2015 Ford Mustang

anonymoususer said:
And that's great. I would still another BMW M3. Refer to my McDonalds comment above.

Enough with the bench racing on a car that you don't own.
Click to expand...
You don't know what I've driven and what I haven't. Whatever though, I'm done. It's all about preferences.
 
anonymoususer said:
The GT500 is a phenomenal car, if you ONLY want straight line speed. But you would probably NEVER find a GT500 for $69,000 when you take into account dealer markup. But since everyone keeps bringing up price, if you really want the whole package you could buy a used Nissan GT-R with some money for mods, and eat GT500s for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. And throw a couple turns into the mix, the GT500 would be worth $100 in scrap metal.

If i want McDonalds, i'll go to McDonalds. Because for $5 i can get a Big Mac meal and get filled up. Why would i want to eat fine dining?
Click to expand...

Oh no I feel ya man. I really do. I've said it before (In this thread even I think) that the higher end Mustangs are for Mustang enthusiasts; there are better cars for the same money.

But then- that's my whole point. It's easy to shoot down the Mustang if you pick the market where it's least advantaged. $21,000 is the MSRP of a lot of compact sedans today and yet it can get you a 300hp V6 hard top Mustang. IMHO, it's the sub $40k Mustangs that are great. The V6, V6 Premium, GT, and GT Premium. They offer a lot of bang for the buck and can be a lot of fun, with great styling, AND be seriously daily drivers. That's something a lot of sports cars can't say (Not when you factor the cost of tires, brakes, and general unreliability). You can get them in a convertible, and with a number of different options and configurations. Everyone wants to compare the GT500 to the BMW/Nissan/etc. variations, but look at what it compares to in the lower price ranges. Is it still beat? Sure, but then that's what we were saying before.

It's not technically faster than a lot of cars out there. There's always something somewhere that can beat it. But so what? Some folks don't buy a car for it's track time- it's for what it does for them. It's also okay if it doesn't do it for anyone else! A Mustang is not a sweet handling car but it is fun, and it has awesome styling, and is instantly recognizable. Those are features that some people want over a half a second advantage on nurburgring or the ability to pass a beemer in a tight hairpin. Not every car is all about half-second advantages here or there- or even great handling. In America, a lot of people prefer straight line speed to anything. Look at how many rice bangers are being modified in high schools all across America with stock suspension and wal-mart tires; but a turbo, fart can, tune, and everything else they could cram in there chasing 1/4 mile times.

Me, personally? I appreciate both. My mom has a Mazda Miata and it's pretty weak in the power department (but it's light), but it's such a blast because of how it handles. It has a nice firm suspension and it's so tiny that, with the top down, it almost has an 'open wheel racing' feel to it. I'm not thrilled with the sound and when you step on the gas after an apex you're kind of left a little disappointed. But it's awesomely satisfying to go around a corner way faster than you could in a lot of other cars and still be confidently in control. For me; that's more fun anyway. I don't go to the track and have zero desire to go way above the speed limit and put myself and others in danger. In the mitata, I can go on a 55mph speed limit road and take tight corners at 50 and have a blast without ever even exceeding the speed limit.

However- I used to have a Mercury Cougar. I've also driven a few mustangs and other big-engine rear-wheel-drive cars. Cornering suffers but you have this amazing sound and the feel of all that torque under your foot.

Two entirely different experiences (though there are cars that do both)- neither one is 'wrong', IMO. And I certainly don't think anyone is making a bad choice going with a 'stang even if it isn't faster than some other car. My wife would love a Mustang, for example. Not because it's fast, or the handling, or anything else like that. But because she loves the sound and styling. For her, putting the top down in a great looking (in her opinion; and if you wanna say 'It's not good looking', well that's just silly- that's purely subjective. If someone likes it, then they like it!) and listening to the rumble is everything she wants in a car.

Me? I dunno- I'd rather have the BMW probably. But that doesn't mean the Mustang isn't a fantastic car.

