Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Ford Mustang Ford Mustang (2005 and Newer)
2847 messages, Last post on Nov 19, 2009 at 4:43 PM
You are in the Ford Mustang Forum. Your Host is claires
|
Edmunds and a few other reviews have paned the V6. I have rented a V6 hardtop and convertible both with automatic transmissions. I can't find anything wrong with the engine other than noise coming in from the engine compartment. Does anyone know what is so wrong with the V6 engine? I understand there are clutch packs needed to fix rear ends. Is this for the limited slip rear end? The reason I am concerned about the V6 is that I am thinking of buying a 2007 V6 premium convertible. I know the V8 offers more power. The convertible is heavier and has softer springs, so you would lose handling and speed due to the extra weight even if I purchased the V8. I am also considering the V8 hardtop in a manual, since I was fortunate to actually own a 1967 289 GT 2+2 Fastback with a 4-speed years ago when I was a kid. On my 67 tang, I had dual exhaust with Cherry Bombs. Has anyone put these on the new Tangs?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: texastang (Sep 01, 2006 5:17 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Saw an article online about the Camaro being produced in Canada for '09 release. Sorry, ugly and overstated, nowhere as cool or natural as the Mustang. Dudes complaining here about this, that, meanwhile paying less than I did a year ago for the same Mustang. No one is ever satisfied.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: pony_pirate (Sep 04, 2006 2:58 am) Personally those who like the '09 are just buying it for the name. Now where have I heard that before........can somebody say 'GTO'? Very short lived if I must say so! So is the '09 Camaro facing the same dooms day count down clock?... 
|
|
|
Replying to: rocketman67 (Sep 04, 2006 4:55 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: tayl0rd (Sep 05, 2006 7:34 am) It will handle pretty much like a GT except for the horsepower with that pkg add on. there is nothing wrong with a V6 except for GT snobs. There's always another better model release so the standard GT is 2nd from the bottom now instead of the top behind GT-H, Shelby GT, and GT500 and probably the Boss went it comes out.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lmm (Sep 05, 2006 1:47 pm) "Except," in other words, for the most important element of a muscle car, the muscle. You might also consider the added torque; and the twin exhausts and different "note". The tranny may be different, too. As for the recent upgrades, all well and good. They weren't available when I bought the car. I got the hottest stock Mustang available, and that wasn't easy. People ain't payin' an extra $6-8k for a GT just for leather seats. The GT is a different car, a distant cousin to the V6. Signed GT "Snob" ha ha. 
|
|
|
Replying to: pony_pirate (Sep 05, 2006 2:12 pm) The OP is well aware of the horsepower difference. No reason to trash talk a v6 unless you feel the need. To 99.9% of the population they cant tell the difference by looking at it so monetarily you paid too much for the same look and only 80hp more. Try reading the post and offering the info he requested. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lmm (Sep 05, 2006 6:54 pm) Oh, I see, you drive a Mustang because of how other people see it. Excuse me, but I don't. Funny, the GT, not the V6, is used in all the Mustang TV ads. I would bet the Vette Z06 looks just like the C06 to "99.9% of the population," which, according to your criteria, eliminates any real difference between the two. Accordingly, anyone spending the extra $30k+ for a Z ("only" 100 HP more) is wasting their money. Interesting. Somehow missing from this conversation is performance. Just to restore some perspective, the big hoopla about the redesigned Mustang is its resurrection of the American muscle car. Er, the V6 is not a muscle car.
|
|
|
Replying to: pony_pirate (Sep 05, 2006 10:42 pm) "Back in the day", I'll bet more I6 Mustangs were sold than V8's. It's also interesting to note the first new car I ever bought was an '85 Mustang GT. It was rated at 220 HP. The current V6 is rated at 210 HP, and this is a more conservative rating than the '85, so it's not a stretch to say that they are the same horsepower. Does the '85 GT qualify as a "muscle car"? |
|
You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Ford Mustang Ford Mustang (2005 and Newer)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Ford Mustang
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
