Had my heart set on a 2015 Mustang GT

[Phanuel]

Idiot teenagers can't afford a late model mustang. Maybe one that's 5 years old. Redneck with a decent job could I suppose. Probably would prefer a truck though.

I'd rather be mistaken for a redneck than a 16 year old ricer.

Golf GTI - $26,915 MSRP

Mustang - $26,810 MSRP

They both cost pretty much the exact same amount of money. For somebody who has the nickname of one of the worst cars ever made, I'd expect you to know better.

 

[tsupersonic]

I mean you could say the Camaro which is about $44-$45k with similar options that is also in it's last year or so of production. There just isn't much.

I own a 2013 S4 - love the car. but the latest Stangs, Camaro and Vettes should really start worrying the German makers. They are certainly different expectations in cars but the vette has ventilate/heated seats and other luxury features that really push them closer to being able t ocompete with the Germans. Same goes for the new Stang.

Luxury is still for the germans/lexus but man the new Vette and Stang have me thinking about switching for the first time ever.

Heh, don't for once think the Germans are afraid of Mustangs or Camaro's, or Vette's. They're aiming for different target audiences. While the Mustang/Camaro/Vette's may have "luxury features," they are no means a luxury car (very apparent if you take them for a ride).

People usually know what they want. You either want a German muscle car (AMG/M/RS) which are comfortable to drive & discrete, or you want American muscle car because well you want American muscle (and it's cheaper!).

I love cars in general. I love an AMG that can drive comfortably and then I can romp on it at a track. I also love the Corvette/Mustang, but for vastly different reasons. It's a great time to be a car enthusiast - the competition is getting fierce and we have great options to choose from.

 

[AMCRambler]

Golf GTI - $26,915 MSRP

Mustang - $26,810 MSRP

They both cost pretty much the exact same amount of money. For somebody who has the nickname of one of the worst cars ever made, I'd expect you to know better.

You've completely missed the point. Other than price, those two cars have nothing in common. Why cross shop a fwd econobox hatch back with a rear wheel drive muscle car? Figure out what you actually want to buy and then compare your options in that class of car. Most people with a clue shop for cars that way. What do you do? Throw darts at a copy of Car and Driver?

 

[MongGrel]

Are you trolling?

The 2015 Mustang GT gained 87lbs for the manual and only 54lbs for the automatic.
It has a completely new front suspension, and independent rear suspension. It is incredible it gained so little adding IRS. They also added 15HP and 10ftlbs of torque. More than enough to haul around an additional 87lbs and then some. Word is it can beat the previous gen Boss 302 around the track, and do it with a better ride and more control.

You won't find anything new with the performance of a Mustang GT for less money.

Still want a 2015 MX-5 myself but not sure if doable with other things in life need fixed

http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/dis...e2TQAABYQUTHfE:20140925030646:s#exterior-view

 

[Dr. Detroit]

For 45 grand, they better compare well to BMW. Its not like you are saving any money.

What BMW are you getting for $45K? A loaded 328i is damn near $52K and thats got a 2.0L turbo for 240HP.

 

[dguy6789]

Lulz at cross shopping a Golf with a Mustang. If your goal is comfort w/peppy performance , get the Golf and enjoy your torque steer. You will look like a highschooler tooling around in Mom's grocery getter.

If you want a car that's going to throw you back in your seat and blow your hair back, get the Stang. Realize the base car is pretty damn nice and stop optioning out cargo nets, ass air conditioning / heaters and Navi which your frigging smart phone does anyway! And don't tell me you need adaptive dampers, you'll never take it to the track.

Both are cars marketed towards teens. The Mustang probably more so.

 

[Midwayman]

You've completely missed the point. Other than price, those two cars have nothing in common. Why cross shop a fwd econobox hatch back with a rear wheel drive muscle car? Figure out what you actually want to buy and then compare your options in that class of car. Most people with a clue shop for cars that way. What do you do? Throw darts at a copy of Car and Driver?

Really? They're both marketed as 'sporty' inexpensive cars. I'd throw a civic SI in there, the BRZ, etc, etc. A lot of people don't shop just by powertrain. Pony cars just a sub-class of 'sporty' cars. At least in base trim.

 

[Wuzup101]

Really? They're both marketed as 'sporty' inexpensive cars. I'd throw a civic SI in there, the BRZ, etc, etc. A lot of people don't shop just by powertrain. Pony cars just a sub-class of 'sporty' cars. At least in base trim.

Agreed. They seem like very likely cars to be cross shopped to me too.

 

[inachu]

The mustang version with eco-boost! WATCH OUT!

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/24/ford-mustang-ecoboost-fake-engine-soundtrack/

 

[Midwayman]

The mustang version with eco-boost! WATCH OUT!

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/24/ford-mustang-ecoboost-fake-engine-soundtrack/

Weird. I'm sure someone will find out how to disable it.

 

[tweakmonkey]

Lol @ Golf being more of a juvenile car than a Mustang.

 

[LTC8K6]

The mustang version with eco-boost! WATCH OUT!

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/24/ford-mustang-ecoboost-fake-engine-soundtrack/

Such soundtracks certainly didn't start with the Mustang.

 

[Insomniator]

Lol @ Golf being more of a juvenile car than a Mustang.

haha seriously

 

[tweakmonkey]

Ford is doing amazing things with turbo engines these days. I'd test the turbo 4. But I've had several v8 mustangs and the sound is always great. Still.... Turbos also sound good and have excellent power + fuel economy. Lower weight etc

 

[MiataNC]

Ford is doing amazing things with turbo engines these days. I'd test the turbo 4. But I've had several v8 mustangs and the sound is always great. Still.... Turbos also sound good and have excellent power + fuel economy. Lower weight etc

That is my only issue with the Ecoboost 2015 Mustang. It isn't much lighter than the Coyote equipped GT.

Mustang EcoBoost: 3,532 lbs (manual), 3,524 lbs (automatic)
Mustang V-6: 3,526 lbs (manual), 3,530 lbs (automatic)
Mustang GT: 3,705 lbs (manual), 3,729 lbs (automatic)

173lbs is not a huge weight advantage when opting for the Ecoboost. Also if you look at standard features the GT has bigger brakes and wheels. I am guessing there is at least 30-50lbs of added weight in the GT that has nothing to do with the motor. So the actual weight of the cars in optioned form is closer than 173lbs.

Front Brakes = EB 12.5" (optional 14") vs 15"
Rear Brakes = EB 12.5" (optional 13") vs 13"
Wheels = EB 17" vs 18"

You can't go wrong with either motor, but you certainly are not gaining a significant weight advantage with the turbo-4.

 

[tweakmonkey]

Oh wow. 170 is still not bad! But I thought it would be higher and from the engine alone.

 

[Throckmorton]

$45k for a Mustang? $35K for a Golf? Both ridiculously expensive.

I'm sticking with my $11k 2006 GT

Look into the BRZ

 

[inachu]

That is my only issue with the Ecoboost 2015 Mustang. It isn't much lighter than the Coyote equipped GT.

Mustang EcoBoost: 3,532 lbs (manual), 3,524 lbs (automatic)
Mustang V-6: 3,526 lbs (manual), 3,530 lbs (automatic)
Mustang GT: 3,705 lbs (manual), 3,729 lbs (automatic)

173lbs is not a huge weight advantage when opting for the Ecoboost. Also if you look at standard features the GT has bigger brakes and wheels. I am guessing there is at least 30-50lbs of added weight in the GT that has nothing to do with the motor. So the actual weight of the cars in optioned form is closer than 173lbs.

Front Brakes = EB 12.5" (optional 14") vs 15"
Rear Brakes = EB 12.5" (optional 13") vs 13"
Wheels = EB 17" vs 18"

You can't go wrong with either motor, but you certainly are not gaining a significant weight advantage with the turbo-4.

BASE 5.0 GT has regular wheels and disc brakes. It is the Gt with all the options that have the bigger everything.

 

[MiataNC]

BASE 5.0 GT has regular wheels and disc brakes. It is the Gt with all the options that have the bigger everything.

The numbers I posted are the Base sizes for both cars with the exception of the front brakes where I made the mistake of using the optional GT 15" instead of the Base 14".

 

[inachu]

The numbers I posted are the Base sizes for both cars with the exception of the front brakes where I made the mistake of using the optional GT 15" instead of the Base 14".

...... going outside to check

 

[MiataNC]

...... going outside to check

You have a 2015 Mustang outside?

Where are the pictures!!!!!!!!

 

[Jumpem]

S3. AWD, 0-60 in 4.7 seconds, for ~$41k.

 

[inachu]

Heh, don't for once think the Germans are afraid of Mustangs or Camaro's, or Vette's. They're aiming for different target audiences. While the Mustang/Camaro/Vette's may have "luxury features," they are no means a luxury car (very apparent if you take them for a ride).

People usually know what they want. You either want a German muscle car (AMG/M/RS) which are comfortable to drive & discrete, or you want American muscle car because well you want American muscle (and it's cheaper!).

I love cars in general. I love an AMG that can drive comfortably and then I can romp on it at a track. I also love the Corvette/Mustang, but for vastly different reasons. It's a great time to be a car enthusiast - the competition is getting fierce and we have great options to choose from.

As of late BMW cars are not that reliable. I was even told inside of BMW sales floor by BMW agent that I was better off getting a mustang.

 

[Lifted]

S3. AWD, 0-60 in 4.7 seconds, for ~$41k.

This ^ if you want new, or a 1 - 2 year old 335i for ~$35k.

2013 BMW 335i M Sport Sedan 0-60 mph 4.5 Quarter Mile 13.1

And that's the sedan, and before adding another 50 - 100hp for ~ $1,000.

 

[LTC8K6]

That is my only issue with the Ecoboost 2015 Mustang. It isn't much lighter than the Coyote equipped GT.

Mustang EcoBoost: 3,532 lbs (manual), 3,524 lbs (automatic)
Mustang V-6: 3,526 lbs (manual), 3,530 lbs (automatic)
Mustang GT: 3,705 lbs (manual), 3,729 lbs (automatic)

173lbs is not a huge weight advantage when opting for the Ecoboost. Also if you look at standard features the GT has bigger brakes and wheels. I am guessing there is at least 30-50lbs of added weight in the GT that has nothing to do with the motor. So the actual weight of the cars in optioned form is closer than 173lbs.

Front Brakes = EB 12.5" (optional 14") vs 15"
Rear Brakes = EB 12.5" (optional 13") vs 13"
Wheels = EB 17" vs 18"

You can't go wrong with either motor, but you certainly are not gaining a significant weight advantage with the turbo-4.

I posted this earlier:

http://blog.caranddriver.com/perfor...mustang-gt-versus-2015-ford-mustang-ecoboost/

It has 3810 for the GT and 3663 for the EB

Both brake and handle the same