thanks for posting that, I was wondering how big was the impact if the wider tires and bigger wheels, this is a great example . . . of course not exactly the same for the mustang, but gives us a good ballpark idea of the tradeoffs when we check-off the 18" or 19" wheel package

 

I think a manual lets me feel more connected to the car and involved in the driving. I am sure automatics are much better shifters than I am, but it is much more fun going through the gears. (Except when sitting in the all too common bumper-to-bumper traffic here in Chicagoland!)

My only autos have been vehicles where manual wasn't an option. One added advantage I found was that when the kids were in college and friends wanted to borrow a car, not many of the other students knew how to drive a stick so they weren't pressured to loan their car.

 

Well said. Being "one" with the car is whats it's all about for me. Shifting keeps me involved in the driving experience.

 

On these cars, the advertised EPA numbers are always run with the "best" combination for MPG's. I'm sure the EPA numbers were run with cars that had wheels/tires with the lowest rolling resistance and the 3.31:1 gears (GT), and conversely the V6 with the 2.73:1 gears. Once customers start to take delivery on their cars with the upgraded ratios 3.31 (V6) or 3.55/3.73 (GT) their real world mileage will more than likely be much lower than what is shown on the window sticker. My guess that a 5.0 with 3.73 gears and the track pack will net ~24 on the highway instead of the advertised 26 just because of this fact.