The Complaint Department

cwd1972 · Jan 15, 2004

I don't think its a step backwards, not at all
while I do agree that when i saw the final numbers on HP/Tourque I was a bit disappointed. I was hoping for a 330 - 350 hp mustang GT...
I think the biggest problem I have with it are the rims. They look funny liek they don;t belong on the car or something.. Of course I can change those but after I spend 25k on a new car it would be long while before i could throw out another grand on new rims. other then that I really like it overall.

chef_333 · Jan 15, 2004

Well,

a comment about the 3 value. This engine is beautiful. Better torgue and hp band then the 4 valve, easier to work on, cheaper, and better emission. As for the solid back don't forget this is a mustang, and that is part of it charm. My current mustang with a few after market pieces corners as well as anything I have seen on the road. Does the back move, yea, but that some of its fun. Plus when you launch you want solid.

the dash doesn't seem to be extreme, but it is growing on me.

In the end a stock GT with 300hp, with larger brakes, better stance, stiffer frame, and from what I have read a "sweet" sound how can you not be giddy about it's arrival?

I garentee the 2005 mustang will be Motor Trends Car of Year!

66Satellite · Jan 15, 2004

fly2low said:
The M3 is simply out of this league. You can't compare it to the current GT. Sorry. I could suggest coulple of solutions for you. First, a domestic solution. There is always the Pontiac GTO (not recommended). If you insist on going on European without breaking your bank account, there is another Ford product. Have you considered the "lowly" Volvo S60R w/ aerodynamics kit (IMO, they look nice)? 6-sp transmission. Three adjustable suspension settings. Flat 295 lb-ft torque from 1950-5250 rpm. 300HP. 0-60mph in 5.5 secs. Insurance rate as low as a TOYOTA COROLLA due to the safety measures. Not bad at $40k,eih?

If you are willing to go Japanese, there are people that will suggest you to get the Nissan 350Z, Infiniti G35 coupe/sedan, Mazda RX-8, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, or my personal fav Mitsu Evolution.

Styling is a subjective matter for you to measure. I just give you a list of cars that perform about equal or better from the current GT withing a reasonable price range.

Good luck.

M3: front engine, RWD, 2 door with seating for four, 333HP, 3415 pounds, 107.5 wheelbase, $50k

05 Stang: front engine, RWD, 2 door with seating for four, 300HP, 3450 pounds, 107.1 wheelbase, $25k

Eos · Jan 15, 2004

66Satellite said:
M3: front engine, RWD, 2 door with seating for four, 333HP, 3415 pounds, 107.5 wheelbase, $50k

05 Stang: front engine, RWD, 2 door with seating for four, 300HP, 3450 pounds, 107.1 wheelbase, $25k

Having an all american muscle car icon Priceless..

rhumbline · Jan 15, 2004

crimson96 said:
I'm sorry. The 2005 Mustang is a disaster. What where they thinking ????

I mean think about it:
235/55/17 wheels ???? Are they completely OUT of their MINDS???
WIDER and LOWER is what they needed. Not Narrower and taller!!!
I was thinking 235/35/18 front 265/35/18 rear (or if it must the same 245/40/18)

Solid rear axle. What the F*** !!! We want the thing to go around corners too!!! This is the biggest gripe I have always had with my Mustang, thought this would give me a reason to upgrade...

3 valves??? Why design a new head???? Why not just use the 4 valver that they used in the Mach 1 and bump the output to a good 350hp by also increasing the engine size... 5.0 or 5.4....

The dash - now this is just a personal taste thing. Looks horrible. I mean it will ONLY suit those that like the old 60's look. I HATE it.

Bottom line is - I was thinking of upgrading my 02 to an 05 but there is no serious performance increasing reason for me to do so. In fact in a number of aspects the 05 is a serious backward step.

I will now consider upgrading to a car that is designed for a serious performance driver. May have to be European.

I'd like to think I am not the only one of this opinion ...What do you all think?

R

I wouldn't call it a disaster by any means, perhaps wanting in a few areas, but certainly an immense step forward from the 1/4 century old FoxStang.

Per your particular gripes:

Tires: the 235/55R17s are only the standard GT tire with 255/45R18s as an option. And just as importantly, if not more so, to overall grip and handling will be the vastly improved suspension, except...

Rear Axle: Yes, it is still an archaic live axle, albeit an improved design. While this may service well the esoteric needs of a small, hardcore drag racing contingent, who really aren't particularly demanding of their suspensions anyway, it does represent the '05's greatest remaining weakness. However, the chassis has been designed with IRS in mind from the beginning, unlike the Fox chassis and its shoe-horned IRS in the Cobra, and should be riding on a good IRS in a year or so, bringing the Mustang's handling fully up to contemporary standards. Hopefully, it will be offered on more affordable, sub-Cobra models too.

3V Head: This represent a very good design compromise between the better breathing of a DOHC 4V design with the simplicity, affordability and lightness of an SOHC design. And this is only the base GT motor, there is every expectation that there will be even higher HP DOHC 4V models coming on board within a year or two. Larger engine options, whether with 3V and/or 4V heads are a real, if unconfirmed, possibility too. Remember, the '05 GT is only the initial rollout of what's likely to be a more fleshed out herd of Mustang models.

Dash: Well, your complaint here is essentially your subjective aesthetics rather than any particular objective/functional shortcoming. However, the overall quality, workmanship and materials of the interior and dash should be hugely improved over the less than stellar current car's. And the dash design looks like it will be more ammenable to customization, whether factory or aftermarket, than the current design too, primarily through easily modified surface treatments.

Overall: I think the '05 does represent a significant evolution of the Pony Car genre as exemplified by the Mustang. This is particularly true if its price and thus value are considered against its competition, European, American and Japanese. Yes, it does retain some significant weaknesses, particularly the aforementioned throwback live axle, but that again should be improved with the introduction of an IRS.

Certainly their are many Euro coupes such as the M3 which possess stellar performance and dynamics, but at a very dear price. Should cost and value be of a lesser or no criteria, then they would make an excellent choice as they are finely executed performance cars.

However, for those of us on a more modest budget, the Mustang delivers most if not quite all the objective and even a large part of the subjective/qualitative aspects of these designs for 1/2 to 2/3s the price, representing a huge value and bang for the buck. With the advent of a follow on model with IRS and more powerfull DOHC 4V motor, the real possibility exists for a $30K Stang with performance characteristic close to matching a $50K M3.

(&) · Jan 15, 2004

crimson96 said:
Solid rear axle. What the F*** !!! We want the thing to go around corners too!!! This is the biggest gripe I have always had with my Mustang, thought this would give me a reason to upgrade...

Pretty much everything else you said has already been debunked, and even though I really want IRS on a GT, this car is going to have awesome handling with the solid axle. The only real advantage to IRS is cornering over rough surfaces and general ride quality, but even that is minimal when you compare to a solid axle that is set up properly, and I would bet that the new Mustang is. The F-body with it's solid rear could run circles around damn near any car on the road under $40k and the new Mustang will probably be better still. Heck, even the current GT is a competent handler. SCC determined that the GT could outcorner an Integra Type R, and although the ITR is FWD, it has quite the reputation for excellent handling.

JaysGreenLX · Jan 15, 2004

(&) said:
Pretty much everything else you said has already been debunked.

I'm pretty sure that this thread was created to voice complaints, so why is everyone jumping on this guy for his opinions??? He doesn't like the car. Get over it.

I'm sick of everyone who doesn't like the car being told they are wrong.

i4power · Jan 16, 2004

(&) said:
Pretty much everything else you said has already been debunked, and even though I really want IRS on a GT, this car is going to have awesome handling with the solid axle. The only real advantage to IRS is cornering over rough surfaces and general ride quality, but even that is minimal when you compare to a solid axle that is set up properly, and I would bet that the new Mustang is. The F-body with it's solid rear could run circles around damn near any car on the road under $40k and the new Mustang will probably be better still. Heck, even the current GT is a competent handler. SCC determined that the GT could outcorner an Integra Type R, and although the ITR is FWD, it has quite the reputation for excellent handling.

The SVO also has a solid rear axle, and that thing can HANDLE, from what i've been told.

351CJ · Jan 16, 2004

JaysGreenLX said:
I'm pretty sure that this thread was created to voice complaints, so why is everyone jumping on this guy for his opinions??? He doesn't like the car. Get over it.

I'm sick of everyone who doesn't like the car being told they are wrong.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But I'm tired of being told that I'm and idiot for liking the 2005 Mustang design.

Go back and read some of the complainer posts and see the attidude they have. What's fair is fair. If someone wants to try to make me feel inadequate because I like the 2005 Stang, I have every right to dump my attitude back on them.

(&) · Jan 16, 2004

JaysGreenLX said:
I'm pretty sure that this thread was created to voice complaints, so why is everyone jumping on this guy for his opinions??? He doesn't like the car. Get over it.

I'm sick of everyone who doesn't like the car being told they are wrong.

No one is wrong for simply not liking the car, but if you don't like it because you have bad info, I'll be happy to point out why a person is wrong.

JaysGreenLX · Jan 16, 2004

(&) said:
No one is wrong for simply not liking the car, but if you don't like it because you have bad info, I'll be happy to point out why a person is wrong.

(crimson96) said:
I'm sorry. The 2005 Mustang is a disaster. What where they thinking ????

Ok this is an opinion. Not bad information.

(crimson96) said:
I mean think about it:
235/55/17 wheels ???? Are they completely OUT of their MINDS???
WIDER and LOWER is what they needed. Not Narrower and taller!!!
I was thinking 235/35/18 front 265/35/18 rear (or if it must the same 245/40/18)

True an 18 inch wheel is optional but I agree the choice of a narrower and taller tire is a dumb choice even a stock GT wheel. Its a step back instead of forward.

(crimson96) said:
Solid rear axle. What the F*** !!! We want the thing to go around corners too!!! This is the biggest gripe I have always had with my Mustang, thought this would give me a reason to upgrade...

No bad information here. The Mustang still has a solid rear axle does it not?? Yeah you can turn a solid rear axle car into a corner carver but why not give the consumer something that handles and rides better right out of the box??

(crimson96) said:
3 valves??? Why design a new head???? Why not just use the 4 valver that they used in the Mach 1 and bump the output to a good 350hp by also increasing the engine size... 5.0 or 5.4....

This isn't bad information. Just an opinion. I will argue against the 4 valve engine being in the GT but only from a cost saving point of view.

(crimson96) said:
The dash - now this is just a personal taste thing. Looks horrible. I mean it will ONLY suit those that like the old 60's look. I HATE it.

Yet another opinion that the man is entitled to. No bad info there.

(crimson96) said:
Bottom line is - I was thinking of upgrading my 02 to an 05 but there is no serious performance increasing reason for me to do so. In fact in a number of aspects the 05 is a serious backward step.

I will say that I don't understand this statement. The car as a whole is a step forward in my opinion. Better chassis, better power, a decidedly better interior. However, there is no bad info here. He is stating an opinion.

(crimson96) said:
I will now consider upgrading to a car that is designed for a serious performance driver. May have to be European.

No arguement here. If I had a choice between a Mustang and a comparable BMW then by all means I would take the Bimmer. The 05 Stang is a vast improvement but it still can't touch the kind of refinement you find in the cars from our Bavarian brothers. Again here is just another show of opinion and not bad information.

(crimson96) said:
I'd like to think I am not the only one of this opinion ...What do you all think?

He isn't.

JaysGreenLX · Jan 16, 2004

351CJ said:
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But I'm tired of being told that I'm and idiot for liking the 2005 Mustang design.

Go back and read some of the complainer posts and see the attidude they have. What's fair is fair. If someone wants to try to make me feel inadequate because I like the 2005 Stang, I have every right to dump my attitude back on them.

My post wasn't directed at you.

But yes you are entitled to your opinion as is everyone else. But everyone here seems to think that if you don't like the 05 Mustang then you are stupid. Its just personal opinion.

IronHippie · Jan 16, 2004

Ron Jeremy I think you and I may Be Related or if were not we should Be...I agree 100% with your Views Brother. The tree huggers are always screwin things up for EVERYONE. I saw the other day were the foam was changed on the space shuttle to be more enviromentally friendly and we know what happened there. If ur worried about blowing up..get yourself one of those honda hybrid pieces of junk.

RICKS · Jan 16, 2004

Browsing through the latest couple pages of whining and dreaming, it seems that the crux of most of the complaints is that the GT isn't a Cobra. The IRS will be in the Cobra. The nuts-o horsepower will be in the Cobra. The big wheels, aggressive low-profile tires will be on the Cobra. The more aggressive styling and facias will be on...the Cobra. So instead of "I was going to trade my '02 on an '05, but now I'm going to consider Euro blah blah blah" why doesn't everybody untwist their panties, take a deep breath, let the GT be what the GT is SUPPOSED to be (a fun and affordable V8 powered pony car for the masses of all ages, a good template for modifying and weekend warrioring, not a cutting-friggin-edge no-compromise rocket for us relatively FEW maniacs), and have a bit of damn patience for the Cobra and other potential premium models (Boss and/or Shelby) . If you want Cobra performance and tech and content in a $26,500 GT, then please move your threads over to the "I like to sit in front of the computer and fantasize about Unicorns, pots of gold, and M3 fighters for half the price" internet forum. You'll feel right at home there.

