CarSPIN Forums

It's muscle car time! Let the games begin. (The post title is a variation of a "Ghostbusters" quote for those who aren't privy to that info.)  :D

The Mustang is the value leader, and the GTO doesn't handle all that well, but I went with the Pontiac. Much nicer interior (seats and quality) and more power, and it isn't much more comparably-equipped.

I'm assuming this is V8 vs. V8 though, otherwise I'd go with a base Mustang V6 and save $11,000 or so.  

QuoteThe Mustang is the value leader, and the GTO doesn't handle all that well, but I went with the Pontiac. Much nicer interior (seats and quality) and more power, and it isn't much more comparably-equipped.

I'm assuming this is V8 vs. V8 though, otherwise I'd go with a base Mustang V6 and save $11,000 or so.

So like ifcar. :lol:

QuoteThe Mustang is the value leader, and the GTO doesn't handle all that well, but I went with the Pontiac. Much nicer interior (seats and quality) and more power, and it isn't much more comparably-equipped.

I'm assuming this is V8 vs. V8 though, otherwise I'd go with a base Mustang V6 and save $11,000 or so.

C'mon man. Let's assume they're both loaded.  :P  

Mustang, because its aftermaket is hot and they got a few good body mods.

(http://www.fast-autos.net/featureproducts/cervinisbodykit.jpg)
like that!

Goat because it looks like a cavalier.

Mustang.  The GTO is a really nice car, but I'm a sucker for the classic Mustang styling cues.

QuoteMustang, because its aftermaket is hot and they got a few good body mods.

(http://www.fast-autos.net/featureproducts/cervinisbodykit.jpg)
like that!

That's a bit much Steve.  :D  

Quote

QuoteThe Mustang is the value leader, and the GTO doesn't handle all that well, but I went with the Pontiac. Much nicer interior (seats and quality) and more power, and it isn't much more comparably-equipped.

I'm assuming this is V8 vs. V8 though, otherwise I'd go with a base Mustang V6 and save $11,000 or so.

C'mon man. Let's assume they're both loaded.  :P

I had, I didn't vote Mustang.

For the record though, at $30K, I wouldn't buy either.  

Quote

Quote

QuoteThe Mustang is the value leader, and the GTO doesn't handle all that well, but I went with the Pontiac. Much nicer interior (seats and quality) and more power, and it isn't much more comparably-equipped.

I'm assuming this is V8 vs. V8 though, otherwise I'd go with a base Mustang V6 and save $11,000 or so.

C'mon man. Let's assume they're both loaded.  :P

I had, I didn't vote Mustang.

For the record though, at $30K, I wouldn't buy either.

If you had $30k you wanted to spend, neither is a bad choice, depending on personal taste of course.

First of all, I cannot ever see myself spending $30,000 on a car. And even if I did, it would be something used.  

You can buy one hell of a used car for $30K.

I'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.  

GTO FTW.

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o  

Mustang, Because i'm a die hard mustang fan, and always will be,
1. there's a great after market for them
2. Both the older models and newer look good (with a few exceptions in the middle)
3. Even my dads V6 kicks @$$

I like the GTO, but if i had the choice, i would have to go with the mustang B)

(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a255/footoflead/Car%20and%20Truck%20pics/P1000550.jpg)
(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a255/footoflead/Car%20and%20Truck%20pics/P1000559.jpg)

Need i say more :praise:  

Quote

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o

Why should I need to? Cheap cars are getting better and better, there is great selection under $7,000.  

Quote

Quote

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o

Why should I need to? Cheap cars are getting better and better, there is great selection under $7,000.

I sure hope so, since 7K so the most my parents will spend on my first car (if they ever get me one :rolleyes: )

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o

Why should I need to? Cheap cars are getting better and better, there is great selection under $7,000.

I sure hope so, since 7K so the most my parents will spend on my first car (if they ever get me one :rolleyes: )

There are lots of great, RWD cars for under $7k. :praise:  

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o

Why should I need to? Cheap cars are getting better and better, there is great selection under $7,000.

I sure hope so, since 7K so the most my parents will spend on my first car (if they ever get me one :rolleyes: )

There are lots of great, RWD cars for under $7k. :praise:

Right now my lists consists of

Datsun 240Z/280Z something along those lines-sean would be proud :praise:
RX7
Miata :crossing fingers:
1st gen MR2-sure their a little boxy, but there pretty damn fast
and it just goes on and on

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o

Why should I need to? Cheap cars are getting better and better, there is great selection under $7,000.

I sure hope so, since 7K so the most my parents will spend on my first car (if they ever get me one :rolleyes: )

There are lots of great, RWD cars for under $7k. :praise:

Right now my lists consists of

Datsun 240Z/280Z something along those lines-sean would be proud :praise:
RX7
Miata :crossing fingers:
1st gen MR2-sure their a little boxy, but there pretty damn fast
and it just goes on and on

There ya go. :praise:  

Such a hard choice.  I'll go with the GTO for now for sleeper looks and a better engine, but that could easily change.

This is a toughie.  The GTO is clearly the more mature, more stylish, faster and better handling car, but the Mustang is cheaper, nearly as fast, and the "it" car right now.  It handles fairly well, and modifications are easy and cheap.  With an MRT supercharger, you'd have spent less money than the GTO and gotten more power in a lighter package.

I love the GTO, but honestly, I have to go with the lighter car that's a better value.

You guys praising the Mustang aftermarket don't realize that the GTO aftermarket is also quite large, almost as big. Especially for the engine (I'd wager it's just as if not bigger).

QuoteYou guys praising the Mustang aftermarket don't realize that the GTO aftermarket is also quite large, almost as big. Especially for the engine (I'd wager it's just as if not bigger).

:shrug: it might be as large, but i dont think its as tested and proven...

And as several people already said, with just a few mods the mustang is more powerful and lighter and better handling, etc

As tested and proven?

The '05 is basically a clean slate design (sure it's based on the LS/S type/Tbird, but still modified a bit).

The Holden Monaro's platform has been around, relatively unchanged since '97 at least. The LS series of V8 engines has been around for much longer too.

You're seriously think that?

Quote(The post title is a variation of a "Ghostbusters" quote for those who aren't privy to that info.)  :D

"This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions."
"What do you mean, biblical?"
"What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor... real Wrath-of-God-type stuff. Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies."
"Rivers and seas boiling!"
"Forty years of darkness, earthquakes, volcanos."
"The dead rising from the grave!"
"Human sacrifice, dogs and cats, living together... mass hysteria!"

:lol:  

Quote

Quote(The post title is a variation of a "Ghostbusters" quote for those who aren't privy to that info.)  :D

"This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions."
"What do you mean, biblical?"
"What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor... real Wrath-of-God-type stuff. Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies."
"Rivers and seas boiling!"
"Forty years of darkness, earthquakes, volcanos."
"The dead rising from the grave!"
"Human sacrifice, dogs and cats, living together... mass hysteria!"

:lol:

how do you know all this stuff? :blink:  

I've seen Ghostbusters about a bajillion times.

QuoteI've seen Ghostbusters about a bajillion times.

I see. What was that movie you said was really good? Goonies?

The Goonies, yeah.

QuoteThe Goonies, yeah.

LOL. This Friday i hope i can check it out.

Nice.

QuoteNice.

It's avalible at any blockbuster place, right?

Should be.

QuoteShould be.

Cool. I'll try to watchit this friday...

'05 GTO all the way.

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:  

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Well the GTO is ~300lbs heavier, and even though its got 100hp on the mustang the mustang is ~.2 seconds quicker to 60,

To me those #'s mean the mustang is more bang for you $$ and is just as fast as the famous GTO, To me the choice is obvious ;)

*and it gets slightly better mpg!

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Well the GTO is ~300lbs heavier, and even though its got 100hp on the mustang the mustang is ~.2 seconds quicker to 60,

To me those #'s mean the mustang is more bang for you $$ and is just as fast as the famous GTO, To me the choice is obvious ;)

*and it gets slightly better mpg!

Except in the head to head test the GTO was labeled as the better overall handler (though the Stang was more nimble, there is more than just nimblness to handling) and its also faster despite what you think (~4.8 seconds to 60 vs the Mustang's ~5.1). From there the distance only grows (1/4 mile in 13.3 for the Goat, 13.8 for the Stang).

They gave the Goat better marks for handling (9/10 vs 8/10) and better steering (10/10 vs 7/10). The only performance aspect they liked better on the Mustang was the transmission (10/10 vs 7/10).

The Goat does just about everything better than the Mustang, but it is more expensive. But its not really surprising that the Mustang does "enough" performance while looking more tendy and being cheaper that it outsells the GTO. The V6 model helps too.

The Stang does get better mileage around town than the Goat (17 vs 15) but then the Goat gets better mileage on the highway thanks to its extra gear no doubt (27 vs 25).

I don't fault people for picking on over the other, but why kid yourself about which is the better performer?

edit: here's the link in case you want to check for yourself
Goat vs Stang Test Results (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=8908&page_number=4)

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Well the GTO is ~300lbs heavier, and even though its got 100hp on the mustang the mustang is ~.2 seconds quicker to 60,

To me those #'s mean the mustang is more bang for you $$ and is just as fast as the famous GTO, To me the choice is obvious ;)

*and it gets slightly better mpg!

Except in the head to head test the GTO was labeled as the better overall handler (though the Stang was more nimble, there is more than just nimblness to handling) and its also faster despite what you think (~4.8 seconds to 60 vs the Mustang's ~5.1). From there the distance only grows (1/4 mile in 13.3 for the Goat, 13.8 for the Stang).

They gave the Goat better marks for handling (9/10 vs 8/10) and better steering (10/10 vs 7/10). The only performance aspect they liked better on the Mustang was the transmission (10/10 vs 7/10).

The Goat does just about everything better than the Mustang, but it is more expensive. But its not really surprising that the Mustang does "enough" performance while looking more tendy and being cheaper that it outsells the GTO. The V6 model helps too.

The Stang does get better mileage around town than the Goat (17 vs 15) but then the Goat gets better mileage on the highway thanks to its extra gear no doubt (27 vs 25).

I don't fault people for picking on over the other, but why kid yourself about which is the better performer?

edit: here's the link in case you want to check for yourself
Goat vs Stang Test Results (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=8908&page_number=4)

13.3 @ 107-GTO
13.6 @ 105-Stang

0-60
4.8
5.1

To me it seems as if the mustang is holding its own right there, it seems as if towards the end of the 1/4 the mustang makes a little bit of a come back

(GTO requires 93 while the GT will take 87...)

