grunting and growling and sounding every bit the frightening Detroit
iron its fabled name recalls. In its 2004 form the GTO was good for
5.49 seconds to 60 mph and a quarter-mile time of 13.82 seconds at
103.0 mph. Not bad numbers, to be sure, especially given the GTO's
none-too-buoyant 3700-plus-pound curb weight, though we're sure the
old model could have dropped a couple of tenths if not for the crazy
amount of wheel hop it kicked up at the line.
The way the Mustang sounds, feels and drives- from the ample grunt
under the hood to the exhaust rumble to the clearly improved suspension
and steering response-has made for many a happy staffer around One
AutoWeek Tower.

Today the ol' Goat has traded in its 5.7-liter LS1 V8 for the monster
6.0-liter LS2, complete with 400 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque all routed
through either a four-speed automatic or, more in line with our
purposes, an optional six-speed manual. Add to that a more obvious
performance-oriented look, including a more aggressive rear fascia with
twin tailpipes, bigger brakes with red calipers and a new hood with
functioning dual hood scoops, and there is plenty of new stuff going on
with the 2005 GTO.

Same goes for the Mustang. After 25 years of Fox-bodied cars, with
little of substance changing from one model year to the next, the folks
at Ford have finally given us an all-new Mustang with which to play.

The last Mustang GT we tested in 1999 turned out 260 hp from its
4.6-liter two-valve V8. On the track that translated into 5.88 seconds
to 60 mph, with the quarter-mile passing in 14.44 seconds at 96.9 mph.
Of course, the much more powerful SVT Mustang Cobra we ran through our
AutoFile tests in 2003 blew that away with a 4.85-second 0-to-60-mph
time, but the new Cobra has yet to come out, so we'll hold onto those
figures for now.
>From the moment you slide behind the wheel, crank that awesome

small-block and fling it into a corner, you know this GTO shares little
with its namesake other than you can have a bunch of fun behind the
wheel.

The new Mustang comes in two distinct flavors. The base model, a lively
six-cylinder churning out 210 horses and 240 lb-ft of torque, makes up
the bulk of Ford's pony car sales, a full 70 percent. It uses a newly
designed 4.0-liter engine with overhead cams in place of the aging
3.8-liter ohv V6 that made its home for so long underhood. For our
purposes, we turned to the backstraight-blazing, V8-powered GT, with
300 horses' worth of thoroughbred top-end married to 320 lb-ft of
clomping off-the-line grunt. It depends on a highly revised version of
the 4.6-liter, using three-valve heads now as well as variable-valve
timing.

Our first few experiences with the Mustang GT have proven Ford still
knows a thing or two about building a fun car, despite the blahness the
Five Hundred imparts. The way the Mustang sounds, feels and
drives-from the ample grunt under the hood to the exhaust rumble to
the clearly improved suspension and steering response-has made for
many a happy staffer around One AutoWeek Tower.

Of course, our first time behind the wheel of a GTO more than a year
ago proved more than fun, too. We thought the steering felt fine,
calling it "quick, crisp and responsive." We especially enjoyed how
well the vehicle handled, its "chassis almost unflappable over road
imperfections and through aggressively driven curves," its
"superior body control... particularly fine when hustled full-on
through tighter combinations of turns." We loved the notchiness of
the six-speed, and found the interior design fresh and exciting. The
skin? Well, we had nothing bad to say about it; we simply called it
forgettable.

Bringing the more-powerful-for-2005 model to the track opened some
eyes, to say the least. All the straight-line numbers hit right where
we had expected-5.15 seconds to 60 mph, 13.75 seconds in the
quarter-mile at 104.1 mph, trumping the Mustang's numbers across the
board-but the GTO didn't feel nearly as lively or as sharp as we
had remembered. The reason? Driving the car back-to-back with the new
Mustang GT.

The difference was most marked through the slalom course. The GTO's
steering, while fine on its own, felt hugely lumbering and slow
compared to the Mustang's. The Pontiac's handling style requir­ed
us to predict each cone by turning the wheel early, then waiting half a
heartbeat for the car to follow behind. Doing so made the car a breeze
to drive, as it could basically be steered on the throttle like that
all day long. Problem was, switching to the Ford almost always resulted
in a spinout the first go-through the cones because our hands would
instinctively try turning in early, only to have the car react in a
flash and loop. In other words, where the GTO's steering wheel-and
everything it's connected to-felt heavy, muddy, even numb, the
Mustang's had a sharp, immediate turn-in feel and bristled with
visceral sensations of the road at every turn.

The Mustang felt sharp throughout the test. Down the drag strip the
shifter made for quicker, more precise shifts than the GTO's, even if
it ultimately couldn't match the extra 100 horses the Pontiac's
increased displacement affords. The Mustang's brakes felt better,
too, even though both cars required 128 feet to stop from 60 mph. After
several deceleration runs the GTO's brakes started to shimmy on
application, indicating a warp or other negative wear pattern; the
Mustang's felt fine.

Overall, the difference with the Mustang mechanicals was you could
actually feel what they were doing; the GTO, in the immortal words of
one staffer, felt like it was wearing an auto-condom. A good set of
performance tires could put the Mustang into another league altogether.

As for style, the Ford looks cooler, inside and out, and cool counts in
this segment. Sure, the Mustang takes zero styling risks as it is
practically a carbon copy of the '67 fastback, but the '67 was a
cool-looking car. The GTO, on the other hand, is total blandsville. It
leaves absolutely no impression whatsoever.

Then there's the matter of the moolah. The pony car segment has
traditionally been a good one in terms of bang-for-buck deals. In that
regard, the 2005 Mustang GT is a hard-core traditionalist, making for
one heckuva compelling package when you consider it costs thousands of
dollars less than the Pontiac.

For our tastes, in the end, pure might doesn't necessarily prove
right. For all the GTO's brute power-its liter-and-a-half,
100-horse advantage, its quarter-second-quicker 0-to-60-mph time,
three-tenths- quicker quarter-mile time-not to mention the car's
hefty price premium, it simply cannot match the Mustang for feel, style
or value.

Overall, the Mustang backs up its looks with a handling performance
that puts to shame the GTO's. Any minor shortfall at the strip was
worth how brightly the Mustang took on the cones. Sound the bell,
it's no contest: The winner is the Mustang GT.

2005 FORD MUSTANG GT PREMIUM - SPECS AND ROAD-TEST DATA

BASE PRICE (INCLUDES DELIVERY): $26,330
AS-TESTED PRICE: $27,395
HORSEPOWER: 300 @ 5750 rpm

ENGINE
Front-longitudinal 4.6-liter/281-cid sohc V8
Output: 300 hp @ 5750 rpm, 320 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
Compression ratio: 9.8:1
Fuel requirement: 87 octane

DRIVETRAIN
Rear-wheel drive
Transmission: Five-speed manual
Final drive ratio: 3.55:1

CHASSIS
Unibody two-door coupe

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Track (front/rear): 62.6/62.5 in
Length/width/height: 188.0/73.9/55.4 in
Curb weight: 3483 lbs

SUSPENSION
Front: Independent MacPherson struts, coil springs, antiroll bar
Rear: Three-link solid axle with coil springs,
gas-charged shock absorbers, Panhard rod, antiroll bar

BRAKES/WHEELS/TIRES
Vented discs front and rear, ABS;
aluminum 235/55ZR-17 Pirelli PZero Nero M+S
----

Patrick
'93 Cobra

  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-15-2005, 23:01   #2 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

I'm confused. First, where's the '05 Stang's quarter mile time? All I
see is that the '05 GTO was "three-tenths-quicker" than the Stang, and
that the '05 GTO turned in a 13.75 @ 104.1. Second, it says the 20 ci
smaller, 50 hp weaker '04 ran a 13.82 @ 103.0. 50 hp is worth only 1
mph? 100 hp more than the Mustang is worth only 7 tenths? There's
something wrong with both numbers.

Anyway, I don't know the source of this article, but I say anyone who
prefers a 300 hp 281 to a 400 hp 364 is nuts. This "value" thing --
give it a rest. I just can't believe the apathy of all the old school
gearheads for a 400 hp car. Hemi Cudas, that wish they actually put
out 400 hp, are going for six figures all day long. I mean, if that's
the value of a 400 hp bone stock car in today's marketplace, then it's
the GTO that is an incredible bargain. And with a few mods, a little
boost, forget about it.

180 Out

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2005, 12:01   #3 (permalink)
RT
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

On 15 Apr 2005 21:08:54 -0700, one80out@hotmail.com wrote:

>I'm confused. First, where's the '05 Stang's quarter mile time? All I
>see is that the '05 GTO was "three-tenths-quicker" than the Stang, and
>that the '05 GTO turned in a 13.75 @ 104.1. Second, it says the 20 ci
>smaller, 50 hp weaker '04 ran a 13.82 @ 103.0. 50 hp is worth only 1
>mph? 100 hp more than the Mustang is worth only 7 tenths? There's
>something wrong with both numbers.
>
>Anyway, I don't know the source of this article, but I say anyone who
>prefers a 300 hp 281 to a 400 hp 364 is nuts. This "value" thing --


In the same car ? sure. in a different car it's a whole different
story and that's what the article is all about. It shows that the
mustang, even though it has less power, will kick the GTO's ass in a
road race. On the drag-strip, sure, it's all about power and how it's
planted to the pavement (which the mustang is better at, solid axle !)


