Mustang Kicks A Goat. News At Eleven.

After years of GM products beating up our favorite horse, finally the
Mustang puts some hoof marks on the competition.

Performance data:
0-60 mph: M - 5.1 / GTO - 4.8
0-100 mph: M - 13.0 / GTO - 11.7
0-130 mph: M - 25.6 / GTO - 19.6
1/4 mile: M - 13.8 @ 103 mph / GTO - 13.3 @ 107 mph
Top speed: M - 147 mph / GTO - 158 mph (governed)

Numbers:
Displacement: M - 281 ci / GTO - 364 ci
Horsepower: M - 300 @ 5,750 / GTO - 400 @ 6,000
Torque: M - 320 @ 4,500 / GTO - 400 @ 4,400
EPA: M - 17 and 25 / GTO - 15 and 27 (estimated)
Weight: M - 3,575 / GTO - 3,787

Car and Driver magazine scores the Mustang GT a point higher than the
GTO. Here's how they broke it down:

Driver comfort (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
Front-seat space (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
Ergonomics (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
Rear-seat comfort (5): M - 4 / GTO - 5
Rear-seat space (5): M - 3 / GTO - 5
Trunk space (5): M - 5 / GTO - 3
Features/Amenities (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
Fit & Finish (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
Styling (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
Value (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
Engine output (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
Engine performance (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
Throttle response (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
Engine (NHV) (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
Transmission (10): M -10 / GTO - 7
Vehicle performance (10): M - 10 / GTO - 9
Steering feel (10): M - 7 / GTO - 10
Brake feel (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
Handling (10): M - 8 / GTO - 9
Ride (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
Gotta-have-it factor (25): M - 25 / GTO - 18
Fun to drive (25): M - 22 / GTO - 23
Grand total: M - 211 / GTO - 210

They sum it up this way: "Pick apart the Mustang's laundry list of
simple components, and it would seem to be less of a car than the GTO,
but drive the Mustang, and it feels like far more than the sum of its
parts. That is the draw of the Mustang: It makes the most of what it
has, doesn't suffer for what it doesn't have, charges you less than you
expect and beckons you from the showroomuntil you come and take it
home."

Patrick
'93 Cobra
'83 LTD

> wrote:
> After years of GM products beating up our favorite horse, finally the
> Mustang puts some hoof marks on the competition.

Thanks for posting that comparism btw the 'stang
and GTO. Both cars have their strong points, and
it's up to the prospective buyer to determine which
one to go with. However, the GTO's styling isn't
all that different from other vehicles out there while
the 'stang can't be mistaken for anything else.

-=G

Very cool, Patrick. I am somewhat surprised though with the end results..
although I am pleased. What year models are they comparing?

-Mike

--
A happy kid behind the wheel of a 98 Mustang GT
Cold air intake
FRPP 3.73 gears
Steeda Tri-Ax Shifter
Flowmaster 40 Series mufflers (self-installed woohoo)
Hi-speed fan switch
255/60R-15 rear tires
Subframe connectors


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> After years of GM products beating up our favorite horse, finally the
> Mustang puts some hoof marks on the competition.
>
> Performance data:
> 0-60 mph: M - 5.1 / GTO - 4.8
> 0-100 mph: M - 13.0 / GTO - 11.7
> 0-130 mph: M - 25.6 / GTO - 19.6
> 1/4 mile: M - 13.8 @ 103 mph / GTO - 13.3 @ 107 mph
> Top speed: M - 147 mph / GTO - 158 mph (governed)
>
> Numbers:
> Displacement: M - 281 ci / GTO - 364 ci
> Horsepower: M - 300 @ 5,750 / GTO - 400 @ 6,000
> Torque: M - 320 @ 4,500 / GTO - 400 @ 4,400
> EPA: M - 17 and 25 / GTO - 15 and 27 (estimated)
> Weight: M - 3,575 / GTO - 3,787
>
> Car and Driver magazine scores the Mustang GT a point higher than the
> GTO. Here's how they broke it down:
>
> Driver comfort (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Front-seat space (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Ergonomics (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Rear-seat comfort (5): M - 4 / GTO - 5
> Rear-seat space (5): M - 3 / GTO - 5
> Trunk space (5): M - 5 / GTO - 3
> Features/Amenities (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Fit & Finish (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Styling (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
> Value (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
> Engine output (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
> Engine performance (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
> Throttle response (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Engine (NHV) (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Transmission (10): M -10 / GTO - 7
> Vehicle performance (10): M - 10 / GTO - 9
> Steering feel (10): M - 7 / GTO - 10
> Brake feel (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Handling (10): M - 8 / GTO - 9
> Ride (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Gotta-have-it factor (25): M - 25 / GTO - 18
> Fun to drive (25): M - 22 / GTO - 23
> Grand total: M - 211 / GTO - 210
>
> They sum it up this way: "Pick apart the Mustang's laundry list of
> simple components, and it would seem to be less of a car than the GTO,
> but drive the Mustang, and it feels like far more than the sum of its
> parts. That is the draw of the Mustang: It makes the most of what it
> has, doesn't suffer for what it doesn't have, charges you less than you
> expect and beckons you from the showroomuntil you come and take it
> home."
>
> Patrick
> '93 Cobra
> '83 LTD
>

wrote in news:1102822767.379833.196310
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> After years of GM products beating up our favorite horse, finally the
> Mustang puts some hoof marks on the competition.
>
> Performance data:
> 0-60 mph: M - 5.1 / GTO - 4.8
> 0-100 mph: M - 13.0 / GTO - 11.7
> 0-130 mph: M - 25.6 / GTO - 19.6
> 1/4 mile: M - 13.8 @ 103 mph / GTO - 13.3 @ 107 mph
> Top speed: M - 147 mph / GTO - 158 mph (governed)
>
> Numbers:
> Displacement: M - 281 ci / GTO - 364 ci
> Horsepower: M - 300 @ 5,750 / GTO - 400 @ 6,000
> Torque: M - 320 @ 4,500 / GTO - 400 @ 4,400
> EPA: M - 17 and 25 / GTO - 15 and 27 (estimated)
> Weight: M - 3,575 / GTO - 3,787
>
> Car and Driver magazine scores the Mustang GT a point higher than the
> GTO. Here's how they broke it down:
>
> Driver comfort (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Front-seat space (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Ergonomics (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Rear-seat comfort (5): M - 4 / GTO - 5
> Rear-seat space (5): M - 3 / GTO - 5
> Trunk space (5): M - 5 / GTO - 3
> Features/Amenities (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Fit & Finish (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Styling (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
> Value (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
> Engine output (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
> Engine performance (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
> Throttle response (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Engine (NHV) (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Transmission (10): M -10 / GTO - 7
> Vehicle performance (10): M - 10 / GTO - 9
> Steering feel (10): M - 7 / GTO - 10
> Brake feel (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Handling (10): M - 8 / GTO - 9
> Ride (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Gotta-have-it factor (25): M - 25 / GTO - 18
> Fun to drive (25): M - 22 / GTO - 23
> Grand total: M - 211 / GTO - 210
>
> They sum it up this way: "Pick apart the Mustang's laundry list of
> simple components, and it would seem to be less of a car than the GTO,
> but drive the Mustang, and it feels like far more than the sum of its
> parts. That is the draw of the Mustang: It makes the most of what it
> has, doesn't suffer for what it doesn't have, charges you less than
you
> expect and beckons you from the showroomuntil you come and take it
> home."
>
> Patrick
> '93 Cobra
> '83 LTD

It appears that the winner was decided based on emotion and feeling.
Certainly, this one of the biggest (if not _the_ biggest) reasons we buy
any particular car. But looking at the objective data, the GTO came out
pretty much on top.

The "Gotta have it factor" (the category with the largest difference)
was a 7-point difference in favor of the Mustang. Take away that
entirely subjective opinion, and the GTO runs away with the prize.

As long as the "Gotta have it factor" was included, I'm wondering why
C&D didn't include a "Chick magnet factor"? Had they included that, the
Mustang would've killed the Goat. But that kind of subjective stuff
isn't why we read comparos, is it?

Joe
Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies
Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

I would call a one-point difference out of 210 subjective points a draw,
personally.

