I have decided...JST is buying a Mustang as his next car

[clyde]

That is all

[JST]

That is all

That does make my decision easier.

[FC]

That is all

That does make my decision easier.

:lol:

[dan]

you're really going out on a limb

I'll say it right now--once the dealer gouging dies down, I will own one or the other of these cars.

There's just no question about it

[bren]

I liked it better when you were advocating for the GTS.

http://www.virtrade.com/auto/pic/Dodge-Viper-GTS-Final-Edition-photo-2.jpg

[clyde]

I wasn't advocating the GTS specifically...any Viper would do...and it still would, actually...but the Mustang has certain practical advantages.

[JST]

I don't know what it is, but the Viper has never held the slightest appeal to me. I doubt I'd buy one even if they cost $20K.

[clyde]

Have you driven one?

[Mathew]

That's awfully nice of you to delegate.

[JST]

Have you driven one?

No. Do they drive well? Better than a Z06? I suppose if I were in the market for a two-seater, I would drive one before writing it off.

A car like a Viper, though, is an emotional thing, and it doesn't inspire any emotion in me. Maybe its the fact that the exhaust note sounds so bad. Dunno.

[clyde]

I have wanted one since seeing the concept on the cover of Autoweek around the 1989 NAIAS. When it started looking like it might actually go into production, I remember begging and pleading with father to put a deposit down on one. "Honest, Dad, I'll never drive it. I want *you* to have it. You deserve it. You owe it to yourself." Didn't work.

[lemming]

well....i was dubious about this (the thread topic) when the original GT specs were official and then it was posted.

but now that i've seen the SVT specs, i believe it.

am not sure the car will ever be a lightweight, but it sounds like it handles and handles and the SVT has plenty of muscle. more ray lewis and less ed reed? both bearing down on you would be terrifying.

(i'm still leaning z06:viper 85:15)

[bren]

more ray lewis and less ed reed?
Nice local references....although I think JST is more likely a Redskins fan :p


The GTS definitely stirs emotion in me. The regular 'vert Viper does not.

[dredmo]

That is all

So am I, and if my wife reads this I will die...

[clyde]

:lol:

[dredmo]

:lol:

my wife thinks she is getting a girly car next...

I don't know what to do.... :(

[bren]

Well, the Mustang was known as a "secretary's car" right? :twisted:

[JST]

more ray lewis and less ed reed?
Nice local references....although I think JST is more likely a Redskins fan :p


The GTS definitely stirs emotion in me. The regular 'vert Viper does not.

Bah.

The only problem with watching the Redskins play the Ravens is that they can't both lose.

[BahnBaum]

The only problem with watching the Redskins play the Ravens is that they can't both lose.

It could be worse.

You could be a Lions fan. :D

Alex

[bren]

It could be worse.

You could be a Lions fan. :D

Alex
That's what I was thinking.....a team so bad that their star player would rather quit than continue playing for them.

[JST]

It could be worse.

You could be a Lions fan. :D

Alex
That's what I was thinking.....a team so bad that their star player would rather quit than continue playing for them.

Could be?

At least we don't have to deal with the Ball Coach and the Second Coming and an owner that doesn't understand the meaning of the words "Salary Cap."

Or steal our team from somewhere else.

[BahnBaum]

Or steal our team from somewhere else.

Eye for an eye. :D

Alex

[JST]

[quote="JSTOr steal our team from somewhere else.

Eye for an eye. :D

Alex[/quote]

What did Cleveland ever do to Baltimore?

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[BahnBaum]

[quote="JSTOr steal our team from somewhere else.

Eye for an eye. :D

AlexTwo wrongs don't make a right.[/quote]

At least Modell and Baltimore had the respect to leave the Browns name in Cleveland.

Anyone from Baltimore knows the lack of respect that "Baltimore should just build a museum" Tagliabue and the NFL has shown the city since the Colts left. So yeah, Baltimore prolly feels that any means to get football back was justified.

Alex

[clyde]

Or steal our team from somewhere else.

Eye for an eye. :D

AlexTwo wrongs don't make a right.

At least Modell and Baltimore had the respect to leave the Browns name in Cleveland.

