Mustang vs. GTO

[GoCougs]

Had they called it anything other than a GTO it would've sold better IMO (or at least not any worse).

With a UAW-limited target number of 18,000 and the baby boomer-GTO legacy, it played to a very small and specific demographic.

That demographic IMO didn't want a rebadged hand-me-down no matter how good it was.

[Raza]

So, Nethead, you've never driven a GTO?

[SVT666]

Had they called it anything other than a GTO it would've sold better IMO (or at least not any worse).

With a UAW-limited target number of 18,000 and the baby boomer-GTO legacy, it played to a very small and specific demographic.

That demographic IMO didn't want a rebadged hand-me-down no matter how good it was.

I really think it was the exterior design that turned people off.  It wasn't ugly by any means, but it certainly wasn't pretty.  It was just....there.  It needed to strike an emotional cord with people to shell out $32K for a two door coupe.  If the exterior design doesn't cause anyone to lust after it then that type of car is a hard sell.

[danielle_16_09]

i would rather have a Shelbie GT any day over the new mustangs they have out now...now, don't get me wrong the new mustangs look nice, but i would still rather have the GT....

[heelntoe]

welcome.

off-topic: are you the danielle from facebook?

[GoCougs]

I really think it was the exterior design that turned people off.? It wasn't ugly by any means, but it certainly wasn't pretty.? It was just....there.? It needed to strike an emotional cord with people to shell out $32K for a two door coupe.? If the exterior design doesn't cause anyone to lust after it then that type of car is a hard sell.

In the grand scheme of things, what was the GTO? Did it help define the most memorable era in US automotive history? Yes. Did it sell in volume to a wide demographic? No. Was it the best performing vehicle of its era? No. Was it a somewhat pricey two door coupe? No.

I think Dodge will run into these issues with the Challenger as well, but even more so. The Challenger really only earned a widespread reputation long after it ceased production, and with the blatant copying of the original, it plays to a very small demographic.

[SVT666]

In the grand scheme of things, what was the GTO? Did it help define the most memorable era in US automotive history? Yes. Did it sell in volume to a wide demographic? No. Was it the best performing vehicle of its era? No. Was it a somewhat pricey two door coupe? No.

I think Dodge will run into these issues with the Challenger as well, but even more so. The Challenger really only earned a widespread reputation long after it ceased production, and with the blatant copying of the original, it plays to a very small demographic.

I think Dodge will sell every Challenger they can build for about 3 years.  After that I think the demand will drop off dramatically and it will be cancelled.  Unfortunately I believe the same thing will happen to the Camaro.  It might last a year or two longer, but I don't see it lasting much longer then 5 years.

[93JC]

93JC: I don't make these figures up, JCDude, I just quote 'em.

I'd like to read your source, if you don't mind.

Personally, a pounds-per-degree value seems less perceptual than a pounds-per-inch value.  You can measure an inch of deflection with a yardstick, ruler, or tape measure but a more complicated apparatus might be necessary to prove that a body-frame had deflected one degree.

That's silly. For several reasons.

If you don't understand what is meant by needing 6000 pounds suspended from any corner of the body/frame to cause that corner to deflect one inch from its non-weighted position, I can't explain that concept in simpler terms other than to say "It takes 6000 pounds of weight to twist the current Mustang's body/frame one inch."

I understand that perfectly. It's stupid, because you haven't a clue where that inch of twist was measured. (Twist, mind you, not deflection. A body is twisted when under torsion and deflected when bending.)

Measuring an inch of twist at the outer edges of the chassis is completely different than an inch of twist near the centreline. That's one of the reasons no one in their right mind reports torsional rigidity based on a per-length unit. You measure it per degree, because one degree measured near the centreline is still one degree at the outer edge.

The other big reason being that you can't compare the figures to anything else. Let's say the Lotus Elise has 7000 "lbs/in" of torsional rigidity. Is it stiffer than the Mustang? Maybe, maybe not. One inch of twist on an Elise is, as a function of the Elise's geometry, proportionally more than an inch in a Mustang (assuming the Elise is narrower; I don't know off the top of my head, I'm just guessing. Assume for the purposes of this discussion that it is narrower than the Mustang). If you measure the twist at the outer edge of both vehicles the overall twist may be the same, but the overall effect on the Elise's geometry is more pronounced.

If we were to say the Mustang had a torsional rigidity of 6000 ft-lbs/? and the Elise has 7000 ft-lbs/?, we would know that the Mustang would twist more than the Elise as a function of it's geometry, which is eminently more important than the overall length of twist.

In a simpler example, take two perfectly cylindrical bars and set them up in a torsional testing machine (which is what torsional rigidity figures are obtained from). Let's say one has a very small diameter, let's say a quarter of an inch. If you measured torsional rigidity on a per inch basis the smaller would wrap around itself (the circumference would be only pi/4 inches, a little over three quarters of an inch) if it twisted an inch. Let's say the other one has a one inch diameter: it would wrap around about a third of it's circumference (3.14... inches). Which one is stiffer?

[FordSVT]

I said shares some design, not that the Mustang rode of the same platform.

