# How Quik Are The '05s, Really?



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

Soooo, how fast are they?
How would they stack up against, say a C5?
How about an 03/03 Cobra Mustang?

Would it be safe to let your wife haul the groceries in one, or are they a bit too much to handle?

Or not wild enough?


----------



## RiceEaterFordBeater (Feb 28, 2005)

you cant compare a svt cobra to a gto, for starters the cobra comes with a blower and if you take that away the car gives even more disgrace to the name muscle car. the interior is bland and not even close to the comfort of a goat. power wise you slap a blower on a goat to compare the 2 and the goat blows away the best of "ordinary" cars (non supercars ie ford gt, saleen s7, etc.) with a manual, shifting is a pain in the @$$. the car has much less room than a gto for hauling groceries and it is sad that the trunk of a gto is actually bigger than a cobra convert.


----------



## Hot Sauce (Mar 21, 2005)

Snap said:


> Would it be safe to let your wife haul the groceries in one, or are they a bit too much to handle?
> 
> Or not wild enough?



A car only goes as fast as the driver makes it go.

And a C5 has 350hp LS1, an 05 GTO has a 400hp LS2.


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2005)

I got the 05 I think its fast . I raced a few KIAs and wiped them up only got beat by a 05 stang :rofl: arty:


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

RiceEaterFordBeater said:


> you cant compare a svt cobra to a gto, .


If you meet at a stoplight, you may feel the compulsion to compare it.


----------



## RiceEaterFordBeater (Feb 28, 2005)

GTOMAN said:


> I got the 05 I think its fast . I raced a few KIAs and wiped them up only got beat by a 05 stang
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## catchmeifucan (Sep 12, 2004)

The GTO has the creature comforts that the Cobra and models alike don't have. The LS1 and LS2 are plenty quick enough stock. They compare all the cars across the board and many of these are not just a stock engine. They are turbo charged, blowers added etc. Put these mods on a GTO then you only can count on one finger how many cars are in that range of performance and at a much higher cost.


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2005)

ya blower on a gto will just about smoke alot of stuff on da street  i know i got 1 and its amazing who wants to race its funny i had a 04 cobra come up at a light i totally mauled him :cool the stang is quick but the gto will smoke it arty: ford =FOR OUR RETARDED DAUGHTER :seeya:


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2005)

RiceEaterFordBeater said:


> you cant compare a svt cobra to a gto, for starters the cobra comes with a blower and if you take that away the car gives even more disgrace to the name muscle car. the interior is bland and not even close to the comfort of a goat. power wise you slap a blower on a goat to compare the 2 and the goat blows away the best of "ordinary" cars (non supercars ie ford gt, saleen s7, etc.) with a manual, shifting is a pain in the @$$. the car has much less room than a gto for hauling groceries and it is sad that the trunk of a gto is actually bigger than a cobra convert.



 
C'mon man. We can all see where your blind loyalty lies, but let's call a spade a spade. The '04 cobras run really well -- who cares what happens if you take away the blower? Why would anyone take away the blower? 
They have 390 hp stock, 1 $7 pulley mod adds about 60hp. Plus, they are lighter than the goat. Stock for stock, an '04 cobra and an '05 goat would be a good race. If you put that $7 part on the cobra, it will take $6000 worth of forced induction mods for the goat to keep up.


----------



## TexasRealtor (Oct 4, 2004)

jterp said:


> C'mon man. We can all see where your blind loyalty lies, but let's call a spade a spade. The '04 cobras run really well -- who cares what happens if you take away the blower? Why would anyone take away the blower?
> They have 390 hp stock, 1 $7 pulley mod adds about 60hp. Plus, they are lighter than the goat. Stock for stock, an '04 cobra and an '05 goat would be a good race. If you put that $7 part on the cobra, it will take $6000 worth of forced induction mods for the goat to keep up.


But who prefers the sound of a hairdryer under your hood to the sweet note of an LS2 at WOT. :seeya:


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

jterp said:


> C'mon man. We can all see where your blind loyalty lies, but let's call a spade a spade. The '04 cobras run really well -- who cares what happens if you take away the blower? Why would anyone take away the blower?
> They have 390 hp stock, 1 $7 pulley mod adds about 60hp. Plus, they are lighter than the goat. Stock for stock, an '04 cobra and an '05 goat would be a good race. If you put that $7 part on the cobra, it will take $6000 worth of forced induction mods for the goat to keep up.


Believe it or not the blown Cobras are only about 40lbs lighter than a 6M Goat (That's because they had to use an iron block to withstand the stresses). That's why stock vs. stock the '05 and the 'stang are fairly even. The pulley upgrade is indeed a cheap and effective mod, but that's what you get with FI.


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2005)

*post edited due to insufficient grasp of English*


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2005)

*post edited due to insufficient grasp of English*


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2005)

*post edited due to insufficient grasp of English*


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

GTOMAN said:


> Yes the GTO is more comfortable and why ----- because-------more and more retired people are buying them there made for comfort not speed and that extra 100 hp that still dont do anything still get the old people to the store faster to get there pills


2005 GTO stats (some I've seen are projected but nonetheless I don't consider it slow)

0-60 Pontiac lists 4.6. Have seen other listings of 4.7 and 4.8
Quarter mile in 13.3
Top speed- around 160 mph

All of this in a hefty 3700 pounds and you think the GTO isn't fast :confused?


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

GTOMAN said:


> Yes the GTO is more comfortable and why ----- because-------more and more retired people are buying them there made for comfort not speed and that extra 100 hp that still dont do anything still get the old people to the store faster to get there pills


So the car has to feel like a cheap, K-mart quality lounge chair for you to appreciate it's performance? An M3 may lose to a blown cobra in the 1/4, but no one would seriously consider comparing the two and calling the 'stang a better vehicle. Tons of Ferraris and Porsches get purchased by doctors and lawyers, so what's your point?  

The only reason the two cars even get compared is because of their historic muscle car names. It's the basic reason why the general populace "doesn't get" the new Goat. It's not a bare bones, archaic muscle car in the old tradition. It's a quality, modern sports coupe with an IRS, but with a great all-aluminum small block - the best of both worlds. A BMW comparison is more apt, much, much more (partly because, apples-to-apples, there just is no domestic alternative). The only thing keeping it from being seen as such is the name plate (and general preoccupation with image & labels), so don't even go there. . . . If you can't appreciate the vehicle for what it really is, step off.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

Well said PWR_SHIFT. I agree with everything you said. 

I was one of those who had to get over "images & labels". But I did, pretty quickly too. This is a nicely built car with great component parts and it's not overpriced for what it is. It's a bargain IMHO.


----------



## m8d2run (Feb 1, 2005)

the gto hands down is a better car than a cobra. $33,650 buys a gto, the last price i saw on a 03 cobra was $36,795 witha $1995 mark-up.
the cobra's are nice and i would take one over a ricer any day, but compared to a gto to it gets beat hands down. plus the extra $3000+ can go to some mods (I.E. supercharger) or to get my pills :lol:


----------



## EdwardC (Oct 8, 2004)

GTOMAN said:


> Yes the GTO is more comfortable and why ----- because-------more and more retired people are buying them there made for comfort not speed and that extra 100 hp that still dont do anything still get the old people to the store faster to get there pills


Normally I wouldn't but how many believe that "GTOMAN" is not the sharpest knife in the drawer? What a retard.


----------



## Capo (Mar 12, 2005)

:rofl:


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

Thanks for all the input and civilized debate.

Having a C5 in the garage, I have to agree that the LS1/2 engine group is amazing and carries the sounds that I grew acoustomed to in the musclecar race of the mid 60's. But these current engines are so much more effective in efficiency and power for a given size than anything that was around back then.

The reason I started the debate was to find another car to keep the C5 company but be safe for the little woman to drive down to "get her pills".

The cobra body has always been an attraction and no other Ford would have enough horsepower to be considered, and then there is the convertible option. But I have concerns that their prospects are based on a little peanut of an engine. It's almost like GM trying to kid mom and dad types by putting a blower on a V6; it's still just a 6. 

The Goat's body wasn't an immediate attraction, but then again neither was the C5. The Goat is growing on me. The thoughts of the LS2 make me think it has to be special in acceleration and exhaust tone. And there is always Lingenfelter's crew or the Corvette Doctors to force some air down it's throat if it get's too boring.

Old Chevy guys don't quit, but I can admit being tempted by the other side (Ford). Have to keep an open mind to find a solution that will carry on the tradition of the pursuit of acceleration. 

Thanks again for the input.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

EdwardC said:


> Normally I wouldn't but how many believe that "GTOMAN" is not the sharpest knife in the drawer? What a retard.


Agreed. Obvious Troll from MENSA Appalachian Chapter.

Groucho, stop editing this guy so we can take aim with the slings and arrows of outrageous english.

Just kidding. Best way to get rid of idiots is to take away their soap box (or stick the bar of soap in their mouth).


----------



## Groucho (Sep 11, 2004)

Wing_Nut said:


> Agreed. Obvious Troll from MENSA Appalachian Chapter.
> 
> Groucho, stop editing this guy so we can take aim with the slings and arrows of outrageous english.
> 
> Just kidding. Best way to get rid of idiots is to take away their soap box (or stick the bar of soap in their mouth).


Put a fork in him. He's done. Too much time wasted on the 'Tards.

Snap, I admit that the whole 'Stang Cobra package was pretty impressive. I find it incredibly hard to believe, however, that Ford SVT has decided to leave a solid rear axle on the upcoming '06 Cobra.

Inexcusable, isn't it? last I checked, this is 2005!


----------



## deezdad (Mar 22, 2005)

Snap said:


> Thanks for all the input and civilized debate.
> 
> Having a C5 in the garage, I have to agree that the LS1/2 engine group is amazing and carries the sounds that I grew acoustomed to in the musclecar race of the mid 60's. But these current engines are so much more effective in efficiency and power for a given size than anything that was around back then.
> 
> ...


just a 6 huh? line up against my grand national and we'll see just how easy you will lose to just a 6


----------



## vmax (Mar 19, 2005)

Jterp-Motor Trend says otherwise, the GTO is faster and a LOT less expensive. Roomier, more comfortable, and easier to drive as well. Snap-I think anyone's wife could easily drive this car. With traction control on I've had to really try to get the car our of line, even on wet pavement.


----------



## vmax (Mar 19, 2005)

Deezdad=the two years GM built that car (Ttype, GN, GNX) were the only time I'm aware of that a 6 with forced induction was actually a performance option. All others have been blown just to make acceptable horsepower in their class, not to be a leader as the GN was. Besides, your solid-axle straight-line relic would fly off the road long before the GTO will. Just kidding, I liked the GNs and hopped up a few of them owned by friends. They were the only modern day musclecar of their time, much as the GTO is now.


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

deezdad said:


> just a 6 huh? line up against my grand national and we'll see just how easy you will lose to just a 6


Sorry deezdad, but any relic musclecar is just an old rattlebox compared to Any new car. I had '65 Hemi Coronet was in our driveway back in the day and it would now be considered a crude, slow elephant compared to performance cars of today.
And a Buick? Oh my. Social Security here I come.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 11, 2004)

Snap said:


> Sorry deezdad, but any relic musclecar is just an old rattlebox compared to Any new car. I had '65 Hemi Coronet was in our driveway back in the day and it would now be considered a crude, slow elephant compared to performance cars of today.


 :agree

Poor quality, too. You forget that the build quality would be wholly unacceptable today.


----------



## vmax (Mar 19, 2005)

Snap said:


> Sorry deezdad, but any relic musclecar is just an old rattlebox compared to Any new car. I had '65 Hemi Coronet was in our driveway back in the day and it would now be considered a crude, slow elephant compared to performance cars of today.
> And a Buick? Oh my. Social Security here I come.