I get the same arguments about motorcycles, too. I ride a cruiser. It's slow, but it's beautiful, it sounds great, and it's comfortable. I bought it for long distance riding and that's what I do with it. Every now and then someone on a sport bike will tell me how much faster their bike is than mine. So what? I didn't buy it to go fast. By virtue of being a motorcycle it'll do 0-60 faster than a lot of cars- but that's still not why I bought it. But it's a one track mind that says a car/bike/etc., can only do one thing (By the way- I don't mean that statement to be offensive; just saying it for the stake of discussion). For me, the bike makes me happy. It's not faster than a sportbike, but I don't need it to be. It sounds great, looks great, gives me a lot of pride when it's clean and shiny and is a lot of fun. PLUS, it's very exciting to push it to it's limits and satisfying to roll it to full throttle when leaving a corner and hear it roar- especially because it's limits are pretty tame and full throttle isn't all that much power- unlike a fast sportbike (which I enjoy too) which you have to 'respect' a lot more and it becomes a bit more stressful, precise, and technical experience dialing in the right power and having much further 'limits' (which is precisely why some people prefer them!).

In other words 'to each their own'. But I, personally, don't think comparing a Mustang to a $60,000 german sports car is fair, nor do I think comparing it to ANYTHING on the basis of performance alone is fair. There are a lot of subjective things; and if a person loves their car- then more power to them! Even if it isn't 'better' than some other car; lifes too short. Get the car that makes you happy and gives you pride and joy to own! My Cougar had a rusty quarter panel and a ton of miles and it was slow. But I bet you I loved it 1000x more than the other kids whose parents bought them brand new cars! There's just something about a car guy/gal and their car- even if some magazine, track, or measurement says it's not as good as the next guys!
 
Romans5.8 said:
Oh no I feel ya man. I really do. I've said it before (In this thread even I think) that the higher end Mustangs are for Mustang enthusiasts; there are better cars for the same money.

But then- that's my whole point. It's easy to shoot down the Mustang if you pick the market where it's least advantaged. $21,000 is the MSRP of a lot of compact sedans today and yet it can get you a 300hp V6 hard top Mustang. IMHO, it's the sub $40k Mustangs that are great. The V6, V6 Premium, GT, and GT Premium. They offer a lot of bang for the buck and can be a lot of fun, with great styling, AND be seriously daily drivers. That's something a lot of sports cars can't say (Not when you factor the cost of tires, brakes, and general unreliability). You can get them in a convertible, and with a number of different options and configurations. Everyone wants to compare the GT500 to the BMW/Nissan/etc. variations, but look at what it compares to in the lower price ranges. Is it still beat? Sure, but then that's what we were saying before.

It's not technically faster than a lot of cars out there. There's always something somewhere that can beat it. But so what? Some folks don't buy a car for it's track time- it's for what it does for them. It's also okay if it doesn't do it for anyone else! A Mustang is not a sweet handling car but it is fun, and it has awesome styling, and is instantly recognizable. Those are features that some people want over a half a second advantage on nurburgring or the ability to pass a beemer in a tight hairpin. Not every car is all about half-second advantages here or there- or even great handling. In America, a lot of people prefer straight line speed to anything. Look at how many rice bangers are being modified in high schools all across America with stock suspension and wal-mart tires; but a turbo, fart can, tune, and everything else they could cram in there chasing 1/4 mile times.

Me, personally? I appreciate both. My mom has a Mazda Miata and it's pretty weak in the power department (but it's light), but it's such a blast because of how it handles. It has a nice firm suspension and it's so tiny that, with the top down, it almost has an 'open wheel racing' feel to it. I'm not thrilled with the sound and when you step on the gas after an apex you're kind of left a little disappointed. But it's awesomely satisfying to go around a corner way faster than you could in a lot of other cars and still be confidently in control. For me; that's more fun anyway. I don't go to the track and have zero desire to go way above the speed limit and put myself and others in danger. In the mitata, I can go on a 55mph speed limit road and take tight corners at 50 and have a blast without ever even exceeding the speed limit.

