Mach 1 is Better than GT350 ...

[gimmie11s]

toyota is trash, no one cares about that soulless econo junk.

how is it superior? Reliability?Fine I’ll give you that it better be reliable cause it makes less torque than the mustang lug nuts.

Reliability, paint, interior, quality of construction, panel alignment, handling, ride quality, front/rear weight bias, mpg, ... and on and on and on.

Sponsored

 

[traxiii]

I still have yet to see another twin on the road or anywhere for that matter. My Mach 1 is still the only one I've seen anywhere so far.

I've seen zero Mach1's on the street, in the wild. I saw 7 of them at Granger Motors when I picked up mine. I've seen a couple at the local dealer too, in the showroom, but not a one in the wild.

 

[Strokerswild]

Reliability, paint, interior, quality of construction, panel alignment, handling, ride quality, front/rear weight bias, mpg, ... and on and on and on.

If only the little buggers had a turbo option for just a little more power....

 

[JetGray_Mach1]

Reliability, paint, interior, quality of construction, panel alignment, handling, ride quality, front/rear weight bias, mpg, ... and on and on and on.

YAWWNNNNN, You are entitled to your own opinion. Its TRASH for me.

 

[AvalancheSVT]

Reliability, paint, interior, quality of construction, panel alignment, handling, ride quality, front/rear weight bias, mpg, ... and on and on and on.

i'll give you panel alignment that's a negatory on the rest of it.

 

[07S281E]

I had the same choice a year ago. I went with the Shelby. Buy what you like and drive it like you stole it. Can't go wrong with either one.

 

[MCS]

My god. I love you all. With the shit I’m going through with my mustang I really needed a laugh and this provided 9 pages of entertainment.

You will never convince a Shelby owner that the Mach 1 is better and you will never convince a Mach 1 owner that a Shelby is better. The simple fact is their vote is intrinsic to the vehicle owned. Otherwise you get “gee you are right. How could I be so dumb “ as we all know, and maybe secretly admit, humans aren’t typically built to admit fault or blame.

Besides. My GT is better than all y’all cars!!!

 

[RTFM]

Things I like about the M1 for tracking : rev matching, adaptive exhaust, and dedicated track dashboard. And the cooled seats.

Things I like about the M1 for street use: low rpm power, silent mode, and heated seats.

Does the GT350 have any of that ?

 

[Hifiguy]

Going to hurt a lot of feelings here and say that all of these cars minus the V6 are essentially the same. 99.9% of the public will just see them all as Mustangs. Enthusiasts and those who know their stuff would still also consider them all comparable. It's only the ones who spent a lot of money, sometimes upwards up to $100k for these vehicles that get super emotional about differences

With that being said, ironically I'd put the M1 closer to the GT500 than the GT350. Wait till people learn the voodoo is just a butchered coyote system, and that 8k rev on the Coyote is just a manufacturer limitation. That without the flat plane crank and required dampers and weights all over the car, I'd have been called a 5.2 coyote with a supercharger.

Nevertheless the M1 has the GT500 diffuser, GT500 wing with one-off paint, GT500 subframe, GT500 Toe links, GT500 rear axle cooler, GT500 tire spats, and then all the other stuff from the GT350. It took everything but the engine, Shelby title, and brakes.

Though I will say I understand the "GT + stickers" angle. I will say that Ford should have stamped out a new hood for this like the old M1 ram air hood or did a shaker hood.

In summary if the brakes were deemed equivalent to the GT350 I really don't see how the GT350 is a better track vehicle, or closer to the GT500 especially when it has an ongoing multimillion class action about it NOT being a track vehicle. As for city driving I think the consensus is that with the low end torque of the Coyote, it wins out. Really the only value to the GT350 is the nameplate and limited production of the voodoo. One can only deem it better in this viewpoint.

That's exactly what I meant by looks being "practically" the same. Every normal person is going to see the car as another mustang.

You are right with the Mach 1 borrowing some of the similarities from the gt500 (being cpc and rear end suspension). The M1 does not have boost though and it has the tremec like the 350. So maybe the M1 isn't closer to one or the other Shelby.

The 6 pistons are pretty darn good on the mach 1. I'm not sure how they compare to the 350 but it can't be that much better, so like I said it's definitely a toss on the track.

I agree you're paying for the nameplate and the one off motor. So as with all things depending on what you prefer, the Mach 1 COULD be the better car. I wouldn't call the voodoo a "butchered" coyote, but definitely a coyote with an exotic firing order and exotic crank. Ford did their best with it IMO.

 

[Hack]

I just looked at the interior its actually nice looking (other than that Fugly steering wheel logo and I see tons of plastic). The exterior and lack of torque would drive me nuts though. But looks like a great commuter.

I didn't like the flat dash top at first, because that seemed cheap looking to me. The leather on the steering wheel is really nice. And the same material is on the door tops, grab handles, arm rests. The interior definitely has nicer materials than my GT or past Shelby GT350 did.

You obviously haven't driven one, because it has a lot of torque. The gearing and light weight makes the engine seem very torquey.

I agree the exterior is plain. I don't really like the exterior looks from any angle.

Its basically new age Miata, small, slow and ugly but fun around corners.

Who wants two finger shifts? Shift like a man.

