By on August 24, 2015

2015 Ford Mustang Exterior-010

2015 Ford Mustang GT Premium

5.0-liter, DOHC V-8, CVVT (435 horsepower @ 6,500 rpm; 400 lbs-ft @ 4,240 rpm)

6-speed Getrag MT82 manual

15 city/25 highway/19 combined (EPA Rating, MPG)

18.2 mpg (Observed, MPG)

Tested Options: GT Premium Trim, Ruby Red Paint, 401A Package, Performance Package, Adaptive Cruise Control, Navigation, Recaro Seats

Base Price:
$30,875*
As Tested:

$45,470*

* All prices include $900 destination charge.

Ford’s Mustang is as American as the hot dog and KFC Double Down, but for 2015 it received an internationally-focused makeover. Since 1964, the Mustang has been the place to find a large V8, a manual transmission and a solid rear axle. That solid axle has been a point of contention for foreign auto journalists who frequently compared the Ford’s handling to a pickup truck, and decried the GT as a one-trick pony: the car that was excellent in a straight line at a drag strip — and that was about it. That’s a problem when Ford’s new mission is greater harmony in their lineup worldwide.

While 2015 retains the large V8 engine, manual transmission and rear wheel drive we’ve all come to know and love, it brings the first completely independent suspension to every Mustang in over 50 years. Also big news for 2015 is the resurrection of a 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine, something we haven’t seen since the Fox body Mustang of the early 1990s. In a nod to our friends in Old Blighty, a factory-made right hand drive model is also in the works. All of these changes are because this Mustang is suddenly thrust into a much bigger pool of competitors.

Can Ford teach this pony some new tricks to compensate?


Exterior
The first thing you’ll notice about the new Mustang is the Aston Martin meets Fusion meets Mustang styling. The sheetmetal looks more elegant and more intentional than before. While the 2014 looked cartoonish from some angles, the 6th generation ‘Stang doesn’t seem to have a bad angle to be found. It’s clear Ford not only spent more time styling their new 2-door, but is also spending more on stamping the metal as we have more curves and angles providing visual interest. The front quarter panel for instance rises up, then curves back down to meet the hood panel, giving the front of the Mustang something of a “proto-fin.” We’re hyped that 2016 will bring back turn signals integrated into the hood vents (visible to the driver) in certain trims.

2015 Ford Mustang Exterior-014

All Mustang models now come standard with HID headlamps, a nice touch in a segment that generally lacks modern lighting. Out back, the sequential turn signals are now made from LED strips inside large vertical plastic housings with deep recesses between the lamp modules. The look is striking, but proved more effort to clean than I had considered.

The sleek profile belies the sixth generation’s shrinkage of about two inches versus the out outgoing model. The loss in length helps the Mustang slightly in international markets where the Ford is considered a large two-door. In terms of comparisons, the Mustang is nearly a foot longer than the BMW M235i we recently reviewed, about the same size as a 435i, and a foot shorter than a Dodge Challenger. The main reason for the long body, of course, is the massive engine bay designed to longitudinally accommodate large engines.

There was a great deal of speculation about Ford’s right-sizing program. Would a weight reduction be part of the package? The answer is no, the Mustang has actually gained a little weight in this generation. Contrary to the earlier rampant “weightgate” speculation, curb weight is up just 20 to 80 pounds, depending on how you compare a 2014 trim to a 2015 trim.

2015 Ford Mustang GT Interior-004

Interior
The one area that didn’t receive as much attention is the interior. The style is fresh and instantly recognizable as a Mustang, but we only get an incremental improvement in the feel of the parts. There are still plenty of hard plastics lower in the interior including the center console and areas where your knee and leg are likely to rest. (Remember that the Mustang starts under $24,000.) The new steering wheel is loaded with buttons, but thankfully I found the layout intuitive. Lovers of thick-rimmed steering wheels will be disappointed to find that the tiller is no thicker than the Ford Edge we recently tested.

