Ford Mustang GT Deluxe - $26,800
Ford Racing Whipple Charger Installed - $7100
Steeda Q Suspension - $2300

A car built simply to the price range would WALK on almost any production car of that price.

Above, 1.1G on skidpad, Zero to 60 in 4+ seconds, 1/4 Mile in 11.90.

The Subie is a great car, but no room for growth. It is what it is and then you own it for the duration. Ever look at what a 500 Hp Subie costs?

I have one of each, but I drive my Subie in winter. Guess which one I take more pride in?

 

Have you already driven a new Bullitt? If not, where do you get the info that it is "better" than an SGT in the ride department? That's all I was asking, who formed this opinion and under what comparison? For instance, who on earth said the SGT was unbalanced? And why on earth would it be?

Under your stated qualifications for better, that would mean the standard GT is better riding than both the Bullitt and the SGT, which would be an opinion some would have, mostly those who don't give a whit about driving the car in a performance oriented manner. A more stable, stiffer ride is something I like to have, and like the feel of, while not being uncomfortably harsh or rough riding. I think most true enthusiasts, at least performance enthusiasts, would agree.

If I boil down your statements, then better means a softer ride, pure and simple. Yes, it is true that most people will agree with you, mostly those who don't drive their cars in an agressive manner. People that agree with this like to say "more compliant" or "responds less arubtly to road imperfections." The basic fact is that a car that leans more towards this type of "better" is usually less of a high performance machine. The key is to find a balance between being stable in a turn and still being compliant enough to be considered comfortable for a street driven passenger car. I think the SGT is a very good balance in this category. No one can just say it's better without qualifying their statement.

For instance, the SGT has a better balance and feel than I have experience in any of the other Mustangs I have owned that were lowered and had modified suspensions. After several months in my SGT I can truly tell you that it is certainly not harsh or rough riding. Anyone who would characterize it in this way are certainly used to driving far less performance oriented cars.

The Bullitt was certainly designed to be a more comfortable riding car. If comfort is an important, or primary concern then it would certainly be the choice to go by. However, the biggest difference is that the Bullitt is not lowered and therefore can afford to have a softer riding suspension than the SGT. Since I'm not into the 4-wheel-drive looking Mustangs, if I were to buy a Bullitt (which I do like), I would have to lower it, and due to this the suspension would have to be stiffer. Considering the SGT is lowerer (and factory warrantied with a lowerer suspension), I am especially happy that it has a very comfortable ride. Maybe I've just owned a lot of cars that were far more harsh.

 

I drove both the SGT and Mustang GT back to back.

I would describe the SGT ride as firm but not harsh (purely subjective terms). It's optimized for performance, rather than comfort. The Mustang GT suspension does what it's designed to do...appeal to a larger audience as not everyone is going to want a suspension optimized for performance.

If you are in the market for a Mustang GT, Bullitt, and/or Shelby GT, test drive all 3 so that you get exactly what you want.

 

It's lower than a standard GT by 6mm

I am not certain how the GT-H suspension compares to the SGT, but if they are the same, I personally noticed a firmer ride, but to me, it did not seem that harsh. I was a passenger and not the the driver, so my experience might not be truly represtantive.

I have an SN-95 car with aftermarket springs, and with that chassis, you can definitely feel a difference when it was lowered.

I think the S197 chassis makes a big difference, along with the tuning done, as compared to previous generations.

 

I recently took delivery of an '08 SGT, Vista Blue, 5 speed manual. I have had several Fords in the past, a '67 Mustang 289 Coupe, an '85 Mustang GT, '87 Thurnerbird Turbo Coupe and an '89 Mustang GT. At 55 years of age, both daughters are finished with college, one is married and it was time for me to get myself back into the saddle. I bought the new '04 Alumacraft fishing boat, and '05 Harley Road King and now my wonderfull '08 SGT. Now of course, there may be faster cars, quicker cars, etc., but I wanted another Mustang not a Subaru, or other cars from the rice fleet. And guess what, I really do not need 500, 600 or 750 H.P in a weekend driver and carriage to drive women around on dates. That's why I did not buy the GT500. Where are you really going to drive a car like that anyway and not kill yourself or someone else, or just plain end up in jail. I bought the GTH for pure pleasure. Great looks, plenty of power, great sound. Drive around town and it snaps people's necks clean off. I like the Vista Blue. It's one of those colors that are very dependent on sun lighting. On a full sun day, with clear blue skys, that paint lights up like a jewel. I bought the car near dealer cost. If I want to put a blower on it later on, I just may do that, but right now I will drive it as is, although I plan to throw on a pair of shorty ceramic coated headers and perhaps a few other tricks suggested by Ford Racing. If I did install a blower at ~$7K, I'd have a 470 HP SGT for ~$45K. Not a bad deal, in MY book.

 

Welcome Doctor Detroit.

Make sure you register your car in the SGT registry section. http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showthread.php?t=69579

Post some pix too.

 

welcome and congrats Doc Det.

Start a new thread with pics of your car. Vista is my fav of the SGTs as well.