However- I used to have a Mercury Cougar. I've also driven a few mustangs and other big-engine rear-wheel-drive cars. Cornering suffers but you have this amazing sound and the feel of all that torque under your foot.

Two entirely different experiences (though there are cars that do both)- neither one is 'wrong', IMO. And I certainly don't think anyone is making a bad choice going with a 'stang even if it isn't faster than some other car. My wife would love a Mustang, for example. Not because it's fast, or the handling, or anything else like that. But because she loves the sound and styling. For her, putting the top down in a great looking (in her opinion; and if you wanna say 'It's not good looking', well that's just silly- that's purely subjective. If someone likes it, then they like it!) and listening to the rumble is everything she wants in a car.

Me? I dunno- I'd rather have the BMW probably. But that doesn't mean the Mustang isn't a fantastic car.

I get the same arguments about motorcycles, too. I ride a cruiser. It's slow, but it's beautiful, it sounds great, and it's comfortable. I bought it for long distance riding and that's what I do with it. Every now and then someone on a sport bike will tell me how much faster their bike is than mine. So what? I didn't buy it to go fast. By virtue of being a motorcycle it'll do 0-60 faster than a lot of cars- but that's still not why I bought it. But it's a one track mind that says a car/bike/etc., can only do one thing (By the way- I don't mean that statement to be offensive; just saying it for the stake of discussion). For me, the bike makes me happy. It's not faster than a sportbike, but I don't need it to be. It sounds great, looks great, gives me a lot of pride when it's clean and shiny and is a lot of fun. PLUS, it's very exciting to push it to it's limits and satisfying to roll it to full throttle when leaving a corner and hear it roar- especially because it's limits are pretty tame and full throttle isn't all that much power- unlike a fast sportbike (which I enjoy too) which you have to 'respect' a lot more and it becomes a bit more stressful, precise, and technical experience dialing in the right power and having much further 'limits' (which is precisely why some people prefer them!).

In other words 'to each their own'. But I, personally, don't think comparing a Mustang to a $60,000 german sports car is fair, nor do I think comparing it to ANYTHING on the basis of performance alone is fair. There are a lot of subjective things; and if a person loves their car- then more power to them! Even if it isn't 'better' than some other car; lifes too short. Get the car that makes you happy and gives you pride and joy to own! My Cougar had a rusty quarter panel and a ton of miles and it was slow. But I bet you I loved it 1000x more than the other kids whose parents bought them brand new cars! There's just something about a car guy/gal and their car- even if some magazine, track, or measurement says it's not as good as the next guys!
Click to expand...

Very well said.
 
Roman, your above thread was very well stated and to everyone else who's contributed to the thread, thank you and it just shows what a hit Ford has here in the Mustang. Many don't believe you can compare the Stang to the BMW M3, while others talk about "bang for the buck" while others talk about cost of ownership, resale value and straight line speed vs. corners but guess what, the Stang is soooo good that we are infact talking about the car, that's a good thing but guess what else, noone is comparing the Camaro or Challenger to the BMW and THAT really, really says something!

Sent from my SPH-M930 using AG Online
 
anonymoususer said:
And that's great. I would still buy another BMW M3. Refer to my McDonalds comment above.

Enough with the bench racing on a car that you don't own.
Click to expand...

The tone is unnecessary. Second mention of no one owning an M3 on AGO. Many AGO members own high performance cars and some own super cars. How do you know no one owns an M3 on AGO?

Oh and that GTR you mentioned will eat your M3 and many other super cars and sports cars too. I didn't own the 10 M3 but got to drive it on the street and highway back to back with my GT500. Sure it was much nicer in many ways, but it also cost double the price and it didn't make me pitch a tent while driving it.

If I wanted an M3 I would go get one, but I am very happy with the 1500hp of American Muscle sitting in my driveway.
 
