Spent all day with a Mustang GT today

[gr8fl4porsche]

Borrowed my mechanics car today while he worked on my truck.
Stock '07 Mustang GT.

Impressions

The Good

Actually a fun car to play with for a day.
Sounds very nice .
OK HP and Torque
Made me appreciate the quality of my 22 yr old little lady.

The Bad

What a POS.
Plastic, plastic, plastic - Interior was horrible, maybe worse than that.
Noisy tranny.
Took a while to redline.
Needed a supercharger.
Felt like being in a cave.
Terrible viewing of the outside world.
The worst looking steering wheel I may have ever seen.
Felt very cheap - everything about it. - no refinement at all.
Had these very odd headlight covers.

[Sarc]

Pretty spot on. The latest and greatest iteration has wiped away most (if not all) of those cons in my opinion.

[azasadny]

Yep, those were common complaints and the new one is quite an improvement! Don't compare the Mustang to your Porsche, that's not really fair!

[Schumi]

Originally Posted by azasadny

Don't compare the Mustang to your Porsche, that's not really fair!

Why not? His 87 targa use most likely cost 8-10K less than a new mustang. Technology has far advanced since then. The mustange should be able to be a better car in every way by now.


It's not, and that's because this nation is full of people who gladly pay lot of money for crap.

[ZOO]

Originally Posted by Schumi

Why not? His 87 targa use most likely cost 8-10K less than a new mustang. Technology has far advanced since then. The mustang should be able to be a better car in every way by now.

That's a bit of a spurious argument -- I'd suspect the cost of the 87 Targa in constant dollars is appreciably higher than the cost of the Mustang when new. That would account for the difference in interior appointments, and even some of the features.

I'd also suspect that most people looking at new Mustang GTs aren't cross-shopping 22 year old Porsches.

Did the one you drive have the Track Package?

[onewhippedpuppy]

Cue Paul in 3...2...1....

I had a 2007 Mustang (non GT) as a rental and had similar impressions. Sure it's a rental, but no new car should have multiple rattles with only 15k. Lots of hard plastic and not a very high quality feel. I had a very similar impression in my father-in-law's new F-150.

I often compare new cars to old cars I have owned. Why? Because cars are supposed to IMPROVE. Cutting edge 20 years ago should be garden variety today. A new Camry has higher quality materials than most any car from the '80s. Apparently the American makers advance a bit slower than most.

[ZOO]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Cue Paul in 3...2...1....

I had a 2007 Mustang (non GT) as a rental and had similar impressions. Sure it's a rental, but no new car should have multiple rattles with only 15k. Lots of hard plastic and not a very high quality feel. I had a very similar impression in my father-in-law's new F-150.

I often compare new cars to old cars I have owned. Why? Because cars are supposed to IMPROVE. Cutting edge 20 years ago should be garden variety today. A new Camry has higher quality materials than most any car from the '80s. Apparently the American makers advance a bit slower than most.

I'd bet that the Mustang is safer, pollutes less, gets better mileage with far more power, and costs less in constant dollars than an 87 Mustang 5.0 GT. That's pretty significant improvement, in my eyes.

I'd take all of the above over improvements to plastic in the interior. The GT I drove with the leather (an 09 premium) was far better than any of the cars I own in terms of interior quality.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by ZOOMiata

I'd bet that the Mustang is safer, pollutes less, gets better mileage with far more power, and costs less in constant dollars than an 87 Mustang 5.0 GT. That's pretty significant improvement, in my eyes.

You're not starting with much.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by gr8fl4porsche

Plastic, plastic, plastic - Interior was horrible, maybe worse than that.

You know i hear these comments, and i look at my top of the line $110,000.00 adjusted for 2009 dollars 928S and i see.............plastic.

Everywhere.

And i say why is Porsche plastic ok, but American plastic is not? WTF?

[Schumi]

I hate plastic dashes.

The dash in my 924S is pressed particle fibers covered by glued and stretched on fake rubbery-leather like material. I don't know how Porsche makes it. I don't know what it is made of. But I do know that it looks and feels 10 times better than hard plastic.

For instance- Chevy Colbalt SS. Nice car, quick. Fun. PLASTIC *$@#@ing DASH.

It cannot be that much more expensive to go the fake leather over pressed fiber dash route.


You know why, from an engineering point, plastic in american cars is so prevalent now?

It's easy as hell to design, cheap and easy to fabricate, and a 2nd grader could put the nice snap together interlocking pieces together. Engineers with solid modelling programs love the sh** out of designing little plastic everything with little one-time-assembly snap together tabs because it's extremely functional and form-following. Which is great from an engineering standpoint but extremely annoying from a personal perspective. It makes the cars cheaper and cheaper to make and assemble since Jo-Bob on the line just has to snap a plastic part in place instead of use a screw driver and 8 Phillips head self tapping screws into those little metal backing plates- if you've ever noticed, Porsche in the 80's was infatuated with screws in everything- screws, with pointy tips- not bolts.

Screws are ugly, hard to cover up, and hard for Jo-Bob to assemble quickly.


So we have plastic injection molded snap together kindergarten parts everywhere.

And I hate it.

Signed,

Mike

[speedracing944]

but you can do coinjection or insert molding to remedy the cheap feeling plastic.

Speedy

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

You know i hear these comments, and i look at my top of the line $110,000.00 adjusted for 2009 dollars 928S and i see.............plastic.

Everywhere.

And i say why is Porsche plastic ok, but American plastic is not? WTF?

All plastic is not created equal. I think cheap plastic when I see hard, thin stuff with little/no graining. When you touch it, you know. Good stuff is soft to the touch, has attractive patterns/graining, and is not shiny.

[Dantilla]

Plastic doesn't bother me.

The Mustang is engineered around a budget, the Porsche is premium priced. And the dash of a 924S is going to crack.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by Dantilla

Plastic doesn't bother me.

The Mustang is engineered around a budget, the Porsche is premium priced.

+1, this is how i view it.

The plastic in my Porsche doesn't bother me, nor does the plastic in my Saab 900SE turbo, nor did the plastic in my recently sold 30+K when new cadillac, or in any of the other cars i've owned.

Plastic is light. Light= better power to weight ratio. Better power to weight ratio= bigger smile on my face.

Plastic is cheap. Cheap= more car for my dollar. More care for my dollar= bigger smile on my face.

Shrug.

[Schumi]

I would take some nice plastic peppered with some aluminum like this:


mmmmm now that's the good kind plastic.


EDIT: I am spending way too much time in OT this morning.

[ZOO]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

You're not starting with much.

You made the comment about there being no improvement in 20 plus years. I was simply pointing out that there has been significant improvement in ALL cars over the last 20 years, plastic interiors notwithstanding.

Sometimes it's helpful to look past what is immediately obvious to the naked eye.

[pwd72s]

You're right...the '87 Targa Porsche has it all over my Mustang Bullitt in....what?
Perhaps snob appeal. Let's see, I have leather seating, air that blows ice...a radio stereo (CD-Satellite) that sounds great, a leather covered steering wheel that is VERY similar in design to the Lotus one pictured above. Two big round gauges, tach and speedo, much like the lotus, with fuel, volts, temp, and oil pressure gauges below. A 5 speed that shifts easily...pedals perfectly placed for heel & toe, even with my size 13 feet.

Performance? Only 315 horses powering a 3:73 limited slip rear end.

0-60 4.9
0-100 12.3
0-140 34.2
13.6 @ 105 in the 1/4 mile
5-60 5.4
200 ft. skidpad 0.92

EPA mileage 15-23

Yep, you don't want a Mustang guys...stick to those wonderful P-cars.

Besides, looks like '09 was the last year for the Bullitt? It's not being offered in the '10 lineup.

Then and now...no regrets.

