Car and Driver Review- 05 Stang vs. 05 GTO

[svtcobra0304]

you'd think they would give the stang some more power...but I didn't think the GTO was all that impressive.

 

[TRAMS_AM]

Don't think so scooter. They've only sold 53% of planned sales by 11/1/04. Yes, the incentives have increased sales but not dramatically. If they had increased as much as you seem to think, they wouldn't have 127 days worth of inventory stockpiled.

As Bob Cosby said in an earlier post, it's relative. I'm not saying that the GTO went from selling 800 cars one month to 40,000 the next. But as soon as the incentives kicked in, sales rose 177%. That's pretty dramatic, don't you think?

Unfortunately, this is too little too late. The supply is pretty big and it probably won't be possible to sell all the '04s before the '05s show up.

BTW, is your name a MST3K reference?

 

[TomServo92]

As Bob Cosby said in an earlier post, it's relative. I'm not saying that the GTO went from selling 800 cars one month to 40,000 the next. But as soon as the incentives kicked in, sales rose 177%. That's pretty dramatic, don't you think?

Unfortunately, this is too little too late. The supply is pretty big and it probably won't be possible to sell all the '04s before the '05s show up.

BTW, is your name a MST3K reference?

If sales jumped by 177% and they're only at 53% of planned this late in the year, then the early sales must have been truly pathetic. Yes, you are correct that it's too late to sell all the 2004s. I'm sure that's why 2005 production has been scaled back.

To me it's a shame. I used to be a big fan of Pontiac years ago. The car I dreamed of in my youth was the '78 T/A with the 6.6L. When I heard the GTO was coming back I was very interested but when I saw it, I was disappointed. The performance was there but the styling was just unappealing to me.

Yes, my name is an MST3K reference.

 

[351CJ]

At the beginning of November, 9,487 GTOs had been sold with a stockpile of approx. 5,900 (a 127 day supply...yikes!). GM has already reduced 2005 production by 30% from 18,000 units to 12,000. All the GTO owners brag about being able to get a GTO for around $26K but I personally don't think that's anything to brag about when you look at the big picture. A limited edition high-performance vehicle with a $3500 incentive that has only sold 53% of it's expected sales is a sales failure. If this trend continues through next year, the GTO could go the way of the F-bodies.

November was the best sales month for the GTO with 1,130 sold for an 11 month sales total of 10,617, so the rebates and dealer discounts must be working.

I have to agree that dealer markups really hurt early GTO sales and killed any sales momentum that the GTO may have ever had. That same dealer screwing of the customer killed T-Bird sales. The T-Bird never recovered from the slime ball dealers. Possibly the 2005 upgrades for the GTO will give it new life, that is if the dealers don't try making up the 05 GTOs.

However the Automotive news article that talked about the production cuts said that GM now has a 168 day supply of 2004 GTO's on hand meaning that there will still be plenty of 2004 GTOs sitting on dealer lots in April 2005.

 

[fivepointNO]

The fastest Pontiac is BMR Fabrication's car. It's ran 10.98@125. The fastest Holden (to my knowledge) is a CV8 that runs 10.22@139.

125 and 139mph with those horrible ETs? YIKES!!! Well, still no worries.

Btw, both are obviously fast. Why the ET for the second car isn't in the 9's, I donno. Maybe the IRS, maybe any number of other factors though, like weight.

 

[fivepointNO]

FivepointNO – the 13.2’s are more common than you may think. In one weekend, two members of LS1GTO ran that time, and several others have also run similar times. I think that due to the small number of GTO’s running around out there, and the even smaller number that see the track, there won’t be too many people posting times, let alone really good ones. The lowest time I’ve heard is a 12.9, which is close to the fastest stock LS1 F-body times (although a chicken may have been sacrificed or a soul may have been sold for this time. I also would love to see a slip for that run).

13.2's after mods aren't uncommon. But there's only 1 I've heard of that managed it all stock, even after checking on LS1GTO. There's no '04 GTO that ever ran 12's stock, period. That's why you haven't seen the slip. It didn't happen. The common A4 times are about 14.0, but several have run 13.60's. 12's just aren't at all believeable. Particularly when considering ever other ET we've heard, only one having run 13.18 once from all I can find about them, totally stock.

 

[Cobra-Master]

If I were in the market for another new car, and my choices were the 05 Mustang or the 05 GTO, I'd likely pick the Mustang based on my own preferences and biases. However, I would like to comment on one point you made:


The gas guzzling moniker is inaccurate, especially as it pertains to the manual cars. The 05 GT M5 is rated at 17/25 mpg. The 04 GTO M6 is rated at 17/29 mpg. That's even in the city, and significanly better on the highway. Granted, that is the 04 with the 5.7L LS1, but if the Vette is any indication (and it should be, as they shared engine in both 04 and 05), the 05 GTO will get similar, if not the same mileage. It makes sense....the LSX-based GMs always do well on mileage.

FYI...A5 Mustangs are rated at 18/23 mpg and A4 GTOs are rated at 16/21 mpg (and pay a gas guzzler tax because of it).

Just some friendly info.

This is one thing that I have to hand to GM. The "LS" engines get awesome gas mileage. I used to own a 2000 Z28 and typically got 18-20 MPG around town and upwards to 27 MPG on the highway. Way better than my Terminator gets...

 

[Stang2k5]

When I was considering buying a muscle car I considered the 04 Cobra, 04 GTO and the 2005 Mustang GT. The best car in my opinion ... dollar for dollar is the 2005 Mustang GT....

How can you beat a car thats putting out over 300 HP for only 23k. You can get a loaded 05 Stang GT for 25k invoice. What would a fully loaded Cobra or GTO cost ???

Need I say more

 

[Bob Cosby]

When I was considering buying a muscle car I considered the 04 Cobra, 04 GTO and the 2005 Mustang GT. The best car in my opinion ... dollar for dollar is the 2005 Mustang GT....

How can you beat a car thats putting out over 300 HP for only 23k. You can get a loaded 05 Stang GT for 25k invoice. What would a fully loaded Cobra or GTO cost ???

Need I say more

Mine was $29.8k. Worth it to me.

 

[max2000jp]

"4.5? Heh... Enter, Corvette. Turn and stop on a dime. Please. It's good, yes. But it's not in that arena yet."

I am using that expression relative to the fact that it is a 3,700 lb near luxury car. For a car of that nature, the performance is sick!! The other cars in its price range are the G35 or CTS. Those cars would get their asses handed to them.

If Car and Driver got 4.8 out of a GTO that isn't broken in, mid 4s should be possible. A Corvette should be able to get aweful close for 4 flat.

"Not "were," are. The reason, GM isn't selling enough and they're offering incentives. The base price is still over 30K."

That is the whole point. Those rebates turn the GTO from a good value to an insane value. Right now the Mustang GT simply can't compete on value. But then again, people who buy cars in their first year right when they come out do so for emotional reasons, not value.

I am simply pointing out that since RIGHT NOW the GTO costs about as much as a Mustang GT, it is a pretty damn good value. You get an exclusive car with good performance and good luxury for the price of a pure performance-oriented car like the Mustang. The only reason people hate the GTO is because of A) cost and B) styling. But the GTO costs 10s of thousands less than comparable vehicles, and the styling is meant to appeal to the more conservative audience who want a 'stealth' car, not a showy type sports car.

I guess what I am saying is that all these reviews for the GTO are practically irrelevant. They all dog it because they evaluate it as something it is not (a camaro). Of course it is going to suck if you want a Camaro or Firebird. But it was never meant to appeal to that type of consumer. It's meant to appeal to the type of guy who wants to go to his accounting job every day and not stand out in the parking lot, but still have a car that is capable of providing a good amount of fun on the track on the weekends. The type of guy that wants to be able to carry four people around in comfort on occassion, and impress them to some degree WITHOUT mashing on the gas pedal.

Evaluate it like that, and no other car within $15K can compete. The next cheapest you are going to get is a CTS-V, but the GTO is about 85-90% of that car for 60% of the price.

First, the GT is a better value IMHO for what you are getting. Comparing the 05 GT to 05 GTO, I saved 8K. GM is offering some sick rebates currently because the car isn't selling well. The GTO has a great engine; were it not for the LS1/LS2 I doubt the car would have sold as much as it currently did. The GTO doesn't compete against the G35 , BMW, or the CTS; those are LUXURY cars. I think a lot of people don't understand that the GTO, nor Mustang isn't close to being classified as a luxury car. Both cars have poor interiors compared to a "luxury" car. Sit in a BMW, Audi, Acura, Lexus etc. and you will immediately see a difference.

Secondly, you say that you get 85-90% of a CTS-V in a GTO, this is false. The CTS-V offers a quite a bit more. You get a more dynamic chassis/suspension, 18" Wheels, HID's, Brembo brakes, LS6, etc. You also get a much cleaner looking exterior and an interior with a lot more features. The only thing you really can compare with the two is the engine/transmission.

The GTO isn't selling well IMO because GM didn't do their homework. GM needed a product that would create a "buzz" instead of a bland product. The upcoming Solstice is a great example of GM doing just the opposite. The GTO really looks too much like the other Pontiac products, such as the Grand Prix. GM also priced the car too high, as you pointed out. When the GTO first came out and no incentives were offered, it was within a couple thousand of the base 04 C5. GM was offering some real great incentives on that vehicle because of the upcoming C6.

 

[jgressley2003]

Why do people that are huge diehard GM fans come on the Mustang boards to try and cause trouble. Hmm I'm a huge Mustang fan and I've never gone onto any GM website to cause trouble. Well ok maybe I did once only to look for parts for the pos Firebird I'm working on at the moment. But anyways I guess that is why I don't like GM people. They always think their stuff is better than everyone else. Just doesn't make sense to me. If you have no interest in Mustangs how about you stay off of Stangnet.

 

[MichMash]

I think they are both great cars and I'll be testing them both out in the spring. I like the power and performance of the GTO but the looks of the GT. It will come down do what I enjoy driving most I suppose. I am glad I have two great American V8s to choose from.

I don't understand the debates though - the numbers don't lie. The GTO is a better performer and the GT is a better looker. I suppose some are entitled to their opinion that the GTO looks better (since it is an opinion), but I don't think anybody can say the GT is faster. "My car is better than your car" debates are fun, but you guys need to be more honest here. You can't rebut a faster 0-60 or 1/4 time with a price or looks argument.

Don't argue about price - it isn't a valid point in the "my car is better than your car" debate. One car isn't better than the other because it is more or less expensive. If you are bragging about your car to some guy on the street are you going to tell him how great your car is because it was cheap? Leave that to the Toyota and Honda drivers. If you want to say the GT is a good value (it may or may not be), that is fine - but it isn't "better" than the GTO because it is cheaper. The GTO isn't better than a vette because it is cheaper, although they have the same engine/torque and similar performance figures.

If I were a Mustang owner, I wouldn't get too excited about C/D picking them over the GTO. Thier reviews are WAY too subjective - nothing more than the opinions of a few. The "winners" of their tests always do so by the most narrow of margins (almost always a single point), and then you see the difference on "got to have it" factor.

One who thinks their GT is better than the GTO (let alone goes out and buys one) because C/D gave it more "gotta have it" points is a disappointing individual. Do your research (which is why these forums are great and why I am here), and buy what you desire - who cares what everyone else thinks.

BTW - Anyone have any pics of silver GT with racing stripes. I am thinking that it would look sweet!

 

[one2gamble]

how is it a better performer than the 05? The GTO gets beat in the slalom and theres a timeslip of a stock 05 a few threads down running a 13.35.....

 

[GM-Guy81]

Why do people that are huge diehard GM fans come on the Mustang boards to try and cause trouble. Hmm I'm a huge Mustang fan and I've never gone onto any GM website to cause trouble. Well ok maybe I did once only to look for parts for the pos Firebird I'm working on at the moment. But anyways I guess that is why I don't like GM people. They always think their stuff is better than everyone else. Just doesn't make sense to me. If you have no interest in Mustangs how about you stay off of Stangnet.

Well, in spite of my status as a GM guy who has loved camaros forever, Im currently debating between an 05 GT or a 05 GTO at GMS pricing. I really like the GT, I think it looks great even though I havent ever liked mustangs before.

As for GM people coming to your boards to bash, I post alot over at GM Insidenews, and there are at least 5 ford people who do nothing but bash every GM product over and over and over and over again in every thread, then never go back to the thread to actually have a conversation. Thinking that its all GM people or all Ford people who do that is in error.

Anyway, I just wish the GT had a bit more horsepower, I mean the 98 Camaro Z28 had 305. Ah well, thats what the Mach1 and Cobra are for. Im probably going to be getting a new car in the next couple months, and Im leaning towards a GT until 07 when the new Camaro comes out.

When it comes right down to it, in spite of being a Chevy guy, I would MUCH rather see ford do well than they Japanese companies. Anything that keeps people buying american is great with me, the mustang does that, so more power to it and ford.

 

[fivepointNO]

I don't understand the debates though - the numbers don't lie. The GTO is a better performer and the GT is a better looker. I suppose some are entitled to their opinion that the GTO looks better (since it is an opinion), but I don't think anybody can say the GT is faster. "My car is better than your car" debates are fun, but you guys need to be more honest here. You can't rebut a faster 0-60 or 1/4 time with a price or looks argument.

The GTO is the better consistent performer, IN A STRAIGHT LINE! This used to be the Mustangs biggest drawback, it on;y went straight "well." The GTO handles well, but not AS WELL as the new MustangGT. It doesn't slalom nearly well, nor does it match the skidpad numbers of the GT. Also, the GTO is faster on top end. So in 2 categories, it beats the Mustang outright. In two other performance categories, it falls into second place. Does it truly outperform the MustangGT? No it doesn't, unless we're only looking at the points where the GTO is better, and skipipng others.

If I were a Mustang owner, I wouldn't get too excited about C/D picking them over the GTO. Thier reviews are WAY too subjective - nothing more than the opinions of a few. The "winners" of their tests always do so by the most narrow of margins (almost always a single point), and then you see the difference on "got to have it" factor.

I agree not to be too exited about something the magazines say. However, the "gotta have it" factor isn't the only one the Mustang was rated higher in. So it earned 7 more points there. The average onlooker says that advantage is more like 60:1, not just a few points. In that regard, the magazine was "going easy" on the GTO, because it's a good performer. Being realistic, the GTO GtH it factor isn't even close, as I said. The sales figures tell that story all too well. That noted, the GT would've won by a bigger margin had they been realistic and said... "Well, most folks like it's performance but won't buy one because they think it's ugly." I don't personally think it's ugly, but compared to the MustangGT(which they did), it's "butt ugly."

The looks and price will kill the GTO in the end. If it looked even close to it's original model that would be different. But it doesn't and unless the price is stabilized at about 30K out the door, this car will go bye bye in 2 more yrs.

 

[GTP2GTO]

how is it a better performer than the 05? The GTO gets beat in the slalom and theres a timeslip of a stock 05 a few threads down running a 13.35.....

Funny how the timeslips have errors on them, such as the car number changes on the slips. The time is also .8 better than his other runs not too long ago. What were his 60's then?
Also, look at the trap speed. 100mph? Big whoop. So the car is geared to jump off the line, it obviously has no balls up top. If it even really was his car...

 

[Bob Cosby]

how is it a better performer than the 05? The GTO gets beat in the slalom and theres a timeslip of a stock 05 a few threads down running a 13.35.....

As for the timeslips....the 13.35 was run on a different day at a different track and with a different driver. The GT/GTO shootout was done on the same day at the same place and with the same drivers, thus the results are more relative. When the 05 GTOs hit the track, you will see high 12's out of them with competent drivers in good air.

Funny how the timeslips have errors on them, such as the car number changes on the slips. The time is also .8 better than his other runs not too long ago. What were his 60's then?
Also, look at the trap speed. 100mph? Big whoop. So the car is geared to jump off the line, it obviously has no balls up top. If it even really was his car...

And here we have one of the inevitable doubters. He (I'm assuming - if you're a she or something else, please correct me) finds out that one of the timeslips has a "00" on it vice the same car number, and thus figures it there is some funny business going on, and thus he/she doesn't have to believe it for that reason.

BTW....it was .3 better, not .8. If you'll do a search on that person's username, you'll find a post about him running 13.6 just a short time back. Not sure why I have to tell you that, but there you go.

I bet you've got a bunch of folks high-five'ng you on a different forum, huh?

 

[Jon Do]

"The GTO handles well, but not AS WELL as the new MustangGT. It doesn't slalom nearly well, nor does it match the skidpad numbers of the GT."

But on the Car And Driver subjective ratings, the GTO scored higher for handling. Handling is not like acceleration in the sense that it is hard to measure by numbers alone. BMW cars have terrible handling limits--as witnessed by their low skidpads and slolams--but they are considered among the best handlers because they are comfortable to use right up to the limits. The Mustang might post better handling numbers, but if that Car and Drive article is God (which poses a problem in itself) it doesn't feel as good in the handling component when driven hard.

There is a reason the GTO costs $8K more than the base Mustang GT. When higher end Mustangs of comparable prices come out, they will probably handily beat the GTO in acceleration, handling and performance, but not the GT. Sorry.

 

[CatmanJJ]

I think it's awesome that Ford comes this close in straight line performance with nearly a 100 hp deficit (going by Manu numbers).

 

[Jon Do]

"The GTO doesn't compete against the G35 , BMW, or the CTS; those are LUXURY cars."

But the GTO doesn't compete against the Mustang either. If it had to be compared to a Mercury product, it would be the 4 door Marauder. Spiritually it is successor to the 4 door Impala SS of 10 years ago.

The Camaro and Firebird are meant to compete witht he Mustang, not the GTO. The only reason that people compare the GTO to the Mustang is because A) The Camaro/Firebird won't be available for a couple more years and B) if it was compared to the Marauder, the comparison would be so one sided at least as far as performance is concerned that it would be nearly pointless.

Pretty soon Chrysler is going to come out with a 400+ HP version high performance version of the 300C. Even though that is a 4 door, it is a much better comparison to the GTO than the Mustang. If a coupe of that type of car was made, they would be targetting nearly the same consumer. The Mustang OTOH is meant to appeal to a totally different consumer.