Anyone from Baltimore knows the lack of respect that "Baltimore should just build a museum" Tagliabue and the NFL has shown the city since the Colts left. So yeah, Baltimore prolly feels that any means to get football back was justified.

Alex

When the Browns came to Baltimore, it was a long time coming and everyone knew that it was going to happen well in advance. Compare with Irsay's removal of the Colts from Baltimore. It literally happened in the middle of the night in the during a snowstorm. The ink on the deal with Indiapolis hadn't even had 24 hours to dry when the Mayflower trucks strated pulling out (and going in different directions to try to hide the move and where it was going.
http://www.indystar.com/library/factfiles/sports/football-pro/indpls_colts/history/mayflower.jpg

[BahnBaum]

The ink on the deal with Indiapolis hadn't even had 24 hours to dry when the Mayflower trucks strated pulling out (and going in different directions to try to hide the move and where it was going.
http://www.indystar.com/library/factfiles/sports/football-pro/indpls_colts/history/mayflower.jpg

To do this day Mayflower has zero presence in Baltimore.

Alex

[JST]

[quote="JSTOr steal our team from somewhere else.

Eye for an eye. :D

AlexTwo wrongs don't make a right.

At least Modell and Baltimore had the respect to leave the Browns name in Cleveland.

Anyone from Baltimore knows the lack of respect that "Baltimore should just build a museum" Tagliabue and the NFL has shown the city since the Colts left. So yeah, Baltimore prolly feels that any means to get football back was justified.

Alex[/quote]

Modell is a son of a bitch.

There isn't a single team in the NFL that I take more pleasure in watching lose games than the "now we're from Baltimore" "Ravens." Even if they were guaranteed to lose every game 78 to nothing I would TiVo each and every single one and watch them all with relish.

EDIT: Not to say that what happened with the Colts wasn't worse. But I were a Baltimore fan, the last thing I would want is a team that fucked over another loyal set of fans. That's bad karma, and just all around unpleasant. Had the Browns not been re-established as an expansion team, I'd have rather given up pro ball entirely than see someone else's team stolen from their city and transplanted to Cleveland.

[bren]

Moving a team is far less emotional in modern day sports than was the case back in the day of the Colts exit from Baltimore. As far as Cleveland is concerned they still have the Browns, just a new coach and players...which would have happened soon enough anyway.

[clyde]

Moving a team is far less emotional in modern day sports than was the case back in the day of the Colts exit from Baltimore.

You're absolutely right. However, the Colts exit from Baltimore was one of the seminal events in modern pro sports from a business perspective. Plenty of teams had moved in the past, but none had done in such a manner as the Irsay family did it.

In comparison to the Browns and Cleveland, while I know that the fan base was rabid, I don't know if they were as dyed in the wool as the Baltimore Colts fans. I'm sure that JST has seen the movie "Diner." The wedding test... it was an understatement.

[lemming]

just as youngsters of today have no idea about ohv engines, the Diner reference will also be lost on 'em.

:D

in fact, i don't think most youngsters can appreciate the new mustang, either, since to most of them, their idea of pony car is a honda civic.

[JST]

Moving a team is far less emotional in modern day sports than was the case back in the day of the Colts exit from Baltimore. As far as Cleveland is concerned they still have the Browns, just a new coach and players...which would have happened soon enough anyway.

"Far less emotional?"

You have not met either my father or my aunt.

Or most of the rest of Cleveland, I wager.

EDIT:

You Baltimore guys are just rationalizing. You know that you have dirty, tainted goods in the Ravens, and you are looking for some way to make it OK for you to have gained at the expense of a group of other fans who are as passionate and "rabid" as any on Earth. The Browns were just as much a part of Cleveland as the Colts were part of Baltimore, whether or not anyone made a movie about it--the Browns predated the Colts, FWIW.

FURTHER EDIT:

That came out a bit harsher than I meant it to.

[BahnBaum]

Not to say that what happened with the Colts wasn't worse. But I were a Baltimore fan, the last thing I would want is a team that fucked over another loyal set of fans.

Cleveland was not the way that Baltimore wanted to go, but after the NFL completely dissed the city through 2 expansions, along with Tagliabue's obvious desire NOT to bring football back to Baltimore, the Cleveland situation was welcomed. Had the city been offered the expansion team they deserved, the Cleveland deal would never have happened.