>give it a rest. I just can't believe the apathy of all the old school
>gearheads for a 400 hp car. Hemi Cudas, that wish they actually put
>out 400 hp, are going for six figures all day long. I mean, if that's
>the value of a 400 hp bone stock car in today's marketplace, then it's
>the GTO that is an incredible bargain. And with a few mods, a little


a bargain ? sure, if you're just into hp and dont' care about handling
or body style.
Gm has to face the music. The current GTO is a failure.

>boost, forget about it.
>
>180 Out


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 13:01   #4 (permalink)
Nicholas D
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt


<one80out@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113624534.287147.76630@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I'm confused. First, where's the '05 Stang's quarter mile time? All I
> see is that the '05 GTO was "three-tenths-quicker" than the Stang, and
> that the '05 GTO turned in a 13.75 @ 104.1. Second, it says the 20 ci
> smaller, 50 hp weaker '04 ran a 13.82 @ 103.0. 50 hp is worth only 1
> mph? 100 hp more than the Mustang is worth only 7 tenths? There's
> something wrong with both numbers.
>
> Anyway, I don't know the source of this article, but I say anyone who
> prefers a 300 hp 281 to a 400 hp 364 is nuts. This "value" thing --
> give it a rest. I just can't believe the apathy of all the old school
> gearheads for a 400 hp car. Hemi Cudas, that wish they actually put
> out 400 hp, are going for six figures all day long. I mean, if that's
> the value of a 400 hp bone stock car in today's marketplace, then it's
> the GTO that is an incredible bargain. And with a few mods, a little
> boost, forget about it.
>
> 180 Out




The article lets you do the math for yourself. The GTO with 1.4more liters
and 100 more hp was 0-60 in 5.15sec, 13.75sec 1/4mile. The Stang was .25
slower 0-60 that is 5.4. The Stang was also three tenths slower 1/4 mile
henceforth 14.05. As far as the GTO being slightly quicker then the previous
year perhaps the larger 6L motor is heavier then the previous 5.7 or maybe
they had to change gearing or something else that gobbled up the extra 50hp.
Again with 100 hp more then the Stang it is only .3 seconds quicker then the
Stang not 7 tenths not sure were that came from. Remember the Mustang weighs
much less then the GTO (over 200lbs less) and speed is based on more factors
then hp and weight such as gearing for instance. Source of article. It
mentions around the One Autoweek Tower so I imagine this is an Autoweek
article. :) Now other factors to consider that make one choose a car with
less hp over another. First off it clearly indicated that the GTO is an
Aussie made car the Mustang American, asking an American consumer that means
a whole lot. Right now you are basing your decision on a hp or cubes for
that matter. How about handling, breaking, price, style? Also aftermarket
accessories. The potential of the Mustang alone is worth more then shoving a
6L into a car that looks like a Pontiac Sunbird.

Oh keep in mind the '04 Cobra had whopping better times then the GTO with a
0-60 of 4.85sec 1/4 mile while not listed have been noted well in the 12's.
I would imagine the GTO is more lined up for a Cobra rather then a GT.

-Nick


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2005, 15:01   #5 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

Nicholas D wrote:

> perhaps the larger 6L motor is heavier
> then the previous 5.7 or maybe
> they had to change gearing or something
> else that gobbled up the extra 50hp.


'05 GTO: wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1; '04 GTO: wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1. So
the gear is the same and the weight is less (although a mere 34 lb diff
may be accounted for by the weight of gas, the test driver, etc.)

These numbers are from the side by side test of '05 GTO vs. '05 Mustang
in January '05 Car and Driver
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
and the December 2003 test of the '04 GTO
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
.. C&

C&D also got a 5 mph trap speed improvement from the additional 50 '05
horses, and the '045 was 0.7 seconds quicker in the quarter. These
numbers make sense. The Autoweek numbers don't.

