You make me blush...thanks big guy.

Dave

 

Thats what she said!

 

I have to show you nothing. But I will anyway.

www.fueleconomy.gov

you will see that coupe/convertible manual/automatic cars have their own specific entry.
gear ratios have <1mpg difference in all testing for all consumer vehicles.

 

I don't see where it says that every gear ratio in the Mustang was tested for fuel economy like you said they were.

I see that each motor and transmission and body style was tested but not that every gear ratio and option package was tested to come up with the EPA fuel economy rating.

And a general statement that gear ratios in all cars made less than 1 mpg difference doesn't mean that they were required to include all ratios and options to come up with their fuel economy numbers.

 

I don't see where it says I have to google for you.

To not be a jerk:
Very, very few automobiles sold in the US have a different rear end gear or transmission gear variances. The only ones I can think of is the Mustang, The Corvette with the z51 option(2.73 was optional on automatics without z51 in 08/09) and heavy trucks.

 

LMAO sorry thats just too funny

 

People on internet message boards think the burden of doing the footwork to look up facts is on the original poster. Truth is they're just lazy.

 

I looked, trying to find the facts to support your original statement and did not find any so it was put back on you.

 

1. Keep looking.
2. Believe me without reading it on another webpage.
3. Don't believe me.

It doesn't really matter which you choose.

 

Let me Google that for you!
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=EPA+which+vehicles+are+tested

 

Good grief....the most interesting thread in a long time has been completely hijacked.

 

True, it has been side tracked. Here, let's take it back.

So we all knew that the new GT was going to possibly run toe to toe with an M. Too incredible that it actually performed. The GT was never set out to match the M, especially in Competition trim. I know that Europe has many other variations of the M, I am not throwing them into the pot here.

So my point being, if the GT was set out to decimate the local competition like Camaro, Challenger and some possibilities of a few lower Euro models, then what will happen now that the BOSS bypassed it's US competition and said screw you guys I'm going for gold? What will the BOSS do to the likes of M3's, Aston Vantage, possibly lower AMG's???

There are tons of Aston, Ferrari, Lambo, Audi, Benz's where I live, I am stoked to be able to some day drive my BOSS around, I think the Alcantara steering wheel is a nice "yeah, I'm pissing in your pool" touch for the high end Euro's and shows what the rest of the U.S. is still doing wrong.

Fixed.

 

Anyone go on the Ford Mustang facebook page? Talk about jock swingers for the BMW camp!

Not to magazine race, but a GT with the FR3 suspension, Steeda CAI, and tune will easily jump ahead of the M3. Not to mention you're not shelling out extra cash for the GG tax at purchase. Heck, even if you want to ante up the $300+ per tire cost for a set of PS2's or better performing tires, you'll really have the edge. Bottom line, you can spend $40k and get a perfectly well performing car without sacrificing anything that the M3 has.

 

I really can't get over how amazing this is. Just think of what things were like even 10 years ago. The Mustang was sitting on a variation of a chassis that was older than some of the people driving the car, and it was barely taken seriously as a performance car of any kind.

Now the every man's GT is breathing down the neck of some of the best performance cars in the world. It's pretty cool.

Personally I think the difference between the two is negligible, and I can't wait to see the Boss hand some serious performance cars their a$$es.

I'd also like to see how the GT500 (which is more similarly priced to the M) would compare.

The Mustang is still a great bang for the buck, it's just way more bang for quite a few more bucks.

 

This is why I got the Brembo brake package

 

The myth of the M3's superiority has been disspelled, both are great cars but serve different audiences. I bleed blue, so I'd pick a GT500 over an M3 anyday, but I'd pick an M3 over almost any Audi/Merc or etc if I was so inclined.

 

Interesting? Wait till you see the battle between the 4.4 litre M3 GTS and Boss 302.

 

I approve of this statement.

 

The GT500 vs. M3 would make sense if you don't mind blown cars. I like normally aspirated so I would get a Boss 302 or M3 before I would even consider a GT500.

Dave

 

I apporove of this statement as well. I agree, blown engines just don't have the same attitude or response as all natural engines do. I like the turbos on my 335i but only because they are timed so well that lag is very dimished and response is quick. Otherwise I just like it natural.

Though price point to price point the GT500 is the better pick. Performance to Performance the BOSS or even the GT is more the dead heat.

One thing I am tired of reading about (not in this post) is the talk of how the two cars are in different leagues and that the two are not comparable. Well, it looks like in this scenario, they both sport a sporting but natural (non-sports car) body and chassis, 2 doors with a back seat, normal seating position as opposed to low slung or flat (i.e. Corvette, Lamborghini) 6 speed manual transmission, RWD, vented performance oriented brakes, performance oriented tires (size and style), are built for twisting roads (believe it or not Mustang fans). Seems to me like the two cars are nearly as even as it gets. No less even then testing it with an S5. Same scenario there. So what, put better door panels on it, cover the dash in leather, lower it and call it a Lincoln if people are so hard up about how un equal the cars are. I think the truly understanding see it as a battle of an up and comming American star vs. the consitant German power house that serves as a reference to most others. Yep, driving the Mustang will provide for a bit of untamed character, but we are Americans, not once has tamed been a part of our motorsporting history. Hell, we have a race series based on souped up bootleggers hot rods. So yeah, we like to kick out the *** end every once in a while, only to know that it's our heavy foot doing all the work.

Anyway, so I suppose I just blabbed about some usless crap huh. Anyway, I don't shame M/T for bringing this article to fruition either, I think it's great. I think they should throw in an S5, V8 Vatnage, XJ, whatever blows your skirt up so that when I get in my $36,000 Mustang I know that it's making a mockery of cars in the $100K price range.

Don't get me wrong, the Mustang still has a lot to go if they want to match much of the craftsmanship of the BMW. But think, once Ford produces an M3 killer that is built like an M3, it's going to cost as much as an M3. It's simple math. I'd rather have the Mustang the attainable performance value.