2015 Mustang benchmarked against outgoing M3. Already trailing the upcoming M4?

[jbockrd]

Originally Posted by kmarei

the biggest disappointment, as always with American cars
is the second you sit inside
cheapo plastic interior all around

I have a friend at work who owns the GT500
rode with him a few times
sounds nice, tons of power
but feels like i'm sitting in a cheapo Ford focus on the inside

in no way does it feel premium
its a cheap car, with a strong engine

Agree +1

They don't compare from the ownership, market segment standpoint. Only from the performance end

[BwoodBMW]

yes to be clear... Ford was trying to compete with performance, not necessarily refinement. For a car who's base price will be in the low 20's I think this is going to be great. The GT looks hot, allegedly has lost more than 200 lbs and gains IRS. And people who have actually sat in it say the interior is lightyears better than the last car. I don't think there is much to complain about with this thing. Unless you are an E92M3 owner that has a problem with a much cheaper car keeping up with you.

[dhirm5]

This is a meaningless comparison. Noone in their right mind cross shops an M3/M4 and a Mustang. The comparison can only be used for Mustang people to make themselves look/feel better. M3/M4 buyers have no skin in this game - it's irrelevant.

[BPMSport]

While I don't think this is the most valid comparison out there, I'm really digging the new look of the Mustang, particularly the front.

[wdeerfield]

its definitely a looker. at that price, the interior trimmings being less is fine by me. lots of power and IRS, we'll see how it does

[roastbeef]

i drove a gt 5.0 and i was impressed. i'm sure this one is going to be even better.

[Danyutz]

Sooo, the Ford Fusion went Coupe..

[Dbcgolf1]

Anyone can build a track car or street car. The M3 is a good combination of BOTH and track car AND a Daily Driver. That's hard to beat.

The Mustang looks good, but at first glance - the front looks a little like the current Ford Fusion.

Dave

[ramuman]

I'm actually glad that Ford and GM are benchmarking the GT and the CTS-V etc. against BMW. GM by all accounts has been doing a pretty good with the -V Cadillacs and the C7 - well... I had a 2013 GT as a rental and it was fast in a straight line, but the handling was atrocious. If Ford is realizing what they need to make it better, then that's great (though sticking with a live axle this long is...)

I'm also glad that BMW seems to be the first of the German big 3 to realize they can push in a different performance direction and aggressively reduce weight.

I never cross-shopped the GT when I got my E92 M and didn't consider the '15 GT or C7 when I put a deposit on the F82 M. However, I'm glad that companies do push each other like this. Even if it doesn't affect a direct cross-shopped sale, it affects the broader industry and that's great. A 40k car doesn't have to directly compete with a 70k car for there to be a benefit to consumers of both.

[bavarian19]

Im glad the 'stang is in this comparison. People think the M3 is in a class of its own performance wise. It just isnt. Build materials, sure. But I bet you it is not $30k better in just interior trim and finish.

This becomes more appealing now that pricing on the M3/M4 will just be astronomical (based on non-M 3/4 pricing as it is).

[mlhj83]

Even if the Mustang matched the M3 for performance, I think the biggest difference would be durability; how long can the Mustang withstand hard use before something wears out or breaks. We already know that the M3 in general has very good durability over many many miles of both road and track use. I think this is why the M3 costs so much more. It is one thing to produce a fast car, it is another to make it durable.

[b0bab0i]

Originally Posted by XtoM

Looks nice but it's no comparison to either of it's benchmarking cars, it's a fast car but not a sports car, muscle cars don't cut it unless you live on a drag strip.

If you think the Mustang GT is only a muscle car, you will be surprised when you meet one on the track. Previous Gen Mustang Laptimes were equivalent to E9X M3 times and this new gen has lost weight. Same performance for half the price.

Mustang Gt500 completely annhilates the M3.

[basscadet]

Originally Posted by reborn

I think that a true comparison for a GT is the 335. The M3 is a much more expensive car and should be compared to special models of the mustang.

The GT is far more capable than the 335i and is more of a performance match for the M3. Cost doesn't really factor here. If the GT 350 were available yet, that's surely what we would compare with the M3 but the results would not be pretty for the M3.

Originally Posted by Remonster

The current Mustang can keep up with an M3, but the handling is not even close. Bear in mind that there's a LOT more to handling than skidpad numbers and lap times, I've driven every year of the fifth gen Mustang (2005-2013) and pretty much every engine they offer (3.7 V6, 4.6 V8, 5.0 V8, a couple of the earlier GT500s) and they all have basically the same handling characteristics; very lazy steering with almost no feel, very soft springs and dampers, tons of rubber in the suspension, etc.

I cancelled my '11 M3 lease deal at the last moment after I test drove an '11 GT out of guilt. I ended up buying the Mustang.

I agree with everything you have said about the sloppy GT handling but I would say that 90% of the slop in the Mustang can be eliminated with very minor suspension modifications. Koni yellows and sport springs made gigantic improvements to the way the car felt. Almost to the point that it is criminal Ford did not include such a suspension as factory. The car was quite literally transformed in terms of handling, much more buttoned-down and M3-like. Still, the live axle was a pain in the ass and ultimately I had to get rid of the car.

The core problems of the Mustang were not the performance or interior (which isn't THAT bad), it was the fact that in the end it is a Mustang, they are a dime-a-dozen, and the retro styling made me just hate to have to look at it.

[Saphirschwarz]

it has the 4 series msport front equipped !

[Randy M]

Imo the new Mustang will be cross shopped with the M4 and other euro cars. Even more so than they have in the past. I've had all kinds of cars and have cross shopped them all. These among others:

Aircooled 911's and a 997.2 GT3
R32, Corrado and GTI
Ram SRT-10 and Challenger SRT 8
Landrover D90
Audi RS4
E46 M3
and sadly a H2 SUT lol

I'm not a euro car snob and I personally don't feel like I'm somehow better or above driving an American car. They do some things better like fit and finish, dealer experience, more refined cars etc. The Americans do other things better, POWER, style, service and parts costs. And the best thing the Americans do is sell you a car at a price point where you don't feel like you've paid too much.

I have a deposit on a M4. It'll likely cost in $77-82K or so. When (if) I take delivery I will feel like I paid too much. Just like I did with the GT3 and the RS4. On the other hand I could buy a new Mustang GT for likely half the price. The difference with this new Mustang is that fit/finish and overall performance will be much closer to the European feel and will compare favorably with the M4. The Americans are getting better for sure. GM and Chrysler will follow Ford in the quality of their offerings. That is a win for everybody...

[wdlfbio]

Whether it can hold up to a newer M3/4 isn't a big issue for me. We've had two E92s, one E92 M3, and an E89 Z4 35is. I'm ready to replace the 2012 E92 335xi with a DD I can have fun with and maybe a little track time. Loved the M3, but never went even 7/10ths on the few track/autoX events, so did I get my money out of the extra $30k?? Do most people get to really feel the difference? I can buy another M (M2 is intriguing), but value for my $$$ is an issue. Especially since I only keep a car for 2-3 years.

But if the interior is crap and it's going to rattle in 12 months, I'm out for sure!!!

[puma1552]

Originally Posted by XtoM

Looks nice but it's no comparison to either of it's benchmarking cars, it's a fast car but not a sports car, muscle cars don't cut it unless you live on a drag strip.

lol.

Originally Posted by m3kenny

The new M3/M4 will hand it to the competition. Again. They always do

No they won't and no they don't, if you watched the full video in post #4 of this thread you'd see that.

Originally Posted by reborn

I think that a true comparison for a GT is the 335. The M3 is a much more expensive car and should be compared to special models of the mustang.

While I would somewhat agree with you on this, it wouldn't bode well for BMW given what a $30k GT can do against an E92 M3.

Originally Posted by Remonster

The current Mustang can keep up with an M3, but the handling is not even close. Bear in mind that there's a LOT more to handling than skidpad numbers and lap times, I've driven every year of the fifth gen Mustang (2005-2013) and pretty much every engine they offer (3.7 V6, 4.6 V8, 5.0 V8, a couple of the earlier GT500s) and they all have basically the same handling characteristics; very lazy steering with almost no feel, very soft springs and dampers, tons of rubber in the suspension, etc. They're just sloppy cars, you can throw them into a corner and they will generate enough grip to go through very quickly but you don't feel the road at all and can't really tell how close you are to the limit. That live rear axle (which is gone now) isn't as bad as some say but it still has some very annoying characteristics, chief among them is the huge weight of the rear diff and axle hanging off of the suspension which means that even though the suspension is very soft, it still crashes and makes the body wobble when you hit a bump and hitting a bump mid-corner makes the whole car bounce. The earlier fifth gen GTs with the 4.6 were worse than the 5.0s, in the last few years Ford started offering the track pack and a couple other options that went a long way towards improving the way the Mustang drove. The 2013 GT Track Pack I drove was pretty good as long as the road was fairly smooth.

Handling IS skidpad and lap times, regardless of how the car feels as you're doing it. Either the car can get around the corners fast enough, or it can't - everything else is irrelevant IMO.

Originally Posted by dhirm5

This is a meaningless comparison. Noone in their right mind cross shops an M3/M4 and a Mustang. The comparison can only be used for Mustang people to make themselves look/feel better. M3/M4 buyers have no skin in this game - it's irrelevant.

I wouldn't be so sure. Would you also argue that nobody would cross shop a 2 series and a Mustang? That's what I'll be doing.

Originally Posted by ramuman

I had a 2013 GT as a rental and it was fast in a straight line, but the handling was atrocious.

How did you arrive at this conclusion? Based on that, the E92 M3 also has atrocious handling.

----

All the above aside, everyone wins when manufacturers compete at this level, it's great for everyone.

[S65V8]

I have a feeling BMW is in for a rude awakening in 2014. This stang I have to admit looks pretty good (especially once it comes in Seca or 500 versions), and if they really benched it against a M or 911, then the Americans would make it lighter, more agile, and behave like a euro car with improved interior materials / styling to boot - I would imagine the RING numbers will be touted alot more this time around to just show how well this car performs. BMW needs to do something surprising with the M3/M4 to retain its status as the best all around GT sports car for sub $80k. If it's too close to C7Z51 and '14 Stang 5.0, then people might just say screw it, I'd rather save $20k.

[mookie45]

I had a 2013 5.0 rental for 5 days. I agree, the interior is cheap. Another thing that really bothered me was the handling and the feeling. The drive experience is lifeless. There is no road feedback and felt boring.

The car does have lots of power and sounds great. I wouldn't be surprised if it gave an m3 a run for its money.

[puma1552]

One other note - to those saying the 5.0 they rented has a cheap interior, I guarantee you it's a base GT, not a GT Premium which is MUCH nicer inside.

I agree, the base GT interior is blah, but that's a car akin to the Fox Body LX cars - no frills, all power. The GT Premium rights a lot of wrongs of the base GT interior-wise, and I'd expect a similar dual GT offering for the upcoming 2015.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by reborn

I think that a true comparison for a GT is the 335. The M3 is a much more expensive car and should be compared to special models of the mustang.

I love my 335 but it's does not even come close to the GT in any performance measure. It compares better with the M3.

[gzim335]

The 2015 GT will be faster than the outgoing boss 302 both straight line and track.