Here are all the vital stats from the C&D stories:

'04 GTO:

0-60: 5.3. 1/4 mile: 14.0 @ 102; 346 ci; 350 hp @ 5200; 365 lb-ft @
4000; wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1

'05 GTO:

0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.1 @ 107; 364 ci; 400 hp @ 6600; 400 lb-ft @
4400; wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1

'05 Mustang GT:

0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.8 @ 103; 281 ci; 300 hp @ 5750; 320 lb-ft @
4500; wt: 3575; gear: 3.55:1

> Again with 100 hp more then the Stang it is only
> .3 seconds quicker then the Stang not 7 tenths
> not sure were that came from.


I got my wires crossed between Autoweek's numbers showing the '05 GTO
being seven tenths quicker than the '04 GTO, and three tenths quicker
than the '05 Stang. I meant to type "3" but it came out "7". For the
GTO to beat the Stang by seven tenths would be OK (e.g., see the C&D
numbers); three tenths from a car that's only 200 lbs heavier and 100
hp stronger and I say something's wrong.

> How about handling, breaking, price,
> style?


Handling and braking: From the C&D comparo:

'05 GTO: wt ft/r %: 53.8/46.2; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .88; vented discs/vented discs; 70-0: 167
ft;
'05 Stang: wt ft/r %: 52.5/47.5; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .89; vented discs/solid discs; 70-0: 170
ft.

> Also aftermarket accessories.


Potential for mods is where the GTO leaves the Stand far in the dust.
First, it comes with IRS and an utterly bullet-proof 6-spd, while the
Stang comes with a solid axle that will NEVER equal IRS in street
handling, and the latest update of the failure-prone T-5. So the same
aftermarket handling improvements to both will still leave the Stang
behind.

And as far as the engines, well that was my point to begin with, that a
364 ci LS2 (that means with the GOOD LS6-style heads and the ability to
pop it out to 400+ ci no problem) kills the GT mod motor off the
assembly line, and with a few mods will kill the GT, the Cobra, AND the
GT500 too. There is no replacement for displacement. Already there's
a Vortech blower/intercooler kit for the '04 GTO
http://www.vortechsuperchargers.com/...ar/04_gto.html : 481
hp and 435 lb-ft @ 7-8 psi. That's with a stock baseline of 350 hp,
365 lb-ft. Adding the same percentage increases to an '05 puts you at
550 hp, 477 lb-ft.

Finally, as far as "value," the '05 GTO is already selling at or below
list price. The '05 Stang is barely there. With added dealer profit
of $5000+ the Stang GT verts are going for thousands MORE than the GTO.
There's also the collectibility factor. I predict the GTO will be the
Hemi Cuda of 2030, and the '05 Stang will be the '65 with the 289-2v.
As in $1 mil for a perfect low miler, vs. $20,000. Remember, no one
bought the Hemis when they were new either.

180 Out

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2005, 15:01   #6 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

Nicholas D wrote:

> perhaps the larger 6L motor is heavier
> then the previous 5.7 or maybe
> they had to change gearing or something
> else that gobbled up the extra 50hp.


'05 GTO: wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1; '04 GTO: wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1. So
the gear is the same and the weight is less (although a mere 34 lb diff
may be accounted for by the weight of gas, the test driver, etc.)

These numbers are from the side by side test of '05 GTO vs. '05 Mustang
in January '05 Car and Driver
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
and the December 2003 test of the '04 GTO
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
.. C&

C&D also got a 5 mph trap speed improvement from the additional 50 '05
horses, and the '045 was 0.7 seconds quicker in the quarter. These
numbers make sense. The Autoweek numbers don't.

Here are all the vital stats from the C&D stories:

'04 GTO:

0-60: 5.3. 1/4 mile: 14.0 @ 102; 346 ci; 350 hp @ 5200; 365 lb-ft @
4000; wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1

'05 GTO:

0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.1 @ 107; 364 ci; 400 hp @ 6600; 400 lb-ft @
4400; wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1

'05 Mustang GT:

0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.8 @ 103; 281 ci; 300 hp @ 5750; 320 lb-ft @
4500; wt: 3575; gear: 3.55:1

> Again with 100 hp more then the Stang it is only
> .3 seconds quicker then the Stang not 7 tenths
> not sure were that came from.


I got my wires crossed between Autoweek's numbers showing the '05 GTO
being seven tenths quicker than the '04 GTO, and three tenths quicker
than the '05 Stang. I meant to type "3" but it came out "7". For the
GTO to beat the Stang by seven tenths would be OK (e.g., see the C&D
numbers); three tenths from a car that's only 200 lbs heavier and 100
hp stronger and I say something's wrong.

> How about handling, breaking, price,
> style?


