KGSGT350

What pathetic times for the Mustang. The GTO stomped all over the Mustang. This test was monitored by the SCCA for un-bias results, but it was anything but that. IMO. The Mustang ran 0-60 in over 6sec. I have to believe that the Mustang would have to be much closer in comparison.

Anyone see this?

Sorry for the miss spelling

FiaCobra

Yeah, what the GTO lacks in looks more than makes up for it in performance. You can call it whatever you want, but slow. Start modifying your GT's if you wanna compete with a GTO on the street/strip.

mark221

The Mustang was an automatic.

mlcrisis

For the difference in price not to mention LOOKS, the Mustang still wins Hands Down in my book. There's not that much difference in the performance numbers, especially when you consider the 100 horsepower difference. See attached:

LL05GT

GTO biased program. The program was pitting the GTO against three other cars, of which, the Mustang was 1 of 3, the other two- who cares.

The GTO finished first in EVERY test they ran, did it not.

The Mustang held its own, considering 100hp less.

GTO biased program :yes:

mustangfun101

I'm sorry but for being 100hp less and the price difference.....I'd take the Mustang.

SVTJayC

The GTO really isnt more expensive than the mustang. You can't touch a GT for less than 30k and with rebates, that is right where the GTO is right now. The GTO is hands down a better performance car when looks are thrown out the window.

TMSBrad

The times were TERRIBLE. The Mustang's quarter-mile time was 14.3 and it's 0-60 was 6.1. I think my grandma was driving the Mustang.

moc1976

Didn't we already discuss this test? To me the bottom line is that the GTO is too plain, and I got my GT for 25K, so for the price diff. the slight performance increase is not worth the $ or the plain looking car!

MeanStang

ugly gto, what a shame... bring back such a classic like the gto and make it look like that crap... thats a holden monaro with a gto badge slapped on.. thats all it is.. i had high expectations when i heard they were making a GTO.. thats until i saw it

scottie1113

I can't believe those 0-60 times for the Mustang. Every magazine test I've read has the car in the low 5's. Maybe they forgot to release the parking brake before they timed it!

hgriz

I will agree that the GTO is a faster car both in a straight line and on a road course, but it's still ugly. As far as price goes to pay $30,000 for a mustang you have to buy one will every option possible, or pay some dealerships ridiculous markup. My 05 came with every option except the shaker 1000, side air bags, automatic tranny and red leather interior and it was $27,000. It's cheaper,l better looking and a better deal than a GTO will ever be!

If you can buy a deluxe Mustang GT at $25,000, then add a supercharger (your choice $3,500-$5,500) and for under or at $30,000. You have a better looking and faster car than the GTO. How is that not a better deal?

As far as the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times go, those guys are generally idiots when it comes to driving. Times for both cars should be faster. I ran a 13.9 in my totally stock 05. I've seen others post 13.6's and 13.7's.

2K6TungstenVert

thank you scottie1113 for saying exactly what I was thinking. Motor Trend, Car an Drive Autoweek ALL put the Mustang. . .even with the automatic around 5.1 seconds for the quarter. Now all of a sudden some idiot comes out with these figures? I smell a skunk somewhere !

samckernan

I reciently saw a mag article comparing the new vs. the old GTO. Looking at the classic and looking at the new... I didn't see even one little hint that the new was a derivitave of the classic. They may as well have put the GTO badge on a Mack truck. The thing looks pathetic. My Dad should be driving it (he's 74). As for the Mustang, it's an awesome starting point, and it looks way cool.

V10

No skunk, the time they gave for the GTO is 6.0 seconds. That is the slowest GTO time I've ever seen. Most rags had the old 350 HP GTO in the low 5s and some have the new 400 HP GTO breaking into the 4s.

vincesandlin

i can drive my stick stang to a 13.5 in the quarter. these sissies don't know how to drive a real car!!!!

vince

bobrickert

Just to say...look at what we paid....Msrp on my ride was 25995.....So I think that the diff in price pays for 1/2 second time on the track....

Legion681

I saw that show and this is what I think:
1) I am absolutely happy that the Stang stayed SO close to the GTO...I imagined it would be more than that seen the (ugly) goat has a 100 hp advantage over the Pony.
2) The GTO beats the Mustang in performance ? Sure. Did anyone have any doubt about it ? Come on: 300 hp vs. 400 hp...do you think it's a fair comparison ? Tune a Stang to 400 hp and then let them do this test again...
3) I don't believe those testers were the best you can find as a 6.0 time for 0-60 for the GTO and 6.2 for the Stang sound very ridiculous to me.

Conclusion: the Stang is less expensive than the GTO, looks a million times better and even with "only" 300 hp vs. the GTO's 400 it can still stay neck to neck with it...
What car do you think people would want to buy between these two ?
The answer is already out there: for every GTO sold, Ford sells 16 Mustangs...
I rest my case...

Enfynet

I like how the 6.0L V8 GTO was compared to the 3.0L V6 330i... talk about different markets! :scratch:

SVTJayC

The stang is NOT less expensive. If you walk into a dealer TODAY and ask for a stang GT, what do you think you will pay? if you can even find one, do you think they will part with it for a penny less than 30k? You can walk into any pontiac dealer in the country right now and get an GTO for 30k, some slightly less. Stop using that tired price argument, it's just not reality right now. Will it be if Ford gets their heads out of their rears and ramps up GT production? maybe, but we all know that is never going to happen. You can say looks go to the Stang, though that is subjective, but performance, quality, materials, etc, all go to the GTO.

And it's not like you get nothing for the cost diff. The GTO has 100 more hp, almost 100 more tq, a 6 spd, REAL LEATHER SEATS (no fake vinyl crap), suede appointments all over the car. If you have sat in both, and can honestly say the mustang's interior is nicer or of higher quality, you are out of your mind.

I'm from a Ford family, and I have always been true blue. I looked at the mustang real hard for a long time, and for the money I would put it up against many a car. But I'm not a blind fan boy, and GTO is not one of those cars. How GM can make a dime on that car with all you get for the $ is beyond me.