 

If I were offered one for free, it would take less than 1 second for me to choose the Mustang.

 

I haven't been in a SGT, but I have been in a car with the FRPP handling pack so I have a pretty good idea of what a SGT rides like. For everyday duty the handling gains aren't substantial enough to justify the degredation in ride quality IMO. As for balance....The FRPP suspension livens things up to be sure but it doesn't go out of it's way to make the car feel composed especially when pushed....and that is a major factor in balance

A good ride, for a true road car, should find the car comfortable and composed at the same time in as many driving conditions as is possible. The notion that a rough ride has anything to do with proper handling is just not correct. BMW's M3 will shame most cars on the planet in the twisty stuff, but the ride quality is actually quite good. A rough ride is nothing more than what it seems...a rough ride.

I've been in cars that handle far better than the Mustang does with the FRPP handling pack more than a few of which were much more comfortable than that particular setup.

I don't follow you here. While it is certainly true that many cars, and many handling packs, do make a move to stiffer spring rates and thereby a stiffer ride as the car is lowered the same isn't an inevitable side effect of lowering a car by any stretch. In fact, one of the benefits of lowering a car is that the lower center of gravity gained by doing so allows for improved handling without the need for more aggresive spring rates.


I feel much the same. But I'm also not conviced by any means that I would have to accept a serious consequence in terms of ride quality for these actions.

Different strokes for different folks is the reason for the gap here I suppose. I actually rather like the SGT in 08 trim with the revised grille-work and the newly available blue paint scheme. That said I'm obviously not convinced that I would want to live with the ride everyday given the choice to do otherwise.

 

Thanks for the welcome to the group. I noticed the fog lights on your Stang. Where did you purchase them? I need some sort of fog light for mine.
As soon as I get some decent weather (on my days off), I plan to take some pix and post them. Have you had any upgrades done?
I have had a few e-mails with Dave @ Brenspeed. Here's his reply to one of my questions..

"You can only expect very minor power improvements with a set of shorty style headers. The factory pieces are very efficient. We have been able to develop some very effective tunes for the Shelby GTs that will give you a “Night & Day” difference in performance. This modification along with a set of under drive pulleys should net you a satisfactory gain. Peak horsepower is only 30% of the experience you will see with our custom tuning. "

 

DD,
I got my lower grille and fogs done at the SAI mod shop prior to it being shipped out. This piece will be available to general public in Spring 08. Go to pg 13 of this pdf file http://scottdrake.net/SPPCatalog2007LO-RES.pdf

No performance mods at this time. Looking at SCT X-CAL 3 with custom tune from Dyno Tuned Performance and Steeda Elbow (to go with the Steeda produced CAI).

Hoping that combo will give me about 10 hp over stock SGT (or 290rwhp vs stock SGT avg of 280rwhp). Also thinking about 3.90s and adjustable panhard bar (especially if I get larger wheels/tires in back). I guess if I wanted a little more, I could go with the UDPs and CMCV Delete Plates. That may get me to the 300 rwhp mark.

Brenspeed is getting about 5.5rwhp over stock tune. I'm guessing a custom tune may net 2-3rwhp over that. http://forum.shelbyautos.com/index.p...topic=2700&hl=

Thus, based only on what I've read online, I think a custom tune may get 7-8hp over SGT stock and the elbow may net 2-3rwhp more.

 

Tony the GT-H uses the same pieces that the 07 S-GT does and it is exactly that .....Firmer but not harsh by any means.

 

in those comparsions the car they want to look good does. i have raced plenty wrx's and a few were sti's and i have smoked them all

 

I think you are right about the reasons for the gap in our opinions, but I think if you lowered a new Mustang (a Bullitt, for instance) without the needed spring and strut rate changes (as engineered by Ford in the FRPP packages), you will regret it.

Let me explain in more detail. I was sure you would already agree that to lower the S197 from it's stock height would necessitate stiffening the springs and struts. Done correctly, not only does this equate to a more stable, better cornering machine with better weight transfer qualities, but it also provides the needed protection against bottoming out the suspension of the car when driving on both real world roads as well as at the track.

This is universally understood and is the reason why every factory and aftermarket suspension package available to the Mustang enthusiast for the S197 that features a lowered ride height also has stiffer springs in combination with higher rate struts. Lowering a Bullitt without using stiffer springs will provide a very soggy, unstable and unpredictable ride when compared to one that has been properly adjusted to provide the right amount of stiffness that keeps the car from bottoming out in the real world, on what is basically a limited amount of suspension travel when compared to the standard GT model. The only reason the Bullitt does not use the stiffer parts of the FRPP kit is because it was not lowered by any significant amount, and thus they got away with making it more comfortable for the car buyers who are used to driving less aggressive machines.

We disagree on the pivotal point of my post, which was that the Shelby GT is not a rough riding car and has very balanced handling. Due to that disagreement, we may never meet eye to eye, which is okay of course. I'm just asking you to hold your judgment until you actually ride in one. You might be a little surprised.

