I bought mine last year and it's my pleasure car. Race red with the 401 brick red interior. 6 speed manual with 3.73 rear. I put Borlas and a Brenspeed tune in it and it does scoot. Ear candy at it's best.
I test drove a 2011 Mustang GT
- Thread starter grampi
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: lexus114
More like cost of goods/living vs wage ratio is way,way outta wack today.
^^HUGE 2nd!
More like cost of goods/living vs wage ratio is way,way outta wack today.
^^HUGE 2nd!
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
I just couldn't see having something not similar to the Mustang you drove.
I think I paid 32,000 for my WS6 in 2000. I still have it.
I couldn't do an appliance car. Even my Buick is supercharged and I have mods done to it.
Amen to that one! I love to drive,and I`ll always own something that`s fun and has "ultimate soul!".
I just couldn't see having something not similar to the Mustang you drove.
I think I paid 32,000 for my WS6 in 2000. I still have it.
I couldn't do an appliance car. Even my Buick is supercharged and I have mods done to it.
Amen to that one! I love to drive,and I`ll always own something that`s fun and has "ultimate soul!".
Patman
Staff member
Originally Posted By: grampi
I can't get over the sticker shock of these new vehicles. I can remember when fully loaded Mustang GTs and SHO Taurus' could be had for well under $20K....
I remember in 87 and 88 when you could get a Mustang LX with the 5.0 engine in it and it only cost $12,000! All of my friends had them back then, they were the best bang for the buck going, the only other reasonably affordable new cars on the road back then that were quicker were the Buick GNs and Corvettes, but even then both of them cost considerably more than the basic 5.0 did.
I can't get over the sticker shock of these new vehicles. I can remember when fully loaded Mustang GTs and SHO Taurus' could be had for well under $20K....
I remember in 87 and 88 when you could get a Mustang LX with the 5.0 engine in it and it only cost $12,000! All of my friends had them back then, they were the best bang for the buck going, the only other reasonably affordable new cars on the road back then that were quicker were the Buick GNs and Corvettes, but even then both of them cost considerably more than the basic 5.0 did.
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
I just couldn't see having something not similar to the Mustang you drove.
I think I paid 32,000 for my WS6 in 2000. I still have it.
I couldn't do an appliance car. Even my Buick is supercharged and I have mods done to it.
Same here.
I just would not drive (or would ride my bicycle everywhere) if I were forced to be behind the wheel of an appliance-type car.
The detractors' derogatory "I grew up"/'matured' statements have sooo little meaning to me as I HOPE that I never "grow up" that much!!!
YES!!! There will always be some personality in my driveway as long as i can drive!
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
I just couldn't see having something not similar to the Mustang you drove.
I think I paid 32,000 for my WS6 in 2000. I still have it.
I couldn't do an appliance car. Even my Buick is supercharged and I have mods done to it.
Same here.
I just would not drive (or would ride my bicycle everywhere) if I were forced to be behind the wheel of an appliance-type car.
The detractors' derogatory "I grew up"/'matured' statements have sooo little meaning to me as I HOPE that I never "grow up" that much!!!
YES!!! There will always be some personality in my driveway as long as i can drive!
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
YES!!! There will always be some personality in my driveway as long as i can drive!
I`d like to find something "FUN" before I turn 50!
YES!!! There will always be some personality in my driveway as long as i can drive!
I think it literally does have double the power. 
$33,000 is a lot of money for a Mustang, maybe I really haven't been paying attention to car prices.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
Yeah that SHO weighs 4400lbs and costs this side of $50,000 after taxes and fees.
Yeah she is a porker but she's also a looker (have to credit the wife for making me get red). I love mine.
Not sure how you get it over $50k - I got my 2010 SHO in December 09 and it's loaded with everything less the performance pack. Sticker was, IIRC $45k or so and there was some wiggle room in pricing so I didn't pay sticker.
Yeah that SHO weighs 4400lbs and costs this side of $50,000 after taxes and fees.
Yeah she is a porker but she's also a looker (have to credit the wife for making me get red). I love mine.
Not sure how you get it over $50k - I got my 2010 SHO in December 09 and it's loaded with everything less the performance pack. Sticker was, IIRC $45k or so and there was some wiggle room in pricing so I didn't pay sticker.
Last edited:
2007 GT manual here. LOVE THE CAR. Refuse to test drive the new one because I'll wind up trying to buy one..
This is my second Mustang.
I need a performance car. Just have to.
