Do I want a... V6 Mustang?

In reply to kanaric:

See below about the 370z price and the fact that a v6 mustang with the factory fixens should retain its resale much much much better than the Hyundai Gen.

Also, the Hyundai Genesis has about as much performance aftermarket support as a '93 Toyota Corolla.

In reply to Sky_Render:

The turbo-4 seems to have much more power related through just AMS than the v6 has period.

yamaha wrote: In reply to Sky_Render: The turbo-4 seems to have much more power related through just AMS than the v6 has period.

Doesn't it still weigh as much as a Corvette though?

In reply to z31maniac:

that would be light in todays world......

yamaha wrote: In reply to z31maniac: that would be light in todays world......

But less aerodynamic, still much less power/tq, not as wheel/tire/brake.

But of course, cheaper.

If any truth in this... dealers may have incentives they can stack up for some stellar pricing on a new current model car in prep for the next gen. This sways me to the V8 camp. This guy just ordered as follows for under $27K!:

http://forums.mwerks.com/showthread.php?6063737-A-thread-dedicated-to-my-2014-Mustang-GT

300A (base model coupe GT) Track Pack (LSD, Brembos, 3.73 gears, Boss 302 Radiator) Recaros 6-Speed

yamaha wrote: In reply to Sky_Render: The turbo-4 seems to have much more power related through just AMS than the v6 has period.

Yes, you can retune the Turbo 4. And like two companies make coilovers for it.

Now go look at the aftermarket support for the Mustang. I'll give you a head start:

http://www.americanmuscle.com

In reply to Sky_Render:

I was referencing the turbo4 being superior in the tuning aspect to the v6 genesis.......I know all to well the following of the mustangs.

xflowgolf wrote: If any truth in this... dealers may have incentives they can stack up for some stellar pricing on a new current model car in prep for the next gen. This sways me to the V8 camp. This guy just ordered as follows for under $27K!: http://forums.mwerks.com/showthread.php?6063737-A-thread-dedicated-to-my-2014-Mustang-GT 300A (base model coupe GT) Track Pack (LSD, Brembos, 3.73 gears, Boss 302 Radiator) Recaros 6-Speed

That seems almost unbelievable, but good for him.

I paid $30 K for a base model with the track pack an NO recaros and felt that it was a decent deal.

I have a V6 Mustang with the extra packages added on. It's great for around town, plenty of pull on the highway, actually pretty quick, but still . . .

I'd rather have a V8 !

No question, get the V8 GT if you can find one and afford the tariff.

Luck,

TC

Holy crap! I'm starting to think I need one for that price!

I am with every body else here. There's nothing wrong with the V6 except for the fact that the V8 exists. GT all the way. No regrets.

Have you driven one?

Do you like it?

Nuff said.

I'm a little surprised the V6's fuel economy hasn't been mentioned. For a DD, 30 mph is quite nice in a car that has 300 hp.

I like the GT, but I'd choose the V6. I'd rather not make payments on the roar of the V8 every time I pull up to the pump, and I really don't need it.

^4 mpg isn't that large of a difference. But the track pack 3.73 gears murder the rated economy of 26 down to around 22.

In reply to z31maniac:

That depends entirely on how much you drive.

I drive 60,000- 80,000 miles per year. 4 mpg is a BIG difference to me (and 8 mpg is enormous).

Fule econ. I've posted the pic a couple of times of our 2013 V6 auto Vert getting nearly 30mpg at an average of 80mph from home to Grand Rapids. While that's the case and 30mpg is easy on the highway, my wife get around 21mpg in her daily driving which is all stop and go city streets with no highway/freeway and frequent stops and restarts. That's an absolute worst case situation so I still tihnk that's pretty good as well

Persoanlly, I'd get the 5.0 GT. Life is too damn short.
Check your local rental car agencies and grab a cheap weekend V6 (or V8) rental. That's what I'm going to do about a year from now.

In reply to Adrian:

Yeah, my track pack gt avg'd 16.5 or so, and most of my commute was highway that I did at 65. The best I ever got out of a tank was around 18.5 and that was not having any fun.

Worst tank was down around 15.........I'd hate to see what it would have gotten on track!

SVreX wrote: In reply to z31maniac: That depends entirely on how much you drive. I drive 60,000- 80,000 miles per year. 4 mpg is a BIG difference to me (and 8 mpg is enormous).

True, but the average is 15k, and at that point if a 4 mpg makes a difference money wise, you (general you) couldn't really afford it to begin with.

fornetti14 wrote: Persoanlly, I'd get the 5.0 GT. Life is too damn short.

True, but the average is 15k, and at that point if a 4 mpg makes a difference money wise, you (general you) couldn't really afford it to begin with.

Yes, but using your actual numbers and Adrian's actual numbers (which are probably less than ideal as well due to auto and vert) it's WAY more than 4 mpg (more like 6-12). I agree with the rest of your statement, but 4mpg is an unrealistic number to compare v6 and v8 fuel economy.

Personally, my lack of interest in the 5.0 comes from having ridden in one right after they came out. They actually dont make enough torque to FEEL fast without GOING fast. Some cars can convince you they are fast without actually doing it because they make a crap load of low-rpm torque. I think those cars are the most fun to drive 'mostly legally'. I actually think the regular hemi/6spd challenger is better at that than the Mustang. But aside from that 'big torque' payoff there's nothing else that pulls me towards the v8 over the v6. But even in the case of the old 4th gen f-bodies i still ended up preferring the 3.8 v6. I honestly don't really care about that extra 100 hp because in all honesty ive always lost motivation to make cars any faster after about a 13 second 1/4 mile. Ive owned a lot of cars that would run 14s after my mods. I built one car that could run 12s, never did it, and mostly lost interest in making it any faster until recently. I just have a very stubborn 'good enough' attitude towards acceleration. So for me the 5.0 is sorta short on big-torque payoff, i dont care about the extra 100hp, and it gets way worse mileage.

But i am not a normal mustang customer, or any kind of mustang customer so my opinions are useless crap!!

^Stock V6 to Stock V8 are rated at 30 highway and 26 highway.

Mine was a track pack which came with 3.73s vs 3.31s, and sticky 255/40/19s vs the stock 235 al-seasonish 18s, I was illustrating how much they killed mpg, more than I would have thought.

So you're saying that the track pack took 8mpg off your highway number? Because using your real-life number and his real-life number, there is a 12mpg difference between a v8 track pack and a v6 auto vert (which presumably does slightly worse than a manual coupe, maybe 1mpg?).

Vigo wrote: So you're saying that the track pack took 8mpg off your highway number? Because using your real-life number and his real-life number, there is a 12mpg difference between a v8 track pack and a v6 auto vert (which presumably does slightly worse than a manual coupe, maybe 1mpg?).

No, you should re-read my posts. Those are my combined mileage numbers, not highway only.

My highway only numbers at 65 were typically around 22-23. I got lower combined because I made sure to enjoy that 420hp whenever possible.

Ok, so the hwy number difference is only TWICE as big as you were implying

Sounds like 21 was not a 'combined' number for Adrian's v6 either, so that one can only be higher..

Simple solution: If you want a v8 AND highway gas mileage, dont get the 3.73s, and dont get wider tires. Damage control at best, but hey, then you might at least hit the epa rating and get ONE more highway mpg than a Ram Quad Cab Pickup.