RE: Ford Mustang GT: Driven

[xRIEx]

edinph said:

Impact Blue for me!

Not available on the new model. There's Deep Impact Blue but it's a much darker shade.

[croyde]

Back to the size thing, a BMW M4 is only 3cm shorter than the GT.

Most cars these days are far bigger than their earlier versions. My 1998 3-series BMW looks tiny these days, even when parked next to a modern Mini.

[croyde]

Pony

[david_b]

ewenm said:

kambites said:

Fabulous to see something a bit different finally on the market in the UK. It's far more desirable to me than the M4 or RS5 let alone the German cars that it actually competes with on price.

I'm going to wait a few years, then hopefully re-form my perfect two-car garage - V8 Mustang and Caterham

Good thinking - I have a V8 fastback on order, and it will be joining my S1 Elise. I've driven an Ecoboost convertible in the US and it was really impressive in the flesh, can't wait for mine with a proper engine to arrive!

Should note I do also have a company 320d for the boring stuff...

[daz05]

croyde said:

Back to the size thing, a BMW M4 is only 3cm shorter than the GT.

Most cars these days are far bigger than their earlier versions. My 1998 3-series BMW looks tiny these days, even when parked next to a modern Mini.

Width is more important Almost 4 inches wider than an e92 m3 and 2 inches more than the m4.

[croyde]

daz05 said:

Width is more important Almost 4 inches wider than an e92 m3 and 2 inches more than the m4.

But 3 inches slimmer than my dearly departed Mercury Grand Marquis, which along with being LHD, had no trouble getting to the head of the queues during London commuting and out dragging the baseball cap wearing lot at the lights.

Mind you driving a 5.3m long and very wide car like that did scare everyone else and ruin my wallet at 12mpg

[pSyCoSiS]

That really is staggering value for money. Will it actually be £33k in the UK, or will it be alot higher?

I would deinitiely have one over a TT or equivalent.

[unsprung]

daz05 said:

Very defensive response considering I liked the car, I was very clear that this was a US rental spec and also aware of the differences.

Not defensive. Just correcting text that reads like the usual uninformed opinion about cars that are a bit different, like the Mustang. You've earned several corrections here, including the booby prize: a rebuke about Clarkson-esque prejudice.

On the contrary, little in your post is clear. And I did not address your most puzzling comment...

daz05 said:

Very likeable car though I would have one, I'm just not sure what I would use it for.

[croyde]

pSyCoSiS said:

That really is staggering value for money. Will it actually be £33k in the UK, or will it be alot higher?

I would deinitiely have one over a TT or equivalent.

OTR price for the 5.0 with a base colour is £33,005 including the massive first year road tax.

It's what I have gone for as I don't need the few options available. All the extras can be had for around £1,700. Heated seats, parking sensors, chrome trim, sat nav, upgraded stereo and silver wheels.

[Chris71]

For me personally a £33k Mustang is an irrelevance currently. But I can see these being a great second hand buy in a few years' time...

Big power costs pennies for this engine in the States too, so I can see a tuning industry springing up if it's a success.

Thankyou4calling said:

I wonder how many of the Mustangs that hit UK shores will be V8 versions?

I'd guess not that many.

It's good to see something different over here but I don't think it will make much of an impact on sales of Audis, BMWs and Mercedes at all.

As above, I'd expect it to be the majority. RHD makes the Mustang a more realistic proposition in the UK, but it's still going to be a niche product. Who wants a muscle car with a four-cylinder engine? It's an interesting wildcard, though.

Edited by Chris71 on Monday 11th May 12:21

[FrankAbagnale]

I think i'll be in for one of these when they start hitting the used market. Seems like so much car for the money.

[900T-R]

RedTrident said:

If they start at 33k with very little on the options list you sure get a lot of car.

Take a guess at the Dutch price.

More.

More.

More, still.


Yes, our registration tax based on the NEDC CO2 emissions makes it a whopping 112K euro. :shock:

That's twice as expensive as the 4-cyl Ecoboost version (yours for 55,xxx euro) which in the real world probably won't be much more frugal. I expect very few Mustangs to be sold here, a four banger Mustang is besides the point no matter how fast it is, and the V8 is in the same price bracket as, say, an AMG C63 S...

[xRIEx]

900T-R said:

That's twice as expensive as the 4-cyl Ecoboost version (yours for 55,xxx euro) which in the real world probably won't be much more frugal.

Not sure about that, I reckon high teens/low 20s for the V8 and high 20s/low 30s for the Ecoboost - if that is the case, it's 50% better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdGgaThH0xc 28.5mpg US is 34.5 imperial.


http://jalopnik.com/we-drove-the-2015-ford-mustang...

jalopnik said:

However, unlike the GT, which struggled to break 14 MPG during the morning's thrashings, the Ecoboost managed 21 MPG through some fitful flogging.

[croyde]

900T-R said:

Take a guess at the Dutch price.

More.

More.

More, still.


Yes, our registration tax based on the NEDC CO2 emissions makes it a whopping 112K euro. :shock:

That's twice as expensive as the 4-cyl Ecoboost version (yours for 55,xxx euro) which in the real world probably won't be much more frugal. I expect very few Mustangs to be sold here, a four banger Mustang is besides the point no matter how fast it is, and the V8 is in the same price bracket as, say, an AMG C63 S...

I really feel for you lot over there, the taxes are astronomical. On the Dutch Ford site theere is a £16,000 difference between the lower CO2 EcoBoost manual and the higher CO2 EcoBoost automatic. Crazy.

[900T-R]

By 'real world' over here, I mean mainly sitting at 70-80 mph on the motorway (we don't have much of an 'underlying road network' here) which won't show a massive difference in fuel efficiency for the same car unless one is lots heavier than the other or has wildly different gearing. Thrashing the n*ts off them (where?), yes, I believe there will be quite a difference; nose to tail city traffic from one set of traffic lights to the other, yes. But normal operation, the stuff you'd use a TT or a 435i for...?

xRIEx said:

900T-R said:

That's twice as expensive as the 4-cyl Ecoboost version (yours for 55,xxx euro) which in the real world probably won't be much more frugal.

Not sure about that, I reckon high teens/low 20s for the V8 and high 20s/low 30s for the Ecoboost - if that is the case, it's 50% better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdGgaThH0xc 28.5mpg US is 34.5 imperial.


http://jalopnik.com/we-drove-the-2015-ford-mustang...

jalopnik said:

However, unlike the GT, which struggled to break 14 MPG during the morning's thrashings, the Ecoboost managed 21 MPG through some fitful flogging.

[Alfa159Ti]

optimal909 said:

I don't get the fuss about fuel economy. A V8 driven daily costs like 100 pounds (?) more a month than something boring.
Some people smoke, others lose on betting - hell, I'm driving a V8!

Here here!

I am taking delivery of a 370z tomorrow morning and used the exact same logic to justify such a gas guzzler to predominantly commute into Manchester city centre!

[Clivey]

Chris71 said:

For me personally a £33k Mustang is an irrelevance currently. But I can see these being a great second hand buy in a few years' time...

Agreed, provided that enough are sold to reduce the residuals.

My only problem is that it'd need to be a daily (I can't have 3 "toys", I already have the Discovery and I want a Tuscan S) and I'm not sure the c15mpg we're likely to see would make it viable. It depends how much we're earning but It might have to be an M235i (or similar). Not interested in FWD / FWD-based AWD when we come to replace the Mini.

[Quinny]

Thankyou4calling said:

I wonder how many of the Mustangs that hit UK shores will be V8 versions?

I'd guess not that many.

.

When I placed my order, the dealer told me that all other orders that had been place with him were for V8's.......nobody as yet had ordered an ecoboost

[Centurion07]

xRIEx said:

900T-R said:

That's twice as expensive as the 4-cyl Ecoboost version (yours for 55,xxx euro) which in the real world probably won't be much more frugal.

Not sure about that, I reckon high teens/low 20s for the V8 and high 20s/low 30s for the Ecoboost - if that is the case, it's 50% better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdGgaThH0xc 28.5mpg US is 34.5 imperial.


http://jalopnik.com/we-drove-the-2015-ford-mustang...

jalopnik said:

However, unlike the GT, which struggled to break 14 MPG during the morning's thrashings, the Ecoboost managed 21 MPG through some fitful flogging.

When you say "real world", go and ask some RS Focus owners what kind of mpg they get with a smallish capacity turbo engine in a relatively small car.

The Ecoboost version is not going to be a million miles away from the V8 in "real world" terms i.e. regular driving with a little blat here and there.

Mid to high 20's for the Ecoboost, at best.

[Clivey]

900T-R said:

Yes, our registration tax based on the NEDC CO2 emissions makes it a whopping 112K euro. :shock:

That level of taxation is nothing but spiteful on the part of the government there. How do they attempt to justify that level of "eco tax"?