Brian

In article .com>,
says...
> After years of GM products beating up our favorite horse, finally the
> Mustang puts some hoof marks on the competition.
>
> Performance data:
> 0-60 mph: M - 5.1 / GTO - 4.8
> 0-100 mph: M - 13.0 / GTO - 11.7
> 0-130 mph: M - 25.6 / GTO - 19.6
> 1/4 mile: M - 13.8 @ 103 mph / GTO - 13.3 @ 107 mph
> Top speed: M - 147 mph / GTO - 158 mph (governed)
>
> Numbers:
> Displacement: M - 281 ci / GTO - 364 ci
> Horsepower: M - 300 @ 5,750 / GTO - 400 @ 6,000
> Torque: M - 320 @ 4,500 / GTO - 400 @ 4,400
> EPA: M - 17 and 25 / GTO - 15 and 27 (estimated)
> Weight: M - 3,575 / GTO - 3,787
>
> Car and Driver magazine scores the Mustang GT a point higher than the
> GTO. Here's how they broke it down:
>
> Driver comfort (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Front-seat space (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Ergonomics (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Rear-seat comfort (5): M - 4 / GTO - 5
> Rear-seat space (5): M - 3 / GTO - 5
> Trunk space (5): M - 5 / GTO - 3
> Features/Amenities (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Fit & Finish (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Styling (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
> Value (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
> Engine output (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
> Engine performance (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
> Throttle response (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Engine (NHV) (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
> Transmission (10): M -10 / GTO - 7
> Vehicle performance (10): M - 10 / GTO - 9
> Steering feel (10): M - 7 / GTO - 10
> Brake feel (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Handling (10): M - 8 / GTO - 9
> Ride (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
> Gotta-have-it factor (25): M - 25 / GTO - 18
> Fun to drive (25): M - 22 / GTO - 23
> Grand total: M - 211 / GTO - 210
>
> They sum it up this way: "Pick apart the Mustang's laundry list of
> simple components, and it would seem to be less of a car than the GTO,
> but drive the Mustang, and it feels like far more than the sum of its
> parts. That is the draw of the Mustang: It makes the most of what it
> has, doesn't suffer for what it doesn't have, charges you less than you
> expect and beckons you from the showroomuntil you come and take it

Joe wrote:
> wrote in news:1102822767.379833.196310
> @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>>After years of GM products beating up our favorite horse, finally the
>>Mustang puts some hoof marks on the competition.
>>
>>Performance data:
>>0-60 mph: M - 5.1 / GTO - 4.8
>>0-100 mph: M - 13.0 / GTO - 11.7
>>0-130 mph: M - 25.6 / GTO - 19.6
>>1/4 mile: M - 13.8 @ 103 mph / GTO - 13.3 @ 107 mph
>>Top speed: M - 147 mph / GTO - 158 mph (governed)
>>
>>Numbers:
>>Displacement: M - 281 ci / GTO - 364 ci
>>Horsepower: M - 300 @ 5,750 / GTO - 400 @ 6,000
>>Torque: M - 320 @ 4,500 / GTO - 400 @ 4,400
>>EPA: M - 17 and 25 / GTO - 15 and 27 (estimated)
>>Weight: M - 3,575 / GTO - 3,787
>>
>>Car and Driver magazine scores the Mustang GT a point higher than the
>>GTO. Here's how they broke it down:
>>
>>Driver comfort (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
>>Front-seat space (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
>>Ergonomics (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
>>Rear-seat comfort (5): M - 4 / GTO - 5
>>Rear-seat space (5): M - 3 / GTO - 5
>>Trunk space (5): M - 5 / GTO - 3
>>Features/Amenities (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
>>Fit & Finish (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
>>Styling (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
>>Value (10): M - 10 / GTO - 8
>>Engine output (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
>>Engine performance (10): M - 8 / GTO - 10
>>Throttle response (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
>>Engine (NHV) (10): M - 9 / GTO - 10
>>Transmission (10): M -10 / GTO - 7
>>Vehicle performance (10): M - 10 / GTO - 9
>>Steering feel (10): M - 7 / GTO - 10
>>Brake feel (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
>>Handling (10): M - 8 / GTO - 9
>>Ride (10): M - 9 / GTO - 9
>>Gotta-have-it factor (25): M - 25 / GTO - 18
>>Fun to drive (25): M - 22 / GTO - 23
>>Grand total: M - 211 / GTO - 210
>>
>>They sum it up this way: "Pick apart the Mustang's laundry list of
>>simple components, and it would seem to be less of a car than the GTO,
>>but drive the Mustang, and it feels like far more than the sum of its
>>parts. That is the draw of the Mustang: It makes the most of what it
>>has, doesn't suffer for what it doesn't have, charges you less than
>
> you
>
>>expect and beckons you from the showroomuntil you come and take it
>>home."
>>
>>Patrick
>>'93 Cobra
>>'83 LTD
>
>
> It appears that the winner was decided based on emotion and feeling.
> Certainly, this one of the biggest (if not _the_ biggest) reasons we buy
> any particular car. But looking at the objective data, the GTO came out
> pretty much on top.
>
> The "Gotta have it factor" (the category with the largest difference)
> was a 7-point difference in favor of the Mustang. Take away that
> entirely subjective opinion, and the GTO runs away with the prize.
>
> As long as the "Gotta have it factor" was included, I'm wondering why
> C&D didn't include a "Chick magnet factor"? Had they included that, the
> Mustang would've killed the Goat. But that kind of subjective stuff
> isn't why we read comparos, is it?
>
> Joe
> Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies
> Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

I read the article in the magazine and they basically said they couldn't
let one of their "Ten Best" picks be beaten by a car that never made the
list. They never intended for the Goat to beat the Mustang from the
start of the comparison. I agree that, by the numbers, the GTO soundly
beat the Mustang. They pull the same crap when comparing American cars
to foreign ones. It's just one of the reasons why I don't trust Car &
Driver to give an honest review or comparison.

Michael Johnson, PE opined

>>>
>>>They sum it up this way: "Pick apart the Mustang's laundry list of
>>>simple components, and it would seem to be less of a car than the GTO,
>>>but drive the Mustang, and it feels like far more than the sum of its
>>>parts. That is the draw of the Mustang: It makes the most of what it
>>>has, doesn't suffer for what it doesn't have, charges you less than
>>
>> you
>>
>>>expect and beckons you from the showroomuntil you come and take it
>>>home."
>>>

>>
>> It appears that the winner was decided based on emotion and feeling.
>> Certainly, this one of the biggest (if not _the_ biggest) reasons we buy
>> any particular car. But looking at the objective data, the GTO came out
>> pretty much on top.
>>
>> The "Gotta have it factor" (the category with the largest difference)
>> was a 7-point difference in favor of the Mustang. Take away that
>> entirely subjective opinion, and the GTO runs away with the prize.
>>

>
> I read the article in the magazine and they basically said they couldn't
> let one of their "Ten Best" picks be beaten by a car that never made the
> list. They never intended for the Goat to beat the Mustang from the
> start of the comparison. I agree that, by the numbers, the GTO soundly
> beat the Mustang. They pull the same crap when comparing American cars
> to foreign ones. It's just one of the reasons why I don't trust Car &
> Driver to give an honest review or comparison.

And I dont either.... but looking at the -more or less- subjective stuff, I
think they MIGHT have tried to weight it toward the GTO.
- I speak of handling and "steering feel", whatever the hell THAT is!

Since I dont have experience in either car and havent had the interest to
drive the later cars, I have to track back to my 84 SVO.

When I got it, i fell in love with cars all over again. I was so ecstatic
with its performance and MAINLY the handling, I begged driving sessions in
both Camabirds and Corvettes to see if I was maybe over stating myself.

MY RESULT, as a middle aged seat of the pants driver.. I felt the SS's and
Vettes would surely kick my SVO's ass on both power and time elapsed as well
as speed through corners ...BUT, even trying to compensate for the difference
in road feel through the steering wheel, I REALLY felt that the only one I
would be able to get used to was the Vette.
The ony RECENT GM car I drove that I'd love to have is my Bro' in Laws 02
Vette.. took THAT thru the twisties and it was a hoot!.. Took my Bro's Early
80's through the same roads and it did ok but did not light my fire in ANY
way.

Of course all that is HIGHLY subjective and I really have NEVER liked GM's
"road feel" though all reviewers seem to prefer it over Ford's for the same
type of car.

Bottom Line: It's all just words


--
- Yes, I'm a crusty old geezer curmudgeon.. deal with it! -

>Very cool, Patrick. I am somewhat surprised though with the end
results..
> although I am pleased. What year models are they comparing?
Both are '05 models.

Patrick
'93 Cobra
'83 LTD

>It appears that the winner was decided based on emotion and feeling.
>Certainly, this one of the biggest (if not _the_ biggest) reasons we
buy
>any particular car. But looking at the objective data, the GTO came
out
>pretty much on top.

Yes it did. However, while the GTO handily beat the Mustang on the
track, at least the Mustang didn't embarrass itself. A 103 trap speed
is pretty stout for a stocker, and so are the rest of the Mustang's
track numbers. And now we know with a little super tune (an
aftermarket chip) the Mustang is capable of running all over a stock
GTO, and do it for about 5 grand cheaper.

For me, either car would be a worthy addition to my garage.
Patrick
'93 Cobra
'83 LTD

>MJ wrote:

>I read the article in the magazine and they basically said they
couldn't
>let one of their "Ten Best" picks be beaten by a car that never made
the
>list. They never intended for the Goat to beat the Mustang from the
>start of the comparison.

Mike,

You need to reread the text. That's not at all what they said.

>I agree that, by the numbers, the GTO soundly
>beat the Mustang. They pull the same crap when comparing American cars
>to foreign ones. It's just one of the reasons why I don't trust Car &
>Driver to give an honest review or comparison.

I like C&D. I think their reviews, for the most part, are pretty
accurate.

You have to admit there's a lot of subjective things that go into
picking a winner. (i.e. The feelings of most of us in here deciding
between a Mustang or a LS1 Cambird.) And you have to give credit to
C&D for actually picking winners. Motor Trend seems to always let the
reader decide.

Patrick
'93 Cobra
'83 LTD