No argument there.


Unfortunately, I may just have to agree with you here. It has at least been rolling around in my mind recently.

FWIW though, I was a bit disappointed way back in '93 when IRS wasn't at least an option. I was 22 at the time.



Feelings are most defintely not worthless when it comes down to signing for a 5 or 6 year car loan.

I would argue that this type of car in particular is all about feelings and emotional repsonses.

 

which one of those is 24k?

 

You made the claim, I wanna see track times. 2005 Mustang GT vs. a G35.

G35 vs. SS/WS6???

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

 

i'll second that.

 

I stand by my statement. You can prove me wrong if you'd like. BTW where did SS WS6 come from?

 

Ford sold to the general public (not to rental companies or fleet buyers) 141,907 Mustangs in 2004 according to Ford marketing figures. Of those: 7182 were Mach 1s & 5664 were Cobras.

In 2003, Ford sold 153,134 including 9652 Mach 1s & 13,476 Cobras.
86,440 were V6s, 41,756 were GTs.

Breakdown is roughly: 56% V6 cars & 46% V8s.


I would say few. Why? Both have diehard fans.

If I were to buy a new Mustang and commit to multiple years of car payments, it's because I really like the car.

The last thing on my mind would be "Well, since they don't make Camaro anymore...".

Very well put, but as I said in another thread, the biggest thing I noticed when I switched from Mustang to Camaro is that Camaro circles have far more excuse makers and fantasy painters than in Mustang circles. Mustang guys were very honest about F-bodies being quicker. Tell a Camaro guy that Mustang is selling 200,000 per year, then watch the excuses fly.

Want an example? How about this:

1. Combining 2 cars (the F-"twins", not Camaro or Firebird) as if Chevrolet and Pontiac were the same car line.

2. Glossing over the fact that the F-bodies are dead, and have been for 4 years. Killed by the Mustang in sales.

and....

3. Ford's Mustang has sold pretty steady since Camaro's demise, and was still pretty much whipping it the last few years it was still around

I'm not singling you out dream, so don't take it that way. There are alot of people who have the exact same sentiment as you.


I never drove a IRS Cobra, so I can't say anything. But I'll agree with the rest of what you said.


Point is IRS doesn't equal better handling, and live axle doesn't equal neanderthal. There's more to it than that.

A G35 quicker than the Mustang on a roadcourse? Pleeease!

 

Here, you said that a G35 is quicker "in the twisties" than a Mudstain GT. I said that I would "guess" that a Mudstain GT is quicker on a roadcourse (declarative but non-definitive) and then asked you to back up your statement that the G35 was quicker by providing a track time to prove my "guess" either right or wrong.

I further added that I am pretty darned sure that an F4 SS/WS6 would murder a G35 on a roadcourse (declarative AND definitive), since an F4 SS will actually BEAT a C5 around a roadcourse (a secret Mr. Hill was a bit miffed about if my sources can be trusted... which I believe they can), depending on options. And a C5 will MOST ASSUREDLY chew up and spit out a G35.

 

I agree in part.

On a smooth track there's really not a whole lot to choose between the two at the limit, and much to be said in favor of the live axle.

BUT, when you live in... say... Michigan, where salt is the #1 ingredient in the asphalt used to make our roads, the fact that an IRS can provide better handling AND a better ride over a rough surface shines through.

Given that the odds of driving at 9/10ths down a pothole collection optimistically called a "road" in the Great Lakes State is kind of rare, unless you are dodging the local constabulary, I have been very content with the live axle in my SS... and haven't had any "America's Best Police Chases" moments to date.

The only thing I really don't like about live axles is that they eat up HUGE amount of interior space in the vehicle and are part of the reason that 2005 Mudstain rear seats double as torture devices... unless you happen to be an a double amputee... then they're fine.

The Mudstain was more upright and taller than the Camaro (and remains so) because the seating positions of the occupants had to be made more vertical to avoid the live axle. It made the whole car taller. GM solved the same problem by stretching the car and giving a MUCH more aggressive seating position - that women apparently hated if they happen to have forgotten their undies and were wearing a dress... I have no idea why.


Well now, the kinder, gentler me wasn't going to just hop in and call that B.S.

I just wanted to see the data he based that on.

 

Personally, I think an '05, 6 speed, G35 Coupe with the sport suspension package, will absolutely eat an '05, 5 speed, Mustang GT on a road course.

Just intuitive......don't have any track times.

 

It would be interesting to find that one out... hence my statement that my thought was "guess".

But I still say a full-book F4 SS is going to simply up and destroy a G35. God forbid a straightaway actually being present or they're going to have to clean up the G35's remains with a mop.

 

Z28Marcus was kind enough to supply this link:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...01/pageId=5979



If we assume that the '05 GT is faster than the '01 Bullitt, I guess that we can extrapolate.

 

Since were all having fun here. I have been trying to find some lap times, but no luck. You guys seem pretty smart so I'll lay it out for you:

2005 Mustang GT

3450lbs
300 hp
320ft-lbs
5 speed manual
17" alloys
all-season radials
12" single piston front brakes
live rear axle

2005 Infiniti G35 Coupe

3512lbs
293 hp
260ft-lbs
6 speed manual
18" alloys
summer tires
13" double piston brembo brakes
IRS
Yeah your right the Mustang on paper sounds like it will kick some G35 *** on the roadcourse

 

Steves, I think you can appreciate that while the "tale of the tape" is interesting there, it in no way indicates which car would beat the other on a roadcourse.

If you posted up the data from an F4 SS right alongside, folks wouldn't be tipped off to the fact that the F4 would kick either one of the cars above around pretty easily.

Largely due to GM generating horsepower numbers for the F4 but taking the actual engine horsepower and then subtracting 50, just for giggles.

Anyway, the big number which is the first real tip-off to the comparision is the torque values for each, if we had a idea of the rpm at which the torque peak occurs, it will indicate how much of an advantage the Mustang is really going to have.

 

Oh, quite true, Camaro is all about visceral excitement, by point was THIS:

...is not a feeling. You actually had an emotion that indicated this? Would it not be far more accurate to say you "believe" that?

All I'm saying is lets stop taking what are actually beliefs and opinions and positing them as feelings, because I think we muddle our language too much as it is.

Words mean things. "I feel" is not a substitute for "I think", they mean different things.


As for the open track times, I love this article: http://www.musclemustangfastfords.c...mff_deathmatch/ because the way- underpowered '02 SS comes within .3 sec/lap of knocking off the IRS equipped/supercharged '03 Cobra. Equal out the HP for the straights and the winner would have been the SS by a mile.

 

[QUOTE=guionM]Ford sold to the general public (not to rental companies or fleet buyers) 141,907 Mustangs in 2004 according to Ford marketing figures. Of those: 7182 were Mach 1s & 5664 were Cobras.

In 2003, Ford sold 153,134 including 9652 Mach 1s & 13,476 Cobras.
86,440 were V6s, 41,756 were GTs.

Breakdown is roughly: 56% V6 cars & 46% V8s.QUOTE]

Guion: Because it is important for the discussion I must correct the percentages of V8s vs. V6. I went back and double checked the numbers and I confirmed the numbers I posted for the 2003 MY.

Here are the percentages for the 2001 MY vehicles to use as another point of reference. They have not change for the Mustang but I will throw in the F body numbers also.
2001
Firebird 45%V6, 55%V8 25,743
Camaro 56%V6, 43%V8 35,453
Mustang 65%V6, 35%V8 169,198

Here are the number for the other MY so we get a historical perspective:
1997 MY
Firebird 57%V6, 43%V8 30,459
Camaro 66%V6, 34%V8 58,152
Mustang 64%V6, 36%V8 112,311

1994MY
Firebird 57%V6, 43%V8 45,028
Camaro 66%V6, 34%V8 116,592
Mustang 50%V6, 50%V8 158,421

I see your caveat about rental vehicle, my source is Wards.