It has been compared to a V6 Mustang
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/05/17/battle-of-the-sixes-mustang-v6-takes-on-genesis-coupe-and-370z/
It (the Mustang) loses with an asterisk. but that $5000 asterisk buys a lot of tire to equal things out.
It has been compared to a V6 Mustang
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/05/17/battle-of-the-sixes-mustang-v6-takes-on-genesis-coupe-and-370z/
It (the Mustang) loses with an asterisk. but that $5000 asterisk buys a lot of tire to equal things out.
This is kind of a pointless comparisson.
Kinda like saying Everclear will get your to the finished line faster than GlenLivet. True but...
Different markets all together and very little overlap. Most people buy a BMW to anounce to the world that they CAN buy a BMW. That is a box that the Mustang can not tick.
NOHOME wrote: This is kind of a pointless comparisson. Kinda like saying Everclear will get your to the finished line faster than GlenLivet. True but... Different markets all together and very little overlap. Most people buy a BMW to anounce to the world that they CAN buy a BMW. That is a box that the Mustang can not tick.
If there is a point, I think it is that if you don't care about showing people you CAN buy a BMW, you can get something with just same capability for a lot less money... And it's American!
ReverendDexter wrote: Okay, so without resorting to "every other sports car has it", explain to the dumb Mustang owner *exactly* what makes IRS *so* much better than a decent SRA setup? Near as I know, the only real advantages are the ability to have your inside wheel hit a bump and not have that affect your outside wheel's traction, the ability to do some alignment tuning, and a reduction of unsprung weight. However, this is countered by the IRS setup usually being heavier overall and the SRA being stronger and not changing camber under compression (it's always straight up, yo).
You are right about the theoretical differences, although I would add that a SRA is less costly and better for drag racing, which many Mustang owners do. But in the real world, if a SRA performs as well as an IRS, then it's as good as an IRS.
Just as an aside, how about the new Ford option of a roots supercharger on any GT for just under $8k that makes 642 HP? Lessee, performance pack GT + $8k = $45k for a Brembo-shod, stiffly sprung, 642HP American love machine? Yeah, okay, I'm listening...especially in about 5 years when the (surviving) s/c cars are down to 10k
Clyde just made the point of the thread. I think I'll go test drive one now and buy one in 4-5 years.
bravenrace wrote:NOHOME wrote: This is kind of a pointless comparisson. Kinda like saying Everclear will get your to the finished line faster than GlenLivet. True but... Different markets all together and very little overlap. Most people buy a BMW to anounce to the world that they CAN buy a BMW. That is a box that the Mustang can not tick.If there is a point, I think it is that if you don't care about showing people you CAN buy a BMW, you can get something with just same capability for a lot less money... And it's American!
I'll need to drive a Mustang, but as I've always said numbers don't tell the whole story. While many people probably do buy 5 and 7 series to announce they can, I think a much larger percentage of 3 series owners want a well sorted car that is comfortable, smooth, balance power with great brakes and steering feel.
The Mustang has always been a bag of compromises to get to the lower price point. Hey I love Mustangs, but I'm not going to cross shop an M3 and a Mustang, that's just ridiculous!
Maybe not so much anymore. Honestly, when I bought mine in 05, I specifically had several people tell me it had a "very BMW feel" after riding in it, especially in some of the ancillary switches, door levers, etc. I'm sure Bimmers are higher quality materials and the accessory stuff probably outlasts the Ford, but you're comparing 2 rear drive, performance coupes with very similar capabilities. I really can't understand NOT cross shopping them based on actual facts, previous reputations not withstanding.
Now, granted, I've always said one of the few cars I might trade mine for was a very late model M3, so I'm not guaranteeing Ford a win on the comparison....
I've ridden in 2 07 V6 models that had a higher build quality feel to them. If they've made another improvement as they have with other vehicles, then the new 'Stang should be hewn from a solid steel girder.
VanillaSky wrote: Clyde just made the point of the thread. I think I'll go test drive one now and buy one in 4-5 years.
This is my SOP.
I'm still waiting on the damn Exige though and it took 20yrs to get a 911.
miatame wrote: ... but I'm not going to cross shop an M3 and a Mustang, that's just ridiculous!
Me neither. For that price difference, there's no point in even looking at an M3! 
bravenrace wrote:miatame wrote: ... but I'm not going to cross shop an M3 and a Mustang, that's just ridiculous!Me neither. For that price difference, there's no point in even looking at an M3!
Depending on what you want... there is no point looking at either of them.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:VanillaSky wrote: Clyde just made the point of the thread. I think I'll go test drive one now and buy one in 4-5 years.This is my SOP. I'm still waiting on the damn Exige though and it took 20yrs to get a 911.
Same thing I did with our Mach 1. Did't want to pay the big bucks for it new so picked up one 7 years old with 48k miles.
I wonder how much of this is just the fact that design and manufacturing tools have allowed cheaper cars to perform like expensive cars. The ability to test stuff in the computer has allowed Ford to engineer out a lot of the weaknesses inherent in a SRA and for GM to produce pushrod V8's that are as good as much more exotic stuff.
Most cars are being produced in the same type of facilities, built with the same type of machines, designed with the same set of computational tools and built from relatively similar materials. There's still a difference in the finishes and the quality of the interiors and the use of more exotic materials and probably of the long-term durability of some systems, but it's not anything as in-your-face as it once was. A Honda is a lot closer to a Mercedes today than in 1980. There's no reason the gap between a Mustang and an M3 shouldn't also be closing.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:bravenrace wrote:Depending on what you want... there is no point looking at either of them.miatame wrote: ... but I'm not going to cross shop an M3 and a Mustang, that's just ridiculous!Me neither. For that price difference, there's no point in even looking at an M3!
That can be said for any car ever made.
Yeah, really.
GR40RACER wrote:dyintorace wrote: While avoiding the M3 vs. Mustang debate, would you be willing to give me (us) a short primer on the various Mustang GT's available? I've seen references to the Boss, the Laguna Seca and now the Brembo package. I'd love to know more. One day I might want another Mustang, as my first car was a brand new '87 LX 5.0 notchback. I still miss the sound of that motor, bone stock but with Flowmasters.In a nutshell, Ford offer 3 flavors of Mustangs currently: 1) Base V6 2) 5.0 GT 3) GT500 In all three flavors you can option a performance package that mostly adds a more aggressive suspension package. I don't believe you can get the Brembo brakes on the Base V6 no matter the options, the 5.0 GT gets the Brembos with the performance package option and the GT500 gets the Brembo on all models. The BOSS 302 is sechduled for Spring 2012 and will be offered in a base model and upgraded performance model in the Laguna Seca edition
Thanks! The helps. Sounds like a GT with the performance package will be a car to look at in 5-6 years. I'd love to have another '5.0' at some point. 
GR40RACER wrote: The BOSS 302 is sechduled for Spring 2012 and will be offered in a base model and upgraded performance model in the Laguna Seca edition
I just wanted to add some clarification to the above because I felt it could be read a couple ways.
The Boss "base model" is still a higher-end car than a GT - it has the retuned V8, upgraded wheels/tires/suspension, look-fast bits, all that. The Laguna Seca takes it that step further, adjustable shocks, some weight removal, yadda, yadda, yadda.
When I saw the above post, it almost read like you could get the Boss package on a V6 car (which would be pretty awesome, by the way, but it couldn't be called a Boss at that point).
ReverendDexter wrote:GR40RACER wrote: The BOSS 302 is sechduled for Spring 2012 and will be offered in a base model and upgraded performance model in the Laguna Seca editionI just wanted to add some clarification to the above because I felt it could be read a couple ways. The Boss "base model" is still a higher-end car than a GT - it has the retuned V8, upgraded wheels/tires/suspension, look-fast bits, all that. The Laguna Seca takes it that step further, adjustable shocks, some weight removal, yadda, yadda, yadda. When I saw the above post, it almost read like you could get the Boss package on a V6 car (which would be pretty awesome, by the way, but it couldn't be called a Boss at that point).
Funny you mention the V6 as I've been considering buying a '11 V6 Mustang, add a turbo kit to it and transfer the Griggs suspension I have on my GT500 over the new Mustang. The new V6 is capable of 400+ hp with a turbo kit, add a 6-speed trans and a full Griggs GR40TT suspension to it and you'd have one hell of a track car IMO.
I am LOL-ing pretty hard at the comments that the Genesis Driver is some refined person with fine tastes in sports cars and Mustang drivers are knuckle draggers.