You can try to pick away at my post, but the point I was trying to make is that in a global economy, are there really all-American cars anymore? I think not. It's a worldwide effort nowadays.

Your point is well taken and I agree with it, but you said the Mustang shared a platform with the Mazda 3 (which is incorrect) and the S-Type (which is 75% incorrect).
-FordSVT-

[280Z Turbo]

Your point is well taken and I agree with it, but you said the Mustang shared a platform with the Mazda 3 (which is incorrect) and the S-Type (which is 75% incorrect).
-FordSVT-

I did?

"The Mustang itself also shares some design with the European Focus/Mazda 3/Volvo S40/etc. as well as the Jaguar S-type."

[FordSVT]

I stand corrected, you did say that. But from what I can tell, the Mustang shares about as much with the Mazda 3 as it does with a BMW.

Anyways, next subject.
-FordSVT-

[Cobra93]

Let's hear from those of you who (a) had sufficient cash to buy a new GTO outright but didn't, or (b) could have afforded the payments on a new GTO but didn't:  Why DIDN'T you buy a GTO?  Why were you NOT one of the 44,042 or so folks who bought either an '04, '05, or '06 GTO?  There's gotta be reasons ("Couldn't afford it" is certainly a reason, but what were the reasons why those of you who COULD afford a new GTO in those three years did not buy one?).  I don't know how many vehicles were sold in the US during those three years, but of those multiple millions and millions why did only 44,042 buy GTOs?

I didn't buy a GTO because I'm an old fart with money who wanted something silly and garish looking more than I wanted a good GT. Or so I'm told.

[93JC]

I didn't buy a GTO because I'm an old fart with money who wanted something silly and garish looking more than I wanted a good GT. Or so I'm told.

Damn straight, gramps.

[Cobra93]

Damn straight, gramps.

whippersnapper

[93JC]

Don't give me excuses to put you in a home, you old codger.

[Cobra93]

Don't give me excuses to put you in a home, you old codger.

I'm still pretty spry. I'll take my teeth out and cut loose with a cane thrashing on your hiney. 

[93JC]

Just make sure you have a fresh pair of Depends on.

[Cobra93]

Just make sure you have a fresh pair of Depends on.

I doubt I'll be straining any. 

[93JC]

[the Teuton]

I want a '68-'70 AMX. Glorious cars, and quite rare here, too.

My dad had a '69 AMX 343 back in the day that he bought new over a (surprise, surprise) Shelby Mustang.  He was young and stupid with it.  In 1990, he finally had to sell it as a parts car with the floorpan rusting out to a guy restoring one or two of them.  I will buy my dad one someday, but that's beside the point.  It was an amazing car, and I wish they built more than only 18,000 of them. 

Also, anyone who thinks the Javelin was a pushover, guess again.  They owned the Trans Am racing series for a few years.

This is the same year as my dad's and was for sale for $18k 2 years ago.  This is my next car photo submission, btw.


And here's the original AMX concept car at the Crawford Auto Museum in Cleveland.

[omicron]

Had they called it anything other than a GTO it would've sold better IMO (or at least not any worse).

With a UAW-limited target number of 18,000 and the baby boomer-GTO legacy, it played to a very small and specific demographic.

That demographic IMO didn't want a rebadged hand-me-down no matter how good it was.

Plus, at the time, the Elizabeth plant could not physically build many more cars - they were running a three-shift 24hr production line.

[Nethead]

So, Nethead, you've never driven a GTO?

RAZA:  I've driven two real GTOs, three if you count a '73 based on the Chevy Nova chassis.  'Never have driven the import rebadged as a GTO.  Why would I?

The '67 had more punch than the '68, but the '67 was not stock and the '68 was essentially stock (aftermarket mufflers only).  The less-than-two-weeks-old '73 was a very short drive, maybe three miles.  It was very Nova, and the owner and another co-worker were weighting it down.  I thought it would never get worse than seeing the GTO downgraded to a Nova chassis...   

[Nethead]

i would rather have a Shelbie GT any day over the new mustangs they have out now...now, don't get me wrong the new mustangs look nice, but i would still rather have the GT....

Danielle 16 09:  Yeah, wouldn't we all!  Anyone who bought the Mustang GT woulda taken the Shelby GT for the same money as the Mustang GT.  It's likely that anyone who bought a V6 Mustang woulda taken a Shelby GT for the same money as the V6 Mustang, although there may be some who would not give up the better mileage of the V6 for a Shelby GT.  There are some weird characters out there...

[FordSVT]

I didn't buy a GTO because I'm an old fart with money who wanted something silly and garish looking more than I wanted a good GT. Or so I'm told.

In Canada, we didn't even have a choice to buy the POS instead of the Mustang. 
-FordSVT-

[Nethead]

I'd like to read your source, if you don't mind.

That's silly. For several reasons.

I understand that perfectly. It's stupid, because you haven't a clue where that inch of twist was measured. (Twist, mind you, not deflection. A body is twisted when under torsion and deflected when bending.)

Measuring an inch of twist at the outer edges of the chassis is completely different than an inch of twist near the centreline. That's one of the reasons no one in their right mind reports torsional rigidity based on a per-length unit. You measure it per degree, because one degree measured near the centreline is still one degree at the outer edge.

The other big reason being that you can't compare the figures to anything else. Let's say the Lotus Elise has 7000 "lbs/in" of torsional rigidity. Is it stiffer than the Mustang? Maybe, maybe not. One inch of twist on an Elise is, as a function of the Elise's geometry, proportionally more than an inch in a Mustang (assuming the Elise is narrower; I don't know off the top of my head, I'm just guessing. Assume for the purposes of this discussion that it is narrower than the Mustang). If you measure the twist at the outer edge of both vehicles the overall twist may be the same, but the overall effect on the Elise's geometry is more pronounced.

If we were to say the Mustang had a torsional rigidity of 6000 ft-lbs/? and the Elise has 7000 ft-lbs/?, we would know that the Mustang would twist more than the Elise as a function of it's geometry, which is eminently more important than the overall length of twist.

In a simpler example, take two perfectly cylindrical bars and set them up in a torsional testing machine (which is what torsional rigidity figures are obtained from). Let's say one has a very small diameter, let's say a quarter of an inch. If you measured torsional rigidity on a per inch basis the smaller would wrap around itself (the circumference would be only pi/4 inches, a little over three quarters of an inch) if it twisted an inch. Let's say the other one has a one inch diameter: it would wrap around about a third of it's circumference (3.14... inches). Which one is stiffer?

93JC:? The Nethead here should be able to find the 20,000 pounds/degree figure on the websites easily--I read it the first time in February or March.? The article stating that the '05 Mustang had a torsional rigidity of 6,000 pounds/inch may be tougher--a website posting in late '05 that I found in early '06, which may be archived by now.? It was found by googling some generic input like "2005 Mustang"? and reading some of the thousands of replies.? Now, that would be tens of thousands of replies.? I'll google and see what turns up now.? Damn AutoWeek for abolishing their website, as it was posted there and with the source website given.? I'll probably post whatever I find as an Addendum via an "Edit" to this posting.? Check back here later...

Addendum 1:? Back when I first found these figures, a google on "FR500C" would return maybe 25 pages of results.? A google on the "FR500GT", no more than 3 or 4.? Today, a google on "FR500C" returned 6,620 pages and a google on the extremely rare "FR500GT" returned an amazing 1,233 pages of results!? Resurrecting the correct data will be more difficult and time-consuming than I ever would have believed.? I wish this browser could sort by age of the articles...

Addendum 2: These data for the FR500C and FR500GT are from 'fordracingparts.com/mustang/specifications.asp':
CHASSIS:
* Type: Uni-body full seam welded with integrated safety cage
* Structural Performance: Over 20,000 ft-lbs/degree (torsional)
* Construction: Ford - modified stock steel

BTW, if one end of a frame/body is clamped rigidly in some sorta gizmo, and 6,000 pounds is suspended from one of the corners at the extreme other end of that frame/body, there'll be different degrees of deflection along the entire length of the frame/body--almost no deflection within a few inches of the clamped location, but the maximum degrees of deflection probably occur at the point where the weight is suspended.? Midway between the suspension point and the clamping point is probably gonna be roughly half the degrees of deflection as would occur at the suspension point--this is only approximate since automobile body/frames are anything but symmetric, and the amount of deflection at any given point between the weight and the clamps probably varies much moreso than would the amount of deflection of a straight steel pipe or a straight steel box section.? Do you agree?

[93JC]

BTW, if one end of a frame/body is clamped rigidly in some sorta gizmo, and 6,000 pounds is suspended from one of the corners at the extreme other end of that frame/body, there'll be different degrees of deflection along the entire length of the frame/body--almost no deflection within a few inches of the clamped location, but the maximum degrees of deflection probably occur at the point where the weight is suspended.? Midway between the suspension point and the clamping point is probably gonna be roughly half the degrees of deflection as would occur at the suspension point--this is only approximate since automobile body/frames are anything but symmetric, and the amount of deflection at any given point between the weight and the clamps probably varies much moreso than would the amount of deflection of a straight steel pipe or a straight steel box section.? Do you agree?

Angle of twist is measured at the end of the free end (the end with the force applied to it), by convention, since that's where it's easiest to measure, and where you're most interested (as you would be more concerned with the maximum angle of twist moreso than the corresponding smaller angle at some point along the body).

I know what you're saying.

[sandertheshark]

RAZA:  I've driven two real GTOs, three if you count a '73 based on the Chevy Nova chassis.  'Never have driven the import rebadged as a GTO.  Why would I?

Because it's spectacular.

[Nethead]

Because it's spectacular.

Compared to the Monte Carlo SS and the Cobalt SS, definitely!

[Raza]

Compared to the Monte Carlo SS and the Cobalt SS, definitely!

You've obviously never driven it, because if you had, you wouldn't say something so silly.  I could rattle off cars that I've driven that the LS2 GTO is better than, if you really want me to. 

[280Z Turbo]

I hate Shakespeare, but...

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet."