C&D Review: Mustang GT

[Jason C]

With 5 out of the last 10 (and counting!) active Car Talk threads having something to do with the new Mustang, I though I'd do my part. :devcool:

To sum up, overall they loved it. There were complaints, of course, and some of them echoed observations made by clyde and JST during their test drive. However, they seemed impressed that Ford made such a quantum leap forward without jacking up the price a few thousand.

Select excerpts (because it's not on their site yet, I'll type them out):

http://www.caranddriver.com/assets/image/9282004163749.jpg

"Throttle tip-in is more gentle and predictable. There's still some minor clutch slipping required for first-gear starts, but you can now floor the throttle at 5 mph, than suddenly jump out of it completely without inducing transmission windup."

"Speaking of gushing forth, let's move on to thrust. Three easy steps here: (1) Disable the traction control - a large button up high on the dash, just as Don Garlits intended. (2) Zing the revs to four grand. (3) Dump the clutch. The Mustang squats an inch, than launches straight, hard, and true, painting five to ten feet of expensive P Zero Nero stripes, depending on road texture. In a flash, the V-8 bangs off the rev limiter, and the tires bark on the upshift to second like deep-chested Newfoundlands. Beautiful, man - smoke, noise, velocity, enraged neighbors. Unalloyed essence of Mustang."

"Sixty mph is yours in 5.2 seconds... One hundred looms large in 13.2 seconds... And the quarter-mile is history in 13.8 seconds at 102 mph. Which means the only other pony-car poseur on the market - the costlier, slower-selling 350-horse Pontiac GTO - will be humbled at the drag strip by your lowly little Ford coupe." (Ouch! :lol: )

"The improved shift linkage and stubby new shifter... are co-conspirators in the accel figures. Throws are shorter, less notchy, and require less thought. And even the clutch effort is reduced."

"The next best thing about the Mustang is that it now rides like a modern car... Yet even with the cushier ride, handling has improved. Not even the most recent independent-rear-suspension SVT Cobra can match the new GT's skidpad grip, which now also surpasses a Nissan 350Z Touring's, come to think of it."

"Neutral, understeer, oversteer. Quite a smorgasbord. And the tail-happiness now materializes more gently, rather than in one heart-stopping twitch. Throughout, extraneous body movements are nicely damped."

"Fact is, there's a precision to this Mustang's movement that makes the old car feel like Mr. Ed. Did we just say 'precision' and 'Mustang' in the same sentence?" ( :speechle: )

"The rack-and-pinion steering still isn't a paradigm of accuracy or feel. Road textures, in particular, are transmitted only vaguely. But at least the effort is light at all speeds, the power assist never feels artificial, and there's no kickback."

"Pedal modulation is merely ho-hum, what you'd expect. from say, a Taurus. The transition from threshold braking to ABS is abrupt and tricky to predict..."

"Freeway tracking is exemplary. Gear whine is down to tolerable levels. And this platform is as flex-free as your average Montana bridge abutment. This is the first Mustang whose subassemblies and trim aren't allied in a confederacy of gronks, clinks, and shivers."

"Nevertheless, the GT exhibits a blend of compliance and response worthy of a BMW." ( :paranoid: )

"Unlike the old Stang, this one slips on comfortably - the three-spoke wheel, the pedals, and the stunted shifter all in ergonomic harmony."


(Some test results and vital stats)

Street start, 5-60: 5.9
Top speed (governed) 149
Roadholding: 0.87
3523 lbs
Weight distribution: 53.6/46.4
11.7 lbs per hp
Base price: $24,995


THE VERDICT

Highs: Vastly improved ride, slicker shifter, more power, same old friendly price.

Lows: Ho-hum steering and brakes, needlessly dour interior.

The Verdict: The best Mustang since April 17th, 1964.


Side note: Regarding the other thread concerning Plaz and his choice of black doughnuts, I'm happy to see C&D all but officially endorsing the Pilot Sport PS2's in this issue, alternatively describing them as "griptastic" and "today's must-have" in separate articles by different editors.

