[tyler731]

I think the biggest thing is no one else hopped out of a pp1 into a 1le, if they did im sure they would say very similar things about the pp1. if you drove a camaro then drove a bugatti you'd say the camaro was an absolute dog because the bugatti is way faster, just as m/t said, there's about 4000 years separating them.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

We like to make fun of Mustang drivers because of all the embarrassing crashes. The problem may very well be the car and not the drivers. Red

LOL

Originally Posted by tyler731

I think the biggest thing is no one else hopped out of a pp1 into a 1le, if they did im sure they would say very similar things about the pp1. if you drove a camaro then drove a bugatti you'd say the camaro was an absolute dog because the bugatti is way faster, just as m/t said, there's about 4000 years separating them.

fair enough

[End User]

Originally Posted by oldman

I did NOT order the magride on my SS, I figured that a DSSV GM or aftermarket solution would be in the works, and I'm correct. So if we are talking perfomance, magride is not the optimal solution either OEM and you bolt it on after you roll the car.

Are you going to install DSSV dampers? Your SS is going to have a firm ride to say the very least.

[End User]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Not sure why you keep bringing that up that the 1LE is faster lol.

I needed to. You are focused on reviews that completely missed the flaws inherent to PP1 equipped GTs. The GTs poor lap time clearly demonstrates that problems exist.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by End User

I needed to. You are focused on reviews that completely missed the flaws inherent to PP1 equipped GTs. The GTs poor lap time clearly demonstrates that problems exist.

Did they miss the flaws or did M/T get unlucky and get a lemon? My point is this, if all the GT PP1 cars are as bad as M/T made it out to be, you would think the other reviews would mention they noticed something similar. Yet none of the reviews have, in fact they have stated the opposite of M/T said.

[Thill444]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Did they miss the flaws or did M/T get unlucky and get a lemon? My point is this, if all the GT PP1 cars are as bad as M/T made it out to be, you would think the other reviews would mention they noticed something similar. Yet none of the reviews have, in fact they have stated the opposite of M/T said.

If they sent them a lemon then the Figure 8, track times, etc would likely be much worse in the Motor Trend test. As MotorTrend stated the 18 improved upon the 2015 Performance Pack Mustang and put down a respectable time. The 1LE is just a much better car on track (as the number showed). It wasn't close.

To me it is more that the 1LE is that good on track than the Mustang is that bad. It is what it is. The Camaro is just a much better drivers car and the Mustang will be a better GT car for daily use and still have fun on the track.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Did they miss the flaws or did M/T get unlucky and get a lemon? My point is this, if all the GT PP1 cars are as bad as M/T made it out to be, you would think the other reviews would mention they noticed something similar. Yet none of the reviews have, in fact they have stated the opposite of M/T said.

Other the Motor Trend, has any other publication done an in depth review of the 18 GT? I've only seen brief fluff pieces like the MotorWeek one.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Thill444

If they sent them a lemon then the Figure 8, track times, etc would likely be much worse in the Motor Trend test. As MotorTrend stated the 18 improved upon the 2015 Performance Pack Mustang and put down a respectable time. The 1LE is just a much better car on track (as the number showed). It wasn't close.

To me it is more that the 1LE is that good on track than the Mustang is that bad. It is what it is. The Camaro is just a much better drivers car and the Mustang will be a better GT car for daily use and still have fun on the track.

I am not disputing that at all lol,

Originally Posted by hotlap

Other the Motor Trend, has any other publication done an in depth review of the 18 GT? I've only seen brief fluff pieces like the MotorWeek one.

Besides Edmunds none have gone as in depth, but to me it just seems weird that MT stated they noticed a lot of body roll, and feels like it wants oversteer and understeer at the same time. Felt bad going into a corner.

Those types of things to me if it was as bad as they made it seem would pop up to some degree. But C&D, R&T and Motorweek all said the opposite. They said the car feels like "body motions are tightly controlled" and "adopted the stability and willingness of the GT350. Body roll is tightly checked" "This car feels great, fitting right in with just about any track worthy car you can think of. And it could even raise a few rival fans opinions on the Mustang.