The shifter has a lot nicer feel than a Mustang with either a Tremec or Getrag. You can tell Subaru spent a few dollars on the shift mechanism and didn't cheap out as much as Ford.

And as far as slow goes, it's definitely at least 80s fast. I owned a 1989 Mustang GT. 210 hp and 3400 lbs or so. This car makes 20 more HP and weighs 600 lbs less. So it's a lot faster than those old Mustangs. It's more like a Porsche in that it's more of a momentum car rather than a bloated straight line SUV 4,000 lb coupe like our Mustangs.

It's definitely not a car to enjoy triple digits speed on a big track like Road America, but it would be a lot of fun on a very small track like DCTC near where I live. The Mustang feels like a big boat on that track and you barely get out of third gear anywhere.

I see a lot of Toyota 86 here on the road in Dubai and I do like its looks. Test drove one, and it al ended there. The car's looks do not translate in any way, shape, or form of how it performs. It was the most boring car I've ever driven in my life, like a car that looks fast but has no soul, no power, a turtle basically. What a shame, if only they could've added just some more torque and HP it would be a very nice economic daily driver which handles good.

tons of fun?

I would rather die than drive that car again and by no means is it a go kart. The Golf R destroys it in terms of being a tossable fun yet not so expensive car IMO.

Golf R costs $44k, GR86 $30k. Golf R should be a lot better for costing so much more. But I've heard a lot of knocks against the Golf R interior especially. Also, I hate FWD and 4WD cars except when it is snowing. They are no fun.

Reliability, paint, interior, quality of construction, panel alignment, handling, ride quality, front/rear weight bias, mpg, ... and on and on and on.

It's not really a Toyota and I don't know how reliable those Scooby flat fours are. I'm definately more careful with the 86 than with my Ford. I trust Fords to handle rough treatment much more so than Japanese stuff.

Oh, and ride quality. I have the Ford Performance Track Handling kit on my Mustang and the stock GR86 suspension is stiffer. It's a lot softer than the FiST suspension was, though. I think it's just about perfect for ride quality and IMO most Mustangs are sprung waaaay too softly.

 

[JetGray_Mach1]

I didn't like the flat dash top at first, because that seemed cheap looking to me. The leather on the steering wheel is really nice. And the same material is on the door tops, grab handles, arm rests. The interior definitely has nicer materials than my GT or past Shelby GT350 did.

You obviously haven't driven one, because it has a lot of torque. The gearing and light weight makes the engine seem very torquey.

I agree the exterior is plain. I don't really like the exterior looks from any angle.



The shifter has a lot nicer feel than a Mustang with either a Tremec or Getrag. You can tell Subaru spent a few dollars on the shift mechanism and didn't cheap out as much as Ford.

And as far as slow goes, it's definitely at least 80s fast. I owned a 1989 Mustang GT. 210 hp and 3400 lbs or so. This car makes 20 more HP and weighs 600 lbs less. So it's a lot faster than those old Mustangs. It's more like a Porsche in that it's more of a momentum car rather than a bloated straight line SUV 4,000 lb coupe like our Mustangs.

It's definitely not a car to enjoy triple digits speed on a big track like Road America, but it would be a lot of fun on a very small track like DCTC near where I live. The Mustang feels like a big boat on that track and you barely get out of third gear anywhere.



Golf R costs $44k, GR86 $30k. Golf R should be a lot better for costing so much more. But I've heard a lot of knocks against the Golf R interior especially. Also, I hate FWD and 4WD cars except when it is snowing. They are no fun.



It's not really a Toyota and I don't know how reliable those Scooby flat fours are. I'm definately more careful with the 86 than with my Ford. I trust Fords to handle rough treatment much more so than Japanese stuff.

Oh, and ride quality. I have the Ford Performance Track Handling kit on my Mustang and the stock GR86 suspension is stiffer. It's a lot softer than the FiST suspension was, though. I think it's just about perfect for ride quality and IMO most Mustangs are sprung waaaay too softly.

Whatever tickles your pickle my friend.

 

[gimmie11s]

i'll give you panel alignment that's a negatory on the rest of it.

Think so?

Im on my 4th Mustang and firmly stand behind all of those I listed.

Actually... the S550 is probably worse on many of those I listed than prior generations.

 

[JetGray_Mach1]

Think so?

Im on my 4th Mustang and firmly stand behind all of those I listed.

Actually... the S550 is probably worse on many of those I listed than prior generations.

I don't think you are standing on a sturdy platform bud.

 

[Mikepol2]

Thank you SO much for this thread, @Rael . I haven't had this much fun since the "Why the Mach 1 is a ripoff" thread of last summer

 

[5-OH]

You got my vote, I love the GT350 of course for the exclusivity of having a Shelby and for what it is “Special”. Owning a Shelby for most of us Mustang enthusiasts (excluding Mach-E fans) is the pinnacle of Mustangism, I mean Shelby was one of us. All of that aside the Mach 1 (the real Mach) is absolutely sick, I don’t care if they call it a parts bin car. The Mach-1 has all of the right parts, if only Ford had paid such attention to the Bullit, but thats a topic for a whole different discussion. The new Mach-1 will go down in the books as one of the best overall performance Mustangs ever made.

Sponsored