:twisted: http://www.wulkanizacja.waw.pl/obrazki/michelinpilotsport2.gif :twisted:

[Autarch]

I actually didn't expect them to gush about it but I never know what to expect with C&D.

That's a pretty glowing review. I personally will have to drive one to believe that the solid rear axle is worthwhile but this is the third of fourth source that has said it is tight, agile and didn't have any problems as a result.

I will have to test drive one at the end of next month when I am in the market to buy.

[Plaz]

The Verdict: The best Mustang since April 17th, 1964.[/size]



I'm glad they're getting such a good reception. I still don't want one, though.

Side note: Regarding the other thread concerning Plaz and his choice of black doughnuts, I'm happy to see C&D all but officially endorsing the Pilot Sport PS2's in this issue, alternatively describing them as "griptastic" and "today's must-have" in separate articles by different editors.

:twisted: http://www.wulkanizacja.waw.pl/obrazki/michelinpilotsport2.gif :twisted:

Okay, well, maybe next time.

[JST]

This will both date me and further reveal my Mustang predilection, but that C/D review was the best review of a Mustang they've done since the 1985/6 Mustang GT (can't remember which one). There, too, they gushed about the unexpected good chassis dynamics in the recently revised Mustang; though the change from 1984 to 1985 was not as substantial as the 2004-->2005 change, it did involve (IIRC) the addition of the Quadra-Shock rear and a bump in hp from the Holley carbuereted engine to over 200 (205?). They said the car had a Germanic way of getting down the road. Back then, the Mustang GT's calling card was value, though 20 years ago that meant less than 10K for a GT.

The more things change...

[killerdeck]

Hmmm...good article and interesting info. Thanks for the post.

[clyde]

This will both date me and further reveal my Mustang predilection, but that C/D review was the best review of a Mustang they've done since the 1985/6 Mustang GT (can't remember which one). There, too, they gushed about the unexpected good chassis dynamics in the recently revised Mustang; though the change from 1984 to 1985 was not as substantial as the 2004-->2005 change, it did involve (IIRC) the addition of the Quadra-Shock rear and a bump in hp from the Holley carbuereted engine to over 200 (205?). They said the car had a Germanic way of getting down the road.

Yeah, but do you still have that C/D issue in a box somewhere? I do. :paranoid: The 85 introduced the quad shock setup and was the final year using a carb, but I'm pretty sure that the article you're talking about was on the 1986 model (the Germanic reference). The 86 was the first fuelie and HP decreased slightly (210 to 200) while torque increased (270-285). In addition to totally new air and fuel delivery systmes, there were other changes to the engine: Pistons were different, compression got a modest bump and the heads were redesigned (poorly, and this was addressed in 87). It got a new engine management computer, ignition system, a new H pipe (that was really, really good compared to the old). It also got liquid filled motor mounts, an upgraded rear (7.5" to 8.8") and a beefier clutch.

Back then, the Mustang GT's calling card was value, though 20 years ago that meant less than 10K for a GT.

The more things change...

In '86 they went for a little more than $10k...at least to those without access to special pricing. IIRC, my first '86 which I bought new, was ~$13k, but it wasn't a stripper.

[JST]

This will both date me and further reveal my Mustang predilection, but that C/D review was the best review of a Mustang they've done since the 1985/6 Mustang GT (can't remember which one). There, too, they gushed about the unexpected good chassis dynamics in the recently revised Mustang; though the change from 1984 to 1985 was not as substantial as the 2004-->2005 change, it did involve (IIRC) the addition of the Quadra-Shock rear and a bump in hp from the Holley carbuereted engine to over 200 (205?). They said the car had a Germanic way of getting down the road.

