Poll
Question:
What would you choose
Option 1: 2015 Mustang GT
votes: 4
Option 2: 2015 M4
votes: 5
2015 Mustang GT: $32K starting price, over 420HP and 390lb ft from NA V8, IRS, probably a ~3600lb curb weight
(http://www.car-revs-daily.com/file/2013/12/2015-Ford-Mustang-GT-in-Silver-32.jpg)
2015 M4: $64K starting price, 425HP and 406lb ft from I6TT, optional DCT, 3530-3580 curb weight
(http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/i1GzjmVgdHa5xuB.jpg)
I would go with the Mustang.... I DD a 350Z so clearly interior quality is a non issue for me. Usable back seats would seal the deal. I'd get it with the sport package, LSD and maybe HIDs as well (though Ford's D3S headlights generally suck compared to the best D2S offerings)
Considering how close the two were in the last generation track test, I'd really like to see these two go at it. I'm not really liking the looks of the 4 series and while I don't love the new Mustang either, I think it would be my choice.
Though I'd rather have a last gen Mustang GT over both.
I like and have a lot of respect for the last gen GT. Easily the best Mustang of all time and maybe one of the most important as well. But you know how weird I am about certain things. For all its girth and presence, its back seat is unexcusably small. Also the weird stance and high wheel gap looks like it is a testing mule. The new one looks like it will have a better back seat... which isn't make or break but still kind of important for an only car.... and its stance is pretty much perfect. Plus after 2 rear beam suspension Maximas I just don't like live axles. If none of that shit bothers you then the '14 is a hell of a deal. I just couldn't do it. I have been waiting for an IRS Mustang for a long time since they dumped the old IRS Cobra/.
2015 GT is very likely to be my next new car. I honestly would've probably been happy with another V6 if Ford hadn't hobbled it so badly, both in performance options and content/ammenities options, for 2015 to make the EcoBoost more appealing. I'll be keeping my eyes peeled this fall for when they start showing up in dealer lots to get a test drive. Kind of afraid it will be way too much for auto-x, though. The V6 is really a nice level of power. Enough to break the back end loose if you want to but not so much that you're always tip-toeing to keep things pointed in the direction you want (except in the wet, then it can be a little bit of a handful).
Can't say I was a fan of the previous Mustang at all. I'm hoping this one will be a big departure from the last gen, but I'm not banking on it.
I've heard good things about the svt models. Unfortunately, the group is too expensive to even entertain anymore.
I don't think I could ever buy a mustang.
I just don't find 2+2s of this size appealing. I would rather just make up my mind whether I want a usable back seat or not, and depending on that decision, M3 or C7 over either of these. Tilting your front seat forward to let someone in to your shitty back seat is acceptable for high school students.
How often do you guys find yourselves using your back seats? No swipes, honest question. I wouldn't miss one at all if the Z had a decent sized trunk. That's my only gripe. If I could stuff some ~5' 8"- 6' friends in the back for half an hour or so I would be fine. From what I remember of the current Mustang it's not possible.
not possible with the BRZ either. It's just a small shelf I can throw things on. Just depends on the car. E92 3-series had sort of usable back seats.
Kinda of a weird comparo. But Camaro ZL1 by a country mile.
All of these cars are too big and heavy for me.
Fiesta ST for me
Alpha Camaro
I'd have to go with Mustang/Camaro on price alone.
Quote from: MrH on May 24, 2014, 11:29:38 AM
not possible with the BRZ either. It's just a small shelf I can throw things on. Just depends on the car. E92 3-series had sort of usable back seats.
I think the BRZ is smaller than my car, which is bizarre. Not the 370Z though.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 24, 2014, 02:28:04 PM
I think the BRZ is smaller than my car, which is bizarre. Not the 370Z though.
I'd bet it's smaller than a 370 also. Looks tiny compared to a Mustang. I park next to my coworkers '13 gt every day.
M3 over both. If I'm going to compromise I'd rather go all in and get the sedan.
This cycle though I'm going to be tempted elsewhere.
I like the C7 a lot and here it's a lot less. Also, the Cayman GTS is lovely and about the same price as the M3.
I respect the Mustang a lot but I don't see myself in one. Great car.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on May 24, 2014, 02:46:02 PM
M3 over both. If I'm going to compromise I'd rather go all in and get the sedan.
This cycle though I'm going to be tempted elsewhere.
I like the C7 a lot and here it's a lot less. Also, the Cayman GTS is lovely and about the same price as the M3.
I respect the Mustang a lot but I don't see myself in one. Great car.
Which of your cars would you replace with the C7/GTS? I think either would definitely round out your lineup.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 24, 2014, 03:41:51 PM
Which of your cars would you replace with the C7/GTS? I think either would definitely round out your lineup.
