Drove a '17 Mustang GT

[c1pher]

Originally Posted by Cavpilot2k

Yes, but a roller skate with a good soundtrack is still a roller skate.

It has some nice looking hot hatch angles but is a pretty narrow car. I got it because I wanted something sporty but inexpensive and economical since I was putting down a lot of miles. It's also FWD which isn't ideal. However, I got 36-37mpg and 210hp/240tq for a 1.4l motor is pretty nice. Can't match the 162hp/95tq on my Diavel (has an NA 1198) though lol.

[Cavpilot2k]

Originally Posted by MGM135is

It has some nice looking hot hatch angles but is a pretty narrow car. I got it because I wanted something sporty but inexpensive and economical since I was putting down a lot of miles. It's also FWD which isn't ideal. However, I got 36-37mpg and 210hp/240tq for a 1.4l motor is pretty nice. Can't match the 162hp/95tq on my Diavel (has an NA 1198) though lol.

Yeah, I actually don't dislike the Abarth for what it is - just giving you a hard time because the Abarth and the GT350 were very nearly juxtaposed in a comparative statement.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Cavpilot2k

Yeah, I actually don't dislike the Abarth for what it is - just giving you a hard time because the Abarth and the GT350 were very nearly juxtaposed in a comparative statement.

I heard an Abarth on cold start up and idle in person. It sounded pretty good. As was implied though, a completely different animal than the GT350.

[c1pher]

IIRC, Akrapovich designed the exhaust for the Abarth. And it has no muffler. Don't believe me? Read the Abarth forums where people fail their car inspections. I just took my Abarth to the dealer since they knew it was designed without a muffler and passed US requirements.

Anywho, yes the Mustang and the Abarth are so very different.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by MGM135is

Anywho, yes the Mustang and the Abarth are so very different.

Not just any Mustang mind you, but the all-mighty GT350.

FWIW I think the Abarth is a great little car.

[c1pher]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Not just any Mustang mind you, but the all-mighty GT350.

FWIW I think the Abarth is a great little car.

For what it's worth, if I were looking at pony cars, I'd probably go with the ZL1. Essentially a 2+2 Z06 for about $20k less.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by MGM135is

For what it's worth, if I were looking at pony cars, I'd probably go with the ZL1. Essentially a 2+2 Z06 for about $20k less.

Yeah, that looks pretty nice, but personally I always liked the Mustang over the Camaro. According to this article, I'm not alone.

http://www.torquenews.com/106/ford-m...aim-2016-title

[ShocknAwe]

Love the new GT350. Really mean car. But. Really should have been about 75% as big. Probably would have bought one tbh.

[Matticus91]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Love the new GT350. Really mean car. But. Really should have been about 75% as big. Probably would have bought one tbh.

Agreed I think for what it offers it's a lot of car and 75% in size would be perfect. Hell even 10% smaller would be great.

[Esteban]

Was looking at the specs of the 1st gen Mustang compared to the 2016 Mustang GT350/GT350R and this is what I found (for those that are interested):

1964-1966
Wheelbase 108 in
Length 181.6 in
Width 68.2 in
Height 51.2 in
Curb weight 2,445 lb

2016 GT350/GT350R
Wheelbase 107.1 in
Length 188.9-189.7 in
Width 75.9 in
Height 53.6-54.2 in
Curb weight 3,796-3,710 lb

So the wheelbase in the 2016 is down approx. 1" but length, width and height are up. Curb weight is up by over 1000 lbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_M...rst_generation) - click on Ford Mustang (first generation)

http://www.caranddriver.com/ford/mus...y-gt350-gt350r

Don't know how accurate my sources are.

[Matticus91]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Was looking at the specs of the 1st gen Mustang compared to the 2016 Mustang GT350/GT350R and this is what I found (for those that are interested):

1964-1966
Wheelbase 108 in
Length 181.6 in
Width 68.2 in
Height 51.2 in
Curb weight 2,445 lb

2016 GT350/GT350R
Wheelbase 107.1 in
Length 188.9-189.7 in
Width 75.9 in
Height 53.6-54.2 in
Curb weight 3,796-3,710 lb

So the wheelbase in the 2016 is down approx. 1" but length, width and height are up. Curb weight is up by over 1000 lbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_M...rst_generation) - click on Ford Mustang (first generation)

http://www.caranddriver.com/ford/mus...y-gt350-gt350r

Don't know how accurate my sources are.

Interesting, smaller wheelbase but bigger otherwise. Also when you think about the era of cars from the 50's/60's and 70's you expect them to be big, especially American cars. I kinda figured we'd stepped away from that but seemingly not

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Matticus91

Interesting, smaller wheelbase but bigger otherwise. Also when you think about the era of cars from the 50's/60's and 70's you expect them to be big, especially American cars. I kinda figured we'd stepped away from that but seemingly not

Actually, the Mustang started as a pony car:

"Pony car is an American class of automobile launched and inspired by the Ford Mustang in 1964. The term describes an affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image."

I guess it's evolved into a muscle car.

[Matticus91]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Actually, the Mustang started as a pony car:

"Pony car is an American class of automobile launched and inspired by the Ford Mustang in 1964. The term describes an affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image."

I guess it's evolved into a muscle car.

"Compact" then and now are VERY different things lol

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Matticus91

"Compact" then and now are VERY different things lol

The weight difference is the big thing imo. Approx 2,400 lbs to approx 3,700 lbs. That car (like almost all cars these days) needs to go on a serious diet.

PS - like the rest of America. Haha

[Matticus91]

Originally Posted by Esteban

The weight difference is the big thing imo. Approx 2,400 lbs to approx 3,700 lbs. That car (like almost all cars these days) needs to go on a serious diet.

PS - like the rest of America. Haha

Safety equipment + comfort = many lbs haha

I looked up the stock specs of the '66 mustang GT - 271hp at best. So the power to weight ratio has at least gotten better.

'66 GT @ 0.108
'17 GT @ 0.118

And just for fun a stock 135i is 0.06 lol

A 135i with around 400 hp (tune + bolt ons) is 0.114

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Matticus91

Safety equipment + comfort = many lbs haha

I looked up the stock specs of the '66 mustang GT - 271hp at best. So the power to weight ratio has at least gotten better.

'66 GT @ 0.108
'17 GT @ 0.118

And just for fun a stock 135i is 0.06 lol

A 135i with around 400 hp (tune + bolt ons) is 0.114

I think still too many pounds. All that extra weight to throw around corners and turns.

Thanks for posting the info.

[ShocknAwe]

Power to weight is for straight line only.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Power to weight is for straight line only.

Yeah, too bad we don't only drive in straight lines. Of course, that would be no fun. Haha

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Yeah, too bad we don't only drive in straight lines. Of course, that would be no fun. Haha

Ever seen a highway in the us Midwest and deserts? Straight as an arrow as far as the eye can see.

[kprocivic]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Power to weight is for straight line only.

troof. my little ecobooster is a heck of a car in the twisties with far less power.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Ever seen a highway in the us Midwest and deserts? Straight as an arrow as far as the eye can see.

Sounds boring, would put me to sleep.

You gotta turn sooner or later.

[Matticus91]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Ever seen a highway in the us Midwest and deserts? Straight as an arrow as far as the eye can see.

Originally Posted by Esteban

Sounds boring, would put me to sleep.

You gotta turn sooner or later.

I love a good long road for a while, but I definitely have the most fun in the corners