RE: Ford Mustang: UK Review
Discussion
s4tronic said:
Test drove V8 manual mustang GT today and it actually is a nice car to drive and sounds and looks gorgeous.
Sales guy said that Ford is only going to produce it for 5 years in RHD and after that thats it, no more - is that true or just a sales pitch to increase desirability of the car?
The model will run in this version for at least 9 years why stop making RHD - I call it bSales guy said that Ford is only going to produce it for 5 years in RHD and after that thats it, no more - is that true or just a sales pitch to increase desirability of the car?
ks but email Karen or Stacey for a definitive answer My average mpg is down to 15 as I'm not doing the long commute and just using it for fun at the moment.
Leaving it in 3rd is loads of fun and I just can't help blipping the throttle. Terminology left over from my biking days.
5 months and 4000 miles and I'm still loving this car. Actually used the AC for the first time today and moved the vents for the first time ever.
Nice touch that a few inches inside the vents is the same honeycomb pattern as the grill.
Leaving it in 3rd is loads of fun and I just can't help blipping the throttle. Terminology left over from my biking days.
5 months and 4000 miles and I'm still loving this car. Actually used the AC for the first time today and moved the vents for the first time ever.
Nice touch that a few inches inside the vents is the same honeycomb pattern as the grill.
300bhp/ton said:
But for the same money as a C63 you could have had a 600hp + Mustang (probably still change over), which would likely have changed your verdict.
For instance, if you doubled the price of a C63 (or even just added another £30-40k if you are talking the price difference), how much of a better car again could you get for that kind of money?
As I say, I'm not disputing your conclusion. Just that in reality, most people considering a circa £30k new car, don't have the luxury to also consider cars costing in the £60-80k price bracket.
For instance, if you doubled the price of a C63 (or even just added another £30-40k if you are talking the price difference), how much of a better car again could you get for that kind of money?
As I say, I'm not disputing your conclusion. Just that in reality, most people considering a circa £30k new car, don't have the luxury to also consider cars costing in the £60-80k price bracket.
Exactly, and when exactly did Mercedes last offer a manual AMG model?? (Never IIRC).
FFS, one of those turbocharged Mercedes Golfs costs as much as a V8 Mustang new!
You could buy two V8 Mustangs for the price of a C63, and I really cannot see any rational way you could consider the Stuttgart offering as being twice as good!
Pommygranite said:
Here in Oz it's approx 50p a litre and people are shying away from V8's towards small hatches, more diesels and leaner engines.
You think it's cheap but it's still comparative to what you are used to.
I wouldn't say Australia is nearly the petrol head country i was led to believe it was and so for many here why get a car that does 14l/100km when you get one that does 6l/100km and more than halve your fuel bill.
My brief experience of Australia was that it couldn't be more from petrolhead heaven if it tried - acres of space, V8 Utes and cheapish fuel, but religiously enforced speed limits with fines doubled on Public Holidays and a serious attitude issue to hooning (ask Lewis Hamilton)! No wonder Mark Webber lives in the UK!You think it's cheap but it's still comparative to what you are used to.
I wouldn't say Australia is nearly the petrol head country i was led to believe it was and so for many here why get a car that does 14l/100km when you get one that does 6l/100km and more than halve your fuel bill.
But getting back to the thread, a V8 Mustang fastback is the only new car I would want to buy right now (if I could afford one)! RWD, naturally aspirated petrol engine with some grunt - thank you Ford!
It's almost like they finally worked out why V6 Capris and Sierra Cosworths sold so well here, and look what they are worth now!
Mostly far more than the 15 year old hot hatch someone alluded to on here - and Cossies were mostly quicker than those! 30 year old 4 door Sierra is at least as quick as 15 year old Focus!!
s4tronic said:
Test drove V8 manual mustang GT today and it actually is a nice car to drive and sounds and looks gorgeous.
Sales guy said that Ford is only going to produce it for 5 years in RHD and after that thats it, no more - is that true or just a sales pitch to increase desirability of the car?
Your salesman is talking bSales guy said that Ford is only going to produce it for 5 years in RHD and after that thats it, no more - is that true or just a sales pitch to increase desirability of the car?
ks. Rhd will be produced as long as they are selling well. The mustang cycle since the end of the foxbody in 1993, is that a new mustang platform is released, sells for 4 years and then is facelifted, and then sold for 5 more years. Then repeat. I will bet the s550 has 2 more years as it is before it is restyled.
Edited by 5ohmustang on Sunday 8th May 04:53
5ohmustang said:
s4tronic said:
Test drove V8 manual mustang GT today and it actually is a nice car to drive and sounds and looks gorgeous.
Sales guy said that Ford is only going to produce it for 5 years in RHD and after that thats it, no more - is that true or just a sales pitch to increase desirability of the car?