When looking at the Mustang parked next to a BMW 2-Series, you might assume the Ford would be larger inside. You would be wrong. The Mustang and the 2016 Camaro have about the same amount of front and rear seat legroom as the baby Bimmer, with the Mustang actually being slightly smaller inside. This mainly has to do with the position of the engine in the Mustang and the size of the engine bay which makes the nose longer to give it a proportion similar to a British sports coupé. Meanwhile, BMW pushes the engine a little further back making the overall packaging more compact. On the upside, the Mustang has more footwell room making it more comfortable for folks with larger feet.

2015 Ford Mustang GT Interior-011

Our tester had the nearly $1,600 optional Recaro seat package. If you track your car regularly, and need the aggressive bolstering, and are about my size or smaller, get them. Everyone else should avoid them entirely. The standard seats are softer and more comfortable, they offer more lumbar support and the Premium trim of the Mustang would normally get memory-linked power seats, adjustable lumbar support as well as heating and ventilation. All of those features are given up for the Recago logo, and it’s just not a good trade. A quick spin in a dealer provided GT without the Recaro seats, but with the Performance Package, confirmed that the firmer suspension is also easier to live with if you get the base seats. The difference is more pronounced when you consider the Mustang comes with very comfortable seats in every other version, beating the current Camaro and Challenger easily, and are actually quite competitive with the standard seats in the 2-Series, 4-Series and Lexus RC.

Hop in the back and you are reminded the Mustang is best described as a “2+2 coupé” where the last digit is a little smaller than the first. While not as tight as a Jaguar XK, the back seat should be reserved for small children or your legless friends. With the driver’s seat adjusted comfortably for my 6-foot frame, there was a 3-inch gap between my seat back and the rear seat bottom cushion. (I prefer an upright position when driving a manual.) Convertible shoppers will be pleased to know that rear headroom actually increases if you chose the rag top. At 13.5 cubic feet, the Mustang’s trunk is also similar in size to the BMW 2-Series, but Ford thankfully uses hidden hinges to make the most out of the trunk. You should know that the optional ShakerPro speaker package consumes just over a cubic foot of space.

2015 Mustang My Ford Touch

Infotainment
Our pony car had Ford’s optional MyFord Touch infotainment system. This software is due to be replaced in 2016 by Ford’s completely redesigned SYNC3 system. MFT is one of the most maligned infotainment systems on the market, but it is also one of the most fully featured. Even in 2015, there are still mainline brands that don’t offer voice command of your USB-connected music library. At this point, Ford has addressed most of the major issues that plagued MFT, except for the speed. Interacting with the touchscreen requires patience as screen changes are considerably slower than the Hyundai, Chrysler and GM alternatives. SYNC includes an integrated telematics system that emails vehicle health reports, allows you to call a concierge, request emergency assistance and knows when your airbags have gone off. On the downside, this system is dependant on a paired Bluetooth phone to actually make the calls — so if you’ve forgotten your phone and you get in an accident, the car can’t dial for help.

Our tester included the optional navigation software and the up-level ShakerPro branded speaker system. The 12-speaker system uses a trunk mounted subwoofer, a dash-mounted center channel speaker and a 550-watt 9-channel amp. The system is certainly tuned with a significant bass punch, but overall it is still well balanced. It had no problems rocking my Vanilla Ice album all the way to A1A Beachfront Avenue.

2015 Forg Mustang GT Engine-003

Drivetrain
The big engine news for 2015 isn’t that the 3.7-liter V-6 lost a few ponies, or even that Vanilla’s five-point-oh is still available; it’s that we have the first four-cylinder Mustang in quite some time. To make room for the new EcoBoost mill, Ford de-tuned the V6 slightly to 300 horsepower at 6,500 rpm and 280 lb-ft of twist at 4,000. That means that unlike the Camaro, the four-cylinder is an upgrade, not the base engine. Checking the EcoBoost box gives you 310 horsepower at a lower 5,500 rpm and a whopping 320 lb-ft at a low 3,000 rpm. But I’m here to talk about what separates this American from the European and Asian options. Five. Point. Oh. Revving up to 7,000 rpm and featuring twin independent variable valve timing, the Coyote V-8’s only modern omission is direct-injection. Power comes in at 435 horsepower at 6,500 rpm and 400 lb-ft at 4,250 rpm. (The recently announced 5.2-liter V-8 Shelby is a perfect example of naturally aspirated engine designs vs turbo engine design. The 2016 Shelby GT350 will bump power by 91 horsepower but torque by only 29 lb-ft. Compared to the twin-turbo German V8s, the horsepower is similar but torque is notably lower.)