[rfloz]

FWIW, I currently own a 1997 Mustang GT and a 1984 Carrera Factory Turbo-Look. Both have about 75,000 miles and both are currently set up for fairly serious auto-cross.

Stock (I bought it new), the Mustang had nice steering and decent handling up to maybe 7/10s. After that it was a real pig - massive understeer and a rear end that wanted to control the whole damn car (this has been addressed in newer cars). Thus the auto-cross mods. Once "tuned" the Mustang had enormous grip (315 R tires on all four corners will do that), virtually no understeer and was competitive in E Street Prepared until cars with more power showed up.

The only failure I had on the Mustang was an exploding intake manifold - consider the wisdom of a plastic manifold between aluminum heads on an iron block with both intake charge and coolant flowing through it. The replacement has a separate aluminum passage for coolant.

The Porsche I got a couple of years ago. Stock it handled well up to 8/10s which was as far as I got when I discovered the front suspension pan was rusted through. While I blame this mostly on previous owners (and a piss-poor PPI), Porsche did "engineer" this so any escaping battery acid would drip down into and be trapped within the pan. It was unflappable at any sane highway speeds, unlike the Mustang.

Anyway, while getting the pan repaired I went for all new and upgraded suspension. The car is a delight to auto-cross, although I am still fine-tuning the setup.

At almost 1,000# lighter than the Mustang with almost the same power (207 advertised vs. 215), the Porsche is a rocket compared to the Mustang (newer Mustangs are much better in this regard). That weight difference and much smaller overall footprint make the Porsche much easier to auto-cross. The Mustang, although very well-developed, was just too huge to be any fun at an auto-cross. Fast, yes (a lot more torque) - fun, no.

Both have leather interiors. Well, the Porsche has a leather interior. The Mustang has leather seating surfaces and steering wheel. The driver seat had to be replaced with less than 20,000 miles on the car due to very poor quality leather. Plenty of plastic, but decent quality and no rattles. To be fair, the Porsche driver seat leather has a tear that needs attention.

Stock, the Mustang was a very nice driver. It was composed in any traffic situation as long as it was not pushed too hard, comfortable (although the seats had zero lateral support), and, but for the above, dead reliable.

Stock, the Porsche was a great touring car, but unhappy in traffic - with a fairly heavy clutch and an engine far more comfortable above 3,000 rpm than below. It was very comfortable to sit in and the OEM sport seats had (and have) good lateral support.

I am slowly converting the Mustang back to near stock for my daughter to drive to high school. I will keep the Porsche.

The idea of putting the Porsche back to stockish for my daughter is laughable on many levels. It will never happen.

If I were limited to one car, it would be a stockish Porsche. If limited to two, a Mustang might well be the daily driver choice, with the modded Porsche in reserve for weekend duty.

Is it apples and oranges? Sure, but, so what. It's only the internet.


By the way, judging any car by a rental example is grossly unfair. These cars are thrashed from the gitgo. I have driven rental cars with less than 1,000 miles on them that looked and felt worn out.

[rfloz]

Alrighty, then - pictures:




Those are only 275s, couldn't find a picture with the 315s.

[speeder]

Interesting opinions since I've been in a couple new Mustangs and thought that the interiors were pretty nice. Any newer Ford has a much better interior than the same vintage GM product, IMO, w/ the exception of the new GM trucks and Suburbans.

My good buddy has an '08 Mustang Bullit and I really like the interior. Nice black leather seats and a pretty clean dash. There is a lot of plastic but it seems to fit well. I've ridden in it a lot and never noticed any rattles. My '05 F-250 w/ 68k miles doesn't rattle either and it's lived on a ranch until a couple months ago w/ (I suspect) a lot of 4-wheeling. When you put the power windows up in loud traffic or on the freeway, it's like closing a zip-loc bag.

We had a '67 Mustang when I was a kid and I love the retro treatment on the new ones, the interior is brilliant as a modern update.