2011 Mustang GT can hang with........an M3?

[fiveoh2go]

PS: What's up with that exhaust?

+1, that looks retarded - would LOVE an explanation for carrying around all that unnecessary weight...

I'm not a fan either. Just give me dual 3" all the way back and I'd be fine with that.


From the press release -

Every Boss features a unique quad exhaust system: Two outlets exit in the rear similar to a standard Mustang GT. The other two outlets exit to either side of the exhaust crossover, sending exhaust through a set of metal discs that act as tuning elements before the pipes terminate just ahead of the rear wheel opening. Visually subtle, the side pipes flow very little exhaust but a lot of exhaust sound, providing a sonic experience unlike any other Mustang ÔÇô and giving home tuners an additional avenue for modification.

ÔÇ£We added the attenuation discs to meet legal regulations, but we knew buyers might operate these cars in situations where noise regulations werenÔÇÖt an issue,ÔÇØ Carney said. ÔÇ£The disc is removable and includes a spacer plate sized to match aftermarket exhaust dump valves. If an owner wants to add a set of electric valves, they just undo two bolts on either side; the disc and spacer slide out and the valve will slide right in. And the side pipes are tuned so that drivers can run wide-open and the sound levels are comfortable ÔÇô very aggressive but livable for an all-day track outing.ÔÇØ

[Dave]

stoopid, but at least theres a reason that appears to have been well thought out...

[fiveoh2go]

M/T Comparison Test Vid: 2011 Ford Mustang GT vs 2011 BMW M3 Coupe

**puts on flame suit**

[D_Eclipse9916]

what is it with the inferiority complex to M3s?

id kinda get it, in a car magazine wanker kind of way, if they were both competitors in the same market segment. but they arent. not even close.

if you want to say, hey, the new mustang is an asskicking car, thats cool, we all love cars and some more than others.
But when you say "HOLY CRAP the new mustang PWNS the M3!!!!111LULz!!!1" you sound like a top shelf auto forum asswanker (which is much worse than a car magazine wanker FYI)

Quoted

[Mike]

This just in from B&M Magazine:

"1993 Honda Civic v. 2011 Mustang comparo. Civic found to have better interior and ergonomics even after being gutted for track."

This just in from Magazinehumpers.com:

"1997 Honda VFR750F smokes 2011 Mustang GT by more than a second in quarter mile. Yours for 5% of the price! You know how many drinks you can buy skanky girls at the bar with that kind of savings? No mullet required for purchase."

[fiveoh2go]

You guys are way too easy to rile up.

[Evan]

what is it with the inferiority complex to M3s?

What is it with the superiority complex to anything not Bavarian built?

show me the thread on a bimmer fanboi site titled

2011 M3 interior as good as..............a Mustang?



:dunno:




sounds pretty silly doesnt it?

[fiveoh2go]

what is it with the inferiority complex to M3s?

What is it with the superiority complex to anything not Bavarian built?

show me the thread on a bimmer fanboi site titled

2011 M3 interior as good as..............a Mustang?



:dunno:




sounds pretty silly doesnt it?

Whats silly is that this discussion has resorted to talking about the interior quality of the vaunted M3, a vehicle that cost $20k-$25k more than its competition in this comparison, only because its on track performance clearly isn't superior.

[Mike]

You're comparing apples to oranges. Hence my "sport tourer" from 1997 beating the shit out of the Mustang. That's silly, eh? That's how silly you're being. We're just trying to help you realize that, but it seems to really be lost on you.

[D_Eclipse9916]

Whats silly is that this discussion has resorted to talking about the interior quality of the vaunted M3, a vehicle that cost $20k-$25k more than its competition in this comparison, only because its on track performance clearly isn't superior.

Whats more silly is there hasnt been a single damn thread about the e92 M3, nor have I even seen a single posting in any "hot and bothered" threads with millions of pics of them either.

