What handles and performs better?
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,620
Likes: 0
From: Newtown,PA
Originally Posted by Purple_sky,Nov 29 2005, 06:16 PM
Yeah, you're right, you're not delusional. The new Mustang GT is not faster than the S2000. 
It only goes to 60 in almost 5 flat, to the 1/4 mi in mid-13's while trapping @ 104 mph. That's not really faster than a stock S2000, huh?!! Maybe not on a track with corners and turns, but on the straights, it'll hand an S2000 its ass. Delusional S2000 owners!!! 
You probably think a fighter jet is not faster than an S2000 also, right?
Btw, we're talking about the new Mustang GT with 300hp, not the older one with 260.
It only goes to 60 in almost 5 flat, to the 1/4 mi in mid-13's while trapping @ 104 mph. That's not really faster than a stock S2000, huh?!! Maybe not on a track with corners and turns, but on the straights, it'll hand an S2000 its ass. Delusional S2000 owners!!! You probably think a fighter jet is not faster than an S2000 also, right? Btw, we're talking about the new Mustang GT with 300hp, not the older one with 260.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
From: South Windsor, CT
Originally Posted by Purple_sky,Nov 29 2005, 07:22 PM
Why are people so quick to say without thinking realistically? A Mustang GT vert can be had for like, say, $26K (with discounts). An E46 M3 vert for that price would have to be pretty well beaten up, jacked up, beaten down, thrown around, flushed down the toilet and rewashed, etc. If that's the case, I'd rather have a brand new GT. Throw in some mods and you'll have a beast.
Thank you
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
From: Palo Alto
I think Car and Driver has compared the Cobra to the older M3 on several occasions. I remember one time they specifically said it wasn't as crazy as you might think. I believe they were driving one of the first 32V Cobras that still had the live rear axle. They were very complimentary of the damping Ford chose for the car.
Really, I think the poster was looking for some sort of insight from people who may have driven both. Instead he's getting a but of jack ass answers from people who are more interested in being dicks than actually offering reasons WHY one handles or feels better than the other.
Honestly, I haven't driven either so I can't tell you. I know that many of the magazine reviews liked the new Mustang. I have driven the just replaced Cobra. I found the power to be very good. The engine was in all honesty BMW smooth. I was not expecting that at all. There was less vibration through the gear lever than a friends BMW '01 530 5spd. I can also say the seating position, location of wheel relative to the pedals, shifter etc was terrible. It was that, not the handling that really struck me when driving the old car.
To the original poster: I wouldn't bother listening to most of these posts (of course you should listen to mine
). Drive the cars and see what you think. If you like the Mustang to hell with the opinions of the people on this board. If you don't like it, well it was you who didn't like it. Not some unknown person in cyberspace.
Happy hunting!
Really, I think the poster was looking for some sort of insight from people who may have driven both. Instead he's getting a but of jack ass answers from people who are more interested in being dicks than actually offering reasons WHY one handles or feels better than the other.
Honestly, I haven't driven either so I can't tell you. I know that many of the magazine reviews liked the new Mustang. I have driven the just replaced Cobra. I found the power to be very good. The engine was in all honesty BMW smooth. I was not expecting that at all. There was less vibration through the gear lever than a friends BMW '01 530 5spd. I can also say the seating position, location of wheel relative to the pedals, shifter etc was terrible. It was that, not the handling that really struck me when driving the old car.
To the original poster: I wouldn't bother listening to most of these posts (of course you should listen to mine
). Drive the cars and see what you think. If you like the Mustang to hell with the opinions of the people on this board. If you don't like it, well it was you who didn't like it. Not some unknown person in cyberspace.Happy hunting!
