Sponsored

Jalopnik Review (GT)

Robinson02

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Threads
24
Messages
1,336
Reaction score
43
Location
Little Rock, AR
First Name
Kody
Vehicle(s)
2015 Black 5.0
http://jalopnik.com/we-drove-the-2015-ford-mustang-its-still-best-with-a-v-1636142850

Few cars have garnered more attention than the new American performance trifecta. Between the C7 Corvette, the Challenger Hellcat, and the 2015 Ford Mustang it's like the hopes and dreams of a nation are riding on front-engine/rear-drive domination. Now I've driven all three, and it's a tire-shredding reminder that it's a good time to be alive.

[Full Disclosure: Ford wanted me to drive the new Mustang so badly they flew me to LA, put me up in the same hotel as Michael Bolton, and plied me with cheap rum and gourmet hot dogs. I didn't stop pestering the turbo four's engