2013 Mustang GT500

[JackBurton]

When it resembles a Rubbermaid trash can, I do take exception. It was a huge problem with my Corvette, Camaro is bad and the Mustang looks bad also. There are better ways to execute an interior using plastics, brushed aluminum, leather, alcantera, or wood so it doesn't look like a trash can.

I would say, the interior is good enough for a 650HP <$60K car.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

When it resembles a Rubbermaid trash can, I do take exception. It was a huge problem with my Corvette, Camaro is bad and the Mustang looks bad also. There are better ways to execute an interior using plastics, brushed aluminum, leather, alcantera, or wood so it doesn't look like a trash can.

Then buy something else. These cars aren't made to be Acuras or Lincolns. They're made to be fun to drive.

 

[LTC8K6]

The race is closer than you may think. A stock 2010 GT will beat a stock 2011 V6, but it's pretty dang close. Take a look at Youtube, they should have the race still up (I think Car&Driver or Road&Track did the race).

C and D has 4.9 vs 5.4 to 60 so not really that close, imo.
12.3 vs 13 to 100.
top gear 30-50 9.4 vs 12.6
50-70 8.7 vs 12.5

Besides, the 2011 V6 is governed to 113mph...

The 2010 GT driver should have no problem outrunning a 2011 V6, imo.

 

[LTC8K6]

I would say, the interior is good enough for a 650HP <$60K car.

Heck, I love the interior in the Corvette and I can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it...

Different strokes, I guess.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

The race is closer than you may think. A stock 2010 GT will beat a stock 2011 V6, but it's pretty dang close. Take a look at Youtube, they should have the race still up (I think Car&Driver or Road&Track did the race).

What's the point? The 2010 GT with it's 315HP from a 0-60 and quarter mile times are basically a drivers race against the 2011 Camaro SS and Dodge Challegner which both have 100+ HP on the 2010 GT. When I can score a car that fast for $23K, with the premium package, I'm going with it, because unless you are an 18 year old boy that is going to wrap your car around a tree or light pole, the "specs" are nothing more than a penis waving competition, because lets face it, the power these cars have now days can not be legally enjoyed on public streets.
If I wanted a drag/ track car, I would have kept my 450HP 1987 Trans Am.

 

[LTC8K6]

People forget that the Mustang is quite a bit lighter than a Camaro...

In the stoplight drags, a 2010 GT is a match for a Camaro SS.

 

[mwmorph]

5.8, which is the engine I thought was being discussed. Mea Culpa if I'm wrong.

The aluminum block for the shelby is actually a kissing cousin to the block that was in the Ford GT.

The GT 5.4L was a specialized Ford Modular engine. Ford Modular Vs don't imply specific parts sharing, but rather that all modular V8 and V10 engines can be produced in the same factories with the same tooling as any other modular engine within hours.

IIRC, all 5.4s (Including Shelby and GT motors) had the same bore (90.2mm) as the old 4.6L Mod V8s in old mustangs and shared other bits like firing order (1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8).

Here's a breakdown:
4.6L 90.2mm bore, 90mm stroke, 227mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing.
5.4L 90.2mm bore, 105.8mm stroke, 256mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing
5.0L Race engine 94mm bore, 92mm stroke, 227mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing
5.0L Mustang engine 92.2mm bore, 92.7mm stroke, 227mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing, new firing order but I don't remember it, haven't worked for ford since 2008.
6.8L V10 90.2mm bore, 105.8mm stroke, 256mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing, Firing order (1-6-5-10-2-7-3-8-4-9)

 

[IcePickFreak]

What's the point? The 2010 GT with it's 315HP from a 0-60 and quarter mile times are basically a drivers race against the 2011 Camaro SS and Dodge Challegner which both have 100+ HP on the 2010 GT. When I can score a car that fast for $23K, with the premium package, I'm going with it, because unless you are an 18 year old boy that is going to wrap your car around a tree or light pole, the "specs" are nothing more than a penis waving competition, because lets face it, the power these cars have now days can not be legally enjoyed on public streets.
If I wanted a drag/ track car, I would have kept my 450HP 1987 Trans Am.