I think that the mustang will murder the Goat with a few suspension mods and a couple under the hood

Quote

QuoteYou guys praising the Mustang aftermarket don't realize that the GTO aftermarket is also quite large, almost as big. Especially for the engine (I'd wager it's just as if not bigger).

:shrug: it might be as large, but i dont think its as tested and proven...

And as several people already said, with just a few mods the mustang is more powerful and lighter and better handling, etc

You realize that the Goats engine is probably older than you?

Quote

Quote

QuoteYou guys praising the Mustang aftermarket don't realize that the GTO aftermarket is also quite large, almost as big. Especially for the engine (I'd wager it's just as if not bigger).

:shrug: it might be as large, but i dont think its as tested and proven...

And as several people already said, with just a few mods the mustang is more powerful and lighter and better handling, etc

You realize that the Goats engine is probably older than you?

Yea, but what does that have to do with ANYTHING,

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Well the GTO is ~300lbs heavier, and even though its got 100hp on the mustang the mustang is ~.2 seconds quicker to 60,

To me those #'s mean the mustang is more bang for you $$ and is just as fast as the famous GTO, To me the choice is obvious ;)

*and it gets slightly better mpg!

Except in the head to head test the GTO was labeled as the better overall handler (though the Stang was more nimble, there is more than just nimblness to handling) and its also faster despite what you think (~4.8 seconds to 60 vs the Mustang's ~5.1). From there the distance only grows (1/4 mile in 13.3 for the Goat, 13.8 for the Stang).

They gave the Goat better marks for handling (9/10 vs 8/10) and better steering (10/10 vs 7/10). The only performance aspect they liked better on the Mustang was the transmission (10/10 vs 7/10).

The Goat does just about everything better than the Mustang, but it is more expensive. But its not really surprising that the Mustang does "enough" performance while looking more tendy and being cheaper that it outsells the GTO. The V6 model helps too.

The Stang does get better mileage around town than the Goat (17 vs 15) but then the Goat gets better mileage on the highway thanks to its extra gear no doubt (27 vs 25).

I don't fault people for picking on over the other, but why kid yourself about which is the better performer?

edit: here's the link in case you want to check for yourself
Goat vs Stang Test Results (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=8908&page_number=4)

13.3 @ 107-GTO
13.6 @ 105-Stang

0-60
4.8
5.1

To me it seems as if the mustang is holding its own right there, it seems as if towards the end of the 1/4 the mustang makes a little bit of a come back

(GTO requires 93 while the GT will take 87...)

I think that the mustang will murder the Goat with a few suspension mods and a couple under the hood

Hey don't feel bad, I know personal bias can cloud people's ability to read.

The 13.6 @ 105 is the test average of both cars.

(13.8+13.3=13.55, or 13.6)

The Mustang ran 13.8 @103, which does point out that the Goat was pulling away. Apart from that, the 5-60 times were 0.5 seconds in favor of the Goat, which means its 0-60 times are hampered by poor traction. 5-60 numbers are more representative of "real world" results to most people.

Also the GTO does require premium, but premium is 91 octane.

As for your assertion that a modded Mustang will be faster or better at a track than a stock GTO... :rolleyes:  

Quote

Quote

QuoteYou guys praising the Mustang aftermarket don't realize that the GTO aftermarket is also quite large, almost as big. Especially for the engine (I'd wager it's just as if not bigger).

:shrug: it might be as large, but i dont think its as tested and proven...

And as several people already said, with just a few mods the mustang is more powerful and lighter and better handling, etc

You realize that the Goats engine is probably older than you?

he's probably alluding to the fact that their are aftermarket packages that can greatly increase the power of any LSX series engine.

Here's one for 530 BHP (normally aspirated):

2005 Lingenfelter GTO (http://www.lingenfelter.com/GTO427LS2.htm)

Here's one for a 2004 with a supercharger (400 RWHP, or ~475-500 BHP):

2004 S/C GTO (http://www.lingenfelter.com/pack_pon_s.htm)

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Well the GTO is ~300lbs heavier, and even though its got 100hp on the mustang the mustang is ~.2 seconds quicker to 60,

To me those #'s mean the mustang is more bang for you $$ and is just as fast as the famous GTO, To me the choice is obvious ;)

*and it gets slightly better mpg!

Except in the head to head test the GTO was labeled as the better overall handler (though the Stang was more nimble, there is more than just nimblness to handling) and its also faster despite what you think (~4.8 seconds to 60 vs the Mustang's ~5.1). From there the distance only grows (1/4 mile in 13.3 for the Goat, 13.8 for the Stang).

They gave the Goat better marks for handling (9/10 vs 8/10) and better steering (10/10 vs 7/10). The only performance aspect they liked better on the Mustang was the transmission (10/10 vs 7/10).

The Goat does just about everything better than the Mustang, but it is more expensive. But its not really surprising that the Mustang does "enough" performance while looking more tendy and being cheaper that it outsells the GTO. The V6 model helps too.

The Stang does get better mileage around town than the Goat (17 vs 15) but then the Goat gets better mileage on the highway thanks to its extra gear no doubt (27 vs 25).

I don't fault people for picking on over the other, but why kid yourself about which is the better performer?

edit: here's the link in case you want to check for yourself
Goat vs Stang Test Results (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=8908&page_number=4)

13.3 @ 107-GTO
13.6 @ 105-Stang

0-60
4.8
5.1

To me it seems as if the mustang is holding its own right there, it seems as if towards the end of the 1/4 the mustang makes a little bit of a come back

(GTO requires 93 while the GT will take 87...)

I think that the mustang will murder the Goat with a few suspension mods and a couple under the hood

Hey don't feel bad, I know personal bias can cloud people's ability to read.

The 13.6 @ 105 is the test average of both cars.

(13.8+13.3=13.55, or 13.6)

The Mustang ran 13.8 @103, which does point out that the Goat was pulling away. Apart from that, the 5-60 times were 0.5 seconds in favor of the Goat, which means its 0-60 times are hampered by poor traction. 5-60 numbers are more representative of "real world" results to most people.

Also the GTO does require premium, but premium is 91 octane.

As for your assertion that a modded Mustang will be faster or better at a track than a stock GTO... :rolleyes:

:o Wow, you can point out typo's, Good for you give yourself a pat on the back(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a255/footoflead/Smilies/devil.gif)

MTL you're very confrontational as of late. :lol:

On topic, not sure how they differentiated "steering" and "handling" in that review, but I think I would still go with the Mustang. I don't really need that extra .3 seconds off the 0-60 times when you could smoke virtually every car you see with the 'stang anyway. To me, the 10/10 for the tranny is very important. I also see the Mustang as a slightly sportier car, so that all adds up to it being my pick by a narrow margin.  The GTO's interior is a bit nicer and has more back seat room, but I've never been one to care about the needs of others anyway (:P).  As for the better handling of the GTO, my 6 handles more than fine enough for me, and I can't imagine the 'stang being worse.

So, make it a Mustang for me (barely). B)

Quote:o Wow, you can point out typo's, Good for you give yourself a pat on the back(http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a255/footoflead/Smilies/devil.gif)

So it was just a "typo" when you said the Mustang was faster and handled better than the GTO.

Gotcha.

QuoteMTL you're very confrontational as of late. :lol:

Sorry, I just think there are plenty of good reason to prefer the Mustang (cheaper, arguably better looks, some better options, etc...) and there is no reason to just make stuff up about why you like a car.

Quote

QuoteMTL you're very confrontational as of late. :lol:

Sorry, I just think there are plenty of good reason to prefer the Mustang (cheaper, arguably better looks, some better options, etc...) and there is no reason to just make stuff up about why you like a car.

Yeah, I see where you're coming from.  :)  

QuoteAs tested and proven?

The '05 is basically a clean slate design (sure it's based on the LS/S type/Tbird, but still modified a bit).

The Holden Monaro's platform has been around, relatively unchanged since '97 at least. The LS series of V8 engines has been around for much longer too.

You're seriously think that?

Sure, the GTO's got a large aftermarket, but it won't change the fact that the Mustang is an enduring icon, and will be cheaper to modify.


Also, you can't shave 200 pounds off the goat without sacrificing daily-driveability.

Quote

QuoteAs tested and proven?

The '05 is basically a clean slate design (sure it's based on the LS/S type/Tbird, but still modified a bit).

The Holden Monaro's platform has been around, relatively unchanged since '97 at least. The LS series of V8 engines has been around for much longer too.

You're seriously think that?

Sure, the GTO's got a large aftermarket, but it won't change the fact that the Mustang is an enduring icon, and will be cheaper to modify.


Also, you can't shave 200 pounds off the goat without sacrificing daily-driveability.

Another good point B)  :praise:  

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.  

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.

No I'm sure you're right. I hear its front seat sucks and it lacks rear seat space as well.

I for one would take a Kia Rio over either of these cars.

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.

No I'm sure you're right. I hear its front seat sucks and it lacks rear seat space as well.

I for one would take a Kia Rio over either of these cars.

:o  :blink:  

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.

No I'm sure you're right. I hear its front seat sucks and it lacks rear seat space as well.

I for one would take a Kia Rio over either of these cars.

What sort of response could you expect from such a statement? An apology?

If you have a point, please present it. The class is waiting.  

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.

No I'm sure you're right. I hear its front seat sucks and it lacks rear seat space as well.

I for one would take a Kia Rio over either of these cars.

What sort of response could you expect from such a statement? An apology?

If you have a point, please present it. The class is waiting.

I don't know what you mean.

The Kia Rio offers more features at lower price and has more rear seat room than these cars.

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.

No I'm sure you're right. I hear its front seat sucks and it lacks rear seat space as well.

I for one would take a Kia Rio over either of these cars.

What sort of response could you expect from such a statement? An apology?

If you have a point, please present it. The class is waiting.

I don't know what you mean.

The Kia Rio offers more features at lower price and has more rear seat room than these cars.

What does practicality have to do with what I said?

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.

No I'm sure you're right. I hear its front seat sucks and it lacks rear seat space as well.

I for one would take a Kia Rio over either of these cars.

What sort of response could you expect from such a statement? An apology?

If you have a point, please present it. The class is waiting.

I don't know what you mean.

The Kia Rio offers more features at lower price and has more rear seat room than these cars.

LMAO. :lol:  

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote...the GTO doesn't handle all that well...

:rolleyes:

Are you saying that it does? It is not nimble (that's not everything, but for me it represents what I want anything but a track car) and there is nothing to like about the steering.

No I'm sure you're right. I hear its front seat sucks and it lacks rear seat space as well.

I for one would take a Kia Rio over either of these cars.

What sort of response could you expect from such a statement? An apology?

If you have a point, please present it. The class is waiting.

I don't know what you mean.

The Kia Rio offers more features at lower price and has more rear seat room than these cars.

How in the heck Does a kia have anything to do with this thread? :blink:  

It doesn't. But changing the subject is a good way to "win" a discussion if you don't have supporting facts,

QuoteIt doesn't. But changing the subject is a good way to "win" a discussion if you don't have supporting facts,

Good point.

Does this mean you cede the point that I did "win" though?  

(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

Quote(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

:lol:  

Quote

QuoteIt doesn't. But changing the subject is a good way to "win" a discussion if you don't have supporting facts,

Good point.

Does this mean you cede the point that I did "win" though?

ummm...No

Quote(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

Did I say better car? No, a better car for the money. Have you driven the 06 Rio, it's a surprisingly nice little subcompact.

And the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that. Prove me wrong.  

Quote

QuoteIt doesn't. But changing the subject is a good way to "win" a discussion if you don't have supporting facts,

Good point.

Does this mean you cede the point that I did "win" though?

Absolutely, you "won." "Congratulations".  :rockon:  

Quote

Quote(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

Did I say better car? No, a better car for the money. Have you driven the 06 Rio, it's a surprisingly nice little subcompact.

And the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that. Prove me wrong.

Me too :angry:  :angry: <---Determination!

Quote

Quote(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

Did I say better car? No, a better car for the money. Have you driven the 06 Rio, it's a surprisingly nice little subcompact.

And the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that. Prove me wrong.

Me too :angry:  :angry: <---Determination!

QuoteAnd the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that.

Gotcha.

I think "The Phantom" and Napoleon over on C&D would disagree with you. Former owners of an RSX and WS6 Trans Am respectively. Pardon me if their opinions are a little more valuable on the subject than yours. Not to mention Jeremy Clarkson...who isn't exactly known for liking cars that "handle poorly."

This isn't a subject that is "provable" though. You have your opinion and I am sure come hell or high water you will stick to it. Congrats.

To me its just one more reason not to take your reviews seriously.

Quote

Quote

Quote(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

Did I say better car? No, a better car for the money. Have you driven the 06 Rio, it's a surprisingly nice little subcompact.

And the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that. Prove me wrong.

Me too :angry:  :angry: <---Determination!

Right...coming from a guy that thinks the Mustang is both faster and handles better than the GTO...

At least Ifcar is in a grey area (he never really compared the GTO to another car...for all I know his standard for a "sporty coupe" is the Exige). You just make shit up as you go along.

Quote

QuoteAnd the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that.

Gotcha.

I think "The Phantom" and Napoleon over on C&D would disagree with you. Former owners of an RSX and WS6 Trans Am respectively. Pardon me if their opinions are a little more valuable on the subject than yours. Not to mention Jeremy Clarkson...who isn't exactly known for liking cars that "handle poorly."

This isn't a subject that is "provable" though. You have your opinion and I am sure come hell or high water you will stick to it. Congrats.

To me its just one more reason not to take your reviews seriously.

Changing the subject again. I don't care who disagrees, I'm interested in WHY. Care to post their reasoning, and why you agree with it?

Quote

Quote

QuoteAnd the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that.

Gotcha.

I think "The Phantom" and Napoleon over on C&D would disagree with you. Former owners of an RSX and WS6 Trans Am respectively. Pardon me if their opinions are a little more valuable on the subject than yours. Not to mention Jeremy Clarkson...who isn't exactly known for liking cars that "handle poorly."

This isn't a subject that is "provable" though. You have your opinion and I am sure come hell or high water you will stick to it. Congrats.

To me its just one more reason not to take your reviews seriously.

Changing the subject again. I don't care who disagrees, I'm interested in WHY. Care to post their reasoning, and why you agree with it?

There is no standard to prove you wrong Ifcar.

The GTO handles as well or better than most of its competition. If that isn't good enough for you...oh well I guess. I don't really care if you agree or not.

QuoteAt least Ifcar is in a grey area (he never really compared the GTO to another car...for all I know his standard for a "sporty coupe" is the Exige).

An excellent-handling sporty coupe would be the RX8 or 350Z. Very good would be something like a G35C. Decent would be Mustang or Crossfire.

Happy?

Quote

QuoteAt least Ifcar is in a grey area (he never really compared the GTO to another car...for all I know his standard for a "sporty coupe" is the Exige).

An excellent-handling sporty coupe would be the RX8 or 350Z. Very good would be something like a G35C. Decent would be Mustang or Crossfire.

Happy?

As a clam.

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteAnd the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that.

Gotcha.

I think "The Phantom" and Napoleon over on C&D would disagree with you. Former owners of an RSX and WS6 Trans Am respectively. Pardon me if their opinions are a little more valuable on the subject than yours. Not to mention Jeremy Clarkson...who isn't exactly known for liking cars that "handle poorly."

This isn't a subject that is "provable" though. You have your opinion and I am sure come hell or high water you will stick to it. Congrats.

