clockworks

This is the greatest post I have ever read.

Truth be told, I didn't get into cars after I got my GT. ...but now that I know a thing or two, I'm frankly pissed that our "muscle cars" have a) such low displacement and power and b) such a weak bottom end. I, like so many others, would have gladly paid $2-3k more for a strong bottom end that is ready to take on FI into the high 500 rwhp range.

AnotherMustangMan

Well maybe you should have purchased a GTO?

clockworks

Oops, I forgot that when I bought my car, I signed a contract saying that I can never complain or "want more" out of my car...

Have you ever stopped to think that if everyone was always 100% satisfied with what they have, then there would be no reason to progress?

I didn't buy a GTO because I didn't like the way it looked and it was too expensive for the performance it yielded. The Mustang GT is almost perfect. It is the best bang for your buck, but I wish they made it an option to purchase a stronger engine for enthusiast who want to tinker.

AnotherMustangMan

Yes of course youre right concerning the "better is the enemy of good" theory, and im hardly questioning your right to complain about your purchase.
It was the, "I'm frankly pissed that our 'muscle cars'..." remark that solicited my response.

Sort of made me think, "then why'd you buy it?"...


ahh nvm, i didnt read the part where you said you didnt know anything about cars until you bought the stang.

clockworks

Honestly, cuz I think it is one of the best looking cars on the road and it has more power than cars that cost $5k+ more than it.

To me, the Mustang represents the ideal of an American muscle car. It's suppose to be big, loud and strong. It kind of bothers me that an American Muscle icon's engine can only withstand about 450 hp, while some "ricey" imports can withstand 800+ hp on a mostly stock engine.

I know that Mustang sales are rooted in V6's. Mustang sales have aways beaten competitors because of the way it looks (and the incredible price). ...but still, I wish they offered a standard model slightly above the GT. Simply a GT with a stronger block and internals...something that is ready to take on an FI application into the 500+ hp range.

I guess that's what the Mach 1 is though. A GT with a strong Cobra engine. How much more was an sn95 Mach 1 vs. a sn95 GT?

Or maybe I should not care and just build up my engine for the same amount it would have cost to buy it that way. Only, I wouldn't have to pay for labor if it came that way...:P

AnotherMustangMan

I def understand where youre coming from as far as having bragging rights over imports is considered, but have you ever driven a street car with 450hp at the wheels? No one needs more power than that.

And those 800hp Supras youre talking about, can't do a whole lot better in the 1/4 than a 500hp Mustang. Theyre strictly "from a roll" cars.

In response to your question, the Mach was like 3 or 4 grand more.

thump_rrr

Hi' I'm getting in to this debate a little late but there are a couple of things I'd like to know.

1) how many of you actually try to race other cars either on the road or at the track?

2) Why do you even think that Ford won't bump up the horsepower on later models like they have always done.

Traditionally a new chassis is unveiled and for the first 2 years nothing is done except minor revisions. By the time the third year comes around sales start to slow down so some cosmetic changes will appear (hood scoop, faux brake vents, window louvers) along with a slight increase in horsepower.

Thankfully the aftermarket has taken care of that and we're seeing 05's in n/a trim running midway through the 12's at full weight with reasonable gears (4.10's). Yes you can touch the 11's with 4.56's and a severe diet but I'm talking reasonable mods.

With a CAI, and Tuner alone I ran 13.20@105mph on stock tires at full weight. The guy next to me in the 300C SRT-8 couldn't believe I could keep up to him. Yes the guy knows how to drive he was pulling off 1.99 60ft. times and his other car is an alcohol dragster.

With drag radials , UD Pulleys, and Longtube Headers I dropped my times to 12.69@109.170 this was my first day at the track with the headers without a retune and a poor 1.77 60ft. with stock 3.55 gears!!!

To the Mopar fans out there I say BRING IT ON.

TexaStang

Even if the SRT-8 is faster, it's still going to be, what, a 35k+ car?

With 11k difference to spend on my GT, I think I could even up the score pretty easily...

rhumb

The Stang / SRT8 really is an apples and oranges comparison. While both are American RWD V8 vehicles, their similarities diverge rapidly from there.