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 8,561
Likes: 1
From: Foster City, CA
Originally Posted by Gink5,Nov 30 2005, 01:08 PM
HA V8 going 0-60 5.2 seconds. Wow what a car.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,971
Likes: 0
From: was in Boston; now in LA
wow I thought that there were no dumbasses on this board
boy was I ever mistaken... i will address you in the following posts
those people that asked "why is this even being asked?" and the ones that said that "the M3 will obviously CRUSH the new Stang GT" are indeed dumbasses; sorry for my rash language
i understand that the M3 is more desirable, but it costs almost twice as much, and it is a maintenance nightmare
if one is to go to car and driver and look at the tests that were done by them with the 01 M3 vert and tests that were done with the 05 Stang GT vert, one will see this:
02 M3 vert - the godly fire-breathing creature that shall not be doubted
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?se...article_id=2029
Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door convertible
Price as tested: $57,989 (base price: $55,727
Engine type: DOHC 24-valve 6-in-line, iron block and aluminum head, Siemens MSS 54 engine-control system with port fuel injection
Displacement: 198 cu in, 3246cc
Power (SAE net): 333 bhp @ 7900 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 262 lb-ft @ 4900 rpm
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Wheelbase: 107.5 in
Length: 176.8 in
Curb weight: 3838 lb
Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 12.5 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 22.8 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.8 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 104 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 157 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph:162 ft
Roadholding: 300-ft-dia skidpad 0.81 g
EPA fuel economy, city driving: 16 mpg
C/D-observed fuel economy: 19 mpg
05 Mustang GT vert - the horrible POS that shall tremble in the mere presence of the M3 vert
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?se...0&page_number=1
FORD MUSTANG GT CONVERTIBLE
Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door convertible
Price as tested: $34,080
Price and option breakdown: base Ford Mustang GT convertible (includes $625 freight), $29,995; Shaker 1000 audio system, $1295; Premium package (consists of Shaker 500 audio system with in-dash 6-CD changer and leather seats), $1180; Interior Upgrade package (includes MyColor gauge enhancement and leather steering wheel and shifter), $450; side airbags, $370; anti-theft system, $255; chrome wheels, $195; red leather seats and interior accents, $175; convertible boot cover, $115; wheel locks, $50
Major standard accessories: power windows, driver seat, and locks; remote locking; A/C; cruise control; tilting steering wheel; rear defroster
Sound system: Shaker 1000 AM-FM radio/CD changer, 10 speakers
ENGINE
Type: V-8, aluminum block and heads
Bore x stroke: 3.55 x 3.54 in, 90.2 x 90.0mm
Displacement: 281 cu in, 4601cc
Compression ratio: 9.8:1
Fuel-delivery system: port injection
Valve gear: chain-driven single overhead cams, 3 valves
per cylinder, hydraulic lifters, variable intake-
and exhaust-valve timing
Power (SAE net): 300 bhp @ 5750 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 320 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
Redline: 6000 rpm
DRIVETRAIN
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Final-drive ratio: 3.55:1, limited slip
Gear, Ratio, Mph/1000 rpm, Max test speed
I, 3.34, 6.6, 40 mph (6000 rpm)
II, 2.00, 11.0, 66 mph (6000 rpm)
III, 1.32, 16.7, 100 mph (6000 rpm)
IV, 1.00, 22.0, 132 mph (6000 rpm)
V, 0.68, 32.4, 147 mph (4550 rpm)
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Track, front/rear: 61.9/62.5 in
Length/width/height: 188.0/73.9/55.7 in
Ground clearance: 5.7 in
Curb weight: 3673 lb
Weight distribution, F/R: 51.7/48.3%
Curb weight per horsepower: 12.2 lb
Fuel capacity: 16.0 gal
CHASSIS/BODY
Type: unit construction
Body material: welded steel and aluminum stampings
INTERIOR
SAE volume, front seat: 53 cu ft
rear seat: 29 cu ft
luggage: 10 cu ft
Front-seat adjustments: fore-and-aft, seatback angle; driver only: front height, rear height, lumbar support
Restraint systems, front: manual 3-point belts, driver and passenger front and side airbags
rear: manual 3-point belts
SUSPENSION
Front: ind, strut located by a control arm, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Rear: rigid axle located by 2 lower trailing links, 1 upper trailing link, and a Panhard rod; coil springs; anti-roll bar
STEERING
Type: rack-and-pinion with hydraulic power assist
Steering ratio: 15.7:1
Turns lock-to-lock: 2.8
Turning circle curb-to-curb: 38.0 ft
BRAKES
Type: hydraulic with vacuum power assist and
anti-lock control
Front: 12.4 x 1.2-in vented disc
Rear: 11.8 x 0.7-in vented disc
WHEELS AND TIRES
Wheel size/type: 8.0 x 17 in/cast aluminum
Tires: Pirelli P Zero Nero, P235/55ZR-17 98W M+S
Test inflation pressures, F/R: 32/32 psi
Spare: high-pressure compact
C/D TEST RESULTS
ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 30 mph: 1.8
40 mph: 2.7
50 mph: 3.8
60 mph: 5.0
70 mph: 6.6
80 mph: 8.3
90 mph: 10.2
100 mph: 12.6
110 mph: 15.8
120 mph: 19.6
130 mph: 25.3
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.7
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 9.4
50-70 mph: 9.3
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 103 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 147 mph
BRAKING
70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 183 ft
HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive
FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 17 mpg
EPA highway driving: 25 mpg
C/D-observed: 15 mpg
INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 55 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 84 dBA
70-mph cruising: 74 dBA
...so if the dumbasses may just for one second stop drooling over the M3 and actualy focus on what I asked, they will see that the Stang pulls more Gs and accelerates at the same rate, at slightly more than half the price...