OK guys I didn't mean to beat up on Deez's car, they were rockets in '86/'87. I think that was the 2 years they were built, truly ahead of their time. Shame on GM for not continuing something cool with that drivetrain.


----------



## deezdad (Mar 22, 2005)

vmax said:


> Deezdad=the two years GM built that car (Ttype, GN, GNX) were the only time I'm aware of that a 6 with forced induction was actually a performance option. All others have been blown just to make acceptable horsepower in their class, not to be a leader as the GN was. Besides, your solid-axle straight-line relic would fly off the road long before the GTO will. Just kidding, I liked the GNs and hopped up a few of them owned by friends. They were the only modern day musclecar of their time, much as the GTO is now.


you'd be surprised what a couple (bunch) of suspension mods does for the handling of these cars...not saying it handles like your gto but not as bad as you think...mine has the aftermarket gnx suspension making it hook up and take off like a rocket, no spin/hop...your right about the ONLY muslecar in 87 the monte ss was an imposture...and about todays gto being the only one thats why im on this site to learn more and maybe buy


----------



## deezdad (Mar 22, 2005)

Snap said:


> Sorry deezdad, but any relic musclecar is just an old rattlebox compared to Any new car. I had '65 Hemi Coronet was in our driveway back in the day and it would now be considered a crude, slow elephant compared to performance cars of today.
> And a Buick? Oh my. Social Security here I come.


mis/uninformed buddy...i'll unleash my 170,000 (original engine) mile modded w/ only bolt-ons 1987 buick regal w/ chrome bumpers against your new goat and i'll be right there every time...and as far as it being a buick the biggest sticking point there is of keeping it and not selling it towards a gto is the classic american musle car lines it posseses...remember those? car is worth $15,000 as it sits...yes talk is cheap but believe me i have better things to do than to tell lies to strangers...not sure if the 04/05 gto's will retain such a value high mileage, low mileage, original, restored, stock or modded after 18 years do you?


----------



## deezdad (Mar 22, 2005)

Groucho said:


> :agree
> 
> Poor quality, too. You forget that the build quality would be wholly unacceptable today.


whats your point?...in 2023 you dont think well be saying how poor the build quality was on the 04/05 gto's?...kinda goes w/out saying


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

deezdad said:


> mis/uninformed buddy...i'll unleash my 170,000 (original engine) mile


My father's is bigger than your father's.....
NaNaNaNaNa

Let's try to act like adults.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 11, 2004)

deezdad said:


> whats your point?...in 2023 you dont think well be saying how poor the build quality was on the 04/05 gto's?...kinda goes w/out saying


Does it? From all the caterwauling you hear from the "old" GTO faithful, you'd think every left-hand drive Holden Monaro CV8 brought over here should have the numbers 666 in the VIN code...  

My point being that (1) branding the Holden as a Pontiac and (2) calling it a GTO did the car a major disservice. It's not a crude antique retro wannabee...it's a high-performance GT.


----------



## EdwardC (Oct 8, 2004)

deezdad said:


> you'd be surprised what a couple (bunch) of suspension mods does for the handling of these cars...not saying it handles like your gto but not as bad as you think...mine has the aftermarket gnx suspension making it hook up and take off like a rocket, no spin/hop...your right about the ONLY muslecar in 87 the monte ss was an imposture...and about todays gto being the only one thats why im on this site to learn more and maybe buy


Don't forget the Olds 442 and Pontiac Grand Prix which were also built on the G-body platform shared with the Buick GN and Monte Carlo SS in '87. Only the Buick GN was a bonafide muscle car, however.


----------



## rworkman98 (Feb 10, 2005)

Snap said:


> The reason I started the debate was to find another car to keep the C5 company but be safe for the little woman to drive down to "get her pills".


I have a MN6 C5 and a MN6 GTO. Performance-wise, the GTO comes in a close second to my Vette. Both are very fun cars to drive. My wife likes driving the GTO a lot better than the 'Vette, but I think it's mostly psychological. (She also has a little trouble w/ my Hurst shifter on the Vette.) She can drive either of these cars easily. However, she had a *very* difficult time driving a Viper when I rented one. I think your wife would have no problem driving the GTO, and enjoying it. The car only goes as fast as you make it go.


----------



## Braman'sGTO (Mar 14, 2005)

EdwardC said:


> Don't forget the Olds 442 and Pontiac Grand Prix which were also built on the G-body platform shared with the Buick GN and Monte Carlo SS in '87. Only the Buick GN was a bonafide muscle car, however.


anyone who ever loved the olds 442 will tell you that it died in 1972, because when they changed the body and added emissions crap it was never the same.


----------



## dapper24 (Apr 5, 2005)

I had to ask this - Did you really get beat by an '05 Mustang while driving an '05 GTO. I find this hard to believe (and disheartening). I own an '05 GTO as well, I've test driven the Mustang too. I beat a 2005 auto Vette twice, granted probably a crumby driver. Though I haven't yet raced an '05 Mustang, I've tried , I find it very hard to believe that it could beat an '05 GTO, please tell me it's not true!


----------



## djdub (Oct 23, 2004)

dapper24 said:


> I had to ask this - Did you really get beat by an '05 Mustang while driving an '05 GTO. I find this hard to believe (and disheartening). I own an '05 GTO as well, I've test driven the Mustang too. I beat a 2005 auto Vette twice, granted probably a crumby driver. Though I haven't yet raced an '05 Mustang, I've tried , I find it very hard to believe that it could beat an '05 GTO, please tell me it's not true!


How can you be a crumby driver in an auto?


----------



## TexasRealtor (Oct 4, 2004)

Braman'sGTO said:


> anyone who ever loved the olds 442 will tell you that it died in 1972, because when they changed the body and added emissions crap it was never the same.


I had a '72 4-4-2 converible.


----------



## Braman'sGTO (Mar 14, 2005)

I had a 71 holiday coupe and loved it every day I had it


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

dapper24 said:


> I had to ask this - Did you really get beat by an '05 Mustang while driving an '05 GTO. I find this hard to believe (and disheartening). I own an '05 GTO as well, I've test driven the Mustang too. I beat a 2005 auto Vette twice, granted probably a crumby driver. Though I haven't yet raced an '05 Mustang, I've tried , I find it very hard to believe that it could beat an '05 GTO, please tell me it's not true!


If it was really seriously moded, yeah, you'll get beat, so what? Then a moded Goat will come along . . .


----------



## GTODEALER (Jan 7, 2005)

Before I finish this post I want everyone to know I am NOT A MUSTANG FAN!!
However, I have been reading up on these cars and, for instance, with an "air box mod" and tune, and full BMR suspension the car went 12.50 @ 104mph with a 1.33 60ft!! As with imports, do not underestimate these stangs.


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

At 12.5 ET but with 104mph through the traps that particular 'stang really hooked up, but it still didn't make any serious power. A stock '04 GTO will go through the traps at 104-105 and that's with some serious wheel hop. Admitted, the Goat does have traction issues which are common to most IRS cars, it was also a problem in last gen IRS cobra too. This needs to be worked on . . .


----------



## TM2FLI (Jan 17, 2005)

Our 05 with just nittos ran a 12.83 at 108mph with a 1.89 60 foot time.

Please don't try and compare an 05 Gt with an 05 GTO and say the stang is faster...because that is just wishful thinking on your part. 12.50 @ 104? Yeah...soo? Comparing apples to oranges are ya? What's a 05 GTO with a 1.33 60 foot time? 
I like that one mustang article where they pulled out 400lbs, added a bunch of bolt ons and a bunch of drivetrain stuff to run 12.4's. If you want apples to apples the GTO will be faster with the same mods.


----------



## GTODEALER (Jan 7, 2005)

TM2FLI said:


> Our 05 with just nittos ran a 12.83 at 108mph with a 1.89 60 foot time.
> 
> Please don't try and compare an 05 Gt with an 05 GTO and say the stang is faster...because that is just wishful thinking on your part. 12.50 @ 104? Yeah...soo? Comparing apples to oranges are ya? What's a 05 GTO with a 1.33 60 foot time?
> I like that one mustang article where they pulled out 400lbs, added a bunch of bolt ons and a bunch of drivetrain stuff to run 12.4's. If you want apples to apples the GTO will be faster with the same mods.


That is exactly why I said I'm not a fan, not comparing cars just times, don't get so defensive! Besides if a stang with 300hp can run a 12.50 then I don't care what kind of car it is thats quick as well as your 12.8, not bragging on stangs just makin' statements! :cheers


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

Modded or not modded, what's the difference!
Apples to oranges and all the other arguements or excuses don't hit home with me.

When you meet up with a potential opponent somewhere do you do a chemical analysis on the other fellow's oil to see if he's running synthetic in light that maybe his extra 1 hp will scare you off? 

My brother builds and races drag bikes and always laughs whenever someone boasts about all the mods and money that they have in their bikes. He just puts up his money and whispers under his breath "he still has to get it down the track."

Just run what ya brung and let the chips fall where they may.

We all have brand loyalties but when you get enough age under your belt you begin to appreciate ALL the nice cars, no matter what nameplate is on the fender.


----------



## TM2FLI (Jan 17, 2005)

Who said I didn't lke stangs? This thread is about are 05's really that quick? So why are we talking about modded mustangs and drag bikes? ???

Yes the 05's are really quick and don't care in this thread if a 05 GT does run a 12.5 at 104...besides with all that money it would still look stupid on the highway against a stock 05 GTO, much pull a 1.33 60 foot time on the street.


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

TM2FLI said:


> This thread is about are 05's really that quick? So why are we talking about modded mustangs and drag bikes? ???


Guess I know what the thread is about since I started it.
Missing the point, drag bikes were mentioned to make note that driver ability is more important than the fact that someone out a different air filter on their car.

Somehow the thread got hijacked into a pissing match between Mustangers, Relic Racers and GTO owners.

Over and out.


----------



## jterpII (Apr 8, 2005)

So -- the consensus is that the '05's are really quick? I've heard they run low 13's in the 1/4 -- as opposed to the '04's that ran 14.0 in the quarter, right?

CAn anyone confirm the low 13's for the '05 's with a timeslip?


----------



## djdub (Oct 23, 2004)

'04s consistently run 13.3s-13.8s in the 1/4, stock.

Broken-in '05s should run from low 13s down into the 12s.


----------



## newgoat (Apr 5, 2005)

TM2FLI said:


> Who said I didn't lke stangs? This thread is about are 05's really that quick? So why are we talking about modded mustangs and drag bikes? ???
> 
> Yes the 05's are really quick and don't care in this thread if a 05 GT does run a 12.5 at 104...besides with all that money it would still look stupid on the highway against a stock 05 GTO, much pull a 1.33 60 foot time on the street.


According to the article for what they spent on the new '05 GT and parts they are STILL into the Mustang $4,000 less than a bone stock '05 GTO. That is the point, if they spent the other $4,000 on the engine they'd prbably have a 500HP Mustang GT. IMO 500HP is gonna be a fast car especialy when you consider the 200lb. weight advantage they have. The worst thing is that it would probably go mid to low 11's for the same money as I paid for my '05 GTO.

Of course it would still not be as nice inside as my stock GTO but it would sure spank the heck out most GTO's on the street today. Of couse this could change if anyone would design and sell the parts but it could never be done for the same total money. When I think about it the GTO is a higher content car with a higher cost per pleasure unit. I think that's why the Mustang won the pony car review in the C&D. Were they the same price IMO THAT would be incredible!


----------



## newgoat (Apr 5, 2005)

Have you seen this? http://www.saleen.com/supercharger.htm bolt it on to a stock '05 and get a claimed 400HP. Do the usual intake and exaust ECU reflash and add gears and this would be a car that would be hard to beat on the strip OR the freeway. This is scary.


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

newgoat said:


> Have you seen this? http://www.saleen.com/supercharger.htm bolt it ont a stock '05 and get a claimed 400HP. Do the usual intake and exaust ECU reflash and add gears and this would be a car that would be hard to beat on the strip OR the freeway. This is scary.


SVT had that solved back in '03 on the Cobra Mustangs that were rated at 400 hp, so Saleen isn't breaking any new ground here.


----------



## newgoat (Apr 5, 2005)

Yeah, but this is only the 3-valve head and Saleen's solution is a charge cooled low pressure power adder. So this is a conservative rating that should have plenty of room for additional development like a smaller pully, adding fans to the liquid cooler etc. Plus the '03 Cobras were, wait a minute, STILL fugly.

How come WE don't get stuff like this? Why isn't there the same level of factory support for the GM power hungry as for the Ford folks? Just asking, don't shoot the messenger!


----------



## TexasRealtor (Oct 4, 2004)

djdub said:


> '04s consistently run 13.3s-13.8s in the 1/4, stock.
> 
> Broken-in '05s should run from low 13s down into the 12s.


Now I love the GTO, but you are smoking some serious stuff if you think the stock 'o5 GTO's are going to run in the 12's stock. They should run mid to low 13's.


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

Lingenfelter, T Byrne, Corvette Doctors, MTI, Joe Vinci and several other Tuners will be jumping in there.
T Byrne advertises blowers right now: http://www.tbyrne.com/gtointro.html

Take a look at the ProCharger: http://www.procharger.com/gto.shtml

Magnacharger is working on a roots blower for the '05.

Save your pennies.


----------



## newgoat (Apr 5, 2005)

TexasRealtor said:


> Now I love the GTO, but you are smoking some serious stuff if you think the stock 'o5 GTO's are going to run in the 12's stock. They should run mid to low 13's.


I'm with you, this is in line with what I've seen locally on the street and what most legitimate press has reported in reviews and test results. There are GTO owners who have a blindness they had to develop in order to overcome the reality that the '05 GT is a pretty close match for an '05 GTO. The new Mustang is the clear winner in value and bang for the buck... wait a minute I can't see the keyboard, it'll pass in a minute...


----------



## Braman'sGTO (Mar 14, 2005)

I dont know if I would make the same statment, I think it has more to do with were it fits in and individuals budget. If you put the the Mustang and GTO side by side and compare them you can see were the extra 4K went. I have owned several Ford products and have been very pleased with all of them, the same holds true for the GM products I have. The Money is not in the motor, from what I have seen Fords 4.6 is a little more expensive than the LS2. The money did however go to the IRS, interior, fit and finish. 

Before anyone goes and chews my head off, these are just my personl observations.

With the exeption of the KING RANCH truck packages, Ford has always been weak on its interior and even the KR has plenty of room for improvement. To make this a fair comparison GM in most cases has worse paint than ford, both do leave a little to be desired. I have never had mechanical issues with either Ford or GM aside from retarded techs and sales people. Both have had there fair share of Electrical issues. In my eyes both are evenly matched I could afford the nicer and roomier interior and I have alwayse wanted a GTO so that is what I got. If I got a Mustang It whould have to be the GT Convertable, they should have just made that car a 2 seater, the back only has enough room for a double amputy midgit, but that is just my oppinion.


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

I'm sorry fellas, I still don't see how the 'stang really compares/competes with a GTO. It's all about perspectives, and mine is totally different.

Basically the only reason people are trying to compare the two is because they both have the classic muscle car names and are both RWD two-doors with a V8. Maybe the GTO shouldn't have been called that at all, then even the propriety of these discussions would be moot (and the car might sell better too). 

The real problem has to do with badges, images and most folks' inability to break from the herd (read insecurity). The Monaro/GTO has from the start been GM Europe's/Australia's answer to the BMW 3-series coupe (although it's closer in size to the 6-series). Take both in black, cover their badges and put them side by side - the similarity will shock you. 

As I see it, today's GTO is a modern, quality, European coupe with an awesome up-to-date all-alluminum small block. Where does the 'stang fit into this picture? Sorry, don't see it anywhere close. I haven't seen anybody disparaging the M3 because it's slower than the '03 Cobra, or even putting down the 330Ci because it's slower than the '05 Ford product. Same as with those, the actual comparison of the 'stang with the GTO is just plain silly. :cheers


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

newgoat said:


> According to the article for what they spent on the new '05 GT and parts they are STILL into the Mustang $4,000 less than a bone stock '05 GTO. That is the point, if they spent the other $4,000 on the engine they'd prbably have a 500HP Mustang GT. IMO 500HP is gonna be a fast car especialy when you consider the 200lb. weight advantage they have. The worst thing is that it would probably go mid to low 11's for the same money as I paid for my '05 GTO.
> 
> Of course it would still not be as nice inside as my stock GTO but it would sure spank the heck out most GTO's on the street today. Of couse this could change if anyone would design and sell the parts but it could never be done for the same total money. When I think about it the GTO is a higher content car with a higher cost per pleasure unit. I think that's why the Mustang won the pony car review in the C&D. Were they the same price IMO THAT would be incredible!


You know what, I'm just about tired of you pumping up the Mustangs, modded or not. Give it a break. Why don't you trade in your GTO, if you really have one, go get a Stang and join one of their forums because from what I see in most of your posts, you're going to continue belittling the GTO no matter what. The Mustangs are weak... period. Yeah the new look is okay but the only reason Ford went to a retro design is because they can't come up with a new design that people will like. How long did they run the previous body design? TOO LONG! And of course you're eventually gonna find a Mustang that's faster or quicker than the GTO. Hell look at how many Mustang models that are out there. GTs, Saleens, Cobras, Mach 1s, Roush (stage 1 thru 4 or whatever). Now Shelby is coming out with one. WHOOPTY DOO! When it's all said and done, I still won't be impressed and I will still love my Goat. And no matter how much you praise Mustangs, they still don't compare to the overall performance and build quality of the GTO. And a stock '05 GT is not faster than a stock '05 GTO. Look at the stats in this link; http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm The numbers here are pretty consistent with most other publications that I have seen. 