Your salesman is talking bSales guy said that Ford is only going to produce it for 5 years in RHD and after that thats it, no more - is that true or just a sales pitch to increase desirability of the car?
ks. Rhd will be produced as long as they are selling well. The mustang cycle since the end of the foxbody in 1993, is that a new mustang platform is released, sells for 4 years and then is facelifted, and then sold for 5 more years. Then repeat. I will bet the s550 has 2 more years as it is before it is restyled.
Edited by 5ohmustang on Sunday 8th May 04:53
Given the demand I would expect Ford will never again produce a LHD only mainstream Mustang but that's just an opinion.
Mr Tidy said:
But getting back to the thread, a V8 Mustang fastback is the only new car I would want to buy right now (if I could afford one)! RWD, naturally aspirated petrol engine with some grunt - thank you Ford!
It's almost like they finally worked out why V6 Capris and Sierra Cosworths sold so well here, and look what they are worth now!
Mostly far more than the 15 year old hot hatch someone alluded to on here - and Cossies were mostly quicker than those! 30 year old 4 door Sierra is at least as quick as 15 year old Focus!!
People miss the variety in layouts as well I think - the irony is that the popularity of hot hatches were mostly responsible for the demise of cheap rwd coupes in the mid-80s. It's almost like they finally worked out why V6 Capris and Sierra Cosworths sold so well here, and look what they are worth now!
Mostly far more than the 15 year old hot hatch someone alluded to on here - and Cossies were mostly quicker than those! 30 year old 4 door Sierra is at least as quick as 15 year old Focus!!
Manufacturers went with the new format and didn't bother to update the old formulas so much - Manta and Capri became fwd coupes like the Calibra and Probe
Nowadays it seems they'll take a gamble on producing/selling something similar even though the new hot hatches are still very popular
Ozzie Osmond said:
Los Angeles: petrol costs $2.20 (£1.60) a US gallon which is about 40 pence a litre.
I think it's fair to say a lot more Brits would own big V8s if the price of petrol came down from 108p to 40p !!
P.S Californians are all buying Teslas.
Mobile-friendly - As of December 2015 , the Model S ranks as the world's second best selling plug-in car in history after the Nissan Leaf. As of 31 March 2016 , Tesla Motors has sold almost 125,000 electric cars worldwide since delivery of its first Tesla Roadster in 2008.I think it's fair to say a lot more Brits would own big V8s if the price of petrol came down from 108p to 40p !!
P.S Californians are all buying Teslas.
Population of California: 40,000,000
No. of cars in California: 30,000,000
New cars sold in California/annum: 2,000,000
Teslas sold in California in 2015: ~15,000
Technically, it's more accurate to say that no one in California is buying Tesla's than it is is to say they are all buying Teslas.
And as much as I'd like to think it's true that Brits given US fuel pricing would go and buy V8s I have a horrible feeling that they wouldn't and would go and buy more mirrors, hair care products and fill out a few more loan forms.
DonkeyApple said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
Los Angeles: petrol costs $2.20 (£1.60) a US gallon which is about 40 pence a litre.
I think it's fair to say a lot more Brits would own big V8s if the price of petrol came down from 108p to 40p !!
P.S Californians are all buying Teslas.
Mobile-friendly - As of December 2015 , the Model S ranks as the world's second best selling plug-in car in history after the Nissan Leaf. As of 31 March 2016 , Tesla Motors has sold almost 125,000 electric cars worldwide since delivery of its first Tesla Roadster in 2008.I think it's fair to say a lot more Brits would own big V8s if the price of petrol came down from 108p to 40p !!
P.S Californians are all buying Teslas.
Population of California: 40,000,000
No. of cars in California: 30,000,000
New cars sold in California/annum: 2,000,000
Teslas sold in California in 2015: ~15,000
Technically, it's more accurate to say that no one in California is buying Tesla's than it is is to say they are all buying Teslas.
And as much as I'd like to think it's true that Brits given US fuel pricing would go and buy V8s I have a horrible feeling that they wouldn't and would go and buy more mirrors, hair care products and fill out a few more loan forms.
Here in Oz fuel is 50p a litre and has been sliding - guess what, everyone's not buying V8's (and there is a bit of choice of these, many affordable) and more and more buying small efficient petrol engines and a bit of diesel. It's always in perspective to your own country not someone else's.
After spending a month in LA I have to agree with this. The Freeways were littered with fuel efficient Japanese and Korean cars and tons of Pruii, is that the plural, as well as Leafs and quite a few Teslas.
In fact I only saw/heard one V8 Mustang. The rest were all ecoboost and V6.
Lots of Challengers and Chargers, the new ones, but almost all the non V8 versions.
I was picking up petrol for $2.80 per gallon of premium.
In fact I only saw/heard one V8 Mustang. The rest were all ecoboost and V6.
Lots of Challengers and Chargers, the new ones, but almost all the non V8 versions.
I was picking up petrol for $2.80 per gallon of premium.
croyde said:
After spending a month in LA I have to agree with this. The Freeways were littered with fuel efficient Japanese and Korean cars and tons of Pruii, is that the plural, as well as Leafs and quite a few Teslas.
In fact I only saw/heard one V8 Mustang. The rest were all ecoboost and V6.
Lots of Challengers and Chargers, the new ones, but almost all the non V8 versions.
I was picking up petrol for $2.80 per gallon of premium.
Wanted for the show not the go, I think in many places like LA its a case of "look how green I am" or much like the super cars in Knightsbridge "look at me", your average motorist that doesn't want to show off, or isn't interested in performance is going to do much the same as the rest of the world and pick something that suits their needs and budget.In fact I only saw/heard one V8 Mustang. The rest were all ecoboost and V6.
Lots of Challengers and Chargers, the new ones, but almost all the non V8 versions.
I was picking up petrol for $2.80 per gallon of premium.
Don't forget that only 10 years ago cars like the Mustang had a V6 that was good for nothing but a boat anchor, now it has a very good 300hp V6 engine that is both lighter and far more powerful than the old 30 year old truck engine the SN95 and 2005-2009 S197 Mustang V6's were lumbered with, so they do actually now have some go to match their show. Mind you I wouldn't consider buying any Muscle or Pony car styled vehicle without a V8 in it.
PanzerCommander said:
Don't forget that only 10 years ago cars like the Mustang had a V6 that was good for nothing but a boat anchor, now it has a very good 300hp V6 engine that is both lighter and far more powerful than the old 30 year old truck engine the SN95 and 2005-2009 S197 Mustang V6's were lumbered with, so they do actually now have some go to match their show. Mind you I wouldn't consider buying any Muscle or Pony car styled vehicle without a V8 in it.
I love how people make this stuff up.The s197 used a 4.0 V6, it had 210hp. Which in 2005 was pretty good output. More than a Civic Type R and gave the ever so CHEAP Mustang a pretty good turn of speed. 0-60mph 6.8 seconds and 140mph+ top speed.
What exactly is shabby about performance like that?
That engine is also a Cologne V6 from GERMANY....
As for the V8's in the s197 and sn95, yes they might have been used in trucks too, although usually different spec. But that's true today of the 5.0 V8... which is actually still a Modular motor and of the exact same engine family as the older ones.
300bhp/ton said:
I love how people make this stuff up.
The s197 used a 4.0 V6, it had 210hp. Which in 2005 was pretty good output. More than a Civic Type R and gave the ever so CHEAP Mustang a pretty good turn of speed. 0-60mph 6.8 seconds and 140mph+ top speed.
What exactly is shabby about performance like that?
I love how you are so out of touch. 210bhp from a 4.0 v6. I'd say you're in a club of one who thinks that's good or acceptable.The s197 used a 4.0 V6, it had 210hp. Which in 2005 was pretty good output. More than a Civic Type R and gave the ever so CHEAP Mustang a pretty good turn of speed. 0-60mph 6.8 seconds and 140mph+ top speed.
What exactly is shabby about performance like that?
RemyMartin said:
I love how you are so out of touch. 210bhp from a 4.0 v6. I'd say you're in a club of one who thinks that's good or acceptable.
So what UK coupes of similar money had 210hp??? Apart from morons wanting bragging rights, who gives a chuff how many litres the engines is for the power. Has to be the dumbest thing ever to obsess over.Oh and for the record, it's about torque.
240ft lb for the 4.0 Mustang.
132ft lb for something like the Civic Type R
More info here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Nanook said:
300bhp/ton said:
So what UK coupes of similar money had 210hp??? Apart from morons wanting bragging rights, who gives a chuff how many litres the engines is for the power. Has to be the dumbest thing ever to obsess over.
Apparently you.300bhp/ton said:
I love how people make this stuff up.
The s197 used a 4.0 V6, it had 210hp. Which in 2005 was pretty good output.
And please, if it's all about torque, remind me of the relationship between torque and top speed?The s197 used a 4.0 V6, it had 210hp. Which in 2005 was pretty good output.
I stated what the engine is, a 4.0 V6 and it's output. I made opinion on it specific output.
And you know what the relationship is for torque, but again you are being a difficult child about it.
hp = torque x rpm / 5252
If you want an example, a similar era BMW 330i makes 221ft lb PEAK at 3500rpm, the same rpm as the Mustang.
Which means at 3500rpm
BMW = 147hp
Mustang = 160hp
RemyMartin said:
I seriously doubt any engine with 52.5bhp per litre will be remembered as great!
Oh and you say torque matters. No what matters is driving dynamics and chassis hence why an s2000 is better than any diesel rep car.
Torque plays it's part but it isn't the be all end all.
Who said it was great?? -- come on, don't make stuff up FFS Oh and you say torque matters. No what matters is driving dynamics and chassis hence why an s2000 is better than any diesel rep car.
Torque plays it's part but it isn't the be all end all.
But 210hp in a coupe that retail for what I think was sub $20k is pretty ok. It would have likely been cheaper than a 320i which only musters 168hp for your money.
As for driving dynamics, torque plays a BIG part of how a car drives. It's the difference between if you need to thrash a vehicle or not. As for the chassis, well the s197 was very liked from a handling as chassis point of view. So I really don't know what your point is here, unless you simply don't know much about the s197 Mustangs and all the reviews conducted on them and variations of.
And the chassis is still in use today in a more expensive format sitting under the Jaguar XF....
300bhp/ton said:
PanzerCommander said:
Don't forget that only 10 years ago cars like the Mustang had a V6 that was good for nothing but a boat anchor, now it has a very good 300hp V6 engine that is both lighter and far more powerful than the old 30 year old truck engine the SN95 and 2005-2009 S197 Mustang V6's were lumbered with, so they do actually now have some go to match their show. Mind you I wouldn't consider buying any Muscle or Pony car styled vehicle without a V8 in it.
I love how people make this stuff up.The s197 used a 4.0 V6, it had 210hp. Which in 2005 was pretty good output. More than a Civic Type R and gave the ever so CHEAP Mustang a pretty good turn of speed. 0-60mph 6.8 seconds and 140mph+ top speed.
What exactly is shabby about performance like that?
That engine is also a Cologne V6 from GERMANY....
As for the V8's in the s197 and sn95, yes they might have been used in trucks too, although usually different spec. But that's true today of the 5.0 V8... which is actually still a Modular motor and of the exact same engine family as the older ones.
t engine, far from it, that would mean it failed to meet the design brief. It did (and continues to do) the job it was designed to do admirably, I dare say a Cologne V6 will be happily humming away long after a higher specific output engine making the same power will have croaked it. But it doesn't change the fact that it is a boat anchor compared to the new 3.7L V6 which offers similar performance as the 2005-2010 GT models.The Colonge 4.0 V6 may be built in Germany but it was only produced for American vehicles. Not that the origin of the engine is at all relevant to the point I was making, you have as usual taken it off on a tangent that it was not originally meant to go in., I suggest you re-read it. You came back at that post like you are talking to somebody that is a German car fanboy and thinks that F1 is the be all and end all of motorsport, which couldn’t be further from the truth. I own and drive a Mustang (2006 GT) on a daily basis and I also drag race in the SPRC/National Championship in it, I love it, it’s a fab car and I can’t think of any German car of its era or now that I would consider replacing it with.
As for the V6, please, give it a rest. My only experience with a V6 Mustang (2007 model) was as a passenger and tbh It didn’t feel that fast, normally in a car you get more of a rush of speed in the passenger seat than the driver’s seat (or is that just me) but I have to say my 2006 Focus ST felt as quick from the driver’s seat as the V6 Mustang did from the passenger seat, and with a driver of average skill the ST would have run rings around it on road and track. That experience following a test drive in the GT made my mind up, it was keep the Focus or buy the Mustang GT. The V8 Mustang, 300hp from a 4.6 (somewhat in line with the AMG Mercedes of the era 5.0L 350ish hp) is far better from both a driver and a passenger point of view.
I am well aware of the modular motor, how it is used and what its used for. I am also aware of how blasted expensive they are for upgrade parts compared to the LS motors. I am currently looking at buying a bunch of parts to make my N/A ~320hp 4.6L v8 (light bolt ons) into a 450+hp N/A motor over the next few years and I'm beginning to wish I'd bought a Chevy because for the parts cost alone I could have a 500hp+ LS motor in a crate delivered to my door; it may have almost been worth living with a 4th Gen Camaro with a boat anchor V6 in it for a few years before putting a V8 in it (I couldn’t find a US spec SS model for love nor money).
PanzerCommander said:
As for the V6, please, give it a rest. My only experience with a V6 Mustang (2007 model) was as a passenger and tbh It didn’t feel that fast, normally in a car you get more of a rush of speed in the passenger seat than the driver’s seat (or is that just me) but I have to say my 2006 Focus ST felt as quick from the driver’s seat as the V6 Mustang did from the passenger seat, and with a driver of average skill the ST would have run rings around it on road and track.
I don't deny a Focus may well run rings round a stock V6. But the Focus is smaller and lighter. And makes marginally more power.But none of this means the V6 was or is a slow or bad car. Of course newer models are more powerful and quicker, but that's true of almost any car range.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff