I was hoping this would be a mature arguement... No such luck though. Their only seems to be a couple of people in this thread who aren't Mustang fanboys. I compared the GT to the T/A because I think the T/A is faster, which it is. If you can't admit that then maybe some counseling is in order for denial...[8D]

I fully admitted that the 05+ GT's were faster than the 99-04 GT's. I said that IMO I liked the way that the 99-04 GT's drove more than the 05+ GT's. I don't think I once called either model GT slow. I said that neither one of them is blisteringly fast and I was hoping for a bit more out of the 05+ GT's. I also said that I would go for the GT if it were me in response to the OP's question.

The apples to apples comment is funny. What other car's are out that are comparable to the Mustang? I don't know too many other US car manufacturer's that use a modular V8 set-up in their sports car...What should I compare the Mustang too if not another "Muscle Car"? I could compare it to the 350Z but that is not apples to apples since the 350Z is a V6, I could compare it to the Charger but that is an OHV 5.7L too. I just don't know what other car's I can compare the Mustang to since it isn't fair to compare it to a Camaro/Trans Am...

 

I'm just saying the F-bodies had a way bigger motor. Of course they're gonna be faster,duh

Now if Ford in their infinite wisdom decided to bless the Stang with the 5.4L modular motor (not blown like in the Shelby)then that'd be a much more level playing field

 

..crap. Dupe post

 

If it hasn't happened by now, it's not going to happen. The only 2 cars to ever receive an aluminum 5.4 were the Cobra R and the Ford GT. You'll see a 5.0 motor like the one that is in the Parnelli Jones Mustang before you see a 5.4.

 

How is that a legitimate arguement? By that logic the Mustang should kill 90% of the cars on the market right now... The GT should be annihilating all of the Porsches, Audi's, MB, BMW's, Nissan's, Aston's etc. etc. because it comes with a 4.6L V8... Engine size has nothing to do with it.

Do you think that the F-Body guys sit their and get pissy when someone compares the speed of their car to the speed of a Corvette or Viper based on the engine size?You started to get pissy when I made the comment that stock GT's aren't that fast. They are quick and usually quicker than 85% of the cars on the road. They are not fast though.

What kind of 5.4L do you think that Ford should put in the Mustang? I don't think it would work out very well for them if they put the 5.4L into the Mustang. The 5.4L 2v doesn't see that much better of gains than the 4.6L does. If they were to do the 3v 5.4L that would be nice. I don't think it would be a good idea for Ford to put a 5.4L 4v engine into the Mustang even if it wasn't forged. People would start to buy the base GT with a 5.4L 4v and then just getting a forged rotating kit and a blower and be making much more power than the Shelby for a much cheaper price.

 

Who's getting pissy? I'm just confused you're saying the Stang GT's aren't so special because an F-body with a much bigger engine is faster.. THAT to me makes no sense. But if I wanted to have an honest apples-to-apples test, how about pitting a Stang GT againsta 305 V8F-body? Hey the GM willstill has a larger engine but at least it's a morelevel playing field. Years ago I used to have an '86GT and my buddy had an '82 Z28 with a 305,, I'd eat his car for breakfast/lunch & dinner, and my current '02GT is WAY more powerful than that '86 was

And you seem to know about cars to know better than comparing American V8's with higher tuned offshore engines (Europeans, Japanese).. part of performanceAmerican cars appeal is their "low tech grunt" of a larger engine doing it's thing. Europeans & other imports prefer a higher tuned smaller engine,, it's been like that for decades.

 

Your right, it has been like that for decades with Europeans owning the market on high-tech engines. America was falling behind up until about 3-5 years ago. Now they are starting to come back for a brief period of power before the tree-huggers enforce the greenhouse laws...

You stated in your post that comparing a 4.6L V8 Mustang to a 5.7L V8 F-body wasn't fair... How is comparing a 4.6L V8 to a 26 year old 305 that hasn't been produced in over 15 years fair? The old 305 is a dog of an engine though. My first car was an 87 T/A with the 305 in it, my single-port V6 is faster than it ever was. lol

What car can I compare the Mustang too, if I can't compare it to the one car(Camaro/Trans am)that it has been pitted against since its inception over 40 years ago? You just don't want the Mustang compared to the Camaro/Trans Am because they are faster than the Mustang.

I am pretty sure that I never said the GT's weren't special. I said that they are not as fast as people make/want them to be. I think that the GT's are fun cars but they are not overly fast like a lot of people like to claim.

 

You can go right ahead and compare the Stang with any other car you can think of, Just keep in mind the specs of the 2 cars. I don't think a Stang would do so well racing a Lotus Espri Turbo,, and that car has just a 4 cylinder engine. Yes tweaked beyond belief with a mega $ price tag, but an ousider would still wonder why the "fire breathing 8" of a Stang can't keep up with a 4 banger lol.

Same with comparing F-bodies that have 350ci V8's against a Ford 281ci V8.. ain't much of a shocker that the F-body is quicker. And ok don't compare cars 15 years apart.. pick the same year. It used to make more sence back when Stang was available with 302's and 351's amongst other engines, and GM had 305's and 350's etc.. back then you'd look foolish if you compared the Stang 302 against the GM 350, but that's kinda what you're doing now.

 

So just because the a Mustang is slower than the same year Camaro or Trans Am, they shouldn't be compared against one another despite the fact that they compete for the same segment of the market?

 

The GT is so much better the power of the V6 just sucks