Unusual in 2015, even in performance cars, is your choice of manual or automatic transmissions on all models (in 2016, the Shelby will be manual only) and your choice doesn’t interfere with the options packages. That means you can get the GT and EcoBoost Mustangs with radar cruise control, all the goodies and still get the 6-speed stick. (There have been some complaints about the Getrag MT82 manual transmission but I didn’t experience an unusual shift feel during my week. Be sure to let us know if you’ve had a problem with yours in the comment section below. There has been quite a bit of forum buzz regarding “clunks and thunks”.) Also a little unusual these days is the option of multiple rear axle ratios. For those that are unfamiliar, axle ratios are the final “link” in the chain for your drivetrain. The transmission’s 3.65:1 first gear ratio is multiplied by the rear axle you chose — 3.31, 3.55 or 3.73 — to get the effective total ratio of 12:1, 12.9:1, or 13.6:1. (All three ratios are available in the EcoBoost model but just the 3.55 and 3.73 are offered in the GT). That has a big impact on acceleration and fuel economy since the 6th gear ratios have the same variance. The available axle ratios are why fuel economy has dropped in the V-6’s EPA test, as Ford is no longer offering the 2.73:1 rear axle in the V-6 like they did in 2014. This means the base V-6 in 2015 is much peppier, but the MPGs drop two steps. This is where the EcoBoost model steps in with 31 or 32 mpg combined (depending on the transmission) despite giving you more power, more torque and a more aggressive rear axle ratio than the base 2014 V-6. On the downside, power and economy figures for the 5.0 and 2.3 are based on premium unleaded.

2015 Ford Mustang Exterior-001

Drive
Over twenty years ago, I was learning to drive on my neighbor’s 1988 2.3-liter four-cylinder Mustang LX with a shot clutch. My how times have changed. Back then 300 horsepower was a pipe dream, the GT’s 6.3 second 0-60 time was rad to the max and a 32 mpg Mustang was as likely as a blue unicorn. Even ten years ago, the thought that the Mustang would be serious competition to the imports was wishful thinking, but the sixth-generation pony offers 300 horses standard, the mid-range model gets over 30 mpg on the highway, and every version is faster to 60 than it was in 1988. Combined with a more refined and capable suspension, this is that unicorn.

The 2014 Mustang’s rear end got upset on broken pavement and felt heavy in the corners. The 2015 feels composed and significantly lighter in comparison, despite actually being heavier. The GT still feels slightly front heavy in the corners, no surprise with a large V8 under the hood, but the EcoBoost model feels much better balanced. Thanks to the gearing and tire selection, all versions are tail happy when prodded. Next year brings us a new Camaro with a Cadillac ATS-derived chassis and suspension, something that bodes very well for the bowtie brand as well. However, this is 2015 and the current Camaro is a notch behind the outgoing Mustang. Absolute handling is obviously a factor of your tire choice, and ours was equipped with the optional Pirelli PZero summer rubber in a staggered 255/40R19 front, 275/40R19 rear setup. In an interesting twist, the suspension is quite firm but there’s more body roll than you’d expect.

2015 Ford Mustang GT Interior-007

If you’re a traditionalist, fear not. The Mustang, especially our GT tester, is still about well-priced straight-line performance. The V-6 will sprint to 60 in 5.8 seconds, the turbo will do it in 5.6, and our GT in a swift 4.6 seconds with launch control enabled and the 6-speed manual. A nice touch: Unlike many cars out there with launch control, Ford keeps it crazy simple. Once enabled in the LCD between the speedo and tach. it stays on. Period. That means you don’t have to worry about fiddling with menus; you just floor it, release the clutch and let the nannies do their thing. The car retains the setting even through ignition cycles. You can improve things further by double-tapping the traction control button and enabling sport mode which allows a little more action in the rear. (Note: Ford says that both systems should be used on the track only. Sure…) Of course, you’ve probably also heard about Ford’s nifty line lock feature that allows perfect burnouts every time without wearing your rear brake pads.

The GT’s 7,000 rpm redline means that the ‘Stang sings like a high-revving European sports coupé more than a Camaro or Challenger. Since all the ponies come to a trot at 6,500 rpm, you’ll spend a great deal of time at those lofty heights. The good news is thanks to the throttle mapping and general character of the 2015, it revs easily, happily and sounds great while doing it.

2015 Ford Mustang Exterior-009

Thanks to electric power steering, the Mustang’s wheel is as numb as most of the competition, although BMW and Nissan manage to transmit more road feel in the M235i and 370Z. Skipping the Performance Package makes the GT more driveable on a daily basis in terms of suspension tuning, and in that form the body roll seems well-balanced with the spring firmness. The downside of skipping the pack is the reduced grip. If I were shopping in this segment I’d probably skip the package and use the cash to swap in some sticky rubber. If you do get the package, I suggest some stiffer sway bars.

Ford set the base price for 2015 low — very low. At $23,800, the Mustang undercuts the Camaro and Genesis Coupé by $3,000 and the 370Z by nearly $6,000. That means that for the price of the base 2.0-liter, 275-horsepower 2016 Camaro, or the Genesis Coupé V-6, you could get a 2.3-liter EcoBoost ‘Stang with an option or two. A base Z will cost you more than a well-equipped V-6 Ford or only about $2,500 less than a Mustang GT. At $32,850, the BMW 228i is a whopping $7,550 more than the more powerful EcoBoost model, and the M235i is $11,850 more than a Mustang GT. Why all this focus on the M235i? Because the Mustang actually reminded me a great deal of the small BMW. The Mustang finally feels light and nimble, and at the same time the M235i feels far more substantial than small BMWs of the past. While the BMW does feel more refined, the delta has never been smaller. With previous generations, one could have argued that the BMW’s greater refinement was worth $10,000. With this generation, I wouldn’t pay more than $1,000 for the extra feel in the BMW. That’s a problem because in order for the M235i to be as fast as our $45,470 tester, you would need to add the 8-speed automatic and all-wheel drive, both of which would make it less fun. Better in the rain, but less fun. The added hardware also makes the M235i xDrive tip the scales at 3,695 pounds, just 10 pounds lighter than the Ford, and still considerably more expensive. Although the BMW’s suspension is better sorted and more settled, if you shod them with identical tires, the Mustang will be right on the 2-Series’ bumper.

Is the Mustang perfect? No. I wish the interior was a little more comfortable and the automatic transmission needs a few more gears in order to match the competition. Hyundai, BMW, GM and Chrysler have gone 8-speed and even Nissan is one cog higher at 7 in the 370Z. That means there is still a toll to be paid for selecting the automatic, while the competition’s slushboxes promise improved fuel economy and improved acceleration. Still, the Ford holds true to what the Mustang has always promised: performance at a reasonable price. The big news is that those reasonable prices come with surprisingly few compromises and it’s entirely possible to consider the Mustang as a value alternative to a German coupé. Comparing a Pony Car to a compact German coupé used to be ridiculous, but this pony is a blue unicorn that’s learned a few tricks.

Ford provided the vehicle, insurance and one tank of gas for this review.

Specifications as tested

0-30: 2.0 Seconds

0-60: 4.6 Seconds

1/4 Mile: 13 Seconds @ 112 MPH

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

67 Comments on “2015 Ford Mustang GT Review – No Longer A One-Trick Pony (With Video)...”


  • avatar
    White Shadow

    “…the first completely independent suspension to the Mustang in over 50 years.”

    False. It amazes me that people still get this wrong.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    I see Alex’s name… Yay!

    I see it’s a stupid muscle car… Fark!

  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    Am I the only one who wonders what this car would be like if they stretched the wheelbase 7 inches, the body 10 inches, the track and width 3 inches. Added four doors and called it a Lincoln.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Still want an ecobost manual transmission track pack.

    I don’t care what anyone says, this generation is fully worthy of the Mustang name.

  • avatar
    jfranci3

    This article isn’t up to TTAC standards. It reads like you just read every other mustang article and wrote this one. You greatly exaggerate the live axles down sides and give no credit to the previous gens road handling. I’d say drive some more cars, get some unique insights

    • 0 avatar
      Boredonthetoilet

      I agree, the usual “mustangs were straight line cars” comment did not give the impression of a good car buff much less an auto journalist. Considering all the famous models were course cars you’d have to ignore 40+ years of racing to make that statement. This site even did an article of a barely bolt on SN95 wiping the floor with an FRS and gen coupe at TMP.

  • avatar
    Pinzgauer

    This is the fix for all you MT-82 shifting woes. Put one in my Boss and all I can say is it should have been made this way from the factory.

    https://www.blowfishracing.com/drivetrain/101-2011-2014-mustang-v6gtboss-isolated-shifter-support-bracket.html

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      That’s a hell of a contraption.

    • 0 avatar
      Ion

      Eh, I know the factory bracket is a thin piece of rubber but I only had issues with my shifter when it was cold. Below 30 degrees without letting the car warm up 2nd required quit the amount if effort to lock in but I never had the car pop out of gear.

      • 0 avatar
        Pinzgauer

        2-3 shift during hard acceleration and turning slightly would sometimes make me miss 3rd. It felt like the gates would be misaligned due to body flex. Once I added the bracket 2-3 was always perfect no matter what. Also 1-2 shift smooths out a little, even when cold.

        • 0 avatar
          bumpy ii

          I got bored and looked up the shifter design. What numbskull thought this was a good idea?

          http://image.musclemustangfastfords.com/f/29829455/mmfp_1102_04_+ford_2011_mustang_gt_transmission_swap+_factory_transmission.jpg

  • avatar
    dwford

    You can just see the hedges Ford made when they designed this Mustang. They detuned the V6, so there’s more power to be had there, the Ecoboost is rated at only 315 here, but 345 in the Focus RS, and the V8 still doesn’t have direct injection. Should make for easy work to upgrade everything for the refreshed 2018. I’m sure all that was engineered during the original design work anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      Chan

      Detuning an engine is not necessarily in the interest of cheaply unlocking more power in the future. There are issues of packaging and the intended market for the car. For example, I can guess that the average Mustang EcoBoost buyer is not as much an enthusiast as a Focus RS buyer. So, the Mustang buyer will likely want more low-end torque at the expense of peak power.

      The engine is also mounted transversely for the Focus, whereas (correct me if I’m wrong) it’s probably longitudinal in the Mustang. That could cause other constraints.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      I’m sure Ford is a good deal more conservative in the Mustang application due to the higher volume, the likely use of many 2.3L Mustangs in fleets, the less knowledgeable buyer base, and the need to run flawlessly all the time on 87-octane fuel of variable quality. I doubt we will see 340+ hp in the 2.3L Mustang unless/until there are major physical changes to the engine.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      The 5.0 really doesn’t warrant direct injection. Ford’s implementation of variable valve timing and line-of-sight injector targeting allows the 5.0 to get some of DI’s benefits without the cost. The engine is comparable in its performance offering 87 hp/l and 80 tq/l and nearly the same compression ratio as GM’s LT engine (11:1 vs 11.5:1) while the higher performing 5.2 in the Shelby operates with a higher compression and retains port injection as well. If the 5.0 has an unforgivable sin its a lack of displacement.

  • avatar
    dwford

    It’s interesting that the Mustang is so much cheaper than the competition, and that Ford is offering 0% for 72 months + $1000 cash back on it already.

  • avatar
    dougjp

    ” The recently announced 5.2-liter V-8 Shelby is a perfect example of the torque turbochargers add to the equation. The 2016 Shelby GT350 will bump power by 91 horsepower but torque by only 29 lb-ft. ”

    Not only is this illogical and backwards to reality with turbos, the Shelby doesn’t even have turbos!! Really surprised you didn’t research.

    http://blog.caranddriver.com/holy-flat-plane-crankshaft-we-finally-get-an-in-depth-look-at-the-ford-mustang-shelby-gt350gt350rs-5-2-liter-v-8/

    http://www.slashgear.com/shelby-gt350-5-2l-flat-plane-v8-makes-526hp-and-429-lb-ft-of-torque-03386515/

    • 0 avatar
      Zoom

      Alex didn’t say the GT350 will have a turbo. He’s saying a displacement increase doesn’t increase torque very much (29 lb-ft), versus adding a turbo.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      The sentence is confusingly worded, but what he’s trying to say is that the 5.2 *doesn’t* add torque, because it’s not turbocharged.

    • 0 avatar
      ilkhan

      The 5.2 doesn’t add much torque because its only slightly larger displacement, and is designed for revs over extra torque (the coyote is already plenty torquey).
      Turbos have nothing to do with it; and trying to add boost to that *8*0000 RPM motor is going to blow the pistons real fucking quick.

  • avatar
    JMII

    Did anyone else notice the creases on the hood align perfectly with your line of sight? Drove me nuts when I was checking out a co-workers turbo Mustang. Combined with the hood being long and flat I found forward visibility to be poor. On my Z the dash is low and hood drops away giving you an excellent view ahead. Otherwise I really like what Ford has done with the Mustang especially in the looks department, way better then the Camaro. I could see myself owning one in a few years. A rear seat delete with a liftback setup would be ideal. As is the rear glass slopes like a hatchback yet the car has a standard trunk with a tiny deck and small opening.

    Also can anyone explain why the nav system has a blinking white circle around the red triangle that represents the vehicle? My parents Escape (with SYNC) has the same sillyness and we can’t figure out how to turn it off. I find it distracting to have something on the nav screen blinking all the time. In addition inputting voice commands is hit and miss, address numbers have to spoken in a particular way to get them to work, for example 909 is nine-oh-nine, not nine-zero-nine.

  • avatar
    Fordson

    We’re getting an explanation of what a final-drive ratio is and how it affects every gear in the transmission – ?

    And complaints about how the GT and the Ecoboost require premium – ?

    What is this – Consumer Reports? Motorweek?

    Every single car named as the competitive set with the GT or Ecoboost also requires premium. So why would that be a negative?

  • avatar
    Fred

    I wonder when showing a music display if the song shown is picked for a reason. So what’s up with Vanilla Ice?

  • avatar
    IAhawkeye

    I want one so, so bad. Preferably in Triple Yellow with the 5.0,6-speed, Performance Pack, and nothing else.

    Unfortunately at my age insurance costs a ton, and in my area a rwd drive car would make for a very long winter especially if that’s all you have. That’s not even to mention the fact I carry more then just one person with me all the time. And I use my Silverado for “truck” things a lot, a Mustang is quite a loss of utility.. my next rides going to be a Duramax.. but someday..

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I do hope the Getrag MT82 issues have been resolved.

    I had a new MT82 fitted to my vehicle at the beginning of the year. The original lasted around 22 000 miles. The new box shift much easier, which is a bonus.

    The original box did have an issue with gear selection. Not that it was difficult to find a wanted gear, but to actually get it into gear in a timely fashion.

    In the end a rear bearing failed and I lost my cluster gears and the box was replaced under warranty by Mazda.

    From what I found out is Ford do manufacture the MT82 at two locations, China and the UK. Boxes from both countries exhibited the same problems.

    Well Ford have you fixed the MT82?? If not there will be plenty of disgruntled Mustang owners.

  • avatar
    AMDBMan

    These have been grabbing my attention more and more recently. I love the styling. They’ve got a shade of green called “Guard Green” that’s reminiscent of the Highland Green color that the original “Bullitt” car wore, which looks great in person. And the sound of this Coyote 5.0 when it’s stepped on is addicting. I’ve always been a casual fan of the older Mustangs, but like I said these new ones are really growing on me.

  • avatar
    05lgt

    White GT manual performance pack with whatever other package gets me ventilated memory seats. You buy it new and don’t put too many miles on it, I’ll be buying it in 10 years when the nest empties. THX!

  • avatar
    Steve Biro

    “SYNC includes an integrated telematics system that emails vehicle health reports, allows you to call a concierge, request emergency assistance and knows when your airbags have gone off. On the downside, this system is dependant on a paired Bluetooth phone to actually make the calls — so if you’ve forgotten your phone and you get in an accident, the car can’t dial for help.”

    And that’s the way I like it. I’ll pass on the Big Brother telematics, thank you. How ever did I survive driving over the past 40 years?

  • avatar
    wmba

    “and the automatic transmission needs a few more gears in order to match the competition.”

    Why? Does anyone drive paper specs? Only the people who never buy new and obsess over figures worry about this kind of stuff. Or like me, drive anything with a ZF 9 speed and realize the utter rubbish foisted on us as advances.

    My friend has a brand new GT automatic, and more gears is the last thing it needs. Decent tires would be a start – the P Zero’s are about a decade out-of-date.

    His daily driver is a 5 series, and he’s owned several Porsches. But he’s not a car nut in the sense we know here. Never once has he mentioned the number of gears being too little, and judging by the way it goes, it’d be the last thing on my mind as well.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      I was thinking something similar when I read that line. Some explanation of how the Mustang’s lower gear count actually affects the car would be helpful, especially given the abundance of power from the 5.0. I have no experience driving the new 8 and 9 speed autos, but I’ve driven enough 6 speeds to believe that shift logic is far more important than gear count. I’d rather have a well-programmed 4-speed than some of the balky unresponsive 6 speed units, so it isn’t much of a stretch to think the same applies for 6 vs 9.

    • 0 avatar
      05lgt

      Its foreshadowing. Checkovs gun is over the door marked 2016. Bball has told us the 10 speed is robust and has good logic. We’ve all been told it will first appear in the turbo Mustang and trucks. The stage is set, now we all have to hope TTAC gets one to review before next August.

    • 0 avatar
      ponchoman49

      It’s a Millennial thing. Notice that the telematics and electronics are mentioned before performance and driving characteristics. That is a dead giveaway. More gears, more HP etc are often marketing gimmicks to get them to trade up and into a new one more often. I see it all the time with the cell phones. Every time a new phone comes out they are the first in line to upgrade. A perfect example is the 9 speed in the Chrysler 200. It is simply overkill and unnecessary. A proper shifting 6 speed would be more than fine!

  • avatar
    Master Baiter

    It seems like he’s comparing the Mustang’s base price to a BMW, but what he drove was a $45,000 car. An M235i with navigation is only $47,645 MSRP.

    • 0 avatar
      johnny_5.0

      GT: $32,300
      GT w/ Performance Pack: $35,695
      GT Premium: $37,200
      GT Premium w/ Performance Pack: $39,695

      Base M235i: $45,695
      M235i w/ leather & heated seats: $47,845

      Navigation is $795 on the Mustang (but only available on Premium trims) and part of a $1,950 package on the BMW. There’s some other minor differences, the Mustang has a standard backup camera with optional sensors ($295 but reverse only), BMW offers both in a $950 package (front & rear sensors). Yadda yadda. The M235i is certainly a great deal on a new quick BMW, but the prices aren’t really that close when you consider the Performance Pack isn’t really required on the Mustang. It’s still a ~$10K gap for similar content, knock off a grand if you want the automatics. Both are cool cars though, and I love Estoril blue.

  • avatar
    ilkhan

    How do you possible manage to make me yawn THAT many times while reviewing a Mustang GT?
    Maybe its just that video including details we knew about 2 years ago while being recorded a year after most media outlets got their hands on it.

    And the GT *IS* available with the 3.31 rear ratio (its standard on non-PP manual cars). Mine has it.

  • avatar
    skor

    “Since 1964, the Mustang has been the place to find a large V8, a manual transmission and a solid rear axle.”

    The original Mustang could not be found with a ‘large V8’. The original eight cylinder mill displaced all of 260 cubes.

    As for the IRS, such a thing was developed for the first gen car, but it never saw the light of day. Ford management deduced….correctly….that an IRS would not improve sales, that’s why an IRS was not offered for nearly 30 years.

  • avatar
    epaiuk

    I cross-shopped the Mustang GT convertible to the M235, liked them both, but got the BMW. If you are leasing, the BMW is actually cheaper to lease. The details on the interior are far superior, and the car is much more fun to drive. The GT feels ponderous next to the M235. Didn’t drive the coupe, convertibles only…

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    “Back then, the GT’s 6.3 second 0-60 was rad to the max…”

    The GT did have 300 lbs/ft of torque, except was sandbagged with 3.08 gears. All meaningless numbers to the to the casual reader, but its torque came on early and stayed late. I’ve done the ‘side by side’, Fox 5.0, 3.08s vs 3.73s. Whole other different animal.

  • avatar
    Chan

    Those are the worst-looking “Recaro”-branded seats I have ever seen. They look like Ford asked Recaro to brand some chairs for them, and offered $10.

    “Well, all of our products cost more than that, but…..we do have these extra chairs that we found in the back. I guess you could have them.”

    I would pay money NOT to have those, and they seem to be quite terrible to live with as well.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      Ford seems to get the worst Recaros. I couldn’t even sit in those in the Focus ST. Those in the Mustang aren’t that bad, but you get no adjustability, no power, and no heated/cooled seat options. And worst of all, no lumbar support. Even my old Mazda3 has adjustable lumbar support!

      Those in GM cars seem a lot better, based on my experience (’14 Camaro, ’11 CTS). They’re probably more expensive though, so you’re getting what you pay for with Ford. I think the suede/leather seats in the Challenger Scat Pack are better too.

      • 0 avatar
        ponchoman49

        For somebody with back issues I find the Camaro and Challenger seats superior to these Recaro’s. Haven’t spent enough seat time in a base Gt seat but it also seemed better than these chairs.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    I’ve driven a couple GTs with the manual, Premium and standard, with the Performance Pack and without. I wish I liked it more, because these cars are so inexpensive compared to the Scat Pack Challenger I really want. The biggest problem for me was the ride. Way too much bouncing around in the back without the PP.

    With the Z-plan I’m eligible for a Mustang GT with a manual and no options comes in at 29,945 + tax. That’s some serious power for the money. Z-plan is about 4% below invoice.

    I have a couple of invoices in front of me if anyone’s interested in knowing what invoice prices are for individual options. Some dealers are reluctant to show them. They also include fuel charges and the advertising assessment, which is tacked onto the invoice program.

    The invoices are (MSRP/Invoice/Z-plan, and include destination):
    Mustang GT Manual/PP: $35,915/$33,683/$32,379 (options: reverse park assist)
    Mustang GT Premium Manual: $38,215/$35,888/$34,480 (options: reverse park assist, navigation)
    Mustang GT Premium Auto: $40,805/$38,239/$36,714 (options: Automatic, 20-inch wheels ($1,295!), navigation)

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Daddy wants one of these, real bad…


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Fordson: Some makes just should never produce SUVs…this is one of them. Look at the Maserati car in the group...
  • FreedMike: Toyota. Why do you think they haven’t invested in EVs?
  • redapple: Who will buy Tesla? GGM?
  • forward_look: Once I bought a ’74 (?) Colt/Mitsubishi for $100 that had the strut towers rusted out. I welded...
  • thelaine: Tick tock

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States