Alex

[clyde]

You have not met either my father or my aunt.

there are weirdos that are just as passionite about the San Diego Chargers, but they are unusual.

Regardless, the Colts being removed from Baltimore the way they were was as if the city was raped at gunpoint while walking from its office to its car while the Browns leaving Cleveland was like the city was date raped by a long term boyfriend that just couldn't keep it in his pants any longer. Both are traumatic without experiencing both, it's tough to say which is really worse...but I can imagine...

[JST]

You have not met either my father or my aunt.

there are weirdos that are just as passionite about the San Diego Chargers, but they are unusual.




Or most of the rest of Cleveland, I wager.


EDIT:

And we don't normally say, hey, he's a rapist, but it's justified because he got raped himself, and when he got raped, it was worse than what he went out and did to someone else.

Again, two wrongs don't make a right. I feel bad for the Colts fans, and as someone who grew up with EXTREMELY SERIOUS Browns fans, I think I know what it was like for them. But if someone takes something from you, and promises to give it back, and doesn't give it back, it's not OK for you to go take a replacement from someone else. That's the height of selfishness.

Of course, I'm not actually saying that there are really any moral principles being violated here--sports teams are businesses, and to the extent that a toad like Modell wants to move his business someplace else, he's got the right to do that.

[BahnBaum]

....a toad like Modell.....

Enough OT. Back to the subject at hand.

I wonder what kinda car Modell drives, and whether you'd wanna buy one?

Alex

[bren]

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/brain/modell.html#

[bren]

http://www.ravenssuck.com/modell.html

[blee]

I like Mustangs.

[clyde]

I like Mustangs.

are you back or in the airport?

[blee]

I like Mustangs.

are you back or in the airport?

Back. Jack's flight back to Logan was canceled (obviously), and NWA's flights from DTW to BOS tomorrow are all booked solid. He could have tried flying standby all day tomorrow, but instead decided to fly to IAD. I waited for him at the gate after my flight landed, then took him home. He plans to take the train to Boston tomorrow.

Good weekend, good show. Not as much new stuff as the past two years, but still worth the trip. I guess, if you have to miss one, this one isn't a bad one to miss. More later.

[killerdeck]

The only problem with watching the Redskins play the Ravens is that they can't both lose.

It could be worse.

You could be a Lions fan. :D

Alex

Or a 49ers fan... :cry:

[lemming]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

[JST]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

The pic is a definite 'chop. We won't see "official" Ford info until much closer to the NY Auto Show.

OTOH, the stats sound very close to what has been bandied about in other places. I think those are probably pretty close to accurate, but we shall see.

[lemming]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

The pic is a definite 'chop. We won't see "official" Ford info until much closer to the NY Auto Show.

OTOH, the stats sound very close to what has been bandied about in other places. I think those are probably pretty close to accurate, but we shall see.

i would feel badly about being a ford GT owner and watching them use the ford GT engine "detuned" into the mustang SVT.

that's just not cool for peeps who spent at least $175k getting their cars.

[clyde]

i would feel badly about being a ford GT owner and watching them use the ford GT engine "detuned" into the mustang SVT.

that's just not cool for peeps who spent at least $175k getting their cars.

Fuck 'em. That's crap. The engine in the GT is part of the Ford family of modular engines and the engine that's in the GT is the same that's in a bunch of trucks...with some different parts and different tuning as well...and it was in the trucks before the GT.

[JST]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

The pic is a definite 'chop. We won't see "official" Ford info until much closer to the NY Auto Show.

OTOH, the stats sound very close to what has been bandied about in other places. I think those are probably pretty close to accurate, but we shall see.

i would feel badly about being a ford GT owner and watching them use the ford GT engine "detuned" into the mustang SVT.

that's just not cool for peeps who spent at least $175k getting their cars.

Agree with Clyde--just because it uses a similar engine (doubt that the Cobra will get the dry sump system the GT uses) doesn't make the GT any less special. The engine is only one small part of what makes the GT such a bad-ass ticket.