Yet you praise, start millions of threads on mustangs, post about half the pictures in hot and bothered of nearly stock terminators and mustangs and yet you preach on us for our "superiority complex?" :lol:

PS- You compare a brand new car with a 4-year old (and even in whack off magazine terms they used this terminology "long in the tooth" M3......and its still slower on track, has a worse interior, is not nearly as optioned out, and as used by even your magazine article, numb steering and shifter.

I never said I liked the new m3 either and I came out and said I loved the new mustang, but im damn sick and tired of your inferiority complex lol.

[terdcivic]

just a little more expensive than the gt and you get 2.9 second 0-60.

(this is just to point out that the atom is in a different class than the mustang...which is in a different class than the m3, regardless of objective performance)

[.RJ]

your mom handles like a mustang

[Goodspeed]

Huge fanboi-ism aside, markets/segments/who'd buy it/wouldacouldashoulda is irrelevant.

The point is, two companies built the best four seat, 2 door, v8, 6 speed coupes that they could. And the cheap American may have upstaged the Bav in a suit. And thats kinda cool.

:dunno:

[TorinoCobra070]

Huge fanboi-ism aside, markets/segments/who'd buy it/wouldacouldashoulda is irrelevant.

The point is, two companies built the best four seat, 2 door, v8, 6 speed coupes that they could. And the cheap American may have upstaged the Bav in a suit. And thats kinda cool.

:dunno:

Ahhh, spoken like a true person who spoke something true........ :thumbup:

[terdcivic]

Huge fanboi-ism aside, markets/segments/who'd buy it/wouldacouldashoulda is irrelevant.

The point is, two companies built the best four seat, 2 door, v8, 6 speed coupes that they could. And the cheap American may have upstaged the Bav in a suit. And thats kinda cool.

:dunno:

That isn't really true imo. Ford could do much better...the idea behind the mustang is to give people an option for a performance car that is relatively cheap. If Ford put $15-20k more into the mustang I'm sure they could come up with a car that feels as solid and easy to drive as the M3.

I also believe that if BMW took $15-20k off the price of the M3 and put less attention on the drive "feel" then they could easliy make a car around the price of the mustang for around the same performance. The two companies have different philosophies though.

[Dave]

How is this thread still going?

The mustang, like a corvette, delivers a lot of value in their package. It does NOT appeal to everybody though and it isn't designed to. Buyer priorities in cars have a massive range and THAT is why they will pick one car over the other. I applaud Ford for making a car that can apparently compete in performance with a car touted to be so much better, but at the same time it will be hard to deliver the handling and comfort that BMW traditionally brings with their cars. I think we would all probably agree that the BMW is more refined when you're sitting and driving both of them, but you always have to ask "Is it worth the additional costs?"

[Mike]

The point is, two companies built the best four seat, 2 door, v8, 6 speed coupes that they could. And the cheap American may have upstaged the Bav in a suit. And thats kinda cool.

But... But... how did it upstage it? I didn't bother to read the links because they're jerk-off-mag articles, which, to me, are not worth a second of my time. Who buys a brand-new car based purely on track performance? They're in completely different market segments. Nobody is cross-shopping the two; why compare them? IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

[terdcivic]

How is this thread still going?

I'm in the last week of my internship for the summer and trying to kill time :thumbup:

[Goodspeed]

That isn't really true imo. Ford could do much better...the idea behind the mustang is to give people an option for a performance car that is relatively cheap. If Ford put $15-20k more into the mustang I'm sure they could come up with a car that feels as solid and easy to drive as the M3.

This isn't really a valid point. Yes, if every manufacturer put $20k more into every product, everything would probably be better. There are a LOT of limiting factors that go into car production, hence "the best they could".

Nobody is cross-shopping the two; why compare them? IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

This is a motorsports forum? We're looking at their driving performance. (Or at least, I am.)

Re-read my first statement, their both very similar from a technical standpoint, which is bound to fuel comparison, like the Z06 to the F430, and the GTR to the 911 Turbo, and....

[Mike]

This is a motorsports forum

since when?