This GT is precision balanced; much like the 2008 Mustang Bullitt we loved; though here there is enough power to induce some oversteer if you want, and those Michelin’s did take a bit of time to get heated up. "

Edmunds mentioned some body roll, "Body roll is noticeable but not at all off-putting. At the limit, the car behaves in a very predictable manner as long as you carefully modulate the throttle" "No matter your skill level, it's fun exploring the Mustang's performance potential.

Opting for the Performance package option makes Mustang corner flatter, but it also affects ride quality"

You don't find it odd that 1 review said the car feels like it's going to roll over on itself and feels like the front and back aren't connected but every other review so far has said the car feels tight, planted and feels great?

Again, I am just saying if it was as bad as MT said, you would think some of these other reviews might say not as balanced as we would like, or something along those lines

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Did they miss the flaws or did M/T get unlucky and get a lemon? My point is this, if all the GT PP1 cars are as bad as M/T made it out to be, you would think the other reviews would mention they noticed something similar. Yet none of the reviews have, in fact they have stated the opposite of M/T said.

Because like every other profession these days, folks are just lazy. It's hard to read a professionally written piece without grammar and cut/past errors in it. It's like nobody proof reads anymore.

So, if you are reviewing cars for a living, the Mustang handles well compared to an average vehicle that you have been reviewing. But NOT compared to a Camaro, BMW M product, Porsche, etc. But that is the point. The Camaro's handling can be discussed in this group, but the Mustang can not (at least in base and PP1 form. GT350 excepted, of course).

Most reviews, especially Motor Week are just regurgitating what is in the sales brochure. It's always best if you just look at the data yourself. And in this case, you can clearly see the body moving all over on both the road and track tests. It's clear it was there.

It's also clear that the engineers at Ford weren't happy with how the PP1 turned out either, because they worked on another PP in secret to fix the issues with PP1. If PP1 were "tightly controlled" like the other magazines said, there would be no PP2. What would be the point?

And the real issue that all the pieces were there. They already make an S550 that handles on the top level (GT350). Just take some of the components that were already developed for the GT350 and push them down into the PP1. In fact, that is EXACTLY what the 1LE is. If you click the 1LE package on an SS, you get the ZL1 suspension parts. If you click the 1LE package on an LS/LT Camaro, you get the SS suspension. The parts are already there, so it doesn't have much development costs associated.

Instead they put development time into new suspension parts that aren't quite up to the task.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Besides Edmunds none have gone as in depth, but to me it just seems weird that MT stated they noticed a lot of body roll, and feels like it wants oversteer and understeer at the same time. Felt bad going into a corner.

Those types of things to me if it was as bad as they made it seem would pop up to some degree. But C&D, R&T and Motorweek all said the opposite. They said the car feels like "body motions are tightly controlled" and "adopted the stability and willingness of the GT350. Body roll is tightly checked" "This car feels great, fitting right in with just about any track worthy car you can think of. And it could even raise a few rival fans opinions on the Mustang.

This GT is precision balanced; much like the 2008 Mustang Bullitt we loved; though here there is enough power to induce some oversteer if you want, and those Michelin’s did take a bit of time to get heated up. "

Edmunds mentioned some body roll, "Body roll is noticeable but not at all off-putting. At the limit, the car behaves in a very predictable manner as long as you carefully modulate the throttle" "No matter your skill level, it's fun exploring the Mustang's performance potential.

Opting for the Performance package option makes Mustang corner flatter, but it also affects ride quality"

You don't find it odd that 1 review said the car feels like it's going to roll over on itself and feels like the front and back aren't connected but every other review so far has said the car feels tight, planted and feels great?

Again, I am just saying if it was as bad as MT said, you would think some of these other reviews might say not as balanced as we would like, or something along those lines

Edmunds wasn't a really great review either IMO. Of the Mustang they did however say...

With the stock suspension, the Mustang handles much as it did before. Body roll is noticeable but not at all off-putting. At the limit, the car behaves in a very predictable manner as long as you carefully modulate the throttle. Past the limit, the stability control systems will keep you in line. The Sport and Track settings will allow for a bit more freedom and wheelspin, but not enough to get you in trouble. With the systems disabled (not recommended, but, you know ...), there's a tendency for oversteer, but again, with a deft right foot and fast hands, you can either hold the slide or get it back in line. No matter your skill level, it's fun exploring the Mustang's performance potential.