The Mustang is perhaps more the Pony Car of the two in the spirit of the very first Stangs, that is, they trade off some brute strength and size for a more balanced package, sort of a blending of American V8 power with European finesse all in a very affordable package. Ford may be neglecting the finesse side of the equation, relative to contemporary chassis dynamics standards, with the lively axle and stuts, but have got the rest of the package down pretty well. Nevertheless, with the GT starting at $25K, it definitely represents an huge bang for the buck buy.

The SRT8 in many ways is a lot more like a traditional muscle car, though far better realized by contemporary standards than were the clumsy brutes of yore. It's a big, heavy mid/full size car with a big honking motor setting up a great clash of physics (immovable mass vs. irresistible force). However, they have dramatically upped the (relative to contemporary standards) chassis and braking dynamics to very high levels of capability and refinement, quite in contrast to the oafish power barges of the '60's and far more than what Ford hath wrought with the current Stang. On the other hand, that excellent Mercedes based chassis that lends such broad spectrum capabilities, coupled with widgets and lux far surpassing the taxi-cab like accouterments of most '60's muscle cars does push the price rather high, even if still an excellent bang for the buck -- upper $30s or so really is a very good, fair price for all that you get, both in terms of goodies and go (think ½ price Mercedes AMG E55 rather than tarted and souped up lead sled)

Perhaps a better reckoning would be to compare the SRT8s with Ford’s performance sedan portfolio rather than with its one mortal-level performance car. That evaluation really does come up painfully short, and not in Ford’s favor. The 500 and new Fusion, while very “nice� cars your mother would love, don’t have anywhere near the oomph, moves and must have pizzaz of the SRT8s. The geezermobile Grand Marquis, a car your grandmother would love in some nice, light, sedate hue of Bingo Hall Blue (do they have an AARP Special Edition yet?) is laughable and the Taurus, well, is that thing STILL around?

The real comparisons will be in the future when, presumably, Dodge fields their own Pony Car, the Challenger with various flavors of Hemi. A 6.1 Challenger Hemi, backed by a six speed MTX and underpinned by a next-gen LH platform… Alternatively, when Ford finally wakes from its performance torpor to elevate its sedan line’s performance, dynamics and general character from the merely adequate to scintillating. A turbo/supercharged 3.5 AWD Fusion or 500 SVT could prove an able purchase choice of a somewhat different character (fine there) from a 300 SRT8.

snkbtn99

Magazine racers ..... GMAFB. LOL.

rhumb

Yeah, geez, you'd think we're on some free ranging, open-minded discussion forum here or something.

Oh wait, we are.....

clockworks

I liked your previous post, dude...

crispy23c

Sorry to abbreviate you, Rhumb, but I needed room for comment!
I couldn't agreee more with your assessment. Did you know HTT has allegedly pushed off the SVT version of the Fusion? Stated reason was because the Fusion plant is at capacity, so they would wait at least 2-3 years for demand to go down to introduce the SVT variant. Really pissed off the Fusion faithful. D/C takes the opposite approach, if the car is selling well, strike while the iron is hot and roll out SRT versions. Me? I wished they built the Marauder with more testes. Why not slap on a new fascia (when they frshen it for '08) and throw in a blown 4.6 Cobra Motor? The drivetrain can handle it. Oh, yeah...we want "adequate".
What else I find interesting is that the SRT Charger sells at list price on ebay. And they are making only 4,000 units this year!!! So, I ask, why do Ford dealers think they could get +$10-$20K on a car that Ford announced they will build 7,000 of? Beats me!
Back on topic, I think Ford better get it's head out of it's rear if it expects to keep loyalty with understated "average mobiles".

crispy23c

errrr......did anyone see this yet???

http://www.dodgeforum.com/m_335954/tm.htm

If this is true.....holy cow!!!
I love competition...

rhumb

Presuming their correct with their intel -- $28K for a 425hp Hemi Challanger -- that and GM's upcoming Camaro/Chevelle concept -- "Covette motor" on a "Zeta Lite" platform for $?? -- really ought to give Ford, HTT and the GT500 a real case of heartburn.

To clamber back up on my soapbox, this only reaffirms my assertion that the GT500, while certainly a fine and capable car, would be WAY overpriced at anything near $40K, or even much above $35K. My guess is that Ford/SVT/HTT will put off any final GT500 pricing decisions until after these other concepts roll out at the NAIAS. Then, their pricing hubris soundly deflated, you'll hear in a few weeks or months the final, deflated pricing for the GT500 as "an incredible performance value as with previous SVT Stangs for $34,999..." or less.

Ahhhh, competition, it does the consumer good!

MSP

I'll tell you what, I'm down for the HEMI, just to kick Ford in the GUT for placing us in this position... We never should have been placed in this position.. Ford must be taught a lesson...

Either give me big-block Mustangs, or dont give me a darn think Ford!! You are trying my patience.. Either you give up the options so guys can go big-block, or you just keep all of them!

jsaylor

Oh c'mon guys, don't get caught up in the Hemi hype. Think about it. A base Hemi Charger stickers for so close to 30k you may as well just call it 30k....the SRT8 is a 40k car. Somehow, some people here seem to actually be buying the idea that DCX is going to spin a coupe from the new version of this chassis, stuff the 6.1L Hemi in it that brings the Charger SRT8's total to 40k, and somehow magically sell it for less than the base Hemi Charger? Coupes usually cost more than the cars they are spun from, just selling the standard V-8 Charger for 28k would impress me.

Maybe, and I mean maybe, DCX will be able to sell the standard Hemi Charger for 28k. But, considering how much larger (the concept has a nearly 10 inch longer wheelbase than the Mustang) and no doubt heavier, this car is going to be than the Mustang GT it would likely need every one of the current 5.7L Hemi's 345hp to even keep up with the GT. Not to mention, the GT is cheduled to have a refresh before the Charger is even scheduled to show up!

The Boss Hog

rhumb, I could not agree more with your assessment! Your post is the first I have seen that correctly used the phrase "Pony Car" to describe the Mustang. I was surprised when the magazines classified the '05 Mustang as a muscle car. The editors must not have been around when the true muscle cars (Chevelle SS 396 - 454, Plymouth Road Runner 383 - 426, etc.) were in their prime.

The Boss Hog

rhumb

Yeah, ironically, the Mustang was originally conceived more as a sort of anti-muscle car in the context of its day. So rather than being a lumbering, clod of a big-block beheamoth with all the handling finesse of a garbage truck, it, rather, was a fairly compact 2+2 coupe, somewhat European in line but with definite American design idioms too, powered not by some massive industrial age big block but a small, new high winding small block. All at a very affordable price.

Really, aside from a few years of big blocks in the late sixties and very early seventies, the Mustang continued more as the antithesis of a muscle car rather than as the architype of one. What really changed the perception was not so much the Mustang, but rather, its contemporaries, which, from the seventies through the ninities, went downsize and FWD. So by sheer dint of simply remaining a RWD V8, where 5 liters was now seen as a big motor, the Mustang sort of came to be adopted as a muscle car more by the dearth of the real thing than by any transformation or intent on the part of Ford and the Mustang. Indeed, Ford constantly tried to varying degrees of success, through SVO and then SVT, to broaden the Mustangs performance envelope well beyond the narrow confines of simple drag strip/stop light prowess.

The FoxStang of '79 was VERY Euro inspired in both style, character and lesser degrees, engineering. And thoughout the Fox chassis run, with only very rare exceptions, the biggest V8, the 302/5.0 was what was once the smallest available, if one was even available at all as was the case for a few odd years here and there.

For better or worse, the "muscle car" idiom seems to hang more and more strongly around the Mustang's neck, regardless of the original conception of the car in the mid '60's. I personally tend to dislike this trend as I think it tends to narrow the Mustang's appeal and design goals of equal parts power, finesse, sophistication, and value to something more of a one-trick pony along the lines of power, flash and cheapness.

But the S-197 is selling like hotcakes, but how much of that is due to inate qualities and how much is due simply to a lack of any real alternative competition is hard to say. Perhaps in the next couple of years, with the expected onslaught of a lot of competitioin from DC and GM, perhaps even Nissan, that question may be better answered.

Galaxie

While I do think the Shelby is overpriced, I don't believe that D-C will build a 425HP challenger for 28K. While it would undercut the competition in both price and power, they don't have the volume to justify that price, they would be selling those cars at a loss.