Meticulous-Detail said:
The tone is unnecessary. Second mention of no one owning an M3 on AGO. Many AGO members own high performance cars and some own super cars. How do you know no one owns an M3 on AGO?

Oh and that GTR you mentioned will eat your M3 and many other super cars and sports cars too. I didn't own the 10 M3 but got to drive it on the street and highway back to back with my GT500. Sure it was much nicer in many ways, but it also cost double the price and it didn't make me pitch a tent while driving it.

If I wanted an M3 I would go get one, but I am very happy with the 1500hp of American Muscle sitting in my driveway.
Click to expand...

What tone? Comment was regarding GT500 and Boss 302. Brought up the comment on GTR because everyone keeps bringing up price, not me.
 
1fastTbird said:
You have me there. I completely made up the .01%.
Click to expand...


LoL I know man i'm just giving you a hard time wea all have done it to make a point and I do still agree with you. The IRS does basically everything else better than a solid rear except launching at the strip! Maximum Motorsorts, Steeda, Kenny Brown all these companies and more im sure have done some pretty amazing things with the solid rear so I'm even more excited to see what they can do with an IRS one. Only thing I am worried about is durabilty, because I do like drag racing and was once a Pro Gas member at a track. However, the aftermarket will come to the rescue there as well no doubt.
 
anonymoususer said:
The GT500 is a phenomenal car, if you ONLY want straight line speed. But you would probably NEVER find a GT500 for $69,000 when you take into account dealer markup. But since everyone keeps bringing up price, if you really want the whole package you could buy a used Nissan GT-R with some money for mods, and eat GT500s for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. And throw a couple turns into the mix, the GT500 would be worth $100 in scrap metal.

If i want McDonalds, i'll go to McDonalds. Because for $5 i can get a Big Mac meal and get filled up. Why would i want to eat fine dining?
Click to expand...

Respectfully, you are talking out of your rear orifice. Since you like to throw track times at The Ring around, let's also throw out there that the 2013-14 GT500 ran its 'Ring lap in a bit less than 7:40.

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/front-page-news-143/973996-svtp-exclusive-svts-shelby-gt500-mustang-takes-nuerburgring.html

While some dealers did charge ADMs on the 2013-14 GT500, it was easy to order one at invoice. My parents own a '14 GT500 and were able to get it at invoice with zero haggling. And, they bought it at a dealership where they had no prior business with. You can easily validate this by perusing the many threads on the SVTPerformance confirming the same.

How much of a warranty does that GTR have after you start modding it to get to the performance level of the GT500? I seem to remember a big dust up with Nissan voiding GTR warranties based upon the owner's use of the launch button. And, that was on un-modded cars. Oh, wait here it is: Launch control returns for 2012 Nissan GT-R...sort of | New and Used Car Reviews, Research & Automotive-Industry News & LeftLaneNews
 
95oRANGEcRUSH said:
Respectfully, you are talking out of your rear orifice. Since you like to throw track times at The Ring around, let's also throw out there that the 2013-14 GT500 ran its 'Ring lap in a bit less than 7:40.

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/front-page-news-143/973996-svtp-exclusive-svts-shelby-gt500-mustang-takes-nuerburgring.html

While some dealers did charge ADMs on the 2013-14 GT500, it was easy to order one at invoice. My parents own a '14 GT500 and were able to get it at invoice with zero haggling. And, they bought it at a dealership where they had no prior business with. You can easily validate this by perusing the many threads on the SVTPerformance confirming the same.

How much of a warranty does that GTR have after you start modding it to get to the performance level of the GT500? I seem to remember a big dust up with Nissan voiding GTR warranties based upon the owner's use of the launch button. And, that was on un-modded cars. Oh, wait here it is: Launch control returns for 2012 Nissan GT-R...sort of | New and Used Car Reviews, Research & Automotive-Industry News & LeftLaneNews
Click to expand...

Wow! Mod a Nissan GT-R to get the performance level of a GT500... I've heard it all now.

