pkane

What a kick to hang right behind a Mustang GT going through the "windy's". Heading to work and lo and behold, ended up side by side with a 2001 GT at a light heading up a twisty hill that I know well. I left slowly, not wanting to be a rude instigator, and he, of course, took off.

I had no choice but to put my foot through the floor boards. Duh!

Stayed on his tail all the way through several winding turns, even while both of us were leaning seriously. Didn't dare look at the speedo, but guess it was around 85-90. We took the same turn off the main road, and as we cruised into our work areas, he waved and I waved back. Think I shocked him. Big ass "boat" hanging with him!!!

Got into work just a little sweaty, but grinning ear to ear......

HellaWhat

You know what... Over the wekeend I ahd the opputunity to sit in my frineds new 2001 Mustang GT, the Automatic version. I think this is a fair comparison as this is a 260HP pushrod V8 and our cars are 260HP V6's. Anyhow, I actually expected a lot of torque and power off the line from this car but it's not the case. So I let him drive mine and I drove his stang; went around the block and jeez, this car feels like a CLP (no offense). HE gets out fo the car and tells me my CLS feels stronger than his mustang. Too bad, that thing ran about 30K out the door... for about 1500 more he prolly coulda gotten a non-navi CLS and been more happy.

I know this would be different if the car was a stick, but damn that car was slow...

Scorpius

Actually my non-navi CL-S was $29,000... For a fun and fast car you can't bead a Mustang Vert... I didn't know the GTs came in automatic... Live and learn! They aren't listed on Edmunds.

HellaWhat

29K After taxes or before? I was referring to 31K for the price of a CLS Non-navi after taxes.

Pull_T

Hmm...interesting that the GT didn't seem stronger than the CL-S. You did hit the nail on the head though about the automatic, the 5 speed is much lower in 1st and 2nd (3.37, 1.98) vs. the automatic (2.64, 1.56) which definitely hurts the "low end torque" feel. Should have around 5 tenths in the 1/4 over the CL-S, but I guess that is not totally blowing it away or anything.

I am also assuming it's a vert since it was 30K, which doesn't help any in the acceleration department. I do feel bad for the dude paying full sticker on it, though.

The GT is not a pushrod (OHV) motor, though it's of the single overhead cam variety.

JRock

The slushbox Ford automatic transmission can ruin any of their cars.

The GT has around 300torque so it SHOULD feel stronger off the line, but not with an auto tranny.

Caddyİ

get the SWAYS and it won't feel quite like the "BOAT" anymore

Scorpius

Thats after... I did hve a $3,000 trade in though... but my price was 28,000 odd... It was barely below the 30 mark though.

pkane

I think sways are definitely the ticket for keeping the CL-S stuck tight in the turns. I know when I first got it, I was very impressed with the handling after owning a 93 maxima SE. The CL-s is much stiffer, tighter in the turns. Since I've had it for 11 months now, I am ready for an even stiffer ride to lessen sway..... Ergo Comptech sways.... soon....

I am still, 2 days later, tickled about sticking like glue to the stang's hinny. I think it surprised him. And me as well!

Type S

yah it is pretty cool..especially it is rwd and maual.but i dislike its poor quality of assembly and cheap interior look..the shift stick and boots is ugly too:P

Mike

you might want to look at upgrading your tires too. I have the Toyo T1S Proxies and they stick like glue. Sways will help w/handling but I guarantee that the tires are the WEAKEST LINK.

btw, what part of SD do you live in? I'm up in north county.

Scorpius

Pull_T

The key words are "shift stick" :P

Caddyİ

Butt Ugly !

Jens H.

Last time I looked 2001 GT mustangs are equipped with 4.6 litre V8 engines that employ SOHC cylinder heads.The pushrod V8 5.0 litre engine was retired some time ago.Acuras are equipped with all independent suspension systems the Mustang makes do with suspension systems dating back to the Ford Fairmont upon which the current generation cars are still based.This means live axles in the back and an antiquated strut setup in the front.Then again the guy in the Mustang spent considerably less money on his car and regardless of what quality issues the car may have it is a Mustang which is a nameplate that has been around since 1964 and that is pretty damn impressive regardless of whatever else may be true about the car.The CL is a great car but the Mustang is a classic wether the car is good bad or indifferent.Jens

JRock

Weird, I was pretty sure the Camaro/Firebird was the one still using a live rear axle and the Mustang did away with it in favor of an IRS and that's why it handled a bit better than the Camaro/Firebird did in the past couple years.

Pull_T

Well, the 99+ Cobras have IRS, but the GTs (and 6ers) still have the live axle.

The CamBirds still have the live axle as well, like you stated.

JRock

Ah, thanks for the heads-up! I didn't know it was just the Cobra, I thought it was all V8 stangs.

Btw, what's up with giving the lower-end models the hoodscoop and short-changing the Cobra? It looks so plain without it (although it still looks a little different down bottom... does it have a different sideskirt kit or something? Maybe foglights are different?)

pkane

MIke,

I'm waiting for my Michelin's to wear down a tad before springing for the Proxy's.... From what I hear, that's the way to go....

As to where I live, I'm in University City, but travel every day up to Carlsbad for work. 25 mile commute against traffic. I am so amazed that we go 80+ in the morning all the way up..... A whole lot slower going south....

-Pete

Scorpius

The hood and side scoops on the Mustangs are fake... Isn't having something on the car to make it look fast, but doesn't perform a function considered rice? So by definition, the Mustangs are factory rice...

Caddyİ

Jens, I was talking about the W I N G man


My Son has a 95 Mustang ! Nice Car, but I'd prefer my 2001 CL-S

Pull_T

Well, I guess I would tend to agree. I really don't care for the fake side scoops either. There are two reasons they are there, though. First, it is somewhat of a retro cue to the first Mustangs that had very similar side scoops. And secondly, it is there to cover a hole that is needed in the quarter panel during the manufacturing process to access certain areas. Of course, they could revise or redesign the process, but it was apparently very costly to do so.

The 99+ Cobra has a reverse scoop that gives it the bulge in the hood needed to fit the very large DOHC motor in there. My DOHC is not big displacement wise (281ci), but physically, it is larger than any big block V8 including 426 Hemis.

Jens H.

Scorpius I agree the wing is a bit much but c'mon people a Mustang rice???? Ok so it has bogus scoops on it ....So what the car is cool it has been in series production since 64 that is nearly forty years.Mustangs are as American as it gets these machines have had millions of buyers and as it appears will continue to attract people looking for a fun car that is easy on the wallet and big on performance.Bashing Mustangs just somehow seems unpatriotic.I have owned two of these rockets and now am considering a third.Millions of buyers cannot all be crazy,make mine green with those American Racing wheels and a real transmission a V8 and power applied to the right end of the car.Jens