I have 2 friends with 3.8GT Gensis and both think they are the fastest things on the road - usual comments "I bet the Genny would kill that thing" Here in toronto we have tons of them, usually driven by punks who try to race EVERYTHING. I have had sevral 3.8GTs and 2.0L try to race me in my 2000 SiR.. revving back and forth at the light, doing fly by's .. the reason they got them is that its a cheap performance car for the $$$ not becasue they are refined people with high tastes. After riding in the 997S my one friend said "I guess I didn't realize just how slow my car is"
Gensis drivers feel the need to prove something . the guy in a 400hp Mustang wouldn't bother - he know's he's faster.
Gensis = New IROC!
PS: I work @ GM , Drive Hondas - Corvairs - Race a vette and a 997S ... I would def. buy a new mustang over the Camaro or the Gensis. Not because it can beat an M3 (who cares - how many $2009 challenge cars would lay a raping on an M3?) but becasue I like the car. Very few people will every drive either car to their limits. the Gensis is nice, so is the M3 , but 400hp for that kind of money is hard to argue with.
actually I would probaby just get a used Z06 :)
After years of lagging behind, the new 5.0 essentially skips ahead two or three generations in the horsepower wars:
Just to clear up some misinformation from earlier in the thread, the M3 does have the Competition Package. However, the Mustang does have the Brembo Package (which includes the 19" wheels and stickier rubber), as well as the optional 3.73 rear end. So, I'd say the cars were comparably equipped from a performance perspective.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1010_2011_2011_ford_mustang_gt_vs_2011_bmw_m3_comparison/packages_and_pricing.html
calteg wrote: An M3 beater that is going to depreciate like a rock in 3 years? Sign me up!
Unlike the way new BMWs depreciate 
I'd have to drive both cars and decide for myself which one I prefer. I've driven the previous model Mustang and it just plain felt big to me. I don't have any seat time in an M3 newer than the E36. I do have to say that Ford has taken one heck of a jump forward with the new 5.0 though.
GR40RACER wrote:ReverendDexter wrote:Funny you mention the V6 as I've been considering buying a '11 V6 Mustang, add a turbo kit to it and transfer the Griggs suspension I have on my GT500 over the new Mustang. The new V6 is capable of 400+ hp with a turbo kit, add a 6-speed trans and a full Griggs GR40TT suspension to it and you'd have one hell of a track car IMO.GR40RACER wrote: The BOSS 302 is sechduled for Spring 2012 and will be offered in a base model and upgraded performance model in the Laguna Seca editionI just wanted to add some clarification to the above because I felt it could be read a couple ways. The Boss "base model" is still a higher-end car than a GT - it has the retuned V8, upgraded wheels/tires/suspension, look-fast bits, all that. The Laguna Seca takes it that step further, adjustable shocks, some weight removal, yadda, yadda, yadda. When I saw the above post, it almost read like you could get the Boss package on a V6 car (which would be pretty awesome, by the way, but it couldn't be called a Boss at that point).
Do you think that would be faster than your GT500? It's got to be much lighter. If you do this please make a build thread, okay?
MrBenjamonkey wrote:GR40RACER wrote:Do you think that would be faster than your GT500? It's got to be much lighter. If you do this please make a build thread, okay?ReverendDexter wrote:Funny you mention the V6 as I've been considering buying a '11 V6 Mustang, add a turbo kit to it and transfer the Griggs suspension I have on my GT500 over the new Mustang. The new V6 is capable of 400+ hp with a turbo kit, add a 6-speed trans and a full Griggs GR40TT suspension to it and you'd have one hell of a track car IMO.GR40RACER wrote: The BOSS 302 is sechduled for Spring 2012 and will be offered in a base model and upgraded performance model in the Laguna Seca editionI just wanted to add some clarification to the above because I felt it could be read a couple ways. The Boss "base model" is still a higher-end car than a GT - it has the retuned V8, upgraded wheels/tires/suspension, look-fast bits, all that. The Laguna Seca takes it that step further, adjustable shocks, some weight removal, yadda, yadda, yadda. When I saw the above post, it almost read like you could get the Boss package on a V6 car (which would be pretty awesome, by the way, but it couldn't be called a Boss at that point).
In some places it would be faster, but all around, I think the V6 would have to put out close to 500whp to overcome a ~400lbs. weight difference if the suspensions were the same. The deciders would be torque (GT500) and braking (V6), it would be a fun match up.
You'll need to log in to post.
