MotorTrend tests the 2005 Mustang GT...

[Driver72]

Don't want to give away too much of the article, so for those who haven't read it can still enjoy. But let me post some performance numbers: 0-60 in 5.1 seconds 1/4 in 13.6 @ 99.9 mph Oh, and did I mention that those numbers were with the AUTOMATIC!!! Wow! They're predicting 4.8-4.9 with the manual. They said, they don't think the manual will be too much faster because the 1st through 3rd gears on the new GT's automatic is spaced REALLY close together and shifts as quickly as Mercedes AMG automatics. They said the only reason the 1/4 speeds aren't higher is that 4th and 5th gear ratios are pretty much overdrives and the rush of acceleration drops off significantly once the car hits 4th gear (before the 1/4 mile stripe). Because of the higher 4th and 5th gears the MGT automatic gets 26 mpg highway EPA numbers (18 in city). That's one quick new Mustang GT, and the estimated sticker is $25K for the GT. Oh, and on the dyno, again with the automatic it got: 267 hp 283 tq. Looks like the Mustang can finally put up some hot numbers at the track again.

[05LegacyGT330Ci]

The Cobra will be somethin special I assure you that. I hate Mustangs, but I loved the '03+ Cobra and the GT exhuast note. Funny side not, some time about a year and half ago the first time I saw a new SC'd Cobra I floored it in 2nd at about 40 just to see if he would do anything, and he floored the thing and it was sooooooo loud and fast but seconds later it was pouring out smoke and pulled off to the side of the road :oops:

[rao]

Those are great times but a real low trap speed. Once the aftermarket gets ahold of those there should be some really fst cars out there. Almost makes me want to get one, almost :)

[Driver72]

rao, again, keep in mind those trap speeds were with an automatic. Yeah, I loved the retro look of the MGT when I first saw it, but after reading that the interior is still el cheapo in look and feel and (though I know it's good for drag strip starts) that the MGT didn't get an independant rear suspension, that kind of blew it for me. I was a big Mustang fan in the late 80's and the 5.0 GT then was the bomb. But the car needs a bit more upscale interior (like what I said about the WRX when it came out) for me to seriously consider it now. If I was 10 years younger and in my early 20's, I'd pony up the extra couple grand to get one of those over an SRT-4 anyday. I don't think there's another car made where you can run sub 5 seconds to 60 and most likely (with the manual) low 13's in the 1/4 for $25K That alone makes it a contender in many people's books!

[Whitestar Pilot]

Its a very impressive new Mustang. It would still get killed by a stock LS1 on the highway though. Can you believe the guages? Too retro, or just plain sweet? I haven't made a final determination. There's a reason why they haven't made speedometers like that since the 70s, it looks hard to read. But it does invoke memories... tradition, and such. I think I'm going to have to test drive one.

[rao]

Autoweek's review (witout any test numbers) was very neutral. Time will tell, I may have to check one out.

[kanoswrx]

I read autoweek's article on it. Wasn't very impressed. They said the interior was cheaper then ever, and the engine and tranny were basiclly carry overs from previous generations, with the engine getting tunned a bit better. Personally for the money I would rather buy a WRX and get a Cobb stage 2 thrown in and it would keep up with the new Mustang in the 1/4 mile. And then still be able to drive it in the snow :)

[Driver72]

Yeah, Autoweek didn't like the interior much. I'm kind of with them on that, even though I haven't seen it in person. It does look very retro and in that regard it's great. BUT, I think Ford would of been well served to keep the retro look to the exterior, and modernized the interior a bit more. I'll surely take one on a test drive to guage it a bit better. True a stock LS1 would take it on the highway, but not by too much when you figure the new MGT with a manual should post even faster times than this MGT automatic which is already posting as fast as times as the LS1 equipped Camaro to 60 and in the 1/4. But we're comparing 4.6 liters to 5.7 in that regard. My feeling is Ford will sell boat loads of this car in the first two years. I'm sure a vast majority will be the V6 ones. But nonetheless, they'll sell big!

[kanoswrx]

I don't get this whole retro craze America is having. I mean we don't see Japan or Germany making retro cars of their own. The way I see it America is trying to look back at a time when they dominated car sales and maybe they think if their cars looked like that again people will buy them. I don't buy it. They need to realize most kids these days (people who mainly buy the mustang) like smaller sleeker looking cars. While I am sure the Mustang will still sell well, it’s not going to change anything for Ford. I have seen pictures of the interior of the Mustang and it just looks ugly, why would I want something that looks like it was made in the 60-70's. Unless I was around in the 60-70's and it was nostalgic, I don't really car. This was more of a rant against all the retro looking cars coming out, but I just think the mustang epitomizes the failure of American car makers to keep up with new imports.