[lemming]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

The pic is a definite 'chop. We won't see "official" Ford info until much closer to the NY Auto Show.

OTOH, the stats sound very close to what has been bandied about in other places. I think those are probably pretty close to accurate, but we shall see.

i would feel badly about being a ford GT owner and watching them use the ford GT engine "detuned" into the mustang SVT.

that's just not cool for peeps who spent at least $175k getting their cars.

Agree with Clyde--just because it uses a similar engine (doubt that the Cobra will get the dry sump system the GT uses) doesn't make the GT any less special. The engine is only one small part of what makes the GT such a bad-ass ticket.

but when you put it into a performance perspective, then it gets harder to justify the ford GT. even if the SVT is $40k and it has a 500hp package and is within 98% of the ford GT speeds.....why pay the $140k again? that's a $100k swing.

it's less the emotional issue with the engine sharing than it is about a $100k difference for not much more performance.

[JST]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

The pic is a definite 'chop. We won't see "official" Ford info until much closer to the NY Auto Show.

OTOH, the stats sound very close to what has been bandied about in other places. I think those are probably pretty close to accurate, but we shall see.

i would feel badly about being a ford GT owner and watching them use the ford GT engine "detuned" into the mustang SVT.

that's just not cool for peeps who spent at least $175k getting their cars.

Agree with Clyde--just because it uses a similar engine (doubt that the Cobra will get the dry sump system the GT uses) doesn't make the GT any less special. The engine is only one small part of what makes the GT such a bad-ass ticket.

but when you put it into a performance perspective, then it gets harder to justify the ford GT. even if the SVT is $40k and it has a 500hp package and is within 98% of the ford GT speeds.....why pay the $140k again? that's a $100k swing.

it's less the emotional issue with the engine sharing than it is about a $100k difference for not much more performance.

A 465 hp SVT would still have 90 fewer hp, and will probably weigh 200 lbs more at least (3400ish v. 3600ish, based on the 3400+ lb weight of the Mustang GT). The Ford GT goes to 60 in 3.3 seconds--I doubt that even a 465 hp GT will break 4 seconds, given traction, weight and power issues (not to mention gearing, esp. if it has a lower redline).

That doesn't even get to the superior weight dist. and suspension geometry of the GT.

Look at the boundaries--the new SVT has to be substantially more powerful than the old one, but can't be too powerful to avoid insurance problems and stepping on the GT's toes. Given that the old Cobra was 390 hp, and the GT is 550, 465 is about the right numeric balance.

[lemming]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

The pic is a definite 'chop. We won't see "official" Ford info until much closer to the NY Auto Show.

OTOH, the stats sound very close to what has been bandied about in other places. I think those are probably pretty close to accurate, but we shall see.

i would feel badly about being a ford GT owner and watching them use the ford GT engine "detuned" into the mustang SVT.

that's just not cool for peeps who spent at least $175k getting their cars.

Agree with Clyde--just because it uses a similar engine (doubt that the Cobra will get the dry sump system the GT uses) doesn't make the GT any less special. The engine is only one small part of what makes the GT such a bad-ass ticket.

but when you put it into a performance perspective, then it gets harder to justify the ford GT. even if the SVT is $40k and it has a 500hp package and is within 98% of the ford GT speeds.....why pay the $140k again? that's a $100k swing.

it's less the emotional issue with the engine sharing than it is about a $100k difference for not much more performance.

A 465 hp SVT would still have 90 fewer hp, and will probably weigh 200 lbs more at least (3400ish v. 3600ish, based on the 3400+ lb weight of the Mustang GT). The Ford GT goes to 60 in 3.3 seconds--I doubt that even a 465 hp GT will break 4 seconds, given traction, weight and power issues (not to mention gearing, esp. if it has a lower redline).

That doesn't even get to the superior weight dist. and suspension geometry of the GT.

Look at the boundaries--the new SVT has to be substantially more powerful than the old one, but can't be too powerful to avoid insurance problems and stepping on the GT's toes. Given that the old Cobra was 390 hp, and the GT is 550, 465 is about the right numeric balance.

on the one hand, my point is that the SVT will be a sports car. for $40k, which is $5k less than the projected price of an e90 330, that is...odd.

it says BMW's are damn expensive. if they're worth it is someone else's decision and personal arithmetic.

on the other hand, i'm scratching my head about the ford GT. yeah. it uses aluminum and it's midengined. and it still weighs 3350 or so pounds. and it uses a corporate engine, although it is dry sump, and it's priced at $149k. i'm still scratching my head. it is worth it to a lot of people, but not to me.

were i a blue oval guy, i'd gladly take the SVT and make like a pig and giggle in slop. the $110k differential (and that's assuming you can get the ford gt at msrp) buys some incredible intangibles. but it still doesn't buy you racing cred. we're at a level of automotive achievement where we are splitting hairs, but part of the reason i could justify 70k for a plastic corvette is because it is a pretty accurate reflection of the developed-in-paralllel c6r vehicle. even then, the delta compared to the base car is only $20k.

[JST]

is that info Ford official or more leakage, by the way?

can't tell these days because so many yahoos are good at photo-slopping things that they look real.

The pic is a definite 'chop. We won't see "official" Ford info until much closer to the NY Auto Show.

OTOH, the stats sound very close to what has been bandied about in other places. I think those are probably pretty close to accurate, but we shall see.

i would feel badly about being a ford GT owner and watching them use the ford GT engine "detuned" into the mustang SVT.

that's just not cool for peeps who spent at least $175k getting their cars.

Agree with Clyde--just because it uses a similar engine (doubt that the Cobra will get the dry sump system the GT uses) doesn't make the GT any less special. The engine is only one small part of what makes the GT such a bad-ass ticket.

but when you put it into a performance perspective, then it gets harder to justify the ford GT. even if the SVT is $40k and it has a 500hp package and is within 98% of the ford GT speeds.....why pay the $140k again? that's a $100k swing.

it's less the emotional issue with the engine sharing than it is about a $100k difference for not much more performance.

A 465 hp SVT would still have 90 fewer hp, and will probably weigh 200 lbs more at least (3400ish v. 3600ish, based on the 3400+ lb weight of the Mustang GT). The Ford GT goes to 60 in 3.3 seconds--I doubt that even a 465 hp GT will break 4 seconds, given traction, weight and power issues (not to mention gearing, esp. if it has a lower redline).

That doesn't even get to the superior weight dist. and suspension geometry of the GT.

Look at the boundaries--the new SVT has to be substantially more powerful than the old one, but can't be too powerful to avoid insurance problems and stepping on the GT's toes. Given that the old Cobra was 390 hp, and the GT is 550, 465 is about the right numeric balance.

on the one hand, my point is that the SVT will be a sports car. for $40k, which is $5k less than the projected price of an e90 330, that is...odd.

it says BMW's are damn expensive. if they're worth it is someone else's decision and personal arithmetic.

on the other hand, i'm scratching my head about the ford GT. yeah. it uses aluminum and it's midengined. and it still weighs 3350 or so pounds. and it uses a corporate engine, although it is dry sump, and it's priced at $149k. i'm still scratching my head. it is worth it to a lot of people, but not to me.

were i a blue oval guy, i'd gladly take the SVT and make like a pig and giggle in slop. the $110k differential (and that's assuming you can get the ford gt at msrp) buys some incredible intangibles. but it still doesn't buy you racing cred. we're at a level of automotive achievement where we are splitting hairs, but part of the reason i could justify 70k for a plastic corvette is because it is a pretty accurate reflection of the developed-in-paralllel c6r vehicle. even then, the delta compared to the base car is only $20k.

If you were a blue oval guy, you'd probably buy both. I suspect that many/most GT owners will also be SVT Mustang purchasers. Unlike the Z06/Corvette split, the cars are different enough in style and execution that they don't really compete with one another, despite the commonalities of the engine, any more than the Z06 competes with the GTO.

What is the GT? It's a rolling billboard. It will easily recoup the cost of its development, and it was worth the development resources just to have that Superbowl ad and countless magazine covers like the Car that said "SHOCK--FORD BEATS FERRARI."

Is it worth 150K as a car, rather than as a collector's item? Before the Z06, I'd say absolutely. After the C6 Z06, probably not. But they'll still sell all they make.

[lemming]

buying both: good point. something crazy like that is something i'd want to do.

rolling billboard/halo car: yeah. it is. as usual, i am looking at the price differential between the ford GT and....the viper GTS coupe (06 model: 86k), the c6 z06 (70k) and even the 07 svt cobra (40k) or even the 997 GT3 ($110k when it comes) and simply stating that it would be hard for me to, after some thought, to commit to buying that car.

if i honestly had to choose between a ford gt and a viper GTS......i know this sounds stupid, but i think i'd opt for the viper. it's a bonus that it's more inexpensive, but i think they're the same car in different flavors but they're playing with different aesthetics.

the viper and the corvette appeal to blue collar types and use brute force. a fundamental difference, though, is that both have racing heritage and racing R&D in their development. that the street cars are less than $100k is a bonus to me. that the viper weighs 3400 pounds like the ford GT does disturb me.

the ford GT is the perfect halo car because it's rolling car porn --but when i assess it quantitatively it is an homage car (to history) and it does not add up to the $149k price (more like $220k, honestly) and the intangibles that count for many people who would buy it and will buy it don't appeal to me anymore. the $115k 996tt or 997tt or 997 gt3 are examples why:they are homage cars but they make reference more to racing. racing heritage in them, are about as fast, and cheaper?!?!?!?!

that written, the SVT appeals to me, though.

[JST]

buying both: good point. something crazy like that is something i'd want to do.

rolling billboard/halo car: yeah. it is. as usual, i am looking at the price differential between the ford GT and....the viper GTS coupe (06 model: 86k), the c6 z06 (70k) and even the 07 svt cobra (40k) or even the 997 GT3 ($110k when it comes) and simply stating that it would be hard for me to, after some thought, to commit to buying that car.

if i honestly had to choose between a ford gt and a viper GTS......i know this sounds stupid, but i think i'd opt for the viper. it's a bonus that it's more inexpensive, but i think they're the same car in different flavors but they're playing with different aesthetics.

the viper and the corvette appeal to blue collar types and use brute force. a fundamental difference, though, is that both have racing heritage and racing R&D in their development. that the street cars are less than $100k is a bonus to me. that the viper weighs 3400 pounds like the ford GT does disturb me.

the ford GT is the perfect halo car because it's rolling car porn --but when i assess it quantitatively it is an homage car (to history) and it does not add up to the $149k price (more like $220k, honestly) and the intangibles that count for many people who would buy it and will buy it don't appeal to me anymore. the $115k 996tt or 997tt or 997 gt3 are examples why:they are homage cars but they make reference more to racing. racing heritage in them, are about as fast, and cheaper?!?!?!?!

that written, the SVT appeals to me, though.

As I told clyde the other day, the Viper has as much appeal for me as...I don't know, the Acura RSX? I can see why people buy it, but I have no interest at all. I don't know why that is. Same with any 996 Porsche, including the lairy ones like the Turbo, GT2 and GT3. They don't set my heart aflutter. The 997 is moderately more interesting, but not much. At those kinds of prices, I want a car with the engine in the right place (i.e., between the axles).

[JST]

Anyway, back to the original topic of the thread.

JST is not buying a Mustang as his next car.

I can't find a manual transmission GT to test drive, and while there are some cars that I would consider buying without driving, the 2005 Mustang ain't one of them. Today I hauled my ass all the way out to Ourisman Ford in Bethesda, where they denied me a drive in the manual on the lot because I wasn't willing to commit to buying that particular car. Not that I would have ordered from them, anyway, given that they were slapping a $2K markup on all their GTs.

I honestly don't have the time or patience to deal with Ford dealers who think that they are now selling Ferraris because they don't have to slap massive incentives on the cars to move the metal. Obviously, this particular problem will be worse with the SVT, so that's probably out, too, but for now all I'm writing off is the GT. I'll cross the SVT bridge when I come to it.

Also, the R32s seem to be all or mostly gone, so that plan's toast, too.

Options are dwindling...

[zach]

Anyway, back to the original topic of the thread.

JST is not buying a Mustang as his next car.

I can't find a manual transmission GT to test drive, and while there are some cars that I would consider buying without driving, the 2005 Mustang ain't one of them. Today I hauled my ass all the way out to Ourisman Ford in Bethesda, where they denied me a drive in the manual on the lot because I wasn't willing to commit to buying that particular car. Not that I would have ordered from them, anyway, given that they were slapping a $2K markup on all their GTs.

I honestly don't have the time or patience to deal with Ford dealers who think that they are now selling Ferraris because they don't have to slap massive incentives on the cars to move the metal. Obviously, this particular problem will be worse with the SVT, so that's probably out, too, but for now all I'm writing off is the GT. I'll cross the SVT bridge when I come to it.

Also, the R32s seem to be all or mostly gone, so that plan's toast, too.

Options are dwindling...

CTS-V? Used M5?

[lemming]

c6 z51 lease.

???

300C SRT lease?

[clyde]

Anyway, back to the original topic of the thread.

JST is not buying a Mustang as his next car.

I can't find a manual transmission GT to test drive, and while there are some cars that I would consider buying without driving, the 2005 Mustang ain't one of them. Today I hauled my ass all the way out to Ourisman Ford in Bethesda, where they denied me a drive in the manual on the lot because I wasn't willing to commit to buying that particular car. Not that I would have ordered from them, anyway, given that they were slapping a $2K markup on all their GTs.

I honestly don't have the time or patience to deal with Ford dealers who think that they are now selling Ferraris because they don't have to slap massive incentives on the cars to move the metal. Obviously, this particular problem will be worse with the SVT, so that's probably out, too, but for now all I'm writing off is the GT. I'll cross the SVT bridge when I come to it.

Also, the R32s seem to be all or mostly gone, so that plan's toast, too.

Options are dwindling...

I heard this before about the E46 M3 too. Supply WILL catch up. You still have months.

Unless you're trying to talk yourself into a CTS-V...

FYI, I worked at that Ourisman when I was in high school. They were pure sleaze in the 80s, they are sleaze now.

[JST]

c6 z51 lease.

???

300C SRT lease?

Too few seats.


Too few clutch pedals.

[lemming]

c6 z51 lease.

???

300C SRT lease?

Too few seats.


Too few clutch pedals.

i think you just have to wait it out a little bit until the gt's start to accumulate on the lots.

i agree with you that this is ridiculous and this also is what people went through with the STi, subie dealerships were suddenly treating the cars like they were fancy or something and wouldn't let people drive them.

now, of course, you can drive at will because they're sitting on lots.

the mustang is expected to sell what? 100k cars a year? this attitude cannot last that long.

[JST]

c6 z51 lease.

???

300C SRT lease?

Too few seats.


Too few clutch pedals.

i think you just have to wait it out a little bit until the gt's start to accumulate on the lots.

i agree with you that this is ridiculous and this also is what people went through with the STi, subie dealerships were suddenly treating the cars like they were fancy or something and wouldn't let people drive them.

now, of course, you can drive at will because they're sitting on lots.

the mustang is expected to sell what? 100k cars a year? this attitude cannot last that long.

I imagine that they will eventually start accumulating on dealer lots, though it appears that Ford is being cagey with GT production (probably) for CAFE reasons. Supply is still artificially low, as a result.

Don't really care, that much--I like the Mustang GT, but I don't lust after it. The only reason I'd buy one is because it's cheap and easy. If it's not cheap and easy, I lose interest.

As for Ourisman, I wondered why they had so many more Mustangs on their lot than anyone else, according to FordDirect. I guess now I know--they're charging a lot more for them.

[blee]

I keep waiting for a reasonable inventory of GTs to show up on my Focus dealer's lot. I'm reasonably sure they'll let me drive one, provided they have more than one.

[lemming]

again, dealership behavior is not unexpected. they're trying to maximize every single transaction at the expense, sometimes of a long term good relationship. to them, what do you gain out of a long term relationship when you have loans to pay off to cover inventory on the lots every month?

that's why i'm still willing to DRIVE to detroit to get my c5 anc c6's rather than deal with genius new england chevy dealer who think they're dealing in exotic machinery made in kentucky.

[Rob]

the supposedly only driveable GT in existence went for a little over $300k at the auction last weekend . . .