Yeah, but do you still have that C/D issue in a box somewhere? I do. :paranoid: The 85 introduced the quad shock setup and was the final year using a carb, but I'm pretty sure that the article you're talking about was on the 1986 model (the Germanic reference). The 86 was the first fuelie and HP decreased slightly (210 to 200) while torque increased (270-285). In addition to totally new air and fuel delivery systmes, there were other changes to the engine: Pistons were different, compression got a modest bump and the heads were redesigned (poorly, and this was addressed in 87). It got a new engine management computer, ignition system, a new H pipe (that was really, really good compared to the old). It also got liquid filled motor mounts, an upgraded rear (7.5" to 8.8") and a beefier clutch.

Back then, the Mustang GT's calling card was value, though 20 years ago that meant less than 10K for a GT.

The more things change...

In '86 they went for a little more than $10k...at least to those without access to special pricing. IIRC, my first '86 which I bought new, was ~$13k, but it wasn't a stripper.

Probably don't still have it--my folks made me get rid of most of my collection of C/D. I've been a subscriber for 22 years. :paranoid: (My favorite story of all time remains their sport sedan field trip to Baja Mexico with a 6000STE and a Dodge 600--was that 1983?)

I think it was a carburetor in that car; I remember a pic of the round air cleaner. I also vaguely recall the price being listed as 9995, or something similar, but that was probably before destination or any options.

I found a brief reference to a review in C/D in Jan. 1985--that jibes with my memory, as I recall that issue being a Ten Best issue.

http://www.mustangregistry.org/lx_85_86.htm


I forgot about the upgraded rear. When did the 4 speed manual switch to 5? Was that 85, as well, or was that earlier?

[clyde]

Probably don't still have it--my folks made me get rid of most of my collection of C/D. I've been a subscriber for 22 years. :paranoid: (My favorite story of all time remains their sport sedan field trip to Baja Mexico with a 6000STE and a Dodge 600--was that 1983?)

I think it was a carburetor in that car; I remember a pic of the round air cleaner. I also vaguely recall the price being listed as 9995, or something similar, but that was probably before destination or any options.

I found a brief reference to a review in C/D in Jan. 1985--that jibes with my memory, as I recall that issue being a Ten Best issue.

http://www.mustangregistry.org/lx_85_86.htm


I forgot about the upgraded rear. When did the 4 speed manual switch to 5? Was that 85, as well, or was that earlier?

I may have to see if I can find the issue...Or maybe they used another "German" derived word when talking about the 1986 GT. :dunno:

They had 5 speeds at least as far back as 1983 (although I'm not sure if they were for the V8s or the 4cyl Turbo GTs only).

[clyde]

Not what we're looking for, but fun nonetheless.

http://www.iroc-zpostforum.com/NewsTitleBout2.htm

http://www.iroc-zpostforum.com/NewsBestGT.htm

[JST]

Not what we're looking for, but fun nonetheless.

http://www.iroc-zpostforum.com/NewsTitleBout2.htm

http://www.iroc-zpostforum.com/NewsBestGT.htm

Why don't they do timed autox runs in more of their tests? That's intriguing.

I remember the "thickness of a license plate" line. Imagining how agricultural an 87 GT would feel today makes some of their descriptions unintentionally hilarious.

[Jason C]

I'm glad they're getting such a good reception. I still don't want one, though.

I'm waffling, in true 'mudgeon style on this one. I mean, I know it's not quite as involving as other choices like the RX-8. However, it's cheap, RWD, powerful, stylin' inside and out, and the ride/handling compromises seem to be improved enough for me to take it seriously. As I said to someone else, the savings on a Mustang over something like an S2000 will buy a nice amount of Snap-On tools.



:twisted: http://www.wulkanizacja.waw.pl/obrazki/michelinpilotsport2.gif :twisted:

Okay, well, maybe next time.

Next time? How soon is that?

(Given the wear rate of the S0-3's, probably not too long. :roll: :tongue: )

[Autarch]

What I am stil fascinated by is the resounding lack of complaints about the rear axle by reviewers. Every mustang I have driven has had tremendous axle hop and extra uncertainty over bumpy terrain.

The streets near where I live aren't very good so maybe I can test drive one locally and see how it does over poor pavement. I suppose that's the best test of this new setup.

I might even take one for a test drive this weekend. Who knows.

[lemming]

can't commit to enthusiasm until i see SVT specs.

[JST]

What I am stil fascinated by is the resounding lack of complaints about the rear axle by reviewers. Every mustang I have driven has had tremendous axle hop and extra uncertainty over bumpy terrain.

The streets near where I live aren't very good so maybe I can test drive one locally and see how it does over poor pavement. I suppose that's the best test of this new setup.

I might even take one for a test drive this weekend. Who knows.

The old Mustang's axle setup was not well designed. Band-aid fixes like the Quadra-Shock helped even out the axle tramp, but could do nothing about the poor geometry that was a hangover of the late, unlamented Fairmont.

You won't notice the live axle, I bet.

[lemming]

What I am stil fascinated by is the resounding lack of complaints about the rear axle by reviewers. Every mustang I have driven has had tremendous axle hop and extra uncertainty over bumpy terrain.

The streets near where I live aren't very good so maybe I can test drive one locally and see how it does over poor pavement. I suppose that's the best test of this new setup.

I might even take one for a test drive this weekend. Who knows.

The old Mustang's axle setup was not well designed. Band-aid fixes like the Quadra-Shock helped even out the axle tramp, but could do nothing about the poor geometry that was a hangover of the late, unlamented Fairmont.

You won't notice the live axle, I bet.

how does the new mustang GT compare with the L98 corvette, for example?

just curious.

maybe a question better directed at Snyde?

it's an odd thing, i know, but i was at the dual ford-chevy dealership today (recall work done on the c5) and got to sit in both the new rustang and the new c6 (z51 spec). both are awfully nice.

what a nice difference compared to the cars that they replace, also. sheesh.

[clyde]

I don't know exactly what you're looking for with an L98 Vette v '05 Mustang GT comparo...the L98 engined Corvette I had was a 1987 model that I had in 89-90. The new GT feel better in terms of build quality, materials, etc. The GT's ride was more compliant and less choppy, but that was true of the concurrent Mustangs as well. The L98 was a stump puller in terms of bottom end torque that was challenged only by Ford's 302 at the time (even GM's 305 was no match), the new GT is not...but what is anymore? Like TD seems to have accepted the fact that BMW has moved on without him, I need to accept the fact that bottom end monsters aren't going to be made again anytime soon, I think.

[Autarch]

"I need to accept the fact that bottom end monsters aren't going to be made again anytime soon, I think."

With the resurgence of pushrod V8's that is happening in Detroit I think that you will see more and more bottom end monsters.

The LSX family of engines are all torquey beasts that will tow or pull a stump with no problem. It's all about displacement and the right cam profiles. The engine in the 300C is a monster too... you just probably don't feel it as much because of the weight of the vehicles that it is in.

One thing that I would love to see is more smallish displcament pushrod V8's. It would be an easy task to come up with a block that can take a maximum of 4 or 5 liters in V8 form that could fit under the hood of a midsize car in transverse or longitudinal applications.

[lemming]

I don't know exactly what you're looking for with an L98 Vette v '05 Mustang GT comparo...the L98 engined Corvette I had was a 1987 model that I had in 89-90. The new GT feel better in terms of build quality, materials, etc. The GT's ride was more compliant and less choppy, but that was true of the concurrent Mustangs as well. The L98 was a stump puller in terms of bottom end torque that was challenged only by Ford's 302 at the time (even GM's 305 was no match), the new GT is not...but what is anymore? Like TD seems to have accepted the fact that BMW has moved on without him, I need to accept the fact that bottom end monsters aren't going to be made again anytime soon, I think.

i just think that you and JeSTer would be more objective about the v8 in the rustang because you fellas have had v8s before so you're not so stunned by the shock and awe of the racket that they make upon WOT. remember how some people were so enamored of the 645Ci because of the "engine sound"? for a lot of people, that's likely their first exposure to v8 engines. when your n=1, of course it sounds cool.

but you guys have a better sampling, so it's much more fair for your assessments of the new modular v8 and it's characteristics versus the ohv 5litre mustang engine.