*edit* That guesstimate of a lap time is all the evidence you have? Wait a minute. NOW I'VE HEARD IT ALL!
 
anonymoususer said:
Wow! Mod a Nissan GT-R to get the performance level of a GT500... I've heard it all now.

*edit* That guesstimate of a lap time is all the evidence you have? Wait a minute. NOW I'VE HEARD IT ALL!
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that a video of the lap was a guesstimate, but, OK!

The post I quoted of yours was pure supposition with absolutely no truth to it whatsoever. The video shows the whole lap and the time the car ran. Secondly, "you would probably never find a GT500 for $69,000 when you take into account dealer markup" is an outright lie. I've read countless threads on SVTPerformance where people got theirs at invoice. My parents purchased theirs at invoice. "Probably never" is the evidence you have? WOW!
 
anonymoususer said:
What tone? Comment was regarding GT500 and Boss 302. Brought up the comment on GTR because everyone keeps bringing up price, not me.
Click to expand...

I'm the one who brought up price; not sure it was 'everyone'. But we're still missing my point. There is an insane price variation in the Mustang (and my figures were MSRP; not invoice nor what people are actually paying, I don't know those numbers but they'd be easy to look up!) Aside from the fact that any car that someone loves is a great car (my real point), what I was trying to say is, it's a lot more competitive at the lower price points. When you start getting into GT500, Boss 302, and Shelby money- you are moving into a niche market of Mustang enthusiasts who, again, love the car because of the car- even IF it might have some disadvantages in performance or otherwise against German and Japanese offerings. But with incentives and sales that Ford loves to run people are walking away with the keys to a 300 horsepower rear-wheel drive sports car for less than $20,000. That's a pretty good bargain. Even so, it'd be awfully silly if what they needed was a minivan! So is it no good because it doesn't have third row seating?

Contrary to popular belief it IS okay to like something that isn't the fastest! For some, performance is what it's all about. For others, it's the driving experience (which is 1000% subjective), for others- style (also subjective). Still others it's even brand recognition or heritage/nostalgia (Notice how a lot of these high end 'stangs are more closely styled and fashioned off of the 60's Mustangs? That's cuz kids who grew up drooling over those cars finally have the money to buy them- and Ford wants to rake it in!).

I just don't get the emotional attachment from either side of the argument, or this sentiment that is implied that it would be a bad decision to own a Mustang (or any other car) because of one or more particular disadvantages it has to someone else's preferred car. By those criteria it was silly for me to buy my Focus, which had an MSRP of about $21,000 (didn't pay that much though; but for arguments sake). There are a lot of used sports cars I could get for that money. There are also much faster cars I could get for that money (Just about a base model Mustang, in fact!). BUT, this car is reliable, cheap to own, and great on gas. The brakes will last me for a very long time, the tires will also last for a very long time and be much cheaper. It gets 40mpg, etc. I didn't buy it to race on the nurburgring, I bought it to get me where I need to go every day while being comfortable and functional and yet costing me as little as possible on a day to day basis (namely, fuel, maintenance, and repairs). Every person who owns any car has a variety of motivations behind the purchase of that car. Two people can own the same car for entirely different reasons. Likewise, two people can own two different cars and struggle to figure out why the other one would buy that one when theirs is 'obviously superior'. Back to my motorcycle example- I know sportbike riders who just cannot fathom why ANYONE would buy a Cruiser because it's so much slower than a sportbike. To them- there's only one thing to do on a motorcycle and that is to go fast- so it makes sense to buy the fastest one you can! Others have different motivations for riding. (I did offer to race one- but I got to pick the course and the finish line was 8,000 miles away- a little more than the lifespan of his tires if they were new, assuming his rear end, arms, and back could handle it and he could handle having no change of clothes, toiletries, tools, rain gear, or anything else for that matter since he had no storage-, he didn't take my offer).

Point is, we can't be one-tracked about things. It's just silly. It's perfectly valid for someone to buy a car based purely on it's performance and interior quality; just like it's perfectly valid for someone to buy a car because of it's good looks and it's history. Or for any other reason. I don't get the need to angrily debate it as if it's morally wrong for someone to buy a car that doesn't do certain things as well as other cars.
 
To sum it up Roman, buy what fits YOU and YOUR budget and most importantly, what YOU like! A lot of us have to make compromises when it comes to our cars, whether its money, location or both. In my case I can't afford the right E46 M3 in Laguna Sec Blue, hell even the wriong either, so I drive a Honda CR-Z. Its unique as you don't see a lot of them, its good on gas, its reliable and its a 6 speed! I've modded the car a little bit to make it more "me".

As far as the Stang for 2015 goes, can't wait to see them on the road but why is a hot car being released in the fall and not the spring?

Sent from my SPH-M930 using AG Online
 
Klasse Act said:
As far as the Stang for 2015 goes, can't wait to see them on the road but why is a hot car being released in the fall and not the spring?

Sent from my SPH-M930 using AG Online
Click to expand...
Probably so it can be at all the major auto shows before it hits showrooms late Q3 next year. If they waited until April 17th, they would miss Detroit and Chicago. Plus this way all the people that hate it will have time to snatch up every 13' or 14' still on the lots. Smart move if you ask me plus it creates a lot of media buzz.
 
We're apart of the media buzz right here, LOL!

Sent from my SPH-M930 using AG Online
 
Klasse Act said:
To sum it up Roman, buy what fits YOU and YOUR budget and most importantly, what YOU like! A lot of us have to make compromises when it comes to our cars, whether its money, location or both. In my case I can't afford the right E46 M3 in Laguna Sec Blue, hell even the wriong either, so I drive a Honda CR-Z. Its unique as you don't see a lot of them, its good on gas, its reliable and its a 6 speed! I've modded the car a little bit to make it more "me".

As far as the Stang for 2015 goes, can't wait to see them on the road but why is a hot car being released in the fall and not the spring?

Sent from my SPH-M930 using AG Online
Click to expand...

Gotta remember that Ford is a very high volume manufacturer and one of the biggest in the world. Some make hundreds of cars a month. Ford makes hundreds of cars a DAY. Ford usually switched model years late in the year because changes at the plants and et cetera are all planned. The plant workers have the same couple weeks off each year when the plant gets re tooled for the next model year. Then they come back to reduced production to get used to the changes and then back into full swing (assuming significant changes like a generation change).

It could be other reasons but I assume it's as simple as logistics- getting ready for a model shift. This is a 100k/year car. In the world of sports cars that's a ton (but not a million a year like some other cars- like the Focus [worldwide]).
 
Well, if I remember right the 2005 redesign hit production in fall of 2004 with the convertible coming out in spring of 2005. After that though the new model years started coming out in spring the year before. For example, my dad's 2007 was built in May of 2006.
 
Chris's FX4 said:
Well, if I remember right the 2005 redesign hit production in fall of 2004 with the convertible coming out in spring of 2005. After that though the new model years started coming out in spring the year before. For example, my dad's 2007 was built in May of 2006.
Click to expand...

Huh. Mustang must be earlier!

Kind of silly if you ask me! Even fall is a little early. Buy buying a 2007 in May of 2006 is kind of silly! But it's all marketing, I'm sure. You can get an '07 Mustang or an '06 Camaro, etc.
 
Just to up the ante, my friend is at Mercedes buying one of these now. This is a new model. Check this thing out:

CLA45
$47,450 MSRP*ExploreBuild
Handcrafted AMG 2.0L turbo inline-4
Acceleration
0 to 60 mph
4.4sec †
Horsepower
@6000 rpm
355hp
Torque
@ 2,250-5,000 rpm
332lb-ft

ery9ybeh.jpg


ugyqynu8.jpg


These are the phone pics of his actual car. Pretty sweet:

yvaby3ar.jpg


u6u5u2en.jpg



We both agree the Nav screen is terrible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top