Handling and braking: From the C&D comparo:

'05 GTO: wt ft/r %: 53.8/46.2; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .88; vented discs/vented discs; 70-0: 167
ft;
'05 Stang: wt ft/r %: 52.5/47.5; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .89; vented discs/solid discs; 70-0: 170
ft.

> Also aftermarket accessories.


Potential for mods is where the GTO leaves the Stand far in the dust.
First, it comes with IRS and an utterly bullet-proof 6-spd, while the
Stang comes with a solid axle that will NEVER equal IRS in street
handling, and the latest update of the failure-prone T-5. So the same
aftermarket handling improvements to both will still leave the Stang
behind.

And as far as the engines, well that was my point to begin with, that a
364 ci LS2 (that means with the GOOD LS6-style heads and the ability to
pop it out to 400+ ci no problem) kills the GT mod motor off the
assembly line, and with a few mods will kill the GT, the Cobra, AND the
GT500 too. There is no replacement for displacement. Already there's
a Vortech blower/intercooler kit for the '04 GTO
http://www.vortechsuperchargers.com/...ar/04_gto.html : 481
hp and 435 lb-ft @ 7-8 psi. That's with a stock baseline of 350 hp,
365 lb-ft. Adding the same percentage increases to an '05 puts you at
550 hp, 477 lb-ft.

Finally, as far as "value," the '05 GTO is already selling at or below
list price. The '05 Stang is barely there. With added dealer profit
of $5000+ the Stang GT verts are going for thousands MORE than the GTO.
There's also the collectibility factor. I predict the GTO will be the
Hemi Cuda of 2030, and the '05 Stang will be the '65 with the 289-2v.
As in $1 mil for a perfect low miler, vs. $20,000. Remember, no one
bought the Hemis when they were new either.

180 Out

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2005, 15:01   #7 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

180 Out wrote:

> C&D also got a 5 mph trap speed improvement
> from the additional 50 '05 horses, and the '045
> was 0.7 seconds quicker in the quarter.  These
> numbers make sense.  The Autoweek numbers don't.


This should be "C&D also got a 5 mph trap speed improvement over the
'04 GTO from the additional 50 '05 horses, and the '05 GTO was 0.7
seconds quicker in the quarter than the '05 Mustang GT. These numbers
make sense.  The Autoweek numbers don't."

Haste makes waste.

180 Out

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2005, 17:01   #8 (permalink)
Joe
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

one80out@hotmail.com wrote in
news:1113858964.051934.41570@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> Nicholas D wrote:
>
>> perhaps the larger 6L motor is heavier
>> then the previous 5.7 or maybe
>> they had to change gearing or something
>> else that gobbled up the extra 50hp.

>
> '05 GTO: wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1; '04 GTO: wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1.
> So the gear is the same and the weight is less (although a mere 34
> lb diff may be accounted for by the weight of gas, the test driver,
> etc.)
>
> These numbers are from the side by side test of '05 GTO vs. '05
> Mustang in January '05 Car and Driver
> http://www.caranddriver.com/article....15&article_id=

8908
> &page_number=1 and the December 2003 test of the '04 GTO
> http://www.caranddriver.com/article....rticle_id=7360

&
> page_number=1 . C&
>
> C&D also got a 5 mph trap speed improvement from the additional 50
> '05 horses, and the '045 was 0.7 seconds quicker in the quarter.
> These numbers make sense. The Autoweek numbers don't.
>
> Here are all the vital stats from the C&D stories:
>
> '04 GTO:
>
> 0-60: 5.3. 1/4 mile: 14.0 @ 102; 346 ci; 350 hp @ 5200; 365 lb-ft @
> 4000; wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1
>
> '05 GTO:
>
> 0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.1 @ 107; 364 ci; 400 hp @ 6600; 400 lb-ft @
> 4400; wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1
>
> '05 Mustang GT:
>
> 0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.8 @ 103; 281 ci; 300 hp @ 5750; 320 lb-ft @
> 4500; wt: 3575; gear: 3.55:1
>
>> Again with 100 hp more then the Stang it is only
>> .3 seconds quicker then the Stang not 7 tenths
>> not sure were that came from.

>
> I got my wires crossed between Autoweek's numbers showing the '05
> GTO being seven tenths quicker than the '04 GTO, and three tenths
> quicker than the '05 Stang. I meant to type "3" but it came out
> "7". For the GTO to beat the Stang by seven tenths would be OK
> (e.g., see the C&D numbers); three tenths from a car that's only 200
> lbs heavier and 100 hp stronger and I say something's wrong.
>
>> How about handling, breaking, price,
>> style?

