5000 Mile/6 Month Review

[mustang#16]

Nice review, OP. Thanks for sharing.

I'm glad I went with the base suspension. Most of the suspension noises and clunks, interior rattles, etc that I hear about come from folks with the PP (the only exception is the brake squeal issue which affects both GT base and Ecoboost PP). The 3.31:1 gears that come with the base suspension really work great on the street and I haven't found a curve or twistee yet that my base suspension couldn't handle with ease - winter or summer. And, it does such a nice job of absorbing road imperfections and pot holes which is easy on my butt and the car's interior (eg less squeaks and rattles). I saved $2,500, too.

I say all of this to recommend to folks that, before they spend the extra $2,500 for the PP option, test drive both and make an informed decision. For street-use, the base suspension works great for me and provides all the benefits I mentioned above. If you track your car, maybe the PP is a good deal compared to what you can do aftermarket?

ps: I also have a real spare tire in the trunk from the factory.

Sponsored

 

[Steve44]

bmatt & BeauxXL1200, thank you both for the feedback. Much appreciated.

I was getting pretty bad gas mileage in the beginning in mixed driving (high 14's), that has since crept up to around 16.5 which I am happy with. On highway trips I average low 20's...good luck!!

 

[fionic]

Nice review, OP. Thanks for sharing.

I'm glad I went with the base suspension. Most of the suspension noises and clunks, interior rattles, etc that I hear about come from folks with the PP (the only exception is the brake squeal issue which affects both GT base and Ecoboost PP). The 3.31:1 gears that come with the base suspension really work great on the street and I haven't found a curve or twistee yet that my base suspension couldn't handle with ease - winter or summer. And, it does such a nice job of absorbing road imperfections and pot holes which is easy on my butt and the car's interior (eg less squeaks and rattles). I saved $2,500, too.

I say all of this to recommend to folks that, before they spend the extra $2,500 for the PP option, test drive both and make an informed decision. For street-use, the base suspension works great for me and provides all the benefits I mentioned above. If you track your car, maybe the PP is a good deal compared to what you can do aftermarket?

ps: I also have a real spare tire in the trunk from the factory.

the brakes alone make the PP worth it

 

[Texican1911]

But what does a brake job on those Brembos cost vs regular GT brakes?

 

[Barrel]

But what does a brake job on those Brembos cost vs regular GT brakes?

On my 11 it was twice the price for rotors and pads.

 

[113]

Nice review, OP. Thanks for sharing.

I'm glad I went with the base suspension. Most of the suspension noises and clunks, interior rattles, etc that I hear about come from folks with the PP (the only exception is the brake squeal issue which affects both GT base and Ecoboost PP). The 3.31:1 gears that come with the base suspension really work great on the street and I haven't found a curve or twistee yet that my base suspension couldn't handle with ease - winter or summer. And, it does such a nice job of absorbing road imperfections and pot holes which is easy on my butt and the car's interior (eg less squeaks and rattles). I saved $2,500, too.

I say all of this to recommend to folks that, before they spend the extra $2,500 for the PP option, test drive both and make an informed decision. For street-use, the base suspension works great for me and provides all the benefits I mentioned above. If you track your car, maybe the PP is a good deal compared to what you can do aftermarket?

ps: I also have a real spare tire in the trunk from the factory.

the brakes alone make the PP worth it

It's a tough call as yeah I don't really need the PP because I'm only considering tracking it in the future (after the warranty ends) but the Brembos alone cost more than the PP option, and making all those mods myself in the aftermarket would cost much more. Plus, I actually like the firmer suspension; the standard GT just felt a bit floaty in comparison. It would be nice to save $2200 when I order my car tomorrow but ultimately I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford it so I'll treat myself.

 

[Raoh]

Just got back from an 800 mile road trip on Sunday. I averaged 22.8 miles on the highway with an average driving speed of about 75 to 80 mph.

On my commute to and from work (22 miles one way), which includes some freeway driving and in town, stop and go driving, and some stop and go on the freeway, I'm getting about 16.1 or so.

This is with FR touring cat backs, a Steeda CAI with the restrictor removed, and a Lund tune compatible with the restrictor-less Steeda CAI. And I do put my foot down for fun. Just not all the time.

The tank is only 16 gallons so I have to fill up regularly, although not too often.

Hope this info helps. If gas mileage is not too much of a concern, I say go for the 5.0. You want be disappointed. :cheers:

I drive about 11 miles one way to work in my audi, and I get 18 mpg averages with most of it highway. Sounds like I should probably expect similar averages from my 5.0! Thanks for the information!

 

[BeauxXL1200]

bmatt & BeauxXL1200, thank you both for the feedback. Much appreciated.

De nada.

 

[GT Pony]

I drive about 11 miles one way to work in my audi, and I get 18 mpg averages with most of it highway. Sounds like I should probably expect similar averages from my 5.0! Thanks for the information!

If most of it is highway, I'd think the 5.0 would get better than 18 if you keep it in higher gears and keep your foot out of the throttle.

I averaged 17 mpg and that was probably about 50/50 city/highway ... maybe even 60/40 city/highway. And lots of hard throttle episodes.

Sponsored