[Thill444]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

$36K for a base GT.
$40K with PP1.
$41,600 if you add Magneride shocks, lol!!
And $42,500 for the PP2.

Yeah but Ford dealers near me are offering $4-5K off MSRP with little to no negotiation. Chevy dealers are discounting $2-3K unless you qualify for their ridiculous rebates (you either have to own a Mustang or are currently leasing a GM vehicle). I am finding lots of 18 PP1's for the $36K range.

The Magride cars near me though that are on dealer lots are loaded with options I don't want and are MSRPing for $49-50K and streeting for $44-45K. Which is just too much for a Mustang IMHO.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Thill444

The Magride cars near me though that are on dealer lots are loaded with options

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.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Thill444

My guess is the difference is much more apparant when you drive a Mustang and Camaro back to back. And if this is just some journalist with limited skills driving a car around a road course it's different than say Randy Pobst.

Very possible. I also love hearing Randy's input. IT's also a joy to watch that dude hotlap a car around a track.

Originally Posted by End User

M/T now has Jethro. So ya, gospel.

The best performance car reviewers in the world have all, at some point in their careers, worked for Evo - Catchpole / Meaden / Bovingdon / Harris

M/T's use of Randy as a performance driver is brilliant.


The proof is in the pudding. The GT with PP1 is 3 seconds slower after just one rolling start lap.

Yep love Randy's input Not sure why you keep bringing that up that the 1LE is faster lol. I have said it would be since before the MT head to head lol.

Originally Posted by Thill444

Ya but that Motor Week article is weak. Who was the driver? What was the road course? What was the time? How does the same driver compare in other cars?

The Motortrend artcicle was harsh, and probably too harsh as the 18 Mustang improved over the 15 and still put up some respectable numbers but the difference is the Camaro was built with the track in mind and is clearly more of a sportscar whereas the Mustang trends towards its GT roots and is more of the cruiser/street car.

The PP1 vs 1LE was never the right head to head to begin with (should have been PP1 vs SS w/Magride) but it is what it is.

Yes the article is pretty much short and to the point, not the best article. But I did post it for 2 primary reasons.

1. I believe their 12.4 time is the fastest we have seen for a M6 18 GT so far from a magazine review since we love mag tests so much around here lol

2. Again with how bad they made the Mustang sound in the MT review, you would think that other reviews would mention something similar. Isn't that odd to anyone else or just me?

[BlaqWhole]

The Parts Farm just got another wrecked GT350. That is 6 of them wrecked in the past 2 weeks. WTF...

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Yes the article is pretty much short and to the point, not the best article. But I did post it for 2 primary reasons.

1. I believe their 12.4 time is the fastest we have seen for a M6 18 GT so far from a magazine review since we love mag tests so much around here lol

2. Again with how bad they made the Mustang sound in the MT review, you would think that other reviews would mention something similar. Isn't that odd to anyone else or just me?

I think we can call the Mustang a mid 12 sec car at this point. The lowest has been a 12.4 while the highest has been a 12.6 in the quarter. Certainly way off the 11.8 mark, lol!!

As far as the review, well you can look at it a number of ways. One in particular...people criticize the Camaro for visibility issues yet those of us who have one have no problem at all with the visibility. SO does that mean the problem doesn't exist or does that mean it is as bad as the Mustang folk like to exaggerate it is? Or maybe that one particular Mustang felt terrible with the suspension...maybe they just got a bad one. Or maybe the other testers overlooked the issues or were expecting it or they were already used to it. Maybe the tester who thought it was terrible was exaggerating. Maybe he had a bad day. It could be any number of different reasons.

[Thill444]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I think we can call the Mustang a mid 12 sec car at this point. The lowest has been a 12.4 while the highest has been a 12.6 in the quarter. Certainly way off the 11.8 mark, lol!!

As far as the review, well you can look at it a number of ways. One in particular...people criticize the Camaro for visibility issues yet those of us who have one have no problem at all with the visibility. SO does that mean the problem doesn't exist or does that mean it is as bad as the Mustang folk like to exaggerate it is? Or maybe that one particular Mustang felt terrible with the suspension...maybe they just got a bad one. Or maybe the other testers overlooked the issues or were expecting it or they were already used to it. Maybe the tester who thought it was terrible was exaggerating. Maybe he had a bad day. It could be any number of different reasons.

Well I would expect the 10 speed auto Mustang to be faster both 0-60 and quarter mile. 11.8 might be possible with perfect conditions, etc with the auto, who knows. But it will definitely beat the manual.

I also think back to back testing on a tighter technical track may simply be more telling here with a pro driver behind the wheel.

Almost every modern car feels like a fat tub if you drive a Lotus Elise. Historically Ford setup the Mustang to have a softer suspension than the Camaro (especially the 1LE) and this seems to hold true with the 18's. We know Ford can make a very focused track car, but I suspect beating the Camaro around the track with a Mustang GT was just not their goal. It is what it is. I thnk the Motortrend test really revealed that to still be the case. For enthusiasts who value track times and place driving dynamics over other things the Camaro is likely the better fit. Ford may simply be okay with that because they are willing to conede it. Maybe the PP2 will close that gap, but my gut tells me the 1LE will still be the better track/drivers car.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I think we can call the Mustang a mid 12 sec car at this point. The lowest has been a 12.4 while the highest has been a 12.6 in the quarter. Certainly way off the 11.8 mark, lol!!

As far as the review, well you can look at it a number of ways. One in particular...people criticize the Camaro for visibility issues yet those of us who have one have no problem at all with the visibility. SO does that mean the problem doesn't exist or does that mean it is as bad as the Mustang folk like to exaggerate it is? Or maybe that one particular Mustang felt terrible with the suspension...maybe they just got a bad one. Or maybe the other testers overlooked the issues or were expecting it or they were already used to it. Maybe the tester who thought it was terrible was exaggerating. Maybe he had a bad day. It could be any number of different reasons.

Or maybe MT expected the PP1 with its new suspension and magnaride to be better than the outgoing 17 not arguably worse. MT also drove the 1LE and PP1 back to back. No one else has done that yet. I'm sure compared to the 1LE the PP1 does feel floaty and soft. Also that Mustang did not have Recaros and the GT seats were bad in 15. Probably still bad now. The expectation has increased a lot since 2015 Ford needs to improve still.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I think we can call the Mustang a mid 12 sec car at this point. The lowest has been a 12.4 while the highest has been a 12.6 in the quarter. Certainly way off the 11.8 mark, lol!!

As far as the review, well you can look at it a number of ways. One in particular...people criticize the Camaro for visibility issues yet those of us who have one have no problem at all with the visibility. SO does that mean the problem doesn't exist or does that mean it is as bad as the Mustang folk like to exaggerate it is? Or maybe that one particular Mustang felt terrible with the suspension...maybe they just got a bad one. Or maybe the other testers overlooked the issues or were expecting it or they were already used to it. Maybe the tester who thought it was terrible was exaggerating. Maybe he had a bad day. It could be any number of different reasons.

Well to be fair, pretty much every Camaro review/first drive DOES mention the visibility. Which is why I found it odd that so far only the MT review said the steering suspension in the Mustang felt off. So did they get a bad car? Did they just have much higher expectations? Maybe like I said, I just find it odd that MT found it that bad, yet no other review has mentioned it yet

Originally Posted by Thill444

Well I would expect the 10 speed auto Mustang to be faster both 0-60 and quarter mile. 11.8 might be possible with perfect conditions, etc with the auto, who knows. But it will definitely beat the manual.

I also think back to back testing on a tighter technical track may simply be more telling here with a pro driver behind the wheel.

Almost every modern car feels like a fat tub if you drive a Lotus Elise. Historically Ford setup the Mustang to have a softer suspension than the Camaro (especially the 1LE) and this seems to hold true with the 18's. We know Ford can make a very focused track car, but I suspect beating the Camaro around the track with a Mustang GT was just not their goal. It is what it is. I thnk the Motortrend test really revealed that to still be the case. For enthusiasts who value track times and place driving dynamics over other things the Camaro is likely the better fit. Ford may simply be okay with that because they are willing to conede it. Maybe the PP2 will close that gap, but my gut tells me the 1LE will still be the better track/drivers car.

I think 11s will be possible in the 18 GT A10 in the right conditions.

Maybe. Interesting thought points

[Thill444]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

Or maybe MT expected the PP1 with its new suspension and magnaride to be better than the outgoing 17 not arguably worse. MT also drove the 1LE and PP1 back to back. No one else has done that yet. I'm sure compared to the 1LE the PP1 does feel floaty and soft. Also that Mustang did not have Recaros and the GT seats were bad in 15. Probably still bad now. The expectation has increased a lot since 2015 Ford needs to improve still.

I drove a manual 6 2018 Mustang GT w/PP1 (no magride) vs an 18 2SS back to back on a very good twisty backroad.

Even against the 2SS the differences were obvious to me on the street (and I am a novice track driver). The Mustang had a softer/more vague setup. It's not that the Mustang was terrible, but the Camaro was noticeably the better drivers car to me. I am sure the 1LE on track made the differences even more obvious. I was really focused on getting the 18 Mustang because I liked the design more but after I drove the Camaro I could not stop thinking about the car. And again you don't need to be on the track to notice it, it's obvious even on the street.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by shaffe

1. I believe their 12.4 time is the fastest we have seen for a M6 18 GT so far from a magazine review since we love mag tests so much around here lol

Not that anybody "loves" magazine test. They do provide a baseline for what a reasonable driver can do with a showroom stock ride.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by Thill444

I drove a manual 6 2018 Mustang GT w/PP1 (no magride) vs an 18 2SS back to back on a very good twisty backroad.

Even against the 2SS the differences were obvious to me on the street (and I am a novice track driver). The Mustang had a softer/more vague setup. It's not that the Mustang was terrible, but the Camaro was noticeably the better drivers car to me. I am sure the 1LE on track made the differences even more obvious. I was really focused on getting the 18 Mustang because I liked the design more but after I drove the Camaro I could not stop thinking about the car. And again you don't need to be on the track to notice it, it's obvious even on the street.

I agree 100%. The Mustang is better than it was. For a lot people that is a win in their mind. But driving the cars back to back makes the Mustang feel stuck in the middle of the Challenger and Camaro. I like both the Chally and Camaro a lot. The Mustang feels like a watered down version of both. I'm sure a lot of people like that but I dont.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Well to be fair, pretty much every Camaro review/first drive DOES mention the visibility. Which is why I found it odd that so far only the MT review said the steering suspension in the Mustang felt off. So did they get a bad car? Did they just have much higher expectations? Maybe like I said, I just find it odd that MT found it that bad, yet no other review has mentioned it yet



I think 11s will be possible in the 18 GT A10 in the right conditions.

Maybe. Interesting thought points

You really don't need to take MotorTrend (or even Motor Week's) word here. You can clearly see in the MotorTrend video the excessive body motions in both the road tests and the track tests. There is no denying that the body moves around much more than most cars that they have reviewed, let alone the Camaro. BUT, if you are just looking for a sporty 2+2 coupe with a V8, you may not care to even look for things like instantaneous turn-in or steering precision. It just depends on what you are looking for (or testing in the case of a reviewer).

Motor Week is just looking to give us the stats (it went this fast 0-60, etc.), and what features it comes with. They don't go in too much depth about driver feel/involvement, where MotorTrend seems to make that a very important evaluation criteria.

Not everyone wants/needs/or is interested in BMW M car type driving involvement.

But some of us do, and it is nice to see that there is some decent info about this in the MotorTrend articles/videos.

But if you just watch the MotorTrend video, you can see what they were complaining about. And if I can see it in the video, I am SURE I can feel it while driving.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

You really don't need to take MotorTrend (or even Motor Week's) word here. You can clearly see in the MotorTrend video the excessive body motions in both the road tests and the track tests. There is no denying that the body moves around much more than most cars that they have reviewed, let alone the Camaro. BUT, if you are just looking for a sporty 2+2 coupe with a V8, you may not care to even look for things like instantaneous turn-in or steering precision. It just depends on what you are looking for (or testing in the case of a reviewer).

Motor Week is just looking to give us the stats (it went this fast 0-60, etc.), and what features it comes with. They don't go in too much depth about driver feel/involvement, where MotorTrend seems to make that a very important evaluation criteria.

Not everyone wants/needs/or is interested in BMW M car type driving involvement.

But some of us do, and it is nice to see that there is some decent info about this in the MotorTrend articles/videos.

But if you just watch the MotorTrend video, you can see what they were complaining about. And if I can see it in the video, I am SURE I can feel it while driving.

I get that, but like I said with how much bad they made it sound, you would think other reviews would mention something along the same lines as it.

"The electric power steering system lacks the directness and turn-in eagerness of the GT350’s setup, but the GT is edging closer. Body motions are tightly controlled and the brakes have a firm and responsive pedal. "

That's from Road & Track

"Cornering grip rises slightly to 0.96 g (we saw 0.94 g in the old model) thanks to the GT Performance pack, but that’s just a number. It wasn’t until we took the GT through the Angeles National Forest that we learned how it has adopted the stability and willingness of the GT350. Body roll is tightly checked, the magnetorheological dampers glue the tires to the tarmac without brutalizing the ride, and the Michelins give more warnings than a TSA officer. Even the electrically assisted steering reacts naturally and has pleasing heft."

Car & Driver

Those comments are quite different from this from MT

"The car rolls over on itself and seems to not only understeer but also to try and oversteer at the same time. Like the front and back aren’t actually connected. Jethro kept pointing out that although the Ford felt bad going into a corner, once you were actually in a turn it was pretty much OK. “There’s a good car somewhere under there,” he said. I concur."

I am just saying you would think some of the other reviews would mention some of the sloppyness. I mean MT basically said the car is almost the complete opposite of what C&D and R&T said lol

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I get that, but like I said with how much bad they made it sound, you would think other reviews would mention something along the same lines as it.

"The electric power steering system lacks the directness and turn-in eagerness of the GT350’s setup, but the GT is edging closer. Body motions are tightly controlled and the brakes have a firm and responsive pedal. "

That's from Road & Track

"Cornering grip rises slightly to 0.96 g (we saw 0.94 g in the old model) thanks to the GT Performance pack, but that’s just a number. It wasn’t until we took the GT through the Angeles National Forest that we learned how it has adopted the stability and willingness of the GT350. Body roll is tightly checked, the magnetorheological dampers glue the tires to the tarmac without brutalizing the ride, and the Michelins give more warnings than a TSA officer. Even the electrically assisted steering reacts naturally and has pleasing heft."

Car & Driver

Those comments are quite different from this from MT

"The car rolls over on itself and seems to not only understeer but also to try and oversteer at the same time. Like the front and back aren’t actually connected. Jethro kept pointing out that although the Ford felt bad going into a corner, once you were actually in a turn it was pretty much OK. “There’s a good car somewhere under there,” he said. I concur."

I am just saying you would think some of the other reviews would mention some of the sloppyness. I mean MT basically said the car is almost the complete opposite of what C&D and R&T said lol

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