C&D Review: Vette vs. GT500: My take

05MGT

New Member

Dec 8, 2004

31

0

0

Jax, FL

Jun 11, 2006

#1

• Jun 11, 2006

• #1

Again Car and Driver's point system don't match the review. Here's why:

Driver comfort:
Vette - 8
GT500 - 8

C&D complains of flimsy slippery seats in the Vette but praise the GT500 on long haul comfort. Why is it a tie?

Fit & Finish:

Vette - 9
GT500 - 7

This wasn't discussed in the article, but my regular GT has equal if not better fit and finish than by buddy's 05 Vette. Even so it's a pretty big gap.

Interior Styling:

Vette - 9
GT500 - 6

Purely subjective. The last test I read of the Vette they complained of it's cheap interior and boring layout and the last test I read of the regular GT they praised it's retro interior styling saying it worked. But again, a big gap.

Exterior Styling:

Vette - 10
GT500 - 8

Purely Subjective again, but let's give the Vette some more bonus points anyways.

Gotta Have it Factor:

Vette - 24
GT500 - 19

WTF??? The GT500 should win this rediculous category. Every aging 50 year old mid-lifer has a Vette. Look at the mark-up on the GT500. Who's got to have what now?

Fun to Drive:

Vette - 24
GT500 - 20

Again C&D praised the GT500, and I quote: "...I could spend all day lapping thi car (GT500) and never get bored." However on the Vette: "On the track, the effort is fine, but on the road it feels artificially heavy and won't win any prizes for being communicative. It's not awful, but the GT500 is better."

Conclusion. If these points difference were changed to where the GT500 had the Vette by one point in each of these categories the GT500 wouls have won by 2 points. It seems to me Car and Driver needed to place the Vette over the GT500 becuase the Vette was slightly the better performer and the GT500 was, admittedly, the all-arounder. If the points were tallied like the review stated, the all-arounder would have won. Shouldn't it be that way?

 

bigcat

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

May 1, 2005

3,015

1

79

7200 feet

Jun 11, 2006

#2

• Jun 11, 2006

• #2

ever tried to get into a vette? not the easiest thing with the rocker panels going up to the top of the seat cushions.

 

cowtown

Founding Member

Nov 4, 2001

228

0

16

Victoria, BC Canada

Jun 11, 2006

#3

• Jun 11, 2006

• #3

Yeah that's pretty ridiculous. If I recall though Chevy does a lot of advertising in theri mags. It's not as bad as Automotive Magazine. It didn't matter what it was up against, a BMW would always win.

 

Pliskin

New Member

Jul 27, 2004

109

0

0

Jun 11, 2006

#4

• Jun 11, 2006

• #4

So wait, the 500hp GT500 lost to a base corvette? This is just stupid. Good job Ford. I'd understand a Z06 but that thing should just wipe the floor with it then.


I guess thats not the case here where I live. N/A cars are way way underpowered. Stupid elevation.

 

G

gregzioba

New Member

Oct 12, 2004

0

0

0

Jun 11, 2006

#5

• Jun 11, 2006

• #5

cowtown said:

Yeah that's pretty ridiculous. If I recall though Chevy does a lot of advertising in theri mags. It's not as bad as Automotive Magazine. It didn't matter what it was up against, a BMW would always win.

Click to expand...

Compare M6 to Shelby mustang: M6 got smaller engine, it's naturally aspirated and rapes Shelby GT500 in 1/4 mile.
Yes BMW cost $$$, but now I understand why.

 

05MGT

New Member

Dec 8, 2004

31

0

0

Jax, FL

Jun 11, 2006

#6

• Jun 11, 2006

• #6

Pliskin said:

So wait, the 500hp GT500 lost to a base corvette? This is just stupid. Good job Ford. I'd understand a Z06 but that thing should just wipe the floor with it then.


I guess thats not the case here where I live. N/A cars are way way underpowered. Stupid elevation.

Click to expand...

The GT500 also weighs over 600lbs more, has terrible weight distribution, and has taller gearing. I believe its a driver's race between the two.

 

F

Frank99TA

New Member

Nov 28, 2004

29

0

0

Jun 13, 2006

#7

• Jun 13, 2006

• #7

You talk about got to have it factor.. I remember when Car and Driver picked the mustang over the GTO after the GTO kicked its ass in almost every category yet the mustang was number 1 because of got to have factor.. Talk about WTF?? And I'm sorry but the interior on the new C6 is a lot nicer than the mustang.. So are the seats.. But, my Dad's C6 was 16000 more than my mustang.. You get what you pay for..

 

G

greg97svt

New Member

Apr 24, 2003

22

0

0

Jun 13, 2006

#8

• Jun 13, 2006

• #8

Frank99TA said:

You talk about got to have it factor.. I remember when Car and Driver picked the mustang over the GTO after the GTO kicked its ass in almost every category yet the mustang was number 1 because of got to have factor.. Talk about WTF?? And I'm sorry but the interior on the new C6 is a lot nicer than the mustang.. So are the seats.. But, my Dad's C6 was 16000 more than my mustang.. You get what you pay for..

Click to expand...

I see you have 06 GT and 99 Trans Am. Can you give me an unbiased comparison between the two?
Which car is faster?
Which is car is more fun to drive?
Which one is more reliable?
If you had to keep only one, which it would be?
Thanks

 

chuckdoc

Member

Aug 17, 2006

66

0

6

Aug 17, 2006

#9

• Aug 17, 2006

• #9

I'm sorry, but all you have to do is pull the skins off both of these vehicles, then tell me what they are built for.

The C6 is a sports car in the purest sense of the word. Let's agree about that. And they're comparing apples to oranges. The Shelby GT500 is nice, fast, kick-a$$, whatever.... but it's not a sports car. It's built on a heavier platform with different design philosophies and goals. It's a 4 seater. It ways 3900 pounds (That's more than most trucks). No independent rear suspension (need I go on?)

That being said, the people that are shelling over mondo bucks above MSRP to get a Shelby aren't doing it for what it'll do on the track, cause the corvette would eat its lunch in the curves. They are buying it because it's a modern iteration of an American Icon. I give the Shelby the 'wow' factor, but don't bother comparing it with a vette, viper, lotus, or anything else that is a true sports car.

My 2 cents...

Chuck

 

Unbrdld07

Member

May 4, 2005

0

0

18

Where eagles dare

Aug 17, 2006

#10

• Aug 17, 2006

• #10

Personally I don't care what they say....I don't like sitting on the pavement when I'm driving. MY .02

 

T

The Fang

Member

Sep 11, 2005

602

0

16

Tallahassee Fl

Aug 18, 2006

#11

• Aug 18, 2006

• #11

I got in a vette once and it felt like I was being layed down in a coffin. yuk

 

Notchbck93

New Member

Dec 9, 2003

422

1

0

IL

Aug 18, 2006

#12

• Aug 18, 2006

• #12

I'll give you an unbiased opinion on the 06 stang vs the 06 vette.. both autos

The corvette has that muscle car feel w/ the classic pushrod torque and 100 extra hp probably minus a few lbs from the Gt stang. Stab the auto and you can lay some mean rubber up until 50 on the tarmac. Roll along at 70 and punch the beast it will slam you back, then let go of you while it take ten minutes to hit the next gear and replant you back in the seat.

The Gt stang was more of a DD car, fun to be in, more people cared to ask me about it, and felt every bit as tight as the vette. The GT auto is no slouch and nails every gear as it should...has the classic Ford Mustang rumble and brings you back in time...well almost.

The Vette brought me back to a time of 5.0L as-fast-as-you-could-blip-the-throttle you were rewarded with right-now response.

Bottom line is these cars are two differnt animals and it is pretty much unfair to compare the two cars.

Pony vs. Sports; anyone else see anything wrong with that?

 

05MGT

New Member

Dec 8, 2004

31

0

0

Jax, FL

Aug 19, 2006

#13

• Aug 19, 2006

• #13

I definately think it's wrong. We should be comparing the GT500 to the GTO, Charger SRT8, and upcoming Challenger and Camaro, not Vipers, Corvettes, and such. That's the territory of the Ford GT.

 

Mr_Q

Founding Member

Nov 5, 2002

721

8

48

Burbank, CA

Aug 19, 2006

#14

• Aug 19, 2006

• #14

The Mustang is a classic "Grand Touring" car. Poor mans Aston Martin/BMW. It's not a sports car. It never should be compared to the Vette. The fact that a Mustang *can* hang on the track is testiment to how good of a "GT" car it is.

Having said that, the Mustang CAN be made in to a hell of a road racer. FR500c and the FR500GT are kickin a$$ out there. But it takes some work.

What I would love to see is, espeically with high gas prices as the driving gag, is a return of the SVO. A light weight 4cyn up front with a turbo. Would do wonders for weight distribution and give you some fun power to play with. Throw an IRS out back too.

One can dream.

 

Dreadnaught

New Member

Aug 5, 2006

31

1

0

Aug 19, 2006

#15

• Aug 19, 2006

• #15

I wouldn't call the Mustang a poor man's Aston Martin or BMW - and technically if we did do that comparison, the Mustang would be the dirt cheap eatting rotten vegetables poor man's Aston Martin. Other than that I agree with everything you said Mr_Q. Now the Camaro, poor man's Corvette.

The Mustang is the poor man's nothing. The Mustang is a breed onto it's own. It's a culture, it's history, it's American muscle. What says alot about Mustangs from the basic V6, to the Mustang GT, GT350, GT500/KR, BOSS, Mach1, GT-H, any steed every made, cars were compared to the Mustang...not the other way around.

 

Mr_Q

Founding Member

Nov 5, 2002

721

8

48

Burbank, CA

Aug 19, 2006

#16

• Aug 19, 2006

• #16

I do regret calling it a poor mans anything. Bad choice of words.

 

Dreadnaught

New Member

Aug 5, 2006

31

1

0

Aug 19, 2006

#17

• Aug 19, 2006

• #17

It happens .

 

dmaxstang

New Member

Jul 29, 2005

0

0

0

dallas

Aug 20, 2006

#18

• Aug 20, 2006

• #18

here is what i see

The Mustang was never created to be a vette killer. The camaro was introduced to be a stang killer but look what has happened to that brand. The goat and the stang are closer brotherin from a different motha and look what happened to that brand AGAIN. In the realm of real competition for mustang as to what it exactly is... there's nothing else that the auto writers consistently call the greatest bang for the buck. So lets face it, Stangs VS Vettes = Bad Comparo. Lets all just sit back for a couple of years and then take our stangs to the strip and track against the new camaro and challenger and make the new lord of the muscle car on the track.

 

Mach1man22

New Member

Oct 20, 2006

47

0

0

Charlottesville, Va.

Oct 25, 2006

#19

• Oct 25, 2006

• #19

A GT500 with 4.10s or 4.56s? the fiber glass vette will shatter....doesn't everyone see what happened with the previous cobra? It became the Arnold. The Terminator. I don't even want to think about what this next cobra will become.

 

nwoh50

New Member

May 4, 2005

11

0

0

Toledo,Ohio

Oct 25, 2006

#20

• Oct 25, 2006

• #20

Mach1man22 said:

A GT500 with 4.10s or 4.56s? the fiber glass vette will shatter....doesn't everyone see what happened with the previous cobra? It became the Arnold. The Terminator.

Click to expand...

I HATE when people TRY to Compare cars that are not even.
Only thing thats half way even is there both Made in U.S and around same hp levels.

Does the Vette make a Daily driver with Metal body ??
Does the vette make a v6 or 4cyl model ??

The point is... if FORD really wanted to hand GM there Ass,the Mustang would be Fiberglass like the vette.

The vette should be bad ass, that all they focus on, unlike the mustang model there trying to new things with motor setups and body packages

I'm a fan of the zo6 but that's about it from GM

Ford Rules !