I'm really comparing this car to previous Mustangs, which is really what we should do since we are stuck with the basic structure and design and want to buy (and can afford to buy) a Mustang and not an M3. Of course, we cannot really expect the Mustang platform to handle as well as an M3 for so many reasons beyond the scope of this post. Lets just say that the M3 is a much more sophisticated (and expensive) machine, designed from the start to have both a lowered stance and plenty of suspension travel. I'm not sure which Ford Racing suspension packages you have experienced on other models, or if you have even been in a Mustang with that particular package, but each model is unique. This is due to vehicle weight, steering geometry, suspension geometry, tire sizes, etc. BTW, tire make and size can play a huge part in how comfortable a car can be even with identical suspension pieces. Your experience in another model using the FRPP equipment may not amount to a very good comparison at all.

I have had the standard Ford Racing setup on my '06 GT. as well as two other suspension packages and several in-between parts mixes. I have tried many combinations at great cost, as well as the package deals. I used several types and sizes of tires and wheels in an attempt to get a lowered stance with maximum comfort as a priority, without a great overriding concern for what I would call maximum track-style handling (which was a secondary issue since my main concern was real road driving). Having went through all that, I can attest that the package on the Shelby GT (with the tire size and brand/model as issued) is a very balanced and comfortable ride for everyday street driving. It should satisfy those who are looking for a slightly more aggressive handling with a lowered ride height while still providing excellent comfort for everyday driving.

Ford engineers fully understand that they must provide a balanced ride in these packages, because the primary customer will be using them in real world conditions. A "rough ride" is certainly unwelcome and unacceptable, even if it was to equate to a better handling package (which, as you have stated, is of course not always true). I just think that with the live axle, front suspension geometry and weight this car has, they have done a good job of doing this at an affordable price.

The base Mustang GT is already a fairly good handling machine. It also has a stiffer suspension than the base V6, and in turn the SGT has an even stiffer suspension. Improving handling over the base GT with a lowered stance meant stiffening things up. All of the aftermarket kits are the same way, for the same basic reasons. A soft suspension in a lowered vehicle (with half the suspension travel and a great deal less ground clearance) would be far more uncomfortable, unpredictable and harder to live with than a professionally corrected and adjusted suspension that provides the control needed to keep the car from bottoming out on both it's travel stops and the road surface.



.

 

Great post Tantal. I'm interested in what you discovered on the effects of different tires. Any thoughts on brands/types that would reduce the firmness? I know a taller sidewall will help with this, but was curious if there was more to it than this.

Thanks.

 

I say put equivalent tires on the SGT and let's try it again. I'll bet the performance comparison would turn out quite different.

 

I think it would be fair to say that if the two cars were used for constant race use that the simplicity and ruggedness of the SGT would hold up much better under those conditions and when the two cars showed up at the shop for repair that the cost of repair would be substantialy less for the American built car. These are two important advantages of the SGT.

 

Mark, yes, the tires made a huge difference in ride quality and comfort levels. Even tires of the exact same size, of different manufacturers and styles, may feel completely different according to their compounds. I was amazed how important money spent on the tires would make, at least as much as anything else mattered, maybe more so. The wrong tires can make your car ride like a pickup truck while the right set can smooth out every bump and crack in the road. I think the model of tire can be about as important as the size you choose, as far as ride quality.

The 18" BFG KWDS tires that come on the SGT seem to have a soft compound compared to many of the other tire models I tried in both 18- and 20- inch sizes, with a nice quiet comfortable ride, and I think they might have picked them for the SGT for those exact reasons. The KDWS is an all-weather tire with good wear and noise characteristics, and therefore embodies a lot of compromises not found in more higher performance oriented tires. I bet going to a higher performance tire like the KD/KDW, F1's or Pole Positions would really wake up the grip and cornering. The ride could suffer, however. There is almost always a trade-off. I'm sure everyone here has their own favorites.

 

Hell, I just think it was a goofy test.
The stopwatches, orange cones, and clipboards have spoken. Thank you.
But I don't care, and here's why:

1. I'm not buying a 5-door anything. I don't like them.
2. No "suede" seats, thanks.
3. The most pumped-up 4 cylinder still carries a different dynamic than a V8. If you like V8s, no 4 will make you happy.
4. The WRX interior may be "more of an upgrade from the base model" than the Shelby's, but I don't like it. Too "spaceshippy" for me.
5. I don't care if "some 20-year-old kid" has a faster car than me. Am I gonna go punching the gas on a public street to race a stranger? Nope. Never mind the rule most car modders learn early: "there's always someone faster than you". So I don't care how fast someone else is. I just want my car to respond to the level *I* demand when my right foot goes down.

No disrespect to the Subaru, its engineering speaks for itself.
The reason I don't care much for this test is that these two cars are not intended for the same person (for the MOST part), and only one side weighed in. I'd like to see a Car&Driver-style "Counterpoint" from someone writing from the other angle.

Just my 2 cents.

Jer

 

They should compare that to a Roush 427R. Can get a coupe for 42k, and would totally destroy that little ugly thing in every department. That is quite possibly the ugliest car I have ever seen, next to the "le Car"