It certainly is one of the better looking cars on the road as well, IMO.

The V6 PP looks like it'll be a winner when it comes out.  I wonder how well it will compete with the 370Z

Quote from: Xer0 on December 30, 2009, 11:00:37 AM
The V6 PP looks like it'll be a winner when it comes out.  I wonder how well it will compete with the 370Z

The Z will likely trounce it (the current GT can't keep pace with the Z, and it's got more power and a fatter torque curve than the 3.7L V6), but it should certainly give the Genesis coupe a run for its money, not to mention the V6 Camaro.  That is, assuming they don't jack the price up to current Mustang GT prices.

Quote from: HEMI666 on December 30, 2009, 10:32:17 AM
Me too, but I also wish a Honda Odyssey EX-L didn't cost as much as a GT500.  You're comparing two different cars that have two different body styles, and have different levels of refinement and interior appointments.  You simply can't compare the two on price tags.  I'm sure you're okay with the price tag of the ZR1 despite the fact that the Porsche 911 is better in every possible way but outright speed.  Fact is, the GT500 is the cheapest way to get into a very fast, very high performing car with over 500 hp on tap.  Who can argue?

Sure you can (actually MUST) compare the two - you don't like it because it doesn't work out too well for your world view.

Quote from: MX793 on December 30, 2009, 11:02:55 AM
The Z will likely trounce it (the current GT can't keep pace with the Z, and it's got more power and a fatter torque curve than the 3.7L V6), but it should certainly give the Genesis coupe a run for its money, not to mention the V6 Camaro.  That is, assuming they don't jack the price up to current Mustang GT prices.

They won't.  They can't.  It would be automotive suicide.

Quote from: HEMI666 on December 30, 2009, 11:19:46 AM
They won't.  They can't.  It would be automotive suicide.

Well, bear in mind that right now, in the US at least, a Mustang V6 Premium costs $100 more than a Genesis V6GT with similar equipment and about the same as an LT2 Camaro.  Even stepping down a level, the base Genesis V6 has comparable equipment to a Mustang V6 Premium with no added options and is only a few hundred dollars more ($400).  Assuming they don't touch base prices to reflect the pricier powertrain (unlikely), I'm guessing the performance package will cost at least a grand, if not $1500.  That will result in the Mustang being a good chunk of change more expensive than the Hyundai or Camaro.

The 370Z flat out moves; it'd give a Camaro SS a real run for its money let alone stand over the Mustang GT - the last test I saw showed 0-60 in 4.7 sec and the 1/4 mile in 13.1 sec.

Quote from: Nethead on December 30, 2009, 12:59:23 PM
A 370Z has nothing whatsoever to fear from a Camaro SS, other than being hit by an out-of-control SS on a corner somewhere.  But then again, one is a two-passenger sportscar and the other is a four-passenger laughingstock, so different design parameters astonishingly produce different vehicles yet again.   Evidently, different quality control parameters apply as well...

Who woulda thunk?

The 370Z is a GT car, the Camaro is a muscle, or "Pony" car. The Camaro never pretended to be a sportscar, yet it is far from being a laughingstock. And sure, the GT500 has a Ford warranty, but the real laugh is a $50,000 Mustang that weighs 4000 lbs and placed dead last in a recent magazine performance test. Why don't you try and learn about other cars instead of being such a Mustang troll?

They both fit firmly in the definition of a GT car.

And I'd take the Camaro over the 370Z coupe without a second thought.

Quote from: Nethead on December 30, 2009, 01:16:01 PM
Did you miss the Ten Best Driver's Cars competition where the GT500 finished fifth overall and the Camaro SS finished tenth overall?  The ZR1 finished sixth or seventh, and even a Jaguar finished ahead of the Camaro SS--the ultimate putdown of anything on four wheels.

Or do we ignore that since it ain't what we want to hear?

I was referring to the Laguna Seca test where Randy Pobst took each car out and rated them. I can't find a link to the article, and I have not seen the one you refer to. The GT500 a better driver's car than the ZR1? Who did that test... Consumer Reports?

Quote from: Nethead on December 30, 2009, 01:16:01 PM
Did you miss the Ten Best Driver's Cars competition where the GT500 finished fifth overall and the Camaro SS finished tenth overall?  The ZR1 finished sixth or seventh, and even a Jaguar finished ahead of the Camaro SS--the ultimate putdown of anything on four wheels.

Or do we ignore that since it ain't what we want to hear?

I have an aside I'd like to admit to:

Every time I stop at that little roadside diner/gas station right off the turnpike in Beaver Falls (which is just about every time I make my way back to school), I imagine some eccentric will roll up in a Windstar with custom wheels and racing stripes on it. Out will walk four identically dressed people -- Netdude, Wifedude, and two kiddudes -- all in Ford duds and sunglasses, even in the dead of night.

You're the sort of person who I imagine would drive this.

My bad. It was the previous year's test (2008), and it was a GT500KR.