[Driver72]

One of the reasons why Japan isn't doing a "retro" craze is because they didn't really have any cars before the 70's. LOL and their cars of the 70's were pretty ugly and didn't set any design standards. Japanese cars really only began making a statement in the 80's and that's not really far enough back to be considered "retro" and even then, Japanese cars of the 80's were no epitome of design (for the most part). German cars ARE using the retro look. Take VW with the New Beetle of 1998. Porsche doesn't really need to go retro...it's 911 hasn't changed much since it's inception. Mercedes Benz has been evolving ever since too, but they also haven't done anything major. But a "retro" version of their old gullwing car (can't remember the name of it) would be SWEET! And keep in mind, the Baby Boomers (ages 40-60) are a huge demographic now and the nostalgia for them is high. The 2005 Mustang GT looks like the Mustang of the 60's (not 70's) and that's when the baby boomers were in their teens and 20's, so for them, it's nice. Plus, there are a HUGE amount of people who still appreciate "classic" cars and the way they look. With the exception of Chevy's retro attempt at the pretty much useless SSR, GM would be WISE to bring a few retro cars to their line up. Their cars of the 50's and 60's were hot and designed great...now they're the epitome of ugly (for the most part). Anyway, I guess to each their own. I'd love the new Mustang GT if it had an IRS, and not so low grade interior that wasn't quite so retro.

[godwhomismike]

Engines are different, as is the auto tranny. I'm not sure about the 5-sp manual tranny, that might be the same. I really like the look of the new 'stangs. If I had held out on getting my Legacy by a month or two, this new 'stang might've swayed me away from the Legacy. Black exterior with red leather - that's look hot. The exhuast note sounds like the 03-04 Mach 1. I'm floored that the '05 automatic GT is faster than the automatic Mach 1, must be the new 5-sp automatic Ford is using in the '05's instead of the 4-sp it was using in the pervious generation of 'stangs. I've loved Mustangs since I was 5 years old. To this day I have yet to own one, but before I purschased the Legacy, I was almost completely set to buy an '04 Azure Blue Mach 1 Mustang, automatic with the interior upgrade package. Most people here are gonna be like ewww Automatic, from what I had researched, the automatic was holding up almost flawlessly, while the manuals had a bunch of quirky issues. I had all the mods planned out, like the rear louvers, the hurst T-handle shifter handle, billet trim pieces, custom Mach 1 floor mats, and one or two other things. (I guess you see why I was looking for some toys for my Legacy) Mustang's aren't meant to be luxury cars, they have always been fast and obnoxiously loud, fairly inexpensive, an has a lot of heritage. Mustang owners have tons of clubs, meets, and all sorts of things. When you get a Mustang, it not only a car, but also a big club with lots of heritage. The new Mustang looks like a big step forward. It looks like it has a cozier interior with higher level of trim pieces, but yet holds on to its beast roar. I think the new guages might turn a few people off, but at least it's something completely different to look at, very retro - almost like the ones from the '60's. - Mike

[evolutionmovement]

I'm by no measure a Ford fan, but one of my favorite cars is a 1966 Shelby GT-350. The old Mustangs are almost universally loved. I know Chevy die-hards and import-lovers who smile at the Boss and earlier 'Stangs. Because of this, I like the styling, though I agree that the interior would be better served with less retro. I think it still fits the Mustang persona without being too much a throw-back retro exercise put out by a cynical marketing department like the Thunderbird. Steve

[Whitestar Pilot]

[quote name='kanoswrx']I don't get this whole retro craze America is having. I mean we don't see Japan or Germany making retro cars of their own. The way I see it America is trying to look back at a time when they dominated car sales and maybe they think if their cars looked like that again people will buy them. I don't buy it. They need to realize most kids these days (people who mainly buy the mustang) like smaller sleeker looking cars. While I am sure the Mustang will still sell well, it’s not going to change anything for Ford. I have seen pictures of the interior of the Mustang and it just looks ugly, why would I want something that looks like it was made in the 60-70's. Unless I was around in the 60-70's and it was nostalgic, I don't really car. This was more of a rant against all the retro looking cars coming out, but I just think the mustang epitomizes the failure of American car makers to keep up with new imports.[/quote] Funny, I thought it was the VW Bug craze that led us down this road. And Nissan tried to market the new 350z as the return of the 240z in earlier ads, if I remember correctly. The truth is though, these retro cars are mostly plastic interior-laced pale shadows of the originals. Instead of setting the trend, these new models are more like museum recreations... which is appealing to enthusiasts, but your point is well taken, they are not something to get overly excited about. The absolute worst thing a car company can do is what the idiots at GM have done. They'll take a name with tradition, like the Impala, or Monte Carlo, and slap it on a box-shaped 3.8 V-6 car. Or they'll cancel their most traditional line up (the F-bodies) and roll out a POS 2-door Grand Am with a Z-28 motor, and call it a GTO!! (In fact, I have so much to say about this that I'm going to start another thread on it). How many of those have sold? Not too many, damn, as a former Trans Am owner, I just hate GM for what they've done to Pontiac. SO props to Ford for at least keeping the Mustang alive, and I give this new Mustang the nod and a thumb's up.

[IwannaSportSedan]

[quote name='Driver72']One of the reasons why Japan isn't doing a "retro" craze is because they didn't really have any cars before the 70's. LOL and their cars of the 70's were pretty ugly and didn't set any design standards.Japanese cars really only began making a statement in the 80's and that's not really far enough back to be considered "retro" and even then, Japanese cars of the 80's were no epitome of design (for the most part).[/quote] This is very true. Not only that, but the design successes from japan were copies of european designs, which is one reason Toyota still copies everything they sell from someone else. The 240Z and Toyota 2000GT were both rip offs of Jag E-types and Ferrari 250s, for every-day money, in the case of the 240z. Good cars, but deriviative, not original. [quote]German cars ARE using the retro look. Take VW with the New Beetle of 1998.Porsche doesn't really need to go retro...it's 911 hasn't changed much since it's inception.[/quote] The Boxter was a no-bones re-interpretation of a modern, and readily available 550 Spyder. [quote]Mercedes Benz has been evolving ever since too, but they also haven't done anything major. But a "retro" version of their old gullwing car (can't remember the name of it) would be SWEET! [/quote] Can we say "Mercedes SLR McLaren"? Whether it is successful or not, that is it's intent. The old car being the 300SL and racing 300SLR. [quote]And keep in mind, the Baby Boomers (ages 40-60) are a huge demographic now and the nostalgia for them is high. The 2005 Mustang GT looks like the Mustang of the 60's (not 70's) and that's when the baby boomers were in their teens and 20's, so for them, it's nice. Plus, there are a HUGE amount of people who still appreciate "classic" cars and the way they look. [/quote] That is because cars were more intimately built and designed back then. The classic cars that are the most beautiful were designed by one or just a few men who were certifiably nuts about cars. Malcom Sayer comes to mind with classic Jags. Figoni and Falaschi (sp?) also with classic bugattis and Talbot-Lagos. Cars aren't designed or built like that anymore. [quote] With the exception of Chevy's retro attempt at the pretty much useless SSR, GM would be WISE to bring a few retro cars to their line up. Their cars of the 50's and 60's were hot and designed great...now they're the epitome of ugly (for the most part). Anyway, I guess to each their own. I'd love the new Mustang GT if it had an IRS, and not so low grade interior that wasn't quite so retro.[/quote] Agreed. The current Monte Carlo is singly the ugliest car I can think of, that some people actually pay money for. Followed closely by the Pontiac A$$-tek. The current retro theme, with Ford, Chrysler, Nissan's Z, The Miata being a direct throwback to the MGB/TR6/Lotus Elan school of british sportscar design, the New Beetle, the New Mini, and Porsche's age-old design language, seems to be having the effect of "Clearing the Palette" as it were. Getting back to the designs that work, and going forward again. Maybe this time we can take good steps forward, instead of the backward steps of most of the cars in the 70's and a good amount of the 80's were. I guess I didn't mind the interior of the 05 Mustang. goes with the outside, and the materials didn't look that bad to me. The lack of IRS blew it out of my acceptable list, though. I can use the extra 2 doors the Legacy GT has, anyway. Think of retro cars as a history review. "one can't know how to go forward if he doesn't know where he's been." Maybe a lot of good will come from it. Besides that, we are getting way more performance gains out of today's engines and drivelines than they ever got in the "age of horsepower" in the 50s and 60s. A 400 horsepower Mustang (Cobra) and an upcoming 500hp Corvette (C6 Z06 rumor) were not even in the realm of possibility in the 60's. Let alone the exhaust choking 70's.

[Subawho]

is it a bit booty that the difference between 0-60 (5.1) and 0-70 (6.8 ) is nearly 2 seconds, or is it just me?

[scubie02]

Actually, I really like the retro look of the new mustang and if I hadn't already bought my LGT, might have been sorely tempted by one. Of course my subie is much more practical, and come winter the awd, heated seats/mirros/wipers are going to make it seem the logical choice, but there is always that certain something from the heritage of the mustang (of course I owned one in college, so maybe thats some of it for me). If I had the $ there'd be one parked at my house soon.