This is my second Mustang.
I need a performance car. Just have to.
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
$33,000 is a lot of money for a Mustang, maybe I really haven't been paying attention to car prices.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
OK, but the new GT turns left and right (despite the solid axle!), and brakes MUCH better (stock for stock), and can go low to mid twelves (depending on track and conditions) right off of the showroom floor!
$33,000 is a lot of money for a Mustang, maybe I really haven't been paying attention to car prices.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
OK, but the new GT turns left and right (despite the solid axle!), and brakes MUCH better (stock for stock), and can go low to mid twelves (depending on track and conditions) right off of the showroom floor!
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
$33,000 is a lot of money for a Mustang, maybe I really haven't been paying attention to car prices.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
OK, but the new GT turns left and right (despite the solid axle!), and brakes MUCH better (stock for stock), and can go low to mid twelves (depending on track and conditions) right off of the showroom floor!
Some people shouldnt be behind the wheel of a car like that! I see it all the time here.
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
$33,000 is a lot of money for a Mustang, maybe I really haven't been paying attention to car prices.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
OK, but the new GT turns left and right (despite the solid axle!), and brakes MUCH better (stock for stock), and can go low to mid twelves (depending on track and conditions) right off of the showroom floor!
Some people shouldnt be behind the wheel of a car like that! I see it all the time here.
^ Agreed. There's way too many people around in CT that just don't know how to drive what they've got. The one I see most often are the people in new-ish BMWs and such that are barely doing 20mph (speed limit is 20 or 25) on windy backroads because they're too scared to drive faster. Keep in mind, these are roads I cruise down at 30 - 35 in the Jeep (which has 2 solid axles and much worse handling).
I have a friend with a 2011 GT with a few minor mods, and the thing is an awesome car. Doesn't have quite as much character as my dad's bone stock '90 5.0 LX hatch, but it's certainly a heck of a lot quicker and better handling.
As far as the solid axle thing, what I've found since owning the Jeep is that solid axles aren't bad on the road, as long as they're set up right. When they start to be a disadvantage is on very rough pavement, where it's tougher for them to keep the rubber planted (due to more unsprung weight, and the 2 sides being tied together more).
I have a friend with a 2011 GT with a few minor mods, and the thing is an awesome car. Doesn't have quite as much character as my dad's bone stock '90 5.0 LX hatch, but it's certainly a heck of a lot quicker and better handling.
As far as the solid axle thing, what I've found since owning the Jeep is that solid axles aren't bad on the road, as long as they're set up right. When they start to be a disadvantage is on very rough pavement, where it's tougher for them to keep the rubber planted (due to more unsprung weight, and the 2 sides being tied together more).
Originally Posted By: rslifkin
^ Agreed. There's way too many people around in CT that just don't know how to drive what they've got. The one I see most often are the people in new-ish BMWs and such that are barely doing 20mph (speed limit is 20 or 25) on windy backroads because they're too scared to drive faster. Keep in mind, these are roads I cruise down at 30 - 35 in the Jeep (which has 2 solid axles and much worse handling).
Same here, except that it's the 'Short Hillies' (an EXTREMELY wealthy community next to mine) in their AMG/Black Mercs doing the same thing, or going even slower than that.
WHY did they buy such a performance model to drive like that??!!
Originally Posted By: rslifkin
As far as the solid axle thing, what I've found since owning the Jeep is that solid axles aren't bad on the road, as long as they're set up right. When they start to be a disadvantage is on very rough pavement, where it's tougher for them to keep the rubber planted (due to more unsprung weight, and the 2 sides being tied together more).
It is mostly a problem only when trying to either accelerate very hard, or when cornering hard/throttle mid way through the apex on very rough pavement (especially with a very stiff/high spring rate suspension).
Otherwise, it is NO problem whatsoever (for me at least).
^ Agreed. There's way too many people around in CT that just don't know how to drive what they've got. The one I see most often are the people in new-ish BMWs and such that are barely doing 20mph (speed limit is 20 or 25) on windy backroads because they're too scared to drive faster. Keep in mind, these are roads I cruise down at 30 - 35 in the Jeep (which has 2 solid axles and much worse handling).
Same here, except that it's the 'Short Hillies' (an EXTREMELY wealthy community next to mine) in their AMG/Black Mercs doing the same thing, or going even slower than that.
WHY did they buy such a performance model to drive like that??!!
Originally Posted By: rslifkin
As far as the solid axle thing, what I've found since owning the Jeep is that solid axles aren't bad on the road, as long as they're set up right. When they start to be a disadvantage is on very rough pavement, where it's tougher for them to keep the rubber planted (due to more unsprung weight, and the 2 sides being tied together more).
It is mostly a problem only when trying to either accelerate very hard, or when cornering hard/throttle mid way through the apex on very rough pavement (especially with a very stiff/high spring rate suspension).
Otherwise, it is NO problem whatsoever (for me at least).
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
$33,000 is a lot of money for a Mustang, maybe I really haven't been paying attention to car prices.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
What kind of bolt-ons, if you care to share? Was that on the stock H/C/I?
$33,000 is a lot of money for a Mustang, maybe I really haven't been paying attention to car prices.
My old LX 5.0 went 13.12 with bolt-ons and 3.55 gears.
What kind of bolt-ons, if you care to share? Was that on the stock H/C/I?
Originally Posted By: itguy08
They are nice, decent interior, fast, and handle REAL well...
Although if you want 90% of the power, a little less in the handling department, and be practical there's always the Taurus SHO. It will get you into trouble just as easy (maybe easier since it's so quiet)
I like this idea. The new Taurus is an exceptional looking car. Not bad on HP either. I'd love to own one.
They are nice, decent interior, fast, and handle REAL well...
Although if you want 90% of the power, a little less in the handling department, and be practical there's always the Taurus SHO. It will get you into trouble just as easy (maybe easier since it's so quiet)
I like this idea. The new Taurus is an exceptional looking car. Not bad on HP either. I'd love to own one.
Originally Posted By: grampi
As much fun as this car is to drive, I just couldn't see spending $33K on what's basically nothing more than a toy...but apparently there are people who do...
Have you looked at the V6? Even the six cylinder Mustang has 300+hp, which is plenty fast enough for most people. It should be cheaper to insure, handle just as well, and its great on gas.
As much fun as this car is to drive, I just couldn't see spending $33K on what's basically nothing more than a toy...but apparently there are people who do...
Have you looked at the V6? Even the six cylinder Mustang has 300+hp, which is plenty fast enough for most people. It should be cheaper to insure, handle just as well, and its great on gas.
Originally Posted By: Throckmorton
Originally Posted By: grampi
As much fun as this car is to drive, I just couldn't see spending $33K on what's basically nothing more than a toy...but apparently there are people who do...
Have you looked at the V6? Even the six cylinder Mustang has 300+hp, which is plenty fast enough for most people. It should be cheaper to insure, handle just as well, and its great on gas.
No I haven't, and I think my days of having a car as a toy are over. These days my cars are purely utilitarian. I get my vehicle exhilarations by riding motorcycles. Sure, there are some drawbacks, like not being able to ride them in the cold or foul weather, but they're quicker than cars, and less expensive to purchase, maintain, and insure.
Originally Posted By: grampi
As much fun as this car is to drive, I just couldn't see spending $33K on what's basically nothing more than a toy...but apparently there are people who do...
Have you looked at the V6? Even the six cylinder Mustang has 300+hp, which is plenty fast enough for most people. It should be cheaper to insure, handle just as well, and its great on gas.
No I haven't, and I think my days of having a car as a toy are over. These days my cars are purely utilitarian. I get my vehicle exhilarations by riding motorcycles. Sure, there are some drawbacks, like not being able to ride them in the cold or foul weather, but they're quicker than cars, and less expensive to purchase, maintain, and insure.
Too often, middle class guys spend $33,000+ for such a car. The heck with the kid's braces, family vacations, extracurricular activities, and the fact that mom too has to work to support such a lifestyle. Only the rich should be the only ones that drive such a car. One of the causes of today's economic downturn is middle class trying to live rich. Unless you truly gross $150,000 per year, you have no business forcing your manhood, and need for a toy on your family, and the country, because such purchases often find the purchaser in trouble down the road, and the rest of use have to bail him and his family out. Props to the car enthusiests that drive cheap practical cars, even as they truly deeply love the high-end Cameros, Challangers, and Mustangs.
Middle class that buy these are little boys, that have not grown up yet.
By the way, I LOVE the new Mustang in question, and eventhough I can part with $33k cash today, I don't because there are far more important things to save for, to purchase.
Middle class that buy these are little boys, that have not grown up yet.
By the way, I LOVE the new Mustang in question, and eventhough I can part with $33k cash today, I don't because there are far more important things to save for, to purchase.
- Status
Similar threads