SVTdriver · Jan 16, 2004

Yes Jay everyone is entitled to their opinion's. I am entitled to my opinion. And believe it or not you are entitled to refute my opinion. It does not make my opinion any less valid. But merely gives everyone a topic to debate. I have some issues with crimson96's statements. But only because they are not based in any hard numbers.
For instance crimison96's opinion on it's cornering ability. Not one single person so far on this board has had the chance to drive one. And to make a statement about wanting to go around corners. Without having seen what the new suspension is like. Borders on simply not wanting to give the car a chance. I will admit the mustang is not the greatest handling car in the world. But I am not about to complain about the 05's handling without driving it. It's a brand new suspension design. And so bashing it for being a solid axle seems to be based on the assumption that it will handle the same as the old solid axle.
The statement on the tires is kind of odd coming from someone who has already changed their tires to something different (read his sig). My 97 cobra came with 245/45/17. So expecting something like a 40 or 35 series is a near impossibility. Ford probably would like it's cars to go over dimes without being able to tell what year it was struck.
As far as having a 4 valve. I think that would have been great. They could have used the 96-98 cobra engine design. But to say they should bump it out the 350 is just not going to happen. It's a gt. And Ford is not likely going to make that large of a jump in 1 year.
His statement on the dash is a valid point until he got to the point of saying "I mean it will ONLY suit those that like the old 60's look.". This is a debatable statement as it may suit many people that are not into the 60's look.
But lastly and maybe most importantly in his post. He made the statement.

"I'd like to think I am not the only one of this opinion ...What do you all think?"

Gives everyone room to discuss and debate his post. He asked for other opinions. He did not state that it was his opinion and that nobody can change or debate it. This however does not mean his opinion's are invalid. Merely that he opened them up for debate.

(&) · Jan 16, 2004

RICKS said:
Browsing through the latest couple pages of whining and dreaming, it seems that the crux of most of the complaints is that the GT isn't a Cobra. The IRS will be in the Cobra. The nuts-o horsepower will be in the Cobra. The big wheels, aggressive low-profile tires will be on the Cobra. The more aggressive styling and facias will be on...the Cobra. So instead of "I was going to trade my '02 on an '05, but now I'm going to consider Euro blah blah blah" why doesn't everybody untwist their panties, take a deep breath, let the GT be what the GT is SUPPOSED to be (a fun and affordable V8 powered pony car for the masses of all ages, a good template for modifying and weekend warrioring, not a cutting-friggin-edge no-compromise rocket for us relatively FEW maniacs), and have a bit of damn patience for the Cobra and other potential premium models (Boss and/or Shelby) . If you want Cobra performance and tech and content in a $26,500 GT, then please move your threads over to the "I like to sit in front of the computer and fantasize about Unicorns, pots of gold, and M3 fighters for half the price" internet forum. You'll feel right at home there.

It's not that I want all the Cobra features in the GT, just IRS. "GT" is somewhat of a misnomer in a car with a rear end more optimized for drag racing than handling. Let the drag racers have their solid rear in some models, but I don't want to pay $35k+ to get one feature I want, and some other features to which I'm fairly indifferent. I also don't want to do a suspension swap on a brand new car, nor do I want to wait for the car to get old before stepping up to IRS.

SVTdriver · Jan 16, 2004

(&) said:
It's not that I want all the Cobra features in the GT, just IRS. "GT" is somewhat of a misnomer in a car with a rear end more optimized for drag racing than handling. Let the drag racers have their solid rear in some models, but I don't want to pay $35k+ to get one feature I want, and some other features to which I'm fairly indifferent. I also don't want to do a suspension swap on a brand new car, nor do I want to wait for the car to get old before stepping up to IRS.

I agree to a large extent ,but. While you may not want all the features of the Cobra. You only have to look through this thread and others to see that IRS, 6 speed and 350hp etc. Are all things that people think should be stock on the gt. And those are Cobra specs (except for hp). So where do you draw the line? If Ford gave you the IRS people would still moan about no 6 speed. Or if they got the 6 speed. You'd still be unhappy about no IRS. The reality is as far as the gt is concerned. It looks to be a very capable car. I'm waiting for real tests before I start wondering why they didn't include IRS. I actually would love to have IRS. But didn't get it. I have to take into account that there are an estimated 30% of mustang owners who drag race. This is a far larger population than people that road race. So I accept that if I get a gt I am stuck with what the majority wanted.

dreddstang · Jan 16, 2004

sweet~Low~93 said:
Any law were you have to have 3rd Brake light ?

QUOTE]

I did not read this whole thread, so this may have already been said, but there has been a Federal Law saying ALL (not just 2 or 4 dorr) vehicles in US have to have the 3rd brake light. Ever notice how the only difference on the exterior of the '85 and '86 Mustangs are the 3rd light on the 86's? That's because '86 is when they started the law.

Mach460 · Jan 16, 2004

SVTdriver said:
I agree to a large extent ,but. While you may not want all the features of the Cobra. You only have to look through this thread and others to see that IRS, 6 speed and 350hp etc. Are all things that people think should be stock on the gt. And those are Cobra specs (except for hp). So where do you draw the line? If Ford gave you the IRS people would still moan about no 6 speed. Or if they got the 6 speed. You'd still be unhappy about no IRS. The reality is as far as the gt is concerned. It looks to be a very capable car. I'm waiting for real tests before I start wondering why they didn't include IRS. I actually would love to have IRS. But didn't get it. I have to take into account that there are an estimated 30% of mustang owners who drag race. This is a far larger population than people that road race. So I accept that if I get a gt I am stuck with what the majority wanted.

But why should I have to pay a 15-20K premium, go 90 miles to my nearest SVT Dealer (Tasca Ford in RI, I live in Northeast MA), and pray that the allotment of 5000/year hasn't already been spoken for so I can have IRS. Just so 30% of the Mustang market can be placated...when the reality is that a majority of Mustang owners (especially those of us the northeast and midwest) would appreciate the superior ride an IRS would provide? They're counting on 200,000 a year. Whe'res that 200,000 going to come from? Ford better not be hoping to lure potential 350Z, Bimmer, Lancer, WRX, etc buyer by offering a car that is optimized for straightline speed.

Yeah, the road racers make a smalller percentage of the market...but there are those driving enthusiasts who do no racing whatsoever, but who appreciate high performance driving (otherwise Road and Track would have gone out of business years ago). How does Ford expect to get those drivers to buy a Mustang over a 350Z et al.

But like I said, I'll reserve judgement until the road tests come out...but I have a feeling we will still be hearing all the same handling complaints about the new Mustang that we hear about the old.

SVTdriver · Jan 16, 2004

Mach460 said:
But why should I have to pay a 15-20K premium, go 90 miles to my nearest SVT Dealer (Tasca Ford in RI, I live in Northeast MA), and pray that the allotment of 5000/year hasn't already been spoken for so I can have IRS. Just so 30% of the Mustang market can be placated...when the reality is that a majority of Mustang owners (especially those of us the northeast and midwest) would appreciate the superior ride an IRS would provide? They're counting on 200,000 a year. Whe'res that 200,000 going to come from? Ford better not be hoping to lure potential 350Z, Bimmer, Lancer, WRX, etc buyer by offering a car that is optimized for straightline speed.

Yeah, the road racers make a smalller percentage of the market...but there are those driving enthusiasts who do no racing whatsoever, but who appreciate high performance driving (otherwise Road and Track would have gone out of business years ago). How does Ford expect to get those drivers to buy a Mustang over a 350Z et al.

But like I said, I'll reserve judgement until the road tests come out...but I have a feeling we will still be hearing all the same handling complaints about the new Mustang that we hear about the old.

Although we've been over this time and time again. Let's try it one last time. Unless you are talking base models not EVO, STI, or even performance edition 350z. They are all over the price of a gt stang. The BMW is always over the price of a gt (at least the ones I've seen). So you pay for what you get. I looked at 350z's for a while. Seriously considered getting one. Until I drove it. Then I realized that for the price it's not that great. And only seats 2 with near zero trunk spaceThe regular lancer is a dog. And a stock WRX is quick. But it's giving up about 70hp.
200k sales maybe optimistic. But Ford is hoping people who like the old 60's stangs will buy into the 05. And if you look at all the people who currently own stangs. It's not impossible to think that people that don't like the last 4 years or more of stang handling. Could possibly buy the 05.

The Complaint Department

cwd1972

chef_333

New Member

66Satellite

Banned

Eos

Oh Heather Oh yeah... I want your pink taco

rhumbline

(&)

JaysGreenLX

i4power

351CJ

New Member

(&)

JaysGreenLX

JaysGreenLX

IronHippie

RICKS

New Member

SVTdriver

(&)

SVTdriver

dreddstang

Mach460

SVTdriver

Similar threads

The Complaint Department

New Member

Banned

Oh Heather Oh yeah... I want your pink taco

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency