I owned a 1985 special service Mustang that I got when it was just 1 year old. I proceeded to run that car till 1997 when I sold it at 225,000 miles. Still going strong. Except for the AC and faded paint, it was still looking and running in cherry condition. I sold it when I picked up a used Thunderbird SC.

While I owned that SC, I bought, drove, and sold over 8 CHP Mustangs over a 4 year period ending in 2000. I then sold my SC and bought a Camaro Z28.

I picked up another SC 2 years ago, and have restored it to mint condition. It floors people when they see 205,000 miles on the odometer.

The reason I am telling you this is because I want you to understand that I have a history with Ford. I'm a Mustang Cobra and Mach 1 fan, I have done phone interviews with John Coletti of SVT on at least 3 occasions, and occasionally write articles for a couple of magazines. I am an enthusiast for the best performance car at a reasonable price. Period.

That said, the Car and Driver test was the most flawed and the most tilted car test they have ever done in their 40 year history. That test made them lose alot of credibility.

Why?

They have a rating scale that they use when evaluating cars. It's designed to be fair, and over the years has done an outstanding job of giving an honest and balenced rating of vehicles they test.

The GTO outperformed the Mustang in the end, racking up the greater number of points over the Mustang GT they tested. The GTO won their test. No question about it.

The problem is that Car and Driver Magazine is having some type of (*edited*) contest with someone at GM, for whatever reason. Case in point: the original 2004 GTO article recieved relatively high praise from C&D. But their TV show (filmed later) slammed it. An accompanying article to the original story mentioned how they took their test GTO on an unauthorized car race in Neveda then fabricated a story about how they had to take the car to a frame shop because they twisted the chassis. Anyone with a passing knowledge of cars and manufacturer's policy on returning test & loaner cars to them for repairs saw through C&D's BS on this.

Bob Lutz soon after gave a veiled threat about holding up advertizing against car mags unfair reporting (directed mainly at C&D).

Furthermore, Car & Driver named the new Mustang among their 10 best, while essentially ignoring the GTO. When the GTO beat Mustang in overall points, they came up with another catagory. Taking a jab at a term Bob Lutz coined during interviews earlier in his position at GM, they called this invented catagory a "Gotta Have" catagory, then named the Mustang the winner.

There were alot of loyal readers rightfully outraged, and I'd say that most all of us in the auto journalist world shook our heads.

Anyone who has taken time to drive the GTO realizes it's a great car in search of a great wrapper. It's interior & fit & finish is perhaps the best you'll find at that price, the performance is fantastic, and the interior is not only very well detailed, it's very well made (unless you are going to be absolutly silly & compare it to $45,000++++ BMWs & Mercedes.

From a price standpoint, the common mistake is to compare the GTO to a base Mustang GT. Since GTOs come loaded, it's best to compare it to a loaded to the gills Mustang GT, which approaches 30 grand. Then it becomes a simple choice as to how fast are you willing to pay for.

The base Mustang at $25,000 is the best deal on the planet for a RWD V8 coupe. Period. Ford also managed to do what GM seemed incapable of doing: To value their own piece of automotive history enough to make it's continued profitable existence an important part of the company decision making process (even the very tiny GM-Holden subsiderary managed to get a RWD coupe together on a shoestring budget).

Car and Driver should have said that while admitting that GTO outscored Mustang. Car and Driver should also not let their personal disputes with GM management ruin their stelar reputation for fair and critical evaluations

No, those 123 readers aren't GTO owners.
[/b][/quote]

I agree with a few points and I disagree on others. Number one the GTO didn't outperform the GT in every performance catagory, review the test. Second, please don't compare the GTO to a 45K BMW or MB because they aren't in the same league. If you gave me a 330i and GTO, I can spend plenty of time showing you why this is so. Maybe you can compare the GTO's interior to a base 325, but that's even stretching it. Even Cadillac, which has made huge strides to improve interior refinement, doesn't match the Germans. Finally, I don't think that C&D has any disputes with GM; case in point the C6 beat the boxster.

 

Wrote them a letter telling them exactly what I think. Haha, every single GTO owner must have written in for them to get 123 replies.