Opting for the Performance package option makes Mustang corner flatter, but it also affects ride quality. The new MagneRide dampers promise even greater controllability with fewer sacrifices in regard to comfort.
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/fir...rst-drive.html

[tyler731]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Did they miss the flaws or did M/T get unlucky and get a lemon? My point is this, if all the GT PP1 cars are as bad as M/T made it out to be, you would think the other reviews would mention they noticed something similar. Yet none of the reviews have, in fact they have stated the opposite of M/T said.

so will you argue that the car sent to Evan Smith was a ringer since no other magazine has come close to his time?

[oldman]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

Because like every other profession these days, folks are just lazy. It's hard to read a professionally written piece without grammar and cut/past errors in it. It's like nobody proof reads anymore.

So, if you are reviewing cars for a living, the Mustang handles well compared to an average vehicle that you have been reviewing. But NOT compared to a Camaro, BMW M product, Porsche, etc. But that is the point. The Camaro's handling can be discussed in this group, but the Mustang can not (at least in base and PP1 form. GT350 excepted, of course).

Most reviews, especially Motor Week are just regurgitating what is in the sales brochure. It's always best if you just look at the data yourself. And in this case, you can clearly see the body moving all over on both the road and track tests. It's clear it was there.

It's also clear that the engineers at Ford weren't happy with how the PP1 turned out either, because they worked on another PP in secret to fix the issues with PP1. If PP1 were "tightly controlled" like the other magazines said, there would be no PP2. What would be the point?

And the real issue that all the pieces were there. They already make an S550 that handles on the top level (GT350). Just take some of the components that were already developed for the GT350 and push them down into the PP1. In fact, that is EXACTLY what the 1LE is. If you click the 1LE package on an SS, you get the ZL1 suspension parts. If you click the 1LE package on an LS/LT Camaro, you get the SS suspension. The parts are already there, so it doesn't have much development costs associated.

Instead they put development time into new suspension parts that aren't quite up to the task.

should be a sticky..

[R.C. Collins]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

They already make an S550 that handles on the top level (GT350). Just take some of the components that were already developed for the GT350 and push them down into the PP1. In fact, that is EXACTLY what the 1LE is. If you click the 1LE package on an SS, you get the ZL1 suspension parts.

Boom. There it is in a nutshell.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Did they miss the flaws or did M/T get unlucky and get a lemon? My point is this, if all the GT PP1 cars are as bad as M/T made it out to be, you would think the other reviews would mention they noticed something similar. Yet none of the reviews have, in fact they have stated the opposite of M/T said.

Good point but I think it is just as mentioned before, that they tested the Mustang in comparison to the SS 1LE and it felt that bad. If they had tested it according to it's own attributes or as compared to the 15-17 then perhaps they wouldn't have noticed it's flaws. But after coming out of the SS 1LE the flaws were blatantly evident.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Again, I am just saying if it was as bad as MT said, you would think some of these other reviews might say not as balanced as we would like, or something along those lines

Not for nothing but we've been seeing this with the entire S550 lineup. The Mustang is ok. But then the comparable Camaro makes it look not ok. Even the GT350R. Everyone was super impressed by how good they thought it was. To the point that people were paying markups and even thought it would beat the ZL1 (before the H2H last year). But then the SS matched the GT350R's time and the ZL1 straight up flattened it. In fact the only way the Mustang crowd can save face is by bragging that the GT350R didn't get beaten as badly as they somehow think it should have...after it lost which made no sense because they said it would win before they went at it, lol!! Anyway, the Camaro in comparison to the Mustang has been making the Mustang look slow. Even the standard GT. It was a high 12 to low 13 sec car for the 15-17 MY which is fast in it's own right. And every tester of it will say how fast it is. But the SS is soo much faster that it makes the GT look slow. So getting out of a SS and hoping in the GT, the GT would feel slower than if you just tested only the GT. Same with the GT350R, it felt fast, but if you get out of the ZL1 and into a GT350R then it's all about the R not losing worse than it does, lol!

Originally Posted by tyler731

so will you argue that the car sent to Evan Smith was a ringer since no other magazine has come close to his time?

I think even the Mustang guys know that whole thing was a joke. I mean, when one guy goes half a sec faster in a stock GT than other pro drivers can manage on DRs then something is a bit suspicious. That wasn't even "suspicious", it was complete bullshit, lol!!