[JST]

I don't know exactly what you're looking for with an L98 Vette v '05 Mustang GT comparo...the L98 engined Corvette I had was a 1987 model that I had in 89-90. The new GT feel better in terms of build quality, materials, etc. The GT's ride was more compliant and less choppy, but that was true of the concurrent Mustangs as well. The L98 was a stump puller in terms of bottom end torque that was challenged only by Ford's 302 at the time (even GM's 305 was no match), the new GT is not...but what is anymore? Like TD seems to have accepted the fact that BMW has moved on without him, I need to accept the fact that bottom end monsters aren't going to be made again anytime soon, I think.

i just think that you and JST would be more objective about the v8 in the rustang because you fellas have had v8s before so you're not so stunned by the shock and awe of the racket that they make upon WOT. remember how some people were so enamored of the 645Ci because of the "engine sound"? for a lot of people, that's likely their first exposure to v8 engines. when your n=1, of course it sounds cool.

but you guys have a better sampling, so it's much more fair for your assessments of the new modular v8 and it's characteristics versus the ohv 5litre mustang engine.

I driven lots of 5 liter and 4.6 liter SN95s, though the last time I drove an L98 was so long ago that I can barely remember it.

The first mod 4.6, in 1996, was disappointing. Most people thought it would have more power than the 5.0, but it ended up being about the same. Still, I actually preferred the first 4.6s to the last 5.0s in the SN95--clyde really likes stump-pulling power at the expense of all else, but to me the really well built V8s are those that give good power off the line and also can rev a little bit. The early 4.6 made the 5.0 feel very dead in the upper rev range. By that time, though, the Mustang had gotten heavy enough that neither the 5.0 or the 4.6, stock, made enough power.

The 99 4.6 was a revelation--it was what the 4.6 should have been all along. It still had decent torque down low, but really came alive when you revved it.

A brief exposure to the 05, 3V 4.6 reveals that its pretty similar in terms of power delivery to the 99+ engines--there's just more of it, and the engine feels much less coarse (of course, this might have something to do with the NVH of the platform, rather than the engine itself). There's not snap-your-neck power right off the line, but the power builds very quickly with revs, and the engine handles revs extremely well (compared to other American V8s; compared to the RX-8 or the S54, it's a different story, of course).

For a mass market engine running on regular gas in a car less than 25K? This thing is fantastic. It's really an acheivement. If the engines prove tunable and durable, they have the potential of establishing the 4.6 as this generation's 5.0, I think.

[Autarch]

"For a mass market engine running on regular gas in a car less than 25K?"

Does it just run on the cheap gas?

If it does then it swings a little bit more to the forefront in my mind: If it is tuned to run on 87/89 octane then it will be easy for the aftermarket to tune another 25-35 hp with a chip for it to run on 93.

This car is bound to have an enormous aftermarket for every sort of part imagineable. For the extra money it would take to get something like an S2000 I could do some interesting things to the new Mustang.

[JST]

"For a mass market engine running on regular gas in a car less than 25K?"

Does it just run on the cheap gas?

If it does then it swings a little bit more to the forefront in my mind: If it is tuned to run on 87/89 octane then it will be easy for the aftermarket to tune another 25-35 hp with a chip for it to run on 93.

This car is bound to have an enormous aftermarket for every sort of part imagineable. For the extra money it would take to get something like an S2000 I could do some interesting things to the new Mustang.

Yes, from what I've read it runs on 87 octane.

[clyde]

This car is bound to have an enormous aftermarket for every sort of part imagineable.

What do you mean going to? It pretty much already does. It appears that Ford has been rather generous in making cars available to tuners to the extent that many already have parts on the shelves.

I think that JST is right in that this 4.6 may be the new 5.0 in many ways. The 4.6 from 96-04 will always be well supported because there were so damn many of them, but it's likely that 05+ will prove to be more popular due to the new and vastly improved chassis and the exterior design.

[lemming]

This car is bound to have an enormous aftermarket for every sort of part imagineable.

What do you mean going to? It pretty much already does. It appears that Ford has been rather generous in making cars available to tuners to the extent that many already have parts on the shelves.

I think that JST is right in that this 4.6 may be the new 5.0 in many ways. The 4.6 from 96-04 will always be well supported because there were so damn many of them, but it's likely that 05+ will prove to be more popular due to the new and vastly improved chassis and the exterior design.

so how are rx8 resale values on the private market these days, clyde? not that you would have checked lately or anything.

[clyde]

so how are rx8 resale values on the private market these days, clyde? not that you would have checked lately or anything.

Better than I would have expected 51 weeks ago. Add extra money for the shocks, and a second set of wheels and tires (along with a set of nearl :paranoid: used up Hoosiers) and I can get out of the car with more than enough to buy a GT, second set of wheels, front bar and still have some money left in my pocket.

However, if you are interested in a straight up trade for your C5 Z06, I'm more than happy to talk. :D

[lemming]

so how are rx8 resale values on the private market these days, clyde? not that you would have checked lately or anything.

Better than I would have expected 51 weeks ago. Add extra money for the shocks, and a second set of wheels and tires (along with a set of nearl :paranoid: used up Hoosiers) and I can get out of the car with more than enough to buy a GT, second set of wheels, front bar and still have some money left in my pocket.

However, if you are interested in a straight up trade for your C5 Z06, I'm more than happy to talk. :D

that would be a pretty sweet coup if you could swing that because you basically get to swap cars, you aren't quantitatively or qualitatively losing anything, and don't get whalloped financially.

do it! do it! (starsky and hutch....)

[clyde]

do it! do it! (starsky and hutch....)

Okay, should we meet somewhere in Westchester Cty, NY tomorrow to exchange cars and pink slips? :D

that would be a pretty sweet coup if you could swing that because you basically get to swap cars, you aren't quantitatively or qualitatively losing anything, and don't get whalloped financially.

It's mostly a wash (or better)...until it comes time to sell it in 12-24 months. My RX-8 will probably be worth more at that point (but dunno). I doubt that the difference would be more than a couple thousand, but that's significant to me.

And then there are the rumors of a Boss Mustang or other Bullit/Mach One type special edition in the not too distant future (aside from other option possibilities) which would make me kick myself for buying right now if I have to replace the RX-8 to do it.

[JST]

so how are rx8 resale values on the private market these days, clyde? not that you would have checked lately or anything.

Better than I would have expected 51 weeks ago. Add extra money for the shocks, and a second set of wheels and tires (along with a set of nearl :paranoid: used up Hoosiers) and I can get out of the car with more than enough to buy a GT, second set of wheels, front bar and still have some money left in my pocket.

However, if you are interested in a straight up trade for your C5 Z06, I'm more than happy to talk. :D

You know where to find a buyer for those wheels.

[lemming]

so how are rx8 resale values on the private market these days, clyde? not that you would have checked lately or anything.

Better than I would have expected 51 weeks ago. Add extra money for the shocks, and a second set of wheels and tires (along with a set of nearl :paranoid: used up Hoosiers) and I can get out of the car with more than enough to buy a GT, second set of wheels, front bar and still have some money left in my pocket.

However, if you are interested in a straight up trade for your C5 Z06, I'm more than happy to talk. :D

i don't the z06 is worth dirt these days. :cry:

but i love it and wouldn't give it up for any car short of the ford GT or the c6 z06.....or a viper. i know i can't get a ford GT and i refuse to pay over list for one. if the c6 z06 is disappointing, then it's viper GTS time. i don't like the targa and am holding out for a new GTS viper coupe.

i am curious about the SVT, though. i'd throw the 997tt out there, but since not much is known about it, and unless it get lighter......