People forget that the Mustang is quite a bit lighter than a Camaro...

In the stoplight drags, a 2010 GT is a match for a Camaro SS.

Odd, I've walked several 4.6L GT's in my G8. Maybe I need to read moar magazines.

 

[Arkaign]

Odd, I've walked several 4.6L GT's in my G8. Maybe I need to read moar magazines.

There have been huge differences in 4.6 GTs over the years, which makes it slightly confusing. They're anywhere from fairly slow to fairly fast and everywhere in between. And of course you have good drivers, mediocre drivers, and crap drivers. And the ever-present autotragic models which sell all too well.

 

[exdeath]

260 HP 4.6L lulz

 

[JackBurton]

What's the point? The 2010 GT with it's 315HP from a 0-60 and quarter mile times are basically a drivers race against the 2011 Camaro SS and Dodge Challegner which both have 100+ HP on the 2010 GT. When I can score a car that fast for $23K, with the premium package, I'm going with it, because unless you are an 18 year old boy that is going to wrap your car around a tree or light pole, the "specs" are nothing more than a penis waving competition, because lets face it, the power these cars have now days can not be legally enjoyed on public streets.
If I wanted a drag/ track car, I would have kept my 450HP 1987 Trans Am.

Listen, you got a great deal on your Mustang. The problem though is that MOST people didn't get a great deal. They paid $31-33K for a new 2010 Mustang GT and a few months later they released the 2011 which could have been had for the same price. I think that is where a lot of the 2010 Mustang GT owners would be pissed. BTW, did you buy yours used or new?

 

[JackBurton]

Heck, I love the interior in the Corvette and I can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it...

Different strokes, I guess.

Man, I'd be perfectly happy with the interior on the new 2012 Corvette ZR1 Centennial Special Edition! That thing looks so mean, it's not even funny. GORGEOUS car!

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Odd, I've walked several 4.6L GT's in my G8. Maybe I need to read moar magazines.

I'd also wager you're lying. I've gone head to head with 6.0 GTO's and it's neck and neck. Only at the very high end do the 6.0L have more to them as they have more top end.

Let's not pass on the fact that your G8 was killed off with the brand because they sucked.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Listen, you got a great deal on your Mustang. The problem though is that MOST people didn't get a great deal. They paid $31-33K for a new 2010 Mustang GT and a few months later they released the 2011 which could have been had for the same price. I think that is where a lot of the 2010 Mustang GT owners would be pissed. BTW, did you buy yours used or new?

There's always something better on the horizon. If we all waited for that next awesome thing to come out we'd never buy anything.
Anyone that cared about performance and bought a GT new the 5.0 was coming and that it was a serious upgrade over the 4.6L. The people that bought the 4.6L and didn't know about the 5.0 wouldn't be able to tell the difference when driving.

I bought mine brand new.

 

[JackBurton]

There's always something better on the horizon. If we all waited for that next awesome thing to come out we'd never buy anything.
Anyone that cared about performance and bought a GT new the 5.0 was coming and that it was a serious upgrade over the 4.6L. The people that bought the 4.6L and didn't know about the 5.0 wouldn't be able to tell the difference when driving.

I bought mine brand new.

Well the guy that bought the GT a few months before the 5.0 was released sure wasn't happy with his sales guy. I doubt he was a car enthusiast, but passing up on 100 free horsepower was hard to take. If he bought a 2010 in 2009, I'm sure he wouldn't have had an issue with it. But a few months prior and at the same price? That's hard to take. And enthusiast or not, you'll notice 100 extra HP.

That being said, if you bought yours brand new at $23K. That's a HELL of a deal!

 

[Throckmorton]

Then buy something else. These cars aren't made to be Acuras or Lincolns. They're made to be fun to drive.