It's a bit of a dilemma. Those make more sense as 1M replacements. Objectively either is a better performer but the 1M is crazy fun and isn't depreciating much. The rarity/cult factor on it is also nice.
The M3 is older but has been rock solid and makes a better complement to those two because practicality.
If getting the C7 or GTS, something like a 528i would be an ideal complement. But financially that's not possible in a single move. Too much of a hit.
Oooooooooooooooo didn't realize you got rid of the E46. Yea, pretty much a choice between holding on to an investment vs having a full on sports car. If it's any consolation, Caymans actually hold their value well. The 07 Ss refuse to go below 30K up here. I would bet the GTS will hover around the mid 40s forever.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 24, 2014, 02:28:04 PM
I think the BRZ is smaller than my car, which is bizarre. Not the 370Z though.
I looked it up actually, because I was wondering too:
Same length. BRZ is 2" shorter, and 3" wider
The mustang as a package is very appealing. The switch to IRS makes it very tempting now.
Agree with Sporty. I don't think Boxster/Cayman GTS prices are going to drop past what he said.
Also you've got nice weather, why not go Boxster GTS?
I'm interested to see what handling gains were actually made by finally switching to IRS
Quote from: hotrodalex on May 24, 2014, 04:59:45 PM
I'm interested to see what handling gains were actually made by finally switching to IRS
I'm going to bet very little by standard skidpad, or slalom numbers. But, that on real roads that aren't billiard table smooth it will have better manners all around.
Quote from: MrH on May 24, 2014, 04:41:30 PM
I looked it up actually, because I was wondering too:
Same length. BRZ is 2" shorter, and 3" wider
Interesting. Track widths are similar, but the BRZ has a smaller wheelbase. The FR-S I drove handled a lot better than my car for sure. Just didn't like the engine.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 24, 2014, 11:27:44 AM
How often do you guys find yourselves using your back seats? No swipes, honest question. I wouldn't miss one at all if the Z had a decent sized trunk. That's my only gripe. If I could stuff some ~5' 8"- 6' friends in the back for half an hour or so I would be fine. From what I remember of the current Mustang it's not possible.
I do periodically carry 2 passengers in the Mustang, though seldom someone more than 5'8" in the back and I don't think I've ever had 4 people in there (though I have had 3 adults and a small dog in there for an hour+ trip). It's not completely unusable (certainly roomier than the Frizbee twins). Getting into and out of the back seat is pretty tight, but once you're back there it's not as bad as you'd think.
And the trunk is big enough that I seldom need to rely on the back seat for cargo carrying capacity. In fact, I can fit my mountain bike in the trunk without dropping the seats, assuming I remove the front wheel.
I have to see the 2015 Mustang in person before I can say if I even like the styling or not. I'm not digging the new car at all from the A pillars forward. A pillars rearward is awesome though. I would rather go 2013 Boss 302, but between these two I would go Mustang based on price only.
Quote from: SVT666 on May 25, 2014, 02:11:56 PM
I have to see the 2015 Mustang in person before I can say if I even like the styling or not. I'm not digging the new car at all from the A pillars forward. A pillars rearward is awesome though. I would rather go 2013 Boss 302, but between these two I would go Mustang based on price only.
I hated it in pictures, but it looks alot sleeker IRL. As much as it pains me to say it I really like it in metallic colors.
Did it end up being smaller than the previous gen?
Quote from: Rupert on May 25, 2014, 02:34:41 PM
Did it end up being smaller than the previous gen?
After the a pillar IMO yes. It looks lower and wider.
This is one of the best comparisons I've seen in pictures.
(http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/images/89259/photo201_1_large.jpg)
and colors like silver make it look smaller still IMO. (I've seen it in black/white/yellow/red/silver/gray/blue)
(http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq164/1MZ-FZE/20140219_205825_zpstadhfnyw.jpg)
Hmmm same size pretty much.
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3139&d=1387165916)
Seeing them side by side really makes the current one look dated.
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3076&d=1387077380)
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3077&d=1387077380)
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3085&d=1387137767)
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3086&d=1387139194)
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3087&d=1387140610)
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3081&d=1387080117)
Not crazy about the interior design but the materials look much better.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 24, 2014, 11:27:44 AM
How often do you guys find yourselves using your back seats?
Fairly often. Often enough that for weekend trips etc I usually have to take the 4runner, it would be nice to take the fun car.
It's not just amount of use though IMO, I just don't have that much interest in two doors that are as big as a four door. If I don't need rear seats I'd rather something like a C7, and in fact the C6 worked just fine as my dd for years.