Pobst loved his laps in the Ford Shelby GT500KR (10th place), exiting the car while whooping and hollering as if he'd just won the Daytona 500. "Man! That was fun!" he crowed. Yet after the adrenaline rush had subsided, Pobst admitted that, while the KR was a gas to hurl around Laguna Seca's curves, in terms of sheer handling performance it left much to be desired -- a view confirmed by our instrumented tests and on-road drives. The Shelby finished 9th in our lane-change runs, 6th in step-steer reaction time, and next to last in ride quality. One look at the KR's computer tracing in our figure-eight test sums up its overall handling flavor: messy. The Shelby team has massaged the old live-axle Mustang chassis well enough to bring out the boy racer even in a racing pro, but in this sophisticated field the GT500KR comes off as decidedly old-school.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0810_americas_best_handling_car_conclusion/index.html#ixzz0bCxv0qJF

Quote from: Vinsanity on December 30, 2009, 08:24:16 AM
No, I just wish it didn't cost as much as a Corvette

http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=92782&acode=USB90FOC211A0&restore=false

http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=92782&acode=USB90CHC062A0&restore=false

+1,000,000! That it can't outrun with it over 100hp more! But we've beat this horse to death!

[

Quote from: Nethead on December 30, 2009, 12:59:23 PM
A 370Z Corvette has nothing whatsoever to fear from a Camaro SS GT500, other than being hit by an out-of-control SS GT500 on a corner somewhere.  But then again, one is a two-passenger sportscar and the other is a four-passenger laughingstock, so different design parameters astonishingly produce different vehicles yet again.   Evidently, different quality control parameters apply as well...

Who woulda thunk?

Quote from: MX793 on December 30, 2009, 11:02:55 AM
The Z will likely trounce it (the current GT can't keep pace with the Z, and it's got more power and a fatter torque curve than the 3.7L V6), but it should certainly give the Genesis coupe a run for its money, not to mention the V6 Camaro.  That is, assuming they don't jack the price up to current Mustang GT prices.

Yeah, you're probably right.  But it should prove a killer for the V6 Gen and V6 Camaro.  

Just read a PDF that the M/T weight will be 3,600 (est.)

Can't wait to see the real weight

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2011_Mustang_GT_Specs.pdf

Quote from: HotRodPilot on December 30, 2009, 03:45:55 PM
Just read a PDF that the M/T weight will be 3,600 (est.)

Can't wait to see the real weight

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2011_Mustang_GT_Specs.pdf

I expect that one is very close. Ford was claiming 8.7 lb/hp so that seems to jive.

How much does the current GT weigh?

Quote from: the Teuton on December 30, 2009, 04:31:04 PM
How much does the current GT weigh?

About 53,000 ounces.

Quote from: gotta-qik-z28 on December 30, 2009, 03:29:22 PM
+1,000,000! That it can't outrun with it over 100hp more! But we've beat this horse to death!

Who cares about 100 more horsepower when it's a heavy pig?

well to do more power the proper way means heavier axles, driveshafts, clutch, suspension and chassis components... its the price you gotta pay when the "omfg i needz at least 400 horse powers to make my car go up the hill" crowd comes out

Quote from: MX793 on December 30, 2009, 05:00:41 PM
Who cares about 100 more horsepower when it's a heavy pig?

   

Quote from: gotta-qik-z28 on December 30, 2009, 05:52:58 PM
     

Did you not just see the PDF on the previous page?  The GT will weigh 3600 lbs and have 412 hp.  The Camaro is toast.

Uh, the GT500 with 225 more hp can nip the Camaro only by a 0.10 sec in both 0-60 and the 1/4 mile, and its running 285 meats in the rear...

Quote from: GoCougs on December 31, 2009, 03:10:38 AM
Uh, the GT500 with 225 more hp can nip the Camaro only by a 0.10 sec in both 0-60 and the 1/4 mile, and its running 285 meats in the rear...

Wait, which Camaro, the SS? No way the RS hangs ten with a GT500... and I'm pretty sure the SS is only about 120 HP short of the GT500, and lighter as well

Quote from: HEMI666 on December 31, 2009, 02:47:53 AM
Did you not just see the PDF on the previous page?  The GT will weigh 3600 lbs and have 412 hp.  The Camaro is toast.

We were talking about the GT500 vs the Corvette...

Quote from: GoCougs on December 31, 2009, 03:10:38 AM
Uh, the GT500 with 225 more hp can nip the Camaro only by a 0.10 sec in both 0-60 and the 1/4 mile, and its running 285 meats in the rear...

YOU continue to ignore the Road & Track test that backs up other tests that have the GT500 hitting 60 mph in 4.3 seconds which would be 0.3 faster then the Camaro, and it's 114 more horsepower and 285 tires are too narrow for 540 hp.  Ford always undertires the Mustang for some reason.  The GT500 needs 315 rubber.

So basically minor differences for thousands more. 

Quote from: Nethead on December 31, 2009, 12:30:32 PM
Just found some very worthwhile info at this link:

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2011_Mustang_GT_Specs.pdf

Three pages of 2011 Mustang specs:

2011 Ford Mustang GT Technical Specifications , bottom of page 1:

Base Curb Weight in Pounds

        3.7L V6                                          5.0L V8
Manual:       3603 (est.)                       3720 (est.)
Automatic:   3658 (est.)                       3770 (est.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My, my, my...so much added power, so little added weight

Nethead.  Learn how to read.  That spec sheet is for the GT only.

Base Curb Weight in Pounds

5.0L V8 COUPE                   5.0L V8 CONVERTIBLE
Manual:       3603 (est.)                       3720 (est.)
Automatic:   3658 (est.)                       3770 (est.)

Quote from: R-inge on December 31, 2009, 11:30:41 AM
So basically minor differences for thousands more. 

LOL - Nethead there walked right into that one - infinitesimal incremental improvement in performance for 50% more cost...