To me its just one more reason not to take your reviews seriously.

Changing the subject again. I don't care who disagrees, I'm interested in WHY. Care to post their reasoning, and why you agree with it?

There is no standard to prove you wrong Ifcar.

The GTO handles as well or better than most of its competition. If that isn't good enough for you...oh well I guess. I don't really care if you agree or not.

In on-road driving, the GTO has slower responses. Maybe it's better on a track, but I couldn't care less about how it behaves there. Is that the crux of your argument, that handling under normal conditions only represents a small part of handling overall.  

Goodnight Ifcar! Sleep tight and don't let the bed bugs bite.  :praise:  

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

Did I say better car? No, a better car for the money. Have you driven the 06 Rio, it's a surprisingly nice little subcompact.

And the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that. Prove me wrong.

Me too :angry:  :angry: <---Determination!

Right...coming from a guy that thinks the Mustang is both faster and handles better than the GTO...

At least Ifcar is in a grey area (he never really compared the GTO to another car...for all I know his standard for a "sporty coupe" is the Exige). You just make shit up as you go along.

:rolleyes:  

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote(for everyone that isn't Ifcar, I am making fun of him because his opinion is about as useless as a...well...a Kia Rio. No point in trying to "prove" the GTO doesn't handle badly to someone that considers the Kia Rio a better car than the Civic or Cobalt)

Did I say better car? No, a better car for the money. Have you driven the 06 Rio, it's a surprisingly nice little subcompact.

And the GTO does not handle well for a sporty coupe. I stand by that. Prove me wrong.

Me too :angry:  :angry: <---Determination!

Right...coming from a guy that thinks the Mustang is both faster and handles better than the GTO...

At least Ifcar is in a grey area (he never really compared the GTO to another car...for all I know his standard for a "sporty coupe" is the Exige). You just make shit up as you go along.

:rolleyes:

It's true.  

QuoteYou just make shit up as you go along.

When did i make shit up, granted some of it was my opinion which is a little biased (Everyone's is) but when did it make "shit" up?

Feel free to PM me  

I want to point out that the only reason the GTO got a 7/10 on the transmission score was because the pedals are placed so that heel-toe shifts are impossibe, not that the 6 speed is an inferior tranny to the Mustang unit.

:ph34r:  

QuoteI want to point out that the only reason the GTO got a 7/10 on the transmission score was because the pedals are placed so that heel-toe shifts are impossibe, not that the 6 speed is an inferior tranny to the Mustang unit.

I sat in a GTO, and I thought the pedals where pretty close together, but I didn't really mess around with them at all.

Quote

QuoteYou just make shit up as you go along.

When did i make shit up, granted some of it was my opinion which is a little biased (Everyone's is) but when did it make "shit" up?

Feel free to PM me

No need for PM's, just go re-read my posts again. Its all in there.

QuoteI want to point out that the only reason the GTO got a 7/10 on the transmission score was because the pedals are placed so that heel-toe shifts are impossibe, not that the 6 speed is an inferior tranny to the Mustang unit.

The throws are longer and the engagement is also a bit mushier.

That being said everything is relative. The Mustang's transmission will never be as nice as say an RSX transmission simply because its got to be a heavier duty transmission to handle the V8.

QuoteI want to point out that the only reason the GTO got a 7/10 on the transmission score was because the pedals are placed so that heel-toe shifts are impossibe, not that the 6 speed is an inferior tranny to the Mustang unit.

It's much less precise than several other sporty coupes', but as MTL said, it needs to be heavier-duty to handle the extra engine you get over them.  

While I have not driven the new Mustang yet, I have now driven two GTOs, an LS1 6 speed and an LS2 4 speed, and while the steering isn't amazing and the brakes feel soft, I'd say the car handles fairly well, in my "professional" opinion.  

I'd have to say it's the better car, and even if I'm spending the money, I would actually probably get it, though without the hood scoops.  

Damn.  I'm too conflicted on this one.  

My decision was easy. They don't sell the GTO in Canada due to it not passing Canadian crash tests.

I briefly considered the Magnum RT, but since it didn't come in a manual, it was eliminated pretty quick.

QuoteWhile I have not driven the new Mustang yet, I have now driven two GTOs, an LS1 6 speed and an LS2 4 speed, and while the steering isn't amazing and the brakes feel soft, I'd say the car handles fairly well, in my "professional" opinion. 

I'd have to say it's the better car, and even if I'm spending the money, I would actually probably get it, though without the hood scoops. 

Damn.  I'm too conflicted on this one.

Are you kiddin? The scoops keep it from looking all too conservative.

QuoteI want to point out that the only reason the GTO got a 7/10 on the transmission score was because the pedals are placed so that heel-toe shifts are impossibe, not that the 6 speed is an inferior tranny to the Mustang unit.

Aftermarket pedals??  That's an easy fix, though the pedals might be large and cubmersome.

Quote

QuoteWhile I have not driven the new Mustang yet, I have now driven two GTOs, an LS1 6 speed and an LS2 4 speed, and while the steering isn't amazing and the brakes feel soft, I'd say the car handles fairly well, in my "professional" opinion. 

I'd have to say it's the better car, and even if I'm spending the money, I would actually probably get it, though without the hood scoops. 

Damn.  I'm too conflicted on this one.

Are you kiddin? The scoops keep it from looking all too conservative.

Quote

QuoteWhile I have not driven the new Mustang yet, I have now driven two GTOs, an LS1 6 speed and an LS2 4 speed, and while the steering isn't amazing and the brakes feel soft, I'd say the car handles fairly well, in my "professional" opinion. 

I'd have to say it's the better car, and even if I'm spending the money, I would actually probably get it, though without the hood scoops. 

Damn.  I'm too conflicted on this one.

Are you kiddin? The scoops keep it from looking all too conservative.

No, I'm not kidding.  The scoops are goofy and immature.  I know some of you have read my review of the GTO, and I've a hundred times over likened the GTO to a lost child that should be armed to fight the G35 and 330i.  But right now, it's awkwardly between those and the Mustang.  

The "too conservative" styling, as you call it, resulted in one of the best looking cars of this century.  Maybe because it was designed last century.  

Damn, I think that's the first time I've have seen a big fight here on CarSPIN.   :o

Tough call, because I'm into old Pontiacs, and I like that they're finally going back in that direction.  
Right now I'm going to go Mustang, though.  I know it sounds cliche, but it's a national icon and the car I grew up with.  

Quote

QuoteI want to point out that the only reason the GTO got a 7/10 on the transmission score was because the pedals are placed so that heel-toe shifts are impossibe, not that the 6 speed is an inferior tranny to the Mustang unit.

Aftermarket pedals??  That's an easy fix, though the pedals might be large and cubmersome.

The pedals in the mustang are nothing to write home about either, though. They are a 200% improvement over the last generation, but the pedals in my 93 sunbird are set up better, IMO.

mtl_A4, if you are going to argue then argue. Don't change the subject and don't just list names of people who like the car's handling, tell us why you think it handles better. Ifcar has done that, you haven't. So, in my mind, that puts Ifcar at the top of the podium.

Moving on, most definitely the Mustang. The GTO just looks too bland for me, if I spend 30k on a car I want it to stand out and the GTO definitely doesn't do that. The transmission complaints are also a big concern for me and I am one of the few that actually prefers the Mustangs interior. The cheaper price and more durable rear suspension just seal the deal.

Quotemtl_A4, if you are going to argue then argue. Don't change the subject and don't just list names of people who like the car's handling, tell us why you think it handles better. Ifcar has done that, you haven't. So, in my mind, that puts Ifcar at the top of the podium.

It doesn't matter what you think, Ifcar ceded me the victory due to my superiory strategy, facts or no. Therefore I am the champion!!!!

Quote

Quotemtl_A4, if you are going to argue then argue. Don't change the subject and don't just list names of people who like the car's handling, tell us why you think it handles better. Ifcar has done that, you haven't. So, in my mind, that puts Ifcar at the top of the podium.

It doesn't matter what you think, Ifcar ceded me the victory due to my superiory strategy, facts or no. Therefore I am the champion!!!!

:lol:

To be fair, I've always thought the general consensus was that the GTO was the better handler overall by a smidgen, although I'll admit that while I've driven a Mustang I've never driven a GTO so I couldn't say for myself.  Frankly though, eitheway if you love what you drive, it really doesn't make all that much of a difference on the road in my personal opinion.

Quote

Quotemtl_A4, if you are going to argue then argue. Don't change the subject and don't just list names of people who like the car's handling, tell us why you think it handles better. Ifcar has done that, you haven't. So, in my mind, that puts Ifcar at the top of the podium.

It doesn't matter what you think, Ifcar ceded me the victory due to my superiory strategy, facts or no. Therefore I am the IDIOT!!!

:rolleyes:

Thats better :D

Quote

Quote

Quotemtl_A4, if you are going to argue then argue. Don't change the subject and don't just list names of people who like the car's handling, tell us why you think it handles better. Ifcar has done that, you haven't. So, in my mind, that puts Ifcar at the top of the podium.

It doesn't matter what you think, Ifcar ceded me the victory due to my superiory strategy, facts or no. Therefore I am the IDOIT!!!

:rolleyes:

Thats better :D

Wow good one.

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quotemtl_A4, if you are going to argue then argue. Don't change the subject and don't just list names of people who like the car's handling, tell us why you think it handles better. Ifcar has done that, you haven't. So, in my mind, that puts Ifcar at the top of the podium.

It doesn't matter what you think, Ifcar ceded me the victory due to my superiory strategy, facts or no. Therefore I am the IDIOT!!!

:rolleyes:

Thats better :D

Wow good one.

I know  :praise:

Quote

Quote

Quotemtl_A4, if you are going to argue then argue. Don't change the subject and don't just list names of people who like the car's handling, tell us why you think it handles better. Ifcar has done that, you haven't. So, in my mind, that puts Ifcar at the top of the podium.

It doesn't matter what you think, Ifcar ceded me the victory due to my superiory strategy, facts or no. Therefore I am the champion!!!!

:lol:

To be fair, I've always thought the general consensus was that the GTO was the better handler overall by a smidgen, although I'll admit that while I've driven a Mustang I've never driven a GTO so I couldn't say for myself.  Frankly though, eitheway if you love what you drive, it really doesn't make all that much of a difference on the road in my personal opinion.

That is also the impression I have received, but there is no reason to bash someone for an opinion that is back with personal experience just because it differs from the general thought.

What's an idoit?

:D  

QuoteWhat's an idoit?

:D

Typo :rolleyes:  

Quote

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o

Robots don't need expensive cars. It's illogical. :lol:

I prefer the GTO. It has LS2 power, a 6 speed, and it's roomy inside. Not to mention the interior is much better. The Mustang's interior is too choppy (doesn't flow) and it looks like crap w/o all the aluminum.

The Mustang just doesn't look right to me. The long rear over hang, high beltline, and flat nose just do not look good. I'd rather have the smoother and more contemporary styling of the GTO.

Quote

Quote

QuoteI'd never spend that much anyway. I can't see ever going over $10k not counting inflation, and probably won't go past $7K.

In your whole lifetime??? :o

Robots don't need expensive cars. It's illogical. :lol:

*in computerized voice*

EXPENSIVE VEHICLE----DOES NOT COMPUTE.

MUST SEEK OUT BASIC TRANSPORTATION----

TARGET ACQUIRED:

(http://www.edmunds.com/media/reviews/generations/minivans/96-00.dodge.caravan.500.jpg)

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

No, IFCAR would never purchase such a spiffy vehicle such as the one pictured, it is more like this one:
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/0/02/200px-OldDodgeCaravan-non.jpg)
:lol:

QuoteNo, IFCAR would never purchase such a spiffy vehicle such as the one pictured, it is more like this one:
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/0/02/200px-OldDodgeCaravan-non.jpg)
:lol:

:lol:  He does have the 96-00 gen though, I believe. And the van I posted actually does look pretty sharp doesn't it?

Indeed, though it is hardly like the one you pictured which is a top of the line Sport model.

Quote

QuoteNo, IFCAR would never purchase such a spiffy vehicle such as the one pictured, it is more like this one:
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/0/02/200px-OldDodgeCaravan-non.jpg)
:lol:

:lol:  He does have the 96-00 gen though, I believe. And the van I posted actually does look pretty sharp doesn't it?

As far as mini vans goes it looks sharp <_<  :D  

QuoteIndeed, though it is hardly like the one you pictured which is a top of the line Sport model.

I googled Dodge Caravan, I wasn't about to search through the pages for a used-looking one.  :P  

Quote

Quote

QuoteNo, IFCAR would never purchase such a spiffy vehicle such as the one pictured, it is more like this one:
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/0/02/200px-OldDodgeCaravan-non.jpg)
:lol:

:lol:  He does have the 96-00 gen though, I believe. And the van I posted actually does look pretty sharp doesn't it?

As far as mini vans go it looks sharp <_<  :D

Of course I'm just referring to minivans.  ;)  

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteNo, IFCAR would never purchase such a spiffy vehicle such as the one pictured, it is more like this one:
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/0/02/200px-OldDodgeCaravan-non.jpg)
:lol:

:lol:  He does have the 96-00 gen though, I believe. And the van I posted actually does look pretty sharp doesn't it?

As far as mini vans go it looks sharp <_<  :D

Of course I'm just referring to minivans.  ;)

What i was saying is that minivans arent that good looking compared to ANYTHING imo....

I always thought that the red 00-gen Grand Caravan Sport was the most attractive minivan ever produced, actually. But mine is a teal-green 96 SWB base model.
(http://img319.imageshack.us/img319/6633/p10100246bn.jpg)

I do agree with you there, though the high level T&Cs of that era also look pretty nice.

Too tacky, IMO.  

I like this one the best:
http://www.autoseekandsell.com/userimages/dodge.jpg (http://www.autoseekandsell.com/userimages/dodge.jpg)

A link is probably better considering the size of that picture. If you can find a smaller one though, you can post it.  

QuoteA link is probably better considering the size of that picture. If you can find a smaller one though, you can post it.

Thanks iffy. The pic looks a lot smaller in that window that you linked for me... :blink:  

Quote

QuoteA link is probably better considering the size of that picture. If you can find a smaller one though, you can post it.

Thanks iffy. The pic looks a lot smaller in that window that you linked for me... :blink:

Do you have Firefox?

Quote

Quote

QuoteA link is probably better considering the size of that picture. If you can find a smaller one though, you can post it.

Thanks iffy. The pic looks a lot smaller in that window that you linked for me... :blink:

Do you have Firefox?

yeah but it's not working for me, so i'm using IE.

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteA link is probably better considering the size of that picture. If you can find a smaller one though, you can post it.

Thanks iffy. The pic looks a lot smaller in that window that you linked for me... :blink:

Do you have Firefox?

yeah but it's not working for me, so i'm using IE.

I don't know about IE, but Firefox automatically zooms out of pics if you view them at their URLs, and clicking them shows them at actual size.  

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

QuoteA link is probably better considering the size of that picture. If you can find a smaller one though, you can post it.

Thanks iffy. The pic looks a lot smaller in that window that you linked for me... :blink:

Do you have Firefox?

yeah but it's not working for me, so i'm using IE.

I don't know about IE, but Firefox automatically zooms out of pics if you view them at their URLs, and clicking them shows them at actual size.

I see. I guess IE makes teh pic smaller so you can see it better but if you post it, it's in its original size.

There are minivans that look different from each other now?

QuoteThere are minivans that look different from each other now?

:lol: