2005: GTO vs Mustang

[SSbaby]

21st-Century Muscle Cars

Goat and Pony showdown.
BY TONY QUIROGA
PHOTOGRAPHY BY RICH CHENET
January 2005

Featured in This Comparo
Ford Mustang GT
Pontiac GTO
Second Place
Pontiac GTO

Big surprise, right? The Goat finishes second; it's a goat after all, and that's what goats do. Second place might be the expected finish for what some cynics would call the Blunder from Down Under, but despite selling far fewer than the expected 18,000 units in 2004, the GTO has enough upgrades for 2005 to transform itself into a wonder.

Some cosmetic changes have been made to correct the much-maligned inadequacies of the Pontiac's lozenge-like exterior. Two hood scoops protrude in hopes of giving a bit more snarl to the Goat's front end. Nice try. Imagine your aunt Clara penciling in some more angry eyebrows, and you get the idea. She might look a bit more volatile, but she's still your aunt. Around back, there is a new bumper that better separates the two exhaust tips and gives slow stoplight challengers something to think about. Exhaust gases flow freely, and the drum beat is enough to cause meek dogs to cower. The surface changes are a step in the right direction, but the GTO's profile still looks too much like a bloated Cavalier.

The sound piped out of the exhaust comes from the new LS2 6.0-liter V-8 lifted nearly intact from the C6 Corvette. It makes 50 more horses than last year's 5.7-liter LS1, for a total of 400, and 400 pound-feet of torque. Last year's GTO was 0.2 second slower to 60 and in the quarter than the new Mustang GT; if you'd driven them back-to-back, it's unlikely you'd be able to differentiate between the two. Now the disparity is quite apparent as the GTO has moved below five seconds for the 0-to-60 sprint-that's M3 territory.

It's easy to get going quickly in the GTO, but the six-speed manual transmission is about as fun to use as that Soloflex collecting dust in your basement. Throws are long, rubbery, and high effort and drew universal criticism. Even the GTO's staunchest advocate here conceded that the shifter might be enough to keep him from spending the extra dough for the GTO.

Worse yet were the foot pedals. In a car that encourages and embraces delinquent behavior, you expect the pedals to be placed for a heel-and-toe downshift. That's not the case; it's nearly impossible to brake and blip the throttle. The brake pedal is nearly a shoe width away from the accelerator. Making matters more difficult is a hinged accelerator pedal; if you do manage to brake and blip, the pedal swings on its hinge instead of opening the throttle. Luckily, the brakes don't require much effort as they scrub off speed easily. Stand on them, and you can erase 70 mph in 167 feet-a sizable improvement over the 185-foot performance of the 2004 model [C/D, December 2003]. Since we're down here in the footwell, we should point out that Pontiac's literature promises a dead pedal for 2005, but our test car did not have one. The issues from down under the dash aside, the rest of the car is frisky and willing to satisfy.

Bend the GTO into a series of corners that require no downshifting, and it's easy to be seduced. Steering is far more communicative than the system in the Mustang; the effort increases as cornering loads increase. Turn the wheel off-center, and the GTO dives into the corner as predictably and voraciously as a goat at an all-you-can-eat tin-can buffet. A bit of body roll accompanies maneuvers near the 0.88-g threshold, but understeer almost never rears its head.

For the high-schooler in all of us, oversteer is only a foot tap away. Gently roll into the throttle at the exit, and the GTO will kick out the tail slightly to rotate the chassis through the corner. Intemperate amounts of throttle send enough juice to the 245/45R-17 BFGoodrich KDWS all-season rear tires to drift luridly through the corner. A sideways GTO might look hairy to oncoming traffic, but from inside the ****pit everything is copasetic.

Most of the serene nature of the GTO comes from the way the driver is treated. Aside from three chintzy climate-control knobs, there is a lot to admire. Backlit gauges and several digital readouts provide easy-to-read information. One bizarre display even suggested we take a break after two hours by showing an Atari-grade tree and park bench and then beeping at us in an R2-D2 dialect common to some parts of Australia. The display is completely unnecessary because the Goat's expensively leathered seats that electrically adjust in six directions are far better than any park bench we've ever tried-they're even better than the Vette's new seats. Driver comfort is further enhanced by the tilting and telescoping steering wheel that allows for a just-right fit. Taken in from the driver's seat, the interior impresses with its tight tolerances and contrasting materials and textures. There's even a knee-high swath of pseudo-suede that runs from one door to the other.

The voting was as tight as the recent presidential-election spread; in the end, only one point separated the two combatants. Clearly, the Goat is evolving into an incredibly gratifying car. All the changes Pontiac bestowed on its slow seller improved the beast, and dynamically, there really wasn't much wrong with it. With 6.0 liters of power, it won most of the performance tests as well as the fun-to-drive category, but what the GTO lacked last year it lacks this year: Watch one go by on the street, and the design still won't trigger an arrhythmia like a 400-hp coupe should. If only it looked as stunning as the new Mustang, we might have forgiven the mislaid pedals, the stubborn shifter, and even the roughly $5000 difference in price. Unfortunately for Pontiac, our comparo jury wasn't blind.


Car and Driver Review (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=8908)

[SSbaby]

The Drive journos actually make sense compared to the C&D judges.

[PepeLePew]

Odd how they always blame the Aussies for the looks of the bloody thing.....

[jneil]

he reads like he'd made up his mind before he'd got near it anyway.

[Ghia351]

I imagine a VE-based Monaro is already approved and being developed however I just hope that if the 2005 GTO fails to meets its sales targets then it doesn't has an adverse effect of the Monaro's future. It's too good-looking a car to lose because of the difference in US vs Aussie tastes. Would the US division even bother making a locally built GTO for numbers under 20,000?

[Hot Carl]

theyre right though, that mustang looks bloody awesome apart form the colour. the monaro has never looked that aggressive. that mustang in orange, with a black bonnet would be sex on wheels!

i know, im unaustralian :)

[V82xist]

I don't know how they think the 05 Mustang is quicker than the 04 GTO cause I've seen film of 2 new Mustangs getting their ass kicked by a 04 GTO and the Mustangs were doing a mid 14 second 1/4s.
The LS2 GTO would leave the Mustang like it was parked at the lights....no competition.

[Rick76]

If you look at the scoring the GTO won or equalled on all sub categories but lost out on "gotta-have-it factor" 25 / 18. The final score was Mustang 211 / GTO 210, so it could have easily gone the other way if there was a bit more emphasis on objectivity over subjectivity.

Overall vehicle = equal
Powertrain = GTO win
Chassis = GTO win
Fun to drive = GTO win

I think it says something about the author/s of the article if the GTO wins out overall ('conservative' styling and more expensive price included in this score) yet the Mustang is given the win on "gotta-have-it factor" (=WANK FACTOR). ;)

[Swordie]

The GTO losing by 1 point seems quite respectable considering the Mustang was one of the most eagerly waited launches in the U.S in 2005. The Mustang is a nice looking car, imagine the budget they had compared to the Monaro. When it comes down to bang for development dollar the GTO kicks ass. I would assume the LS2 has more development potential then Ford motor.

[BA$TAD]

4.6 litre vs 6.0 litre the GTO would wanna kill the mustang. :rolleyes:

damn i wishd they would build RHD mustangs and Ford AUS import them. I would buy one.

[TriShield]

Odd how they always blame the Aussies for the looks of the bloody thing.....

It's not different from the Monaro really, and both are equally labeled boring. Good thing looks are subjective.

I have to admit though, the new Mustang is a striking car with good performance at a bargain price ($33,000 AUD - 221kW). When you see one on the road you know exactly what it is. That goes a long way I'm afraid.

Ford would probably sell quite a few of them if they built them to Aussie specs and sold them for a similar price there, that's almost half of what a Monaro costs for nearly the same type of car.

[Danv8]

Odd how they always blame the Aussies for the looks of the bloody thing.....


They want to complain about the looks of the GTO then they should have another look at the Pontiac Aztek. :rolleyes:

[ATOMIC MALOO R8]

theyre right though, that mustang looks bloody awesome apart form the colour. the monaro has never looked that aggressive. that mustang in orange, with a black bonnet would be sex on wheels!

i know, im unaustralian :) IF you think the mustang looks good what do you think of of the SHELBY GR1 ? that is some great looking coupe.look here http://www.dropem.net/shelbygr1.htm

[clixanup]

I don't know how they think the 05 Mustang is quicker than the 04 GTO cause I've seen film of 2 new Mustangs getting their ass kicked by a 04 GTO

Same here. On a recent episode of Top Gear, they said that the Mustang does 0-60 mph in 6-point-something seconds. The Monaro is at least 20% quicker than that.

They also said that the suspension in the Mustang is fit to rival a stage coach. It has a live rear axle - something not seen on a Holden in almost a decade...

But then Americans *really* don't like being beaten at their own game.

[ATOMIC MALOO R8]

IF you think the mustang looks good what do you think of of the SHELBY GR1 ? that is some great looking coupe.look here http://www.dropem.net/shelbyGR1.htm
http://www.dropem.net/shelbyGR1.htm

[BA$TAD]

Same here. On a recent episode of Top Gear, they said that the Mustang does 0-60 mph in 6-point-something seconds. The Monaro is at least 20% quicker than that.



watch it again...0 - 60 in just under 6 seconds. ;)

[clixanup]

watch it again...0 - 60 in just under 6 seconds. ;)
Still a lot slower than a Munro.

[BA$TAD]

Still a lot slower than a Munro.
you'd wanna hope so, by a fair bit too. at 1.4litres bigger, the GTO would have a fair amount of egg on its face if a cheaper less powerful car beat it. :rolleyes:

[VZKOOP]

you'd wanna hope so, by a fair bit too. at 1.4litres bigger, the GTO would have a fair amount of egg on its face if a cheaper less powerful car beat it. :rolleyes:

Monaro is only 5.7l in Aus and still hustles the 0-100 in close to a second faster than the Ford.

All the whose faster BS aside. The article is not bad, the GTO wins hands down, looks are subjective as many have already said - I think the GTO looks crap compared to the Monaro - but that is definately subjective. I like the "bizaare - 2 Hour warning" comment. Americans think seatbelts and fatigue are for everyone else on the planet. I like the way he says the seats are a better place to rest (fall asleep?)- because the GTO must have autopilot I guess - I'm pissed if it has because I paid a lot more for my VZ than those 'mericans pay for their GTO :rolleyes:

[BA$TAD]

Monaro is only 5.7l in Aus and still hustles the 0-100 in close to a second faster than the Ford.


and here i was thinking we were talking about the article about the GTO and mustang. :rolleyes:
in which it states that the GTO is cleary running the LS2.

[VZKOOP]

Quote:
Originally Posted by clixanup
Still a lot slower than a Munro.


you'd wanna hope so, by a fair bit too. at 1.4litres bigger, the GTO would have a fair amount of egg on its face if a cheaper less powerful car beat it.

Perhaps responding to a Monaro comment would be the reason "we" went off topic momentarily.

[BA$TAD]

Perhaps responding to a Monaro comment would be the reason "we" went off topic momentarily.
ok then...according to the site below
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=8908&page_number=4

mustang does 0 - 100 in 5.1 and according to wheels mag dec 2004 the MONARO does it in 5.8.

[VZKOOP]

I stand corrected :o - now back to the thread......

[BA$TAD]

I stand corrected :o - now back to the thread......
:cool: no dramas my apologies to all for dragging it away from topic...

both are bloody good cars for their prices. I gurantee though there is no doubt that further dev work on the LS2 in the GTO will be an awesome machine, ala Z06.

[clixanup]

ok then...according to the site below
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=8908&page_number=4

mustang does 0 - 100 in 5.1 and according to wheels mag dec 2004 the MONARO does it in 5.8.

:lol: They measure 0 - 60 mph (which is 96 km/h) differently in the US. They use a "walking pace" rolling start, which is why their numbers are so low.

I'd place more credit in the Top Gear figure of "just under 6 seconds."

[BA$TAD]

:lol: They measure 0 - 60 mph (which is 96 km/h) differently in the US. They use a "walking pace" rolling start, which is why their numbers are so low.

I'd place more credit in the Top Gear figure of "just under 6 seconds."

:rolleyes: i am sure you would. still under 6 seconds aint bad :cool:

[Red CV8 R]

ANYWAY The GTO will never be accepted until it is made in the states. It could be exactly the same car but made in the US and they would love it. The same is probably going to happen here when the Monaro is made over there.

[Nawdy]

A telling quote from the rest of the article:

"The Goat fought hard and kicked even harder, and there were moments when we thought the GTO would prevail and we'd be left to explain how our 10Best muscle car came in second to the only other valid competitor." Can't let a journo from the US of A be wrong, can we?

and this interesting disclaimer:

*These objective scores are calculated from the vehicles' dimensions, capacities, and/or test results.. Objective? Yeah right....

From what I could see, there was no reference to other boring, inconsequential subjects such as build quality and the like; but lots of excuses along the same lines bike mags give when testing H-D's "goes well for a Harley", "stops well for a Harley" and of course "corners well for a Harley :lol: ". If any other bike underperformed this much, they would be shit-canned.

Lets see a real objective test between the two and other contenders, not just "it looks really nice and it's built in America, so it wins". Not very credible is it?

[the mooch]

maybe the next time Holden (sorry, Pontiac) supply a test vehicle to a yankee car mag, they should supply it with a cardboard cut-out of Steve Irwin the back seat and replace the 2 hour warning buzzer with a recording of Irwin exclaiming "Oh, Crikey!". Simple people only need simple things to please them.

[Swordie]

GTO may not of been the best name for the car. GM was trying to cash in on famous brand and it may of back fired. If was called a Monaro there may not of been as many expectations. I wonder if GM is making any money on the GTO?

In business if you deliver below expectation the customer is left unsatisfied. There has been plenty of feedback on how the car should look for American tastes and it seems GM have only gone part of the way.

The Americans are a patriotic lot. If the Mustang lost the review there would have been out rage.

What the review proves is we build some of the best Muscle cars in the world.

[XR6 Martin]

They also said that the suspension in the Mustang is fit to rival a stage coach. It has a live rear axle - something not seen on a Holden in almost a decade...

B

What the hell is under the rear of the Crewman/1 tonner then?

[XR6 Martin]

:lol: They measure 0 - 60 mph (which is 96 km/h) differently in the US. They use a "walking pace" rolling start, which is why their numbers are so low.

I'd place more credit in the Top Gear figure of "just under 6 seconds."

Incorrect
Read the last page of the article

5-60 is 5.6 for the Stang and 5.1 for the GTO
0-60 is 5.1 for the Stang and 4.8 for the GTO

[TriShield]

ANYWAY The GTO will never be accepted until it is made in the states. It could be exactly the same car but made in the US and they would love it.

Wrong.

It's the styling, it doesn't look like a GTO should to people. It resembles a few very unremarkable GM cars sold here in the 90s, and people don't want to be seen driving a car that resembles them or blends in. When people buy a GTO, they don't want it to be mistaken for anything but a GTO. That's the problem.

It was probably impossible to anticipate this happening, but live and learn I guess. Had the car been named G8, or something else it may have been less of an issue.

Still, it doesn't help that the new Mustang is here in all of it's retro-glory. People covet the original Mustangs, now they have a brand new one that captures the style of the originals and people want it.

[JohnS]

What the hell is under the rear of the Crewman/1 tonner then?

XR6 Martin yes it's true that Holden's commercial vehicles use the same rear suspension techology as Ford's latest performance car. Holden should be a shamed :p

[TriShield]

If the Mustang lost the review there would have been out rage.


Not really (although this review has provoked a similar debate on US sites). US cars routinely lose to foreign cars in US publications.

Oz does churn out some awesome muscle though. :D

[Red CV8 R]

Wrong.

It's the styling, it doesn't look like a GTO should to people. It resembles a few very unremarkable GM cars sold here in the 90s, and people don't want to be seen driving a car that resembles them or blends in. When people buy a GTO, they don't want it to be mistaken for anything but a GTO. That's the problem.

It was probably impossible to anticipate this happening, but live and learn I guess. Had the car been named G8, or something else it may have been less of an issue.

Still, it doesn't help that the new Mustang is here in all of it's retro-glory. People covet the original Mustangs, now they have a brand new one that captures the style of the originals and people want it.

I can’t understand how Australians love the look of the Monaro and the Americans hate it so? I really don’t know what they want the GTO to look like? Exactly like the old one? Well that wouldn’t work (I saw someone try in a thread kicking around here and it was diabolical). I have seen the comparison pictures of what the Americans think the Monaro looks like and while I could see a general resemblance I think the Pontiac front is what marks the car as looking like other vehicles. Mind you I think the new Mustang looks like junk myself so i guess it is all in the taste.

My guess on the real problem? Pontiac has aimed this car at the wrong segment of the market. I don’t think they really knew where they wanted to market it. It was meant to be a BMW competitor to a mustang competitor to a remake of the original to a replacement for the Fbody. It was none of these things in the end. Luxury coupe? Nope they pulled to much gear out to be that and the way it was tuned made it more muscle car, but no it wasn’t fast or tough enough looking to be a muscle car? Was also to expensive apparently, which is fine if you are making a luxury coupe but no good if you are selling to the people who love muscle cars. And we know it wasn’t ever going to be accepted by those who covert the GTO nothing would have been. Replacement for the Fbody nope really a different type of car, the new mustang is more that type of car.

So really the poor Monaro/ GTO never stood a chance! And you can’t really tell me that some part of you doesn’t want the GTO to be made in the US.

Just my 2c

[clixanup]

5-60 is 5.6 for the Stang and 5.1 for the GTO
0-60 is 5.1 for the Stang and 4.8 for the GTO

:confused: If the 0-60 time is truly from standstill, how can it be FASTER than the 5-60 time??

[TriShield]

So really the poor Monaro/ GTO never stood a chance! And you can’t really tell me that some part of you doesn’t want the GTO to be made in the US.


It really doesn't stand a chance wearing the GTO name looking like it does, especially now that the new retro Mustang is out. I honestly couldn't care less where the car is made as long as it's as good as it can be. In fact I find it cool and unique it's an Australian car.

The car probably should have looked more like the originals, similar to the Ram Air 6/Woodward concept that debuted months ago. Nobody had any complaints about that, and it would be much harder to confuse it with any other Pontiac or other car on the road here.

[clixanup]

What the hell is under the rear of the Crewman/1 tonner then?

OK. I shoulda phrased it "not seen on a Holden sedan in almost 10 years"

[Red CV8 R]

It really doesn't stand a chance wearing the GTO name looking like it does, especially now that the new retro Mustang is out. I honestly couldn't care less where the car is made as long as it's as good as it can be. In fact I find it cool and unique it's an Australian car.

The car probably should have looked more like the originals, similar to the Ram Air 6/Woodward concept that debuted months ago. Nobody had any complaints about that, and it would be much harder to confuse it with any other Pontiac or other car on the road here.

That is interesting. Do you think that is a common opinion amongst the muscle car fraternity? Would Holden have been better off sending the HSV GTO as the Pontiac GTO? I allways thought this but then I dont think anyone would want to pay for it, again we come back to what market the car is aimed at. I believe if Pontiac had of got this right we wouldnt be having this discussion. They should have done some proper research and worked out what buyers of this car wanted.

The Ram Air 6 concept was funny. When I first saw th pictures of that car I went wow, then I saw lots of pictures from different angles and thought it was an abomination. Opposite of the Monaro for me, when I first saw it I thought I liked the sedan better and that is what I bought, over time I think the original shape has aged well and I now want to buy one.

[TriShield]

That is interesting. Do you think that is a common opinion amongst the muscle car fraternity? Would Holden have been better off sending the HSV GTO as the Pontiac GTO?

Judging by US sites, the media, and general commentary I encouter, it is the most common opinion here.

Everyone seems to love the HSV Coupes, and the Ram Air 6 concept, so in hindsight it may have been better to figure out a way to import the HSV, or maybe just Pontiac-badging the Monaro like every other version of the car.

The car is fighting the ghosts of the past here, and that's really preventing people from giving them a fair shake or a second look. Sales went from a trickle to a run when a fat rebate was slapped on them. That probably won't change in the next two years I'm afraid.

Holden may have been better off exporting Utes here first (I realize it wasn't possible because of the FTA) since they would be extremely unique here, and almost demand you stare at them as they pass you by.

[Red CV8 R]

Wow, you guys love attention over there dont you! :D ;)

Thanks for the feedback. I am genuinely suprised that the looks could have this level of effect! I still love the Monaro shape anyway! :p

[TriShield]

Thanks for the feedback. I am genuinely suprised that the looks could have this level of effect! I still love the Monaro shape anyway! :p

So do I.

To be fair, nobody predicted the styling would be this big of a deal. Everyone thought they would sell 18,000 of them on it's merits, and that sadly hasn't happened.

If the Monaro came as the GTO in 2001, things may have been different. If it retained the Monaro's front bar, things may have been different. If it was a Monaro wearing HSV Coupe bits things may have been different. Who knows, the GTO name is just too iconic for a modern car to live up to.

I think Holden and Chevrolet could have sold 18,000 VY/VZ SS Utes and Crewmen here easily with a simple badge swap and 260kW of power. It's way closer to US tastes stylewise, pricewise and functionally.

[JohnS]

TriShield,

Thanks for giving us the American perspective. Apart from the GTOs exterior how do Americans view the rest of the car (handling, interior, build quality, etc.) and how do they view Holden in general and Holden's role in the Zeta platform which many US cars will use?

[Sid447]

......But then Americans *really* don't like being beaten at their own game.

Sweeping statement. It's probably a very good thing that Americans don't take offence at this kind of thing like some people on this Forum do when national identities are generalised in this way by opening mouth before engaging brain.
A bit of consideration all round would probably bring a few more good people from the USA onto this site to the benefit of all.

Who cares what is better, this is ONE motoring journalist's opinion;
...different strokes for different folks.
Nothing much wrong with a live axle either, properly located; It provides the V8 Supercars with enough go to do a 2min 6second Bathurst lap.

[Swordie]

Are there any plans for Shelby type Mustangs?

[paulvdb]

So do I.

To be fair, nobody predicted the styling would be this big of a deal. Everyone thought they would sell 18,000 of them on it's merits, and that sadly hasn't happened.

If the Monaro came as the GTO in 2001, things may have been different. If it retained the Monaro's front bar, things may have been different. If it was a Monaro wearing HSV Coupe bits things may have been different. Who knows, the GTO name is just too iconic for a modern car to live up to.

I think Holden and Chevrolet could have sold 18,000 VY/VZ SS Utes and Crewmen here easily with a simple badge swap and 260kW of power. It's way closer to US tastes stylewise, pricewise and functionally.

Essentially it's turned out to be a marketing problem (now that's unique for a car manufacturer!!!!). The car was designed to be smooth and clean for the Oz market - if anything to be Euro car substitute at half the price. Lutzy made the right decision in bringing the car to the US and then let the marketing guys stuff it up.

Marketed to the right people at the right time it would sell, but sold as a Mustang competitor it misses the point a bit. Muscle cars are meant to be hard and raw with lots of edgy bits. The Monaro is meant to be a cruiser for guys who don't have to lug a family around and want something sporty - the petrolheads would buy an SS or a HSV. GM need to decide what sort of car they want the GTO to be then - smooth and clean or raw and aggro, not both.

[Ghia351]

OK. I shoulda phrased it "not seen on a Holden sedan in almost 10 years"
I thought the Mustang was coil sprung not leaf sprung like a Ba wagon/ute/holden one tonner...someone needs to check a few things.

[clixanup]

I thought the Mustang was coil sprung not leaf sprung like a Ba wagon/ute/holden one tonner...someone needs to check a few things.

I never mentioned springs. The mustang has a live rear axle, which is what I was referring to.

For the record - Holden sedans have had a coil sprung rear end for more than 30 years...

[Venom XR]

Nothing wrong with good, well sorted live axle setups - ask the V8 Supercar mob.

[r8ls1]

Maybe Holden should offer a 4 link live rear axle in their sedans and Monaro. :o

Manufacturing cost and marketing is why they went to IRS. Working for Holdens at the time I drove them all day was easy to do direct comparo of all the commos with live axle (4link) to ones with IRS. I found the live axle cars a lot more predictable if gotten the car out of shape and handled better when pushing them to the limit. could also be thrown around 90 degree corners kicking the rear out sideways and correcting without sliding into the nearest pole.

IRS in general is overrated, the Holden IRS leaves a lot to be desired.

Ford went back to live axle in the Mustang because owners of the previous model were doing solid axle conversions by the droves.

just for laughs, anyone with 2F2Furious DVD, go to the scene were the do tag team for the old school cars, have a look at how the Yenko turns and exits out the marker on the return :lol: built in 1969 :lol: They have to pull a hand brakie in the Evo and still change camera shots coz it cant slide through it quick enough. now ofcourse i take the evo anyday, but thats besides the point.

[Red CV8 R]

Having owned Commdores with live axle, non control link IRS and control link IRS I would not ever want to own a live axle commodre again. The thought of the bloody thing flapping away in the rear gives me shudders even now. Having said that I didnt think much of the non control link IRS either. I like what they have now alot better!

[r8ls1]

Having owned Commdores with live axle, non control link IRS and control link IRS I would not ever want to own a live axle commodre again. The thought of the bloody thing flapping away in the rear gives me shudders even now. Having said that I didnt think much of the non control link IRS either. I like what they have now alot better!

I agree the control links are big improvement which is why I have a complete VXii susp in my VTii. I still beleive a good live rear axle is better. Dont know what yours was that flapped away, but when the cars were new, they drove very well.

[Jag530G]

V8 Supercars can get away with Live Axles because of the relatively smooth race track, the wheels will always be perpendicular to the (Flat) road surface. As in the article, this explains why the Mustang could pull higher G-Forces than the GTO , of course it can on a flat skid pan with a live axle, compared to a semi trailling arm set up with the inherent toe changes.

But try doing the same test on a bumpy surface and watch the Mustang swap ends quick smart. There is buckley's chance of a live axle pulling higher cornering speeds on a bumpy surface. The momentum of a live axle moving upwards, going over a bump, means it will have less contact on the road than the lighter unsprung weight of a IRS and a greater tendancy for the car to step out. It only has a Live axle because it is cheap and the buyers of Mustangs are hardly the sort who would be deciding over a Mustang versus a BMW 330 Coupe with a decent suspension system and therefore won't appreciate the handling benefits.

[Ghia351]

I never mentioned springs. The mustang has a live rear axle, which is what I was referring to.

For the record - Holden sedans have had a coil sprung rear end for more than 30 years...

lol,...I know you didn't mention what type of spring but by including the stage coach reference that would only infer leaf springs unless Holden had coil sprung stage coaches back where power was measured in the number of horses attached to the reins.....

[TriShield]

An article from awhile ago,

I drove GTOs, I knew GTOs intimately, GTOs were owned by friends of mine, and that's no GTO.

Projected to sell 16,000 units in the first year, the GTO proved to be a bitter disappointment for GM and Pontiac, selling a little over 10,000, with the car benefiting from a massive cash rebate push at the end of this year. The GTO was an effort by GM to get Pontiac back in the rear-wheel-drive, V-8 performance game, after the demise of the Firebird and a weak lineup of front-wheel-drive, pseudo-performance cars that didn't measure up had left the division awash in mediocrity.

Bob Lutz championed the idea, and it was a good one - on paper. Take the hottest car from GM's Australia affiliate - the Holden Monaro - make a few tweaks and bring it over here as the return of the fabled Pontiac GTO. Taking into consideration GM's "go fast" mantra, it was a brilliant way to shore-up Pontiac's tattered image quickly, without spending a ton of money. And the car itself is an excellent car, with outstanding power delivery from its 350HP V-8, excellent chassis manners, a gorgeous interior and a $33,495 sticker price. But there is one serious drawback with it too. The exterior styling is beyond bland, and what passes for a proper, understated, subtle performance look in Australia with the Monaro - conjured up nothing but long, drawn-out yawns over here when it was presented as the GTO. And therein lays the real problem.

The new GTO is not just competing with the contemporary market, it's competing with the ghost of one of America's most celebrated muscle/performance cars. Not just one of them either - but the one that started it all. Arguably no car could have stood up to that kind of mythic image and cult-like following - let alone one that originated in Australia and was aimed at the European performance idiom. It's a harsh lesson for GM, however, and it's a painful reminder to them that it's not enough to just "go fast" these days. You have to figure out where you want to go and why first - and then you've got to figure out how you're going to get there. And you can't leave anything to chance that will be "fixed" in next year's model, either. In the most competitive auto market in history, the product has to be flawlessly executed right out of the box.

Raiding GM's worldwide parts bin for the GTO wasn't a mistake on GM's part - far from it, in fact. But going ahead with a program in the interest of speed and thinking that the package itself would be too good to pass up for most hardcore enthusiasts - even though the looks of the car were less than ideal and a total disconnect with the brand image of one of the industry's legendary icons - was a crucial mistake. It does no good for GM to defend the look of the GTO or to somehow imply that there's nothing wrong with a Euro-look GTO, because that ship has sailed. The enthusiasts out in the real world just aren't buying that perspective. They wanted something more. And even though they can't necessarily articulate what the GTO should look like - the important thing to realize is that they know what's being presented to them isn't it.

GM is tweaking the GTO in '05 with 400HP and an optional body package with scoops, but in the meantime GM has to regroup, get aggressive with the pricing - and get down to defining what a real GTO should look like for the 21st century.

[Old Kiwi]

4.6 litre vs 6.0 litre the GTO would wanna kill the mustang. :rolleyes:

damn i wishd they would build RHD mustangs and Ford AUS import them. I would buy one.

I wish Ford US had used the XR6 turbo engine in the Mustang as an option.

I'm not a big Ford fan, but that would make my wish list

[TriShield]

I wish Ford US had used the XR6 turbo engine in the Mustang as an option.

You're not the first one to say that, especially after the 1,000HP Falcon video made the rounds on US sites. :D

[Frankster_P]

Yenko?
If its a Yenko Camaro its worth a 6 figure sum US dollars
one of the greatest muscle cars ever made.

[r8ls1]

I very much doubt they used a 'real' Yenko, which is why I said id rather have the Evo ;)

[nikola]

They have to pull a hand brakie in the Evo and still change camera shots coz it cant slide through it quick enough. now ofcourse i take the evo anyday, but thats besides the point.

I don't know what the point actually because the EVO is an AWD car which means it CAN'T just slide the rear end like a RWD car can. If they had used a Silvia or RX7 it would have no problems.

[r8ls1]

Yep not a fair comparo, my point was really in a RWD I'd rather have a live axle than an inferior IRS like the Holdens. This can turn into a never ending argument, so im out. Each to their own, hey :)