what do I think? the M3 is OVERPRICED... it delivers extra luxury features that break, and that I have no use for... I'll save the $ and invest it wisely, instead of cramming it down BMW's crapshute
and finaly, yes, I was ORIGINALY comparing a used 01 M3 vert vs a new or 1 year old Mustang GT vert (those would cost the same)... at any rate the Mustang is in a class by itself... no car even comes close in the bang for buck category
boy was I ever mistaken... i will address you in the following posts
those people that asked "why is this even being asked?" and the ones that said that "the M3 will obviously CRUSH the new Stang GT" are indeed dumbasses; sorry for my rash language
i understand that the M3 is more desirable, but it costs almost twice as much, and it is a maintenance nightmare
if one is to go to car and driver and look at the tests that were done by them with the 01 M3 vert and tests that were done with the 05 Stang GT vert, one will see this:
02 M3 vert - the godly fire-breathing creature that shall not be doubted
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?se...article_id=2029
Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door convertible
Price as tested: $57,989 (base price: $55,727
Engine type: DOHC 24-valve 6-in-line, iron block and aluminum head, Siemens MSS 54 engine-control system with port fuel injection
Displacement: 198 cu in, 3246cc
Power (SAE net): 333 bhp @ 7900 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 262 lb-ft @ 4900 rpm
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Wheelbase: 107.5 in
Length: 176.8 in
Curb weight: 3838 lb
Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 12.5 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 22.8 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.8 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 104 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 157 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph:162 ft
Roadholding: 300-ft-dia skidpad 0.81 g
EPA fuel economy, city driving: 16 mpg
C/D-observed fuel economy: 19 mpg
05 Mustang GT vert - the horrible POS that shall tremble in the mere presence of the M3 vert
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?se...0&page_number=1
FORD MUSTANG GT CONVERTIBLE
Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door convertible
Price as tested: $34,080
Price and option breakdown: base Ford Mustang GT convertible (includes $625 freight), $29,995; Shaker 1000 audio system, $1295; Premium package (consists of Shaker 500 audio system with in-dash 6-CD changer and leather seats), $1180; Interior Upgrade package (includes MyColor gauge enhancement and leather steering wheel and shifter), $450; side airbags, $370; anti-theft system, $255; chrome wheels, $195; red leather seats and interior accents, $175; convertible boot cover, $115; wheel locks, $50
Major standard accessories: power windows, driver seat, and locks; remote locking; A/C; cruise control; tilting steering wheel; rear defroster
Sound system: Shaker 1000 AM-FM radio/CD changer, 10 speakers
ENGINE
Type: V-8, aluminum block and heads
Bore x stroke: 3.55 x 3.54 in, 90.2 x 90.0mm
Displacement: 281 cu in, 4601cc
Compression ratio: 9.8:1
Fuel-delivery system: port injection
Valve gear: chain-driven single overhead cams, 3 valves
per cylinder, hydraulic lifters, variable intake-
and exhaust-valve timing
Power (SAE net): 300 bhp @ 5750 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 320 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
Redline: 6000 rpm
DRIVETRAIN
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Final-drive ratio: 3.55:1, limited slip
Gear, Ratio, Mph/1000 rpm, Max test speed
I, 3.34, 6.6, 40 mph (6000 rpm)
II, 2.00, 11.0, 66 mph (6000 rpm)
III, 1.32, 16.7, 100 mph (6000 rpm)
IV, 1.00, 22.0, 132 mph (6000 rpm)
V, 0.68, 32.4, 147 mph (4550 rpm)
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Track, front/rear: 61.9/62.5 in
Length/width/height: 188.0/73.9/55.7 in
Ground clearance: 5.7 in
Curb weight: 3673 lb
Weight distribution, F/R: 51.7/48.3%
Curb weight per horsepower: 12.2 lb
Fuel capacity: 16.0 gal
CHASSIS/BODY
Type: unit construction
Body material: welded steel and aluminum stampings
INTERIOR
SAE volume, front seat: 53 cu ft
rear seat: 29 cu ft
luggage: 10 cu ft
Front-seat adjustments: fore-and-aft, seatback angle; driver only: front height, rear height, lumbar support
Restraint systems, front: manual 3-point belts, driver and passenger front and side airbags
rear: manual 3-point belts
SUSPENSION
Front: ind, strut located by a control arm, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Rear: rigid axle located by 2 lower trailing links, 1 upper trailing link, and a Panhard rod; coil springs; anti-roll bar
STEERING
Type: rack-and-pinion with hydraulic power assist
Steering ratio: 15.7:1
Turns lock-to-lock: 2.8
Turning circle curb-to-curb: 38.0 ft
BRAKES
Type: hydraulic with vacuum power assist and
anti-lock control
Front: 12.4 x 1.2-in vented disc
Rear: 11.8 x 0.7-in vented disc
WHEELS AND TIRES
Wheel size/type: 8.0 x 17 in/cast aluminum
Tires: Pirelli P Zero Nero, P235/55ZR-17 98W M+S
Test inflation pressures, F/R: 32/32 psi
Spare: high-pressure compact
C/D TEST RESULTS
ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 30 mph: 1.8
40 mph: 2.7
50 mph: 3.8
60 mph: 5.0
70 mph: 6.6
80 mph: 8.3
90 mph: 10.2
100 mph: 12.6
110 mph: 15.8
120 mph: 19.6
130 mph: 25.3
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.7
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 9.4
50-70 mph: 9.3
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 103 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 147 mph
BRAKING
70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 183 ft
HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive
FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 17 mpg
EPA highway driving: 25 mpg
C/D-observed: 15 mpg
INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 55 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 84 dBA
70-mph cruising: 74 dBA
...so if the dumbasses may just for one second stop drooling over the M3 and actualy focus on what I asked, they will see that the Stang pulls more Gs and accelerates at the same rate, at slightly more than half the price...
what do I think? the M3 is OVERPRICED... it delivers extra luxury features that break, and that I have no use for... I'll save the $ and invest it wisely, instead of cramming it down BMW's crapshute
and finaly, yes, I was ORIGINALY comparing a used 01 M3 vert vs a new or 1 year old Mustang GT vert (those would cost the same)... at any rate the Mustang is in a class by itself... no car even comes close in the bang for buck category
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,971
Likes: 0
From: was in Boston; now in LA
Originally Posted by xviper,Nov 29 2005, 03:20 PM
I don't know how much these cars cost in the USA, but here in Canada, a Mustang convertible with EVERY imaginable extra cost option on it, come in at $45,109.00. A BMW M3 convertible with NOTHING extra on it comes in at $85,645.00. This is a "fair" comparison? Please tell me where I can buy the M3 for the price of a Mustang. I'll buy 2, sell the other one to a neighbour and the first one will have cost me nothing.
we were not on the same page... i was comparing a 02 M3 vert and a 05 Stang GT vert... i'm sure you caught that later on
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,971
Likes: 0
From: was in Boston; now in LA
Originally Posted by Gink5,Nov 29 2005, 04:02 PM
Dude the new mustangs suck. They aren't fast, never handled, and braking? Instead of getting a used m3 or GT. Buy a 3 series.
cool suggestion, but I'd like to focus on my exact question
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,971
Likes: 0
From: was in Boston; now in LA
Originally Posted by jsalicru,Nov 29 2005, 04:44 PM
Umm.. can I get my click back?
I can't believe that's even being asked.
I can't believe that's even being asked.
believe it - and why not ask that, if experienced editors of top-selling car magazines do?
you must be a greated industry expert, and obviously know better
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,971
Likes: 0
From: was in Boston; now in LA
Originally Posted by KAY'S,Nov 29 2005, 05:04 PM
i hope this is a joke..... your asking if a e46 is a better performer then a current mustang GT? I am not trying to be a dick but this is one of the stupidest things i have ever seen posted.
either way, what did you mean by your post?
your attempt to pose an offensive question was incohesive; that makes you stupid, not me