>
> Handling and braking: From the C&D comparo:
>
> '05 GTO: wt ft/r %: 53.8/46.2; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
> sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .88; vented discs/vented discs; 70-0:
> 167 ft;
> '05 Stang: wt ft/r %: 52.5/47.5; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
> sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .89; vented discs/solid discs; 70-0:
> 170 ft.
>
>> Also aftermarket accessories.

>
> Potential for mods is where the GTO leaves the Stand far in the
> dust. First, it comes with IRS and an utterly bullet-proof 6-spd,
> while the Stang comes with a solid axle that will NEVER equal IRS in
> street handling, and the latest update of the failure-prone T-5. So
> the same aftermarket handling improvements to both will still leave
> the Stang behind.
>
> And as far as the engines, well that was my point to begin with,
> that a 364 ci LS2 (that means with the GOOD LS6-style heads and the
> ability to pop it out to 400+ ci no problem) kills the GT mod motor
> off the assembly line, and with a few mods will kill the GT, the
> Cobra, AND the GT500 too. There is no replacement for displacement.
> Already there's a Vortech blower/intercooler kit for the '04 GTO
> http://www.vortechsuperchargers.com/...ar/04_gto.html :
> 481 hp and 435 lb-ft @ 7-8 psi. That's with a stock baseline of 350
> hp, 365 lb-ft. Adding the same percentage increases to an '05 puts
> you at 550 hp, 477 lb-ft.
>
> Finally, as far as "value," the '05 GTO is already selling at or
> below list price. The '05 Stang is barely there. With added dealer
> profit of $5000+ the Stang GT verts are going for thousands MORE
> than the GTO.
> There's also the collectibility factor. I predict the GTO will be
> the
> Hemi Cuda of 2030, and the '05 Stang will be the '65 with the
> 289-2v. As in $1 mil for a perfect low miler, vs. $20,000.
> Remember, no one bought the Hemis when they were new either.
>
> 180 Out


Except for the value/collectibility thing, I agree 100%. The LS motor
coupled with the 6-speed and IRS is killer. With that combo I can
easily forgive its looks.

Joe
Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies
Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2005, 18:01   #9 (permalink)
Nicholas D
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt


<one80out@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113858964.051934.41570@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Nicholas D wrote:
>
>> perhaps the larger 6L motor is heavier
>> then the previous 5.7 or maybe
>> they had to change gearing or something
>> else that gobbled up the extra 50hp.

>
> '05 GTO: wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1; '04 GTO: wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1. So
> the gear is the same and the weight is less (although a mere 34 lb diff
> may be accounted for by the weight of gas, the test driver, etc.)
>
> These numbers are from the side by side test of '05 GTO vs. '05 Mustang
> in January '05 Car and Driver
> http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
> and the December 2003 test of the '04 GTO
> http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
> . C&
>
> C&D also got a 5 mph trap speed improvement from the additional 50 '05
> horses, and the '045 was 0.7 seconds quicker in the quarter. These
> numbers make sense. The Autoweek numbers don't.
>
> Here are all the vital stats from the C&D stories:
>
> '04 GTO:
>
> 0-60: 5.3. 1/4 mile: 14.0 @ 102; 346 ci; 350 hp @ 5200; 365 lb-ft @
> 4000; wt: 3821; gear: 3.46:1
>
> '05 GTO:
>
> 0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.1 @ 107; 364 ci; 400 hp @ 6600; 400 lb-ft @
> 4400; wt: 3787; gear: 3.46:1
>
> '05 Mustang GT:
>
> 0-60: 4.8; 1/4 mile: 13.8 @ 103; 281 ci; 300 hp @ 5750; 320 lb-ft @
> 4500; wt: 3575; gear: 3.55:1
>
>> Again with 100 hp more then the Stang it is only
>> .3 seconds quicker then the Stang not 7 tenths
>> not sure were that came from.

>
> I got my wires crossed between Autoweek's numbers showing the '05 GTO
> being seven tenths quicker than the '04 GTO, and three tenths quicker
> than the '05 Stang. I meant to type "3" but it came out "7". For the
> GTO to beat the Stang by seven tenths would be OK (e.g., see the C&D
> numbers); three tenths from a car that's only 200 lbs heavier and 100
> hp stronger and I say something's wrong.
>
>> How about handling, breaking, price,
>> style?

>
> Handling and braking: From the C&D comparo:
>
> '05 GTO: wt ft/r %: 53.8/46.2; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
> sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .88; vented discs/vented discs; 70-0: 167
> ft;
> '05 Stang: wt ft/r %: 52.5/47.5; strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils,
> sway bar; 300 ft skid pad g: .89; vented discs/solid discs; 70-0: 170
> ft.
>
>> Also aftermarket accessories.

>
> Potential for mods is where the GTO leaves the Stand far in the dust.
> First, it comes with IRS and an utterly bullet-proof 6-spd, while the
> Stang comes with a solid axle that will NEVER equal IRS in street
> handling, and the latest update of the failure-prone T-5. So the same
> aftermarket handling improvements to both will still leave the Stang
> behind.
>
> And as far as the engines, well that was my point to begin with, that a
> 364 ci LS2 (that means with the GOOD LS6-style heads and the ability to
> pop it out to 400+ ci no problem) kills the GT mod motor off the
> assembly line, and with a few mods will kill the GT, the Cobra, AND the
> GT500 too. There is no replacement for displacement. Already there's
> a Vortech blower/intercooler kit for the '04 GTO
> http://www.vortechsuperchargers.com/...ar/04_gto.html : 481
> hp and 435 lb-ft @ 7-8 psi. That's with a stock baseline of 350 hp,
> 365 lb-ft. Adding the same percentage increases to an '05 puts you at
> 550 hp, 477 lb-ft.
>
> Finally, as far as "value," the '05 GTO is already selling at or below
> list price. The '05 Stang is barely there. With added dealer profit
> of $5000+ the Stang GT verts are going for thousands MORE than the GTO.
> There's also the collectibility factor. I predict the GTO will be the
> Hemi Cuda of 2030, and the '05 Stang will be the '65 with the 289-2v.
> As in $1 mil for a perfect low miler, vs. $20,000. Remember, no one
> bought the Hemis when they were new either.
>
> 180 Out


To be fair we must also conclude this. The GTO is more in line with the
Cobra or so it should be. If there was a retro Lemans this would be more
suitable to compare with the run of the mill Mustang/ GT. Here we can see
both cars IRS with 6 speeds too. The Cobra out handled and performed the GTO
'04 when they were both produced. There are many comparisons that were done
in '04 with the GTO Cobra. For instance:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....&page_number=5
Wait till the Cobra makes its come back by the end of the year to have a
fairer comparison although IMO the regular GT does a hell of a job!

Motortrend has an interesting article on the GTO of '04 mentioning the Cobra
as well. http://motortrend.com/roadtests/coup...gto/index.html If
you go on over all car the fox platform with its 25 year old chassis really
was needing a replacement. The performance stats in a fair comparison was
Cobra 0-60 4.8 13.0 1/4mile @ 110.7 mph to GTO 0-60 5.3 13.62 1/4 mile @
104.78 mph.

Motortrend also list the '05 Stang as 0-60 5.1 1/4 mile 13.6.
http://www.lonestarstangs.com/homepage/page8.jpg Not bad for 100 less hp and
if you went to look for sticker prices you could easily afford an
aftermarket Supercharger to play catch up. MSRP for a Premium GT is $26,125.
GTO is $32.295. Compliments of http://autos.yahoo.com/.

I have to disagree with your presumption of this very new motor having a
huge aftermarket parts source. It even took the 4.6 a bit of time to catch
on with production figures probably 10 times greater then the GTO or Vette
possibly combined. You mention little mods making it go better then the
Stang. The introduction of a Whipple Supercharger should make the Mustang
over 500hp with a mere 4.6L imagine the 5.4L with one.

How many Mustang GT's are produced a year? How many GTO's? How many Cobras
(past or expected present)? Other considerable deciding factors for most are
which comes in convertible? Which has an automatic? Which has more parts
available to include aftermarket? Which is made in America?

I've always had love for Pontiac. I used to love cruising with my '68 Lemans
convertible with sidepipes I ordered from JC Whitney when I was a poor H.S.
student. What a beat up project car that was but it turned heads wearing
primer grey lol. Wish I could have restored it. Sold it to help goto College
wonder if it's worth it looking back lol. I also have a love for the Trans
Am and its killer looks. Thats one thing that I miss with this GTO, it has
the looks of a Sunbird, nice interior but much left to desire. The Mustang
was and seems to always be my true love. It allows us to create our own
image at an affordable price. It created the tuner car market. The '05's
looks are incredible. The interior is growing on me. When I went to the NY
Auto show I had the pleasure to speak to a rep who said they are going to
bring back as many of the classic names and styles as possible. This
includes the California Special, Shelby, Saleen, Mach I, and so forth. Talks
are going on with the late Mr. Shinoda's wife for use of the Boss nameplate
and possibly a newer ASC Mclaren might be on the horizon. I am very happy
with the direction of the Stang and hope it brings back the other pony cars
like the Camaro and Trans Am. It's nice to see Hemi's around again too.
Here's to a brighter future!

-Nicholas


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2005, 19:01   #10 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Mustang Kicks GTO Butt

Nicholas D wrote:

> To be fair we must also conclude this. The
> GTO is more in line with the
> Cobra or so it should be. . . .
> There are many comparisons that were done
> in '04 with the GTO Cobra. For instance:
> http://www.roadandtrack.com/ar ticle.asp?section_id=31&articl

e_id=1368...

R&T showed the MSRP of the '04 Cobra to be $35,895, and the GTO to be
$33,190 -- a $2,704 diff in favor of the GTO . That's about halfway to
that 481 hp, 435 lb-ft, Vortech supercharger kit. The other half you
could get from the fact that the '04 GTO was heavily discounted, while
the '04 Cobra never was. Yet R&T chose the GTO over the Cobra, by
588.1 total points to 574.4. How much higher would the GTO have scored
if it had been packing the extra 50 hp, 35 lb-ft, 18 ci, and better
cylinder heads of the '05?

So when comparing either the '04 or '05 GTO to the '04 Cobra, at least
according to R&T the "value" shoe is on the other foot.

> Motortrend also list the '05 Stang as 0-60 5.1 1/4 mile 13.6.


I mis-typed the '05 Mustang GT's 0-60 as recorded by C&D. It was 5.1
secs, not 4.8. The '05 GTO was 4.8. Also, I copied and pasted the
GTO's "strut, coils, sway bar; IRS, coils, sway bar" to the Mustang
and didn't change it to "strut, coils, sway bar; solid axle, coils,
sway bar."

> I have to disagree with your presumption of
> this very new motor having a huge aftermarket parts source.


Although Chevy is calling the 6.0 LS2 the "4th gen" SBC, it's really
not a lot different than the LS1 that's been out since the 1997 model
year. The "3rd gen" is also used extensively in GM trucks and SUV's
(and ironically these engines run the LS6-style heads that the '04 GTO
lacked). There are lots of speed parts out already -- cams, intakes,
valvetrain upgrades, stroker cranks, blowers -- and with hundreds of
thousands of Gen 3/Gen 4's on the road there is an ever-growing market
for more.

Bottom line is, I am very uncomfortable with being the designated GTO
spokesmodel in this thread comparing it to the '05 Stang. I love the
new Stang, and I am as tempted to buy one as I have ever been in a
lifetime of buying used only. But I like the GTO better. The bland
styling -- which is the most often heard complaint -- is actually a
plus to me.

And really, the reason I jumped into this thread is no one who imagines
him/herself to be any kind of an enthusiast should EVER look down on
anything with 400 hp. When I see all the genuflecting going on toward
old heaps from the '60's that only dreamed of 300 hp, much less an
honest 400 net hp, it bugs me to see the GTO so disrespected by the
same crowd. There are VERY FEW muscle cars that could do a 13.1 @ 107
bone stock. Just Google up one of those "50 Fastest Muscle Car"
compilations and see what I mean. In fact, I just did, and here are
the TOP TEN:

1 1966 427 Cobra 12.20@118 427 8V 425 4-Speed 3.54 CC 11/65
2 1966 Corvette 427 12.8@112 L72 427 425 4-Speed 3.36 CD 11/65
3 1969 Road Runner 12.91@111.8 440 Six BBL 390 4-Speed 4.10 SS 6/69
4 1970 Hemi Cuda 13.10@107.12 426 Hemi 425 4-Speed 3.54 CC 11/69
5 1970 Chevelle SS454 13.12@107.01 454 LS6 450 4-Speed 3.55 CC 11/69
6 1969 Camaro 13.16@110.21 427 ZL1 430 4-Speed 4.10 HC 6/69
7 1968 Corvette 13.30@108 427 6V 435 4-Speed 3.70 HC 5/68
8 1970 Road Runner 13.34@107.5 426 Hemi 425 automatic 4.10 SS 12/69
9 1970 Buick GS Stage I 13.38@105.5 455 Stage I 360 automatic 3.64 MT
1/70
10 1968 Corvette 427 13.41@109.5 L72 427 425 4-Speed 3.55 CD 6/68

ONLY 5-6 EVER THAT COULD RUN WITH A BOX STOCK '05 GTO!!! And just try
to buy a '66 427 Shelby Cobra or a '69 ZL-1 Camaro, or any of these
cars, for $32,295.

180 Out

  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Fordforums Community > USENET NewsGroups > rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:16.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.