I don't get why all carmakers don't just use plastics that look and feel good... The cost difference has to be miniscule. Rubberized plastic doesn't make the car any less fun to drive. I noticed my niece's 2006 Mustang has a lot of nice feeling plastic in the interior...

 

[Pulsar]

The GT 5.4L was a specialized Ford Modular engine. Ford Modular Vs don't imply specific parts sharing, but rather that all modular V8 and V10 engines can be produced in the same factories with the same tooling as any other modular engine within hours.

IIRC, all 5.4s (Including Shelby and GT motors) had the same bore (90.2mm) as the old 4.6L Mod V8s in old mustangs and shared other bits like firing order (1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8).

Here's a breakdown:
4.6L 90.2mm bore, 90mm stroke, 227mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing.
5.4L 90.2mm bore, 105.8mm stroke, 256mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing
5.0L Race engine 94mm bore, 92mm stroke, 227mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing
5.0L Mustang engine 92.2mm bore, 92.7mm stroke, 227mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing, new firing order but I don't remember it, haven't worked for ford since 2008.
6.8L V10 90.2mm bore, 105.8mm stroke, 256mm deck height, 100mm cylinder spacing, Firing order (1-6-5-10-2-7-3-8-4-9)

I understand that. I work for Ford, and in fact was the engineer for the niche line for quite some time.

What I am saying, is that the Aluminum block going into the 2007 Shelby and newer is not the 5.4L of old. It is a block based on the Ford GT block. That includes the bored out 5.8L version. The old 5.4L blocks could never hope to make this much horsepower and still be warrantied.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

These mid-model engine updates have always been common on American cars. I think it's obnoxious and dilutes the brand image.

 

[LTC8K6]

Odd, I've walked several 4.6L GT's in my G8. Maybe I need to read moar magazines.

The 2010 GT had the powertrain from the 2008 Bullitt. It was faster than the 2009 and prior GT's.

It also had the body tweaked, and was more aerodynamic than the 2009.

And of course, you could get the Track Pack as well.

So, exactly which 4.6L GT you "walked", would make a difference.

 

[mwmorph]

I understand that. I work for Ford, and in fact was the engineer for the niche line for quite some time.

What I am saying, is that the Aluminum block going into the 2007 Shelby and newer is not the 5.4L of old. It is a block based on the Ford GT block. That includes the bored out 5.8L version. The old 5.4L blocks could never hope to make this much horsepower and still be warrantied.

I think I understand now, it's probably a fault of how I wrote it, I wasn't trying to say they shared blocks but that they were all part of the same family and shared design traits.

 

[KentState]

Heck, I love the interior in the Corvette and I can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it...

Different strokes, I guess.

I just find it extremely embarrassing when you spend that type of money ($50k+) and the interior rattles, creaks and looks on par with a much cheaper car. Seems to be pretty common across all American cars right now and probably why I not buy another one for a long time.

 

[KentState]

These mid-model engine updates have always been common on American cars. I think it's obnoxious and dilutes the brand image.

Most of the American car companies have flexible engines that can be updated mid cycle. Only something with overly complex engineering like the M3 and M5 will not allow this. Looks at how many changes Nissan makes each year with the GTR, Porsche with the 911 and BMW with the 335i.

 

[Throckmorton]

Heck, I love the interior in the Corvette and I can't understand why anyone wouldn't like it...

Different strokes, I guess.

The Corvette interior looks like it was designed by AIWA in the late 90s. It even has silver plastic doesn't it?

Makes no sense. A good looking interior isn't any more expensive than an ugly one. It just means hiring better designers.

 

[JackBurton]

The Corvette interior looks like it was designed by AIWA in the late 90s. It even has silver plastic doesn't it?

Makes no sense. A good looking interior isn't any more expensive than an ugly one. It just means hiring better designers.

I really have no problems with an interior like this:

 

[KentState]

I really have no problems with an interior like this:

Wait until you get in it and actually experience how crappy it is. Pictures like that can make anything look good. BTW, I still love the car overall, but the interior does not stand up.