When I got my car, I didn't think I'd use back seats at all. I use them enough for me to sometimes wish I got the 4-door GTI, even though I think it looks stupid.
Mustang is still a huge car.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 25, 2014, 02:48:31 PM
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3077&d=1387077380)
That is a huge ass.
It looks huge, but it's not. The reason it looks so big is that the trunk lid is actually 3" lower than the current car's.
And the rear is a good bit wider.
IMO, the problem with the Musmaro is the size.
Yep, it's a huge ass.
Yeah, it's just too big.
Quote from: 68_427 on May 25, 2014, 02:37:25 PM
After the a pillar IMO yes. It looks lower and wider.
This is one of the best comparisons I've seen in pictures.
(http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/images/89259/photo201_1_large.jpg)
and colors like silver make it look smaller still IMO. (I've seen it in black/white/yellow/red/silver/gray/blue)
(http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq164/1MZ-FZE/20140219_205825_zpstadhfnyw.jpg)
The last gen looks so much better.
Other than that fat booty, I like the new one better.
Ultimately though, the Mustang will always be a pony car. It's about big power for cheap. It's always going to be big, and handling and driving dynamics will come second.
Even though the last one put up good numbers, I didn't enjoy driving it much at all.
Quote from: Raza on May 26, 2014, 11:02:48 AM
The last gen looks so much better.
The last one looks like something out of the 90s. And I am not talking, 300ZX, FD3S RX-7, C4 Corvette 90s. I'm talking, PT Cruiser, New Beetle, 97 Malibu 90s. Great car, decent nose, but the b-pillar/rear window is horrible, as is the wheelwell gap/wheel fitment. Just looks unfinished.
A-Pillar forward...current car. A-pillar rearward...2015.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 26, 2014, 01:02:25 PM
The last one looks like something out of the 90s. And I am not talking, 300ZX, FD3S RX-7, C4 Corvette 90s. I'm talking, PT Cruiser, New Beetle, 97 Malibu 90s. Great car, decent nose, but the b-pillar/rear window is horrible, as is the wheelwell gap/wheel fitment. Just looks unfinished.
You've got to be kidding.
Quote from: SVT666 on May 26, 2014, 01:24:57 PM
A-Pillar forward...current car. A-pillar rearward...2015.
I can get behind that.
Quote from: GoCougs on May 25, 2014, 06:05:32 PM
That is a huge ass.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 25, 2014, 02:48:31 PM
Seeing them side by side really makes the current one look dated.
(http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3077&d=1387077380)
The huge ass stance of the '15 is more reminiscent of the '60s models. That they got it so perfect back then makes it hard to improve on. However, I do like the new '15 Mustang more than the previous version.
(http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/wallpaper/1102_1969_ford_mustang_boss_429_wallpaper/30417041%2Bw1600%2Bh1200%2Bst0/1969-ford-mustang-boss-429-rear-view-in-motion-wallpaper.jpg)
I like the '15 a lot better than the current model.
But I am with Lebowski re: doors and seats. I made the mistake of getting a 2-door GTI and I regretted it. If a car is going to have back seats you may as well have the doors to use them.
Although I guess Ford doesn't make a 2 seat sports car, so in that case I guess the Mustang is the only choice for "Ford guys."
Quote from: FoMoJo on May 26, 2014, 08:04:06 PM
The huge ass stance of the '15 is more reminiscent of the '60s models. That they got it so perfect back then makes it hard to improve on. However, I do like the new '15 Mustang more than the previous version.
(http://image.motortrend.com/f/classic/wallpaper/1102_1969_ford_mustang_boss_429_wallpaper/30417041%2Bw1600%2Bh1200%2Bst0/1969-ford-mustang-boss-429-rear-view-in-motion-wallpaper.jpg)
That is one great ass.
Quote from: hotrodalex on May 26, 2014, 11:03:40 AM
Other than that fat booty, I like the new one better.
I think I like it better too but it's a a little (WAY) too late to the tank turret styling craze a la Camaro and Challenger.
Since we've been talking sizes:
(http://i.imgur.com/fwYw7DD.jpg)
Granted, my BRZ is lowered and the Mustang isn't, but it's substantially bigger. The difference is even more pronounced when you look at the front and compare height of the hoods.
Im amazed the BRZ not only does well in modern crash tests but does better than the Mustang
Kind of throws that whole "high shoulder line" thing out the window. The thing has the stance of a 1996 Honda Integra.
O also its time to change your sig dude, I had no idea you upgraded the suspension/wheels.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 27, 2014, 06:51:27 PM
Im amazed the BRZ not only does well in modern crash tests but does better than the Mustang
Kind of throws that whole "high shoulder line" thing out the window. The thing has the stance of a 1996 Honda Integra.
The FRS/BRZ's superior rating is because it has a side curtain airbag for the rear seat passengers that the Mustang doesn't have.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 27, 2014, 06:51:27 PM
O also its time to change your sig dude, I had no idea you upgraded the suspension/wheels.
You gotta stay up to date on the BRZ thread man. 17x9 RPF1's on pilot super sports now. Bilstein PSS10s. That's about it in terms of mods right now. I've got a few more things coming this week though. Once they're on and I get a chance to detail it, I'll try and get a few new pictures.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 27, 2014, 06:51:27 PM
Im amazed the BRZ not only does well in modern crash tests but does better than the Mustang
Kind of throws that whole "high shoulder line" thing out the window. The thing has the stance of a 1996 Honda Integra.
O also its time to change your sig dude, I had no idea you upgraded the suspension/wheels.
That motor is also low as fuck, and the BRZ is very tight inside.
Can't compare the two anyway. Completely different cars.
Maybe the new 'stang is a bit of a porker after all?
http://jalopnik.com/the-2015-ford-mustang-might-have-just-gained-a-whole-fa-1584241975 (http://jalopnik.com/the-2015-ford-mustang-might-have-just-gained-a-whole-fa-1584241975)
For the non GT500 I'd be surprised at 200-300 lbs. It's definitely gonna gain weight - derivative of the S197 chassis, no weight saving techniques mentioned, bigger wheels/tires, bigger brakes, a proper rear suspension, ~2" wider in the rear - but my guess would've been ~150 lbs (or, basically the Camaro).
Quote from: GoCougs on June 01, 2014, 09:58:04 PM
For the non GT500 I'd be surprised at 200-300 lbs. It's definitely gonna gain weight - derivative of the S197 chassis, no weight saving techniques mentioned, bigger wheels/tires, bigger brakes, a proper rear suspension, ~2" wider in the rear - but my guess would've been ~150 lbs (or, basically the Camaro).
Everything I've read and seen indicates this car only shares powertrains with S197.
As aluminum crazy as Ford is going on the F150, it seems like the Mustang might eventually get lighter through that same avenue.
It is definitely a derivative of the S-197, but that doesn't mean it isn't vasty different (fox vs sn95).
The fenders are aluminum for weight savings so Ford is trying here.
I doubt the fusion based IRS is much if any heavier than the stick axle, but all the extra air bags and other nonsense will weigh more.
No way the 2015 with the light coyote engine weighs as much as a gt500 with the giant 5.8 with blower/intercooler/huge brakes.
Quote from: MX793 on June 01, 2014, 11:06:52 PM
Everything I've read and seen indicates this car only shares powertrains with S197.
The wheelbase being within like .1" if not identical says otherwise.....
Lot of idiots on Jalop are saying the IRS is where the 200-300lb weight gain came from :banghead: :facepalm:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 02, 2014, 06:56:53 AM
The wheelbase being within like .1" if not identical says otherwise.....
Lot of idiots on Jalop are saying the IRS is where the 200-300lb weight gain came from :banghead: :facepalm:
Well, it can be heavier. Between CV joints and suspension components. What's the suspension arrangement like in the rear now?
Quote from: MrH on June 02, 2014, 07:58:17 AM
What's the suspension arrangement like in the rear now?
Horse carriage suspension.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on June 02, 2014, 08:09:02 AM
Horse carriage suspension.
Wonderful.
People just don't appreciate floating axles on full elliptic leaf springs these days
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 02, 2014, 06:56:53 AM
The wheelbase being within like .1" if not identical says otherwise.....
Lot of idiots on Jalop are saying the IRS is where the 200-300lb weight gain came from :banghead: :facepalm:
The current car's wheelbase is within a fraction of an inch of the 1960s era car. I guess S197 is derived from the first gen's platform...
IIRC, they completely redesigned the floorpan and the front suspension is significantly different as well.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on June 02, 2014, 08:09:02 AM
Horse carriage suspension.
Sounds about right for a Mustang :lol:
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on June 01, 2014, 08:14:24 PM
Maybe the new 'stang is a bit of a porker after all?
http://jalopnik.com/the-2015-ford-mustang-might-have-just-gained-a-whole-fa-1584241975 (http://jalopnik.com/the-2015-ford-mustang-might-have-just-gained-a-whole-fa-1584241975)
That weight figure came from someone at Steeda, who later clarified on one of the Mustang forums that the number was an estimate on his (or Steeda's) part based past experience with IRS Mustangs (which were of course heavier because they were adapted to IRS via bolt-in conversion rather than being optimized for it) and general industry trends.