So do myself and a few others a favor and BE GONE :seeya: .


----------



## Snap (Apr 2, 2005)

Through the years FORD sure as heck got the color Red correct.


----------



## drmustang (Nov 29, 2004)

05 GT goes 12.5! Perfect article for the mentality at the lower end of the automotive food chain. Unfortunately the crew that these publications cater to denies the fact that the car has been modified to a point where they are more of drag car than a daily driver. Who invests near $30,000 in a new car and rips out seats, defeats it's cornering abilities, and generally does a "high school" job on it.


----------



## Braman'sGTO (Mar 14, 2005)

PWR_SHIFT said:



> I'm sorry fellas, I still don't see how the 'stang really compares/competes with a GTO. It's all about perspectives, and mine is totally different.
> 
> Basically the only reason people are trying to compare the two is because they both have the classic muscle car names and are both RWD two-doors with a V8. Maybe the GTO shouldn't have been called that at all, then even the propriety of these discussions would be moot (and the car might sell better too).
> 
> ...


  This is almost the exact same point I was trying to make in another post and people just did'nt get it. I have driven the M3 as well as the 6 Series and with the exeption of the GTO having a stiffer clutch than the 6Series the drive is almost identical. But that car was not even considered for that comparison.


----------



## djdub (Oct 23, 2004)

TexasRealtor said:


> Now I love the GTO, but you are smoking some serious stuff if you think the stock 'o5 GTO's are going to run in the 12's stock. They should run mid to low 13's.


The ignorance by people on this site kills me.

http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18706

And this link shows Top ETs for both LS1 and LS2 GTOs (stock) http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14617

So unless you're smoking something, this proves you wrong.


----------



## GTOfreak (Apr 5, 2005)

I don't understand all this Mustang comparison crap either. First off, I think GM made a marketing error in calling the damn thing a GTO in the first place. All that did was invite criticism over it's styling (I happen to like the styling), and comparisons to the Mustang. This is a European car, with Euro feel and quality, fit and finish, with a honkin' LS2 torque monster 400 hp engine. We're spending all this time comparing it to a solid axle pony car with no real back seats, when it should be compared to M series or AMG. If they had marketed the car a little differently, perhaps just call it a Monaro, and sell it through Pontiac franchises as an all new model, we probably wouldn't be having all these discussions or comparisons. Now all of a sudden the GTO shines like the performance and quality bargain that it is. The earlier posts alluding to that are right on the mark. I can take 2 couples to dinner in this thing in refined comfort. Quiet, tight, smooth. Try that in a Mustang. 0-60 in 4.6 seconds sure don't hurt either  Keep your Mustangs, if I wanted one of those I would have bought one. I reaaallllly got a kick out of some people who were bitching about he 500 dollar price increase. By rights, this car should sticker for 40K.


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

djdub said:


> The ignorance by people on this site kills me.
> 
> http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18706
> 
> ...


 :agree Like they say, "Sometimes the truth hurts" and no matter how much we try to beat it into someones head THEY JUST WON'T ACCEPT IT. What I think the real problem is, is that some just hate the fact that GM, after the retirement of the Camaro and Firebird, has once again given us a car that will continue the "Whoop up on Mustangs" legacy. Even Ford knows that the GTO is a superior car to their beloved GT. If not, why are they getting Mr. Carroll Shelby involved? Because they just can't man up and take defeat. That's the same thing that Ford did after the Z28s and Firebirds destroyed the GTs they had to counter punch back with the Cobra. Ford is definitely a "Keep up with the Jones" type of company. And that's because some of, and I did say "some of", their products are normally inferior to their competitors so they have to spend more money to catch up. Whether GM used the GTO badge, 442 badge, LeMans badge or whatever, there still would be unjust criticism even if the car is obviously better than the Mustangs.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 11, 2004)

GTOfreak said:


> I don't understand all this Mustang comparison crap either. First off, I think GM made a marketing error in calling the damn thing a GTO in the first place. All that did was invite criticism over it's styling (I happen to like the styling), and comparisons to the Mustang. This is a European car, with Euro feel and quality, fit and finish, with a honkin' LS2 torque monster 400 hp engine. We're spending all this time comparing it to a solid axle pony car with no real back seats, when it should be compared to M series or AMG. If they had marketed the car a little differently, perhaps just call it a Monaro, and sell it through Pontiac franchises as an all new model, we probably wouldn't be having all these discussions or comparisons. Now all of a sudden the GTO shines like the performance and quality bargain that it is. The earlier posts alluding to that are right on the mark. I can take 2 couples to dinner in this thing in refined comfort. Quiet, tight, smooth. Try that in a Mustang. 0-60 in 4.6 seconds sure don't hurt either  Keep your Mustangs, if I wanted one of those I would have bought one. I reaaallllly got a kick out of some people who were bitching about he 500 dollar price increase. By rights, this car should sticker for 40K.


 :agree 

Great post.

Branding it a freaking Pontiac was also a mistake, IMHO. 

Oh well..._we_ get it.


----------



## newgoat (Apr 5, 2005)

drmustang said:


> 05 GT goes 12.5! Perfect article for the mentality at the lower end of the automotive food chain. Unfortunately the crew that these publications cater to denies the fact that the car has been modified to a point where they are more of drag car than a daily driver. Who invests near $30,000 in a new car and rips out seats, defeats it's cornering abilities, and generally does a "high school" job on it.


Hi, drmustang

Are you talking about the same article I was talking about from FF&MM? This was laid on me by my work buddy with the '05 GT. I was at his house Friday (last), night and swiped his copy of the rag. All the FF&MM guys did was re-flash the computer, Magnaflow rear mufflers, pulleys, QA1 rear shocks, 4.10's and mount a set of M/T Streets on the stock wheels. $2,430 total for *308 RWHP* *12.45 *  ET's @ *107.92*. They did not take out any weight from the car like rear seats to turn these ET's, the car crossed the scales at 3640lbs. after the run.

What part of these modifications aside from the M/T Streets (which even a GTO will need to go fast at the strip), have made the car into a drag only car? These are the same type of hop-ups I've been doing for years on my daily drivers. That same 308RWHP will be pushing the car with the stock tires on the street just like my GTO. This is why my buddy's car is so much faster than mine after he hopped it up, lower weight with the same power. These things are fast and cheap, I'm just saying you need to know your competition is all. IMO it's better to bring gun to a knife fight whenever possible.

You know the old saying, _*"Keep your friends close and your enemies closer"*_


----------



## 75coug (Apr 8, 2005)

6QTS11OZ said:


> Even Ford knows that the GTO is a superior car to their beloved GT. If not, why are they getting Mr. Carroll Shelby involved? Because they just can't man up and take defeat. That's the same thing that Ford did after the Z28s and Firebirds destroyed the GTs they had to counter punch back with the Cobra. Ford is definitely a "Keep up with the Jones" type of company. And that's because some of, and I did say "some of", their products are normally inferior to their competitors so they have to spend more money to catch up. Whether GM used the GTO badge, 442 badge, LeMans badge or whatever, there still would be unjust criticism even if the car is obviously better than the Mustangs.


C'mon, let's be realistic. Ford's ancient-platformed 2004 Mustang outsold the GTO by a huge margin, and with the new Mustang on the market, the disparity will be even greater for 2005. 

I love the GTO, but will readily acknowledge that it is nothing more than a niche vehicle. It's existence probably doesn't even register on the radar screens of the powers-that-be at Ford, Toyota, Daimler-Chrysler and Honda.


----------



## 75coug (Apr 8, 2005)

catchmeifucan said:


> The GTO has the creature comforts that the Cobra and models alike don't have.


What are these creature comforts? I'm not saying that you are wrong; I just haven't compared the cars using this criterion, and am wondering about the details.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 11, 2004)

75coug said:


> What are these creature comforts? I'm not saying that you are wrong; I just haven't compared the cars using this criterion, and am wondering about the details.


I commute each day 220 miles RT in my Goat so I'm as qualified as any to answer that.

The seats...ask anyone. They are amoung the best seats in the business...better than Corvette, Audi, or even BMW. Incredibly comforable, yet very supportive for flinging the car around. All leather interiors. the back seats, while admittedly not the easisest things to climb into, are as comfortable as the front (though not nearly as much fun). The ergonomics just _work_. While the Holden as sold in the US doesn't have an auto climate control as the Aussies do, it still is an easy to use and effective piece of kit. 

One snivel-- the 2004s lack a dead pedal, a piece of stupid oversight courtesy Pontiac. The 2005s have them.

The best creature comfort, however? The knoweldge that you have the ability to _stomp_ 93% of the the cars around you... :cool


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

A fabulous, underrated vehicle, that's all (the Aussies and Euros seem to get it though). Part of me is upset that it doesn't get the recognition it deserves, but another part of me loves that they're not on every corner. Here's to all that do "get it" :cheers


----------



## C5ORGTO (Dec 30, 2004)

The 05 GTO should be about as fast as C5 Corvette. The C5 has 350hp, and the GTO 400hp, but the GTO weighs almost 600lbs more.


----------



## TM2FLI (Jan 17, 2005)

New times for us with headers, xpipe, K+N and ASP pulley

12.60 at 110.4mph. 1.86 60 foot time in very warm weather. Yes this is in street trim how we drive it everyday and wil run a couple tenths and mph faster at sea level. No slicks or et streets. Just updating people on how fast 05's are, like the topic says. Old time was 12.83 at 107.4mph stock with nittos in colder weather.


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

75coug said:


> C'mon, let's be realistic. Ford's ancient-platformed 2004 Mustang outsold the GTO by a huge margin, and with the new Mustang on the market, the disparity will be even greater for 2005.
> 
> I love the GTO, but will readily acknowledge that it is nothing more than a niche vehicle. It's existence probably doesn't even register on the radar screens of the powers-that-be at Ford, Toyota, Daimler-Chrysler and Honda.


Evidently you agree with me saying that the truth hurts because you didn't include that protion in your reply. So what if Mustangs outsell GTOs. That still won't change the fact that the GTO is a better car. McDonald's advertise that they sell so many millions of burgers a year. That doesn't stop me from eating at the local Mom and Pop Burger joint. Hopefully in 25 or 30 years from now we'll have an opportunity to see the '05 GTO and the '05 Mustang GT roll across the blocks at the Barrett-Jackson auction. I truly doubt if the sells numbers for the '05 GT will bring a higher price than a low selling, so-call undesireable, obviously better-than-the-Mustang GT '05 GTO. Just because a car is sold in greater numbers doesn't mean that it's better than a lower selling car. The Hyundai Tiburon probably out sold the GTO but I'm not rushing out to get one. And like the GT, the Tiburon isn't in the same league as the GTO either.


----------



## 75coug (Apr 8, 2005)

6QTS11OZ said:


> Evidently you agree with me saying that the truth hurts because you didn't include that protion in your reply. So what if Mustangs outsell GTOs. That still won't change the fact that the GTO is a better car. McDonald's advertise that they sell so many millions of burgers a year. That doesn't stop me from eating at the local Mom and Pop Burger joint. Hopefully in 25 or 30 years from now we'll have an opportunity to see the '05 GTO and the '05 Mustang GT roll across the blocks at the Barrett-Jackson auction. I truly doubt if the sells numbers for the '05 GT will bring a higher price than a low selling, so-call undesireable, obviously better-than-the-Mustang GT '05 GTO. Just because a car is sold in greater numbers doesn't mean that it's better than a lower selling car. The Hyundai Tiburon probably out sold the GTO but I'm not rushing out to get one. And like the GT, the Tiburon isn't in the same league as the GTO either.


You missed my whole point. I did not say that the Mustang is better than the GTO because it sells in greater numbers. 

In your earlier post that I quoted, you said that Ford was chasing the GTO and brought Shelby back on board in an effort to make a car that could compete with the GTO. My point is that because the GTO sells in such small numbers, Ford could care less about making a car that is better than the GTO. 

With the demise of the Camaro/Firebird, the Mustang has no real competition left in its class, so Ford's concern is continuing to make cars that appeal to the loyalists, and which will also be stylish enough to bring on some new buyers.


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

75coug said:


> You missed my whole point. I did not say that the Mustang is better than the GTO because it sells in greater numbers.
> 
> In your earlier post that I quoted, you said that Ford was chasing the GTO and brought Shelby back on board in an effort to make a car that could compete with the GTO. My point is that because the GTO sells in such small numbers, Ford could care less about making a car that is better than the GTO.
> 
> With the demise of the Camaro/Firebird, the Mustang has no real competition left in its class, so Ford's concern is continuing to make cars that appeal to the loyalists, and which will also be stylish enough to bring on some new buyers.


This will be my last time replying to your posts because no matter what you say I'm still not going to agree with you and it's obvious that you're not going to agree with me. But me being a member of this _*GTO FORUM*_, operative word being _*GTO*_, I guess I'm going to be biased in favor of the GTO because I own one, I really enjoy my GTO (that's why I bought it) and I don't care about Mustangs. Based on your previous posts it seems you're here only to pick apart the GTO. Here's a little advice for ya. You may want to share your points with someone who cares because I don't and I'm sure that a large percentage of the GTO owners here don't care either. Why don't you try joining a Mustang forum? :seeya:


----------



## deezdad (Mar 22, 2005)

serenity now!


----------



## 75coug (Apr 8, 2005)

6QTS11OZ said:


> This will be my last time replying to your posts because no matter what you say I'm still not going to agree with you and it's obvious that you're not going to agree with me. But me being a member of this _*GTO FORUM*_, operative word being _*GTO*_, I guess I'm going to be biased in favor of the GTO because I own one, I really enjoy my GTO (that's why I bought it) and I don't care about Mustangs. Based on your previous posts it seems you're here only to pick apart the GTO. Here's a little advice for ya. You may want to share your points with someone who cares because I don't and I'm sure that a large percentage of the GTO owners here don't care either. Why don't you try joining a Mustang forum? :seeya:


Settle down, tiger. Try reading my posts a little more closely. At no point did I ever "pick apart the GTO," nor did I ever say that the Mustang is a better car. I am actually selling a Cobra and replacing it with a GTO.

I simply pointed out that your post made no sense. It still doesn't. 

As for you no longer responding to my posts, I would welcome such a development, since your responses indicate that you lack the cognitive ability to even understand my point.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

Who cares if the Mustang is as quick/quicker than a GTO in a straight line for 1/4 mile? Not me. The GTO is a more well rounded Grand Tourer with room for 4 real adults. It can handle curves and bumps as well as smooth tracks. The GTO has a much nicer interior, a better ride, and less road noise. And, it's plenty fast. No matter the performance, I could never bring myself to buy the Ford with it's yestertech suspension and cheap plasticky interior with an unusable back seat.

Now with that said, I think Ford did a great job with the styling of the new Mustang (exterior). It's a great modern take on the 67. Look at it and you know instantly what it is. And, for a lot of people who can't afford more, it's a great performance value. The Mustang has good performance at it's price point by all accounts. But it stays true to the pony car formula. Cheap performance using cheap components. I've grown beyond that. I expect more from a car and I'm unwilling to put up with pony car quality and design shortcomings.

Both these cars are valid performance cars in their own right but they appeal to different buyers. Ford is looking for a high volume coupe that will sell to everyone from kids to secretaries to budget constrained enthusiasts. They hit the mark. The Mustang should do well.

GM brought a European style Grand Tourer here from Australia and confused the market by calling it a GTO, a revered musclecar legend. The GTO is not a musclecar. It is better than any musclecar ever made in the 60's/70's. People thought it was the second coming of the Fbody. It's not. It was never intended to sell in volume. There are no cheap V6 trims. There are no strippo models. It is a loaded car at a great value.

I'm afraid GM confused everyone by calling the Monaro a GTO. If they had called it the Pontiac 600 or some such name, no one would be making these stupid, invalid comparisons.

May we have the next candidate on the soapbox please?


----------



## Groucho (Sep 11, 2004)

Wing_Nut said:


> GM brought a European style Grand Tourer here from Australia and confused the market by calling it a GTO, a revered musclecar legend. The GTO is not a musclecar. It is better than any musclecar ever made in the 60's/70's. People thought it was the second coming of the Fbody. It's not. It was never intended to sell in volume. There are no cheap V6 trims. There are no strippo models. It is a loaded car at a great value.
> 
> I'm afraid GM confused everyone by calling the Monaro a GTO. If they had called it the Pontiac 600 or some such name, no one would be making these stupid, invalid comparisons.


 :agree 

...except for the Pontiac 600 part.

Branding this car a Pontiac, much less a GTO, was not very bright. It sould have been marketed towards BMW buyer types (like me)...not _Pontiac_ buyer types.

Whatever. I'm glad we got it...even with the foul Red Wedgie thing nailed sacreligiosly to it.


----------



## 75coug (Apr 8, 2005)

Wing nut, Groucho, I agree wholeheartedly with both of you. Well put.


----------



## 1fast05GTO (Feb 27, 2005)

*gto speed*

i dont know about anyone else here, but i have never once gotten beaten by a new cobra...i have the 05..and have 3 friends with the cobras and a friend with an 05 gt....and the cobras take about a 2 car loss to me everytime...They are a waste of money for a v8 with a blower and cant even keep up with an all motor car. As for the new GT...Lets just say i could have started in 2nd and still might have one....not bad...only a 4 car victory for the gto....Its all about the driver...if u can drive the car, u can beat almost everything.....when u r loosing to cars that have less power...then u should practice a lil driving


----------

