Ask the Car People.SM


Ford Mustang (2005) vs. 2005 Pontiac GTO

2056 messages,  Last post on May 27, 2009 at 5:34 PM

You are in the Ford Mustang Forum.

What is this discussion about? Ford Mustang, Pontiac GTO, Coupe, Convertible

Messages Page 151 of 207

#1495 of 2056 Re: Mustang Vs. GTO [graphicguy] by kevm14

Sep 07, 2005 (12:54 pm)

Replying to: graphicguy (Sep 06, 2005 3:31 pm)
As much as you want to give credit to the Mustang's formula for being just right, you have to admit that the 2004 (and previous years) Fox Mustang STILL sold pretty well, despite being a wholly inferior car. That's one point of evidence that prompted me to claim they probably had a LOT more leeway with the 05's formula than you're suggesting. Ford has a lot of best sellers in a given segment. Explorer, F-150, Mustang, and Taurus for a while...they seem to make "popular" vehicles. This comes from a GM guy, in case anyone has forgotten.
 
BTW, the 04 GTO also has a "vette motor."

#1496 of 2056 Re: Mustang Vs. GTO [kevm14] by rorr

Sep 07, 2005 (12:59 pm)

Replying to: kevm14 (Sep 07, 2005 12:54 pm)
Yep, even up through the '04 edition, the Mustang has sold well for the last couple of decades. This could be attributed to decent bang for the buck (GT editions), some halo effect trickling down to the V6 models, and tweaking the exterior styling every 2-3 years to keep the car looking 'fresh'.
 
Wholly inferior car? Depends on what your criteria is. Obviously for those who bought the 'wholly inferior car', they have a different criteria....

#1497 of 2056 Re: Supercharged Stang GT barely beats stock GTO, funny [gxpgtodanman] by kevm14

Sep 07, 2005 (1:04 pm)

Replying to: gxpgtodanman (Sep 07, 2005 11:06 am)
it can't even break 147mph with NO governor.
 
That's funny. A TPI 350 Camaro (~90-92) could do an even 150 and a 93+ Camaro was good for 155+. Not that we have an autobahn here, but I just found it mildly amusing considering I'm talking about a 15 year old car here.

#1498 of 2056 Re: Supercharged Stang GT barely beats stock GTO, funny [kevm14] by rorr

Sep 07, 2005 (1:08 pm)

Replying to: kevm14 (Sep 07, 2005 1:04 pm)
"Not that we have an autobahn here, but I just found it mildly amusing considering I'm talking about a 15 year old car here."
 
Well, as gxpgtodanman likes to point out, the Mustang has a pretty high CD of 0.35. No matter how you slice it, that's breaking a lot of wind....

#1499 of 2056 Re: Mustang Vs. GTO [rorr] by kevm14

Sep 07, 2005 (1:29 pm)

Replying to: rorr (Sep 07, 2005 12:59 pm)
Wholly inferior car? Depends on what your criteria is
 
I meant 04 Mustang compared with the 05.

#1500 of 2056 Re: Mustang Vs. GTO [kevm14] by rorr

Sep 07, 2005 (1:51 pm)

Replying to: kevm14 (Sep 07, 2005 1:29 pm)
"I meant 04 Mustang compared with the 05."
 
Thanks. That clears it up for me (a bit).
 
Wait, something doesn't follow: you say sales of the previous generation '04 were strong despite it being a wholly inferior car to the '05? Well, granted the '04 was 'inferior' to the '05 models but I don't know that there were many '04 sales when the '05 was available. It's not like they were competing side by side.
 
That's like saying sales of the C5 Corvette were strong despite it being 'wholly inferior' to the C6 Corvette.

#1501 of 2056 Re: gto vs. mustang too boring, how about gto+gt vs SKYLINE [tayl0rd] by elias

Sep 07, 2005 (1:52 pm)

Replying to: tayl0rd (Sep 07, 2005 6:15 am)
taylord, thanks for the info. i was being serious. sometimes i am behind the mustang in traffic so i like to know the cues/clues from the back also. i think the reason i am not familiar with the badges is that i rarely see a stang GT !
my idea about whatever vs. skyline was along the lines of gto & gt being more similar than different. but anyway, probably it was a lame idea! i didn't realize there was a tweeked version of the skyline, the GT-R. and maybe i'm blind since i have trouble distinguishing stang from stang GT, and i couldn't find the pricing/specs info on skyline here on edmunds either. time for me to get glasses (seriously). ttfn!

#1502 of 2056 Now what? by graphicguy

Sep 07, 2005 (2:31 pm)

So we disagree. No surprise there.
 
rorr....watch out.....breaking wind....how dare you!!!!! LOL!
 
In order for Pontiac to have a "hit" on their hands, the North American market is where they have to succeed. That's the target. I'm glad that the Manaro has done well in Aussieland. That's not going to help the GTO "HERE" though, where the market segment is much, much bigger.
 
If you're behind a Mustang, the BIG GT badge should be a dead give away. Same way with looking at it from the sides. From the front, those BIG fog lamps in the grill will be the tell-tale sign.
 
The '05 Mustang actually spurred resale values for the previous
models. So, yes...the legacy for the Mustang became stronger with the release of the '05.model.
 
Anyone can make any car faster with aftermarket exhausts, superchargers, gearring, hotter cams, etc. This is true whether you've got a Mustang, a GTO or a Cavalier.
 
With the current GTO resembling the "LATE '90s" Pontiacs, they didn't do themselves any favors. Now, if they were to mimic the '67-'70 models, they would have had a better chance and a more distinctive look to separate it from Pontiac's other models.

#1503 of 2056 Re: Now what? [graphicguy] by rorr

Sep 07, 2005 (3:09 pm)

Replying to: graphicguy (Sep 07, 2005 2:31 pm)
Had to inject a little levity back into the thread. I could feel the blood pressures beginning to rise on both sides of the aisle.....
 
Hard to define what constitutes a "hit". IMO, it depends on what the manufacturers expectations are and how well sales met those expectations.
 
Re: making the car faster: True. If it was ONLY about going fast, for the money spent on a GTO, an individual could slap a S/C (or nitrous for that matter) on a Mustang and be quicker. Of course, they could buy an '80's model Camaro or Mustang for next to nothing and drop $25k into a SERIOUS motor and suck the headlights out of either car. So what? As gxpgtodanman pointed out (correctly), the factory waranty may take a beating with these kind of aftermarket mods. All I was trying to point out (in my roundabout way) was that speed/acceleration is NOT all there is to the equation for determining which vehicle is 'better' for any one individual because if power was ALL that mattered, neither one of these is the 'best' choice.

#1504 of 2056 Re: Mustang Vs. GTO [rorr] by kevm14

Sep 08, 2005 (5:33 am)

Replying to: rorr (Sep 07, 2005 1:51 pm)
What I am saying is, since the 04 is generally considered inferior to the 05 (as opposed to a freshening where there are only subtle differences), yet the 04 still sold pretty well, then maybe the success of the 05 wasn't as magical as others seem to suggest. In other words, if they did well with that Fox platform, the ancient interior, etc, then it doesn't seem like it would have taken much to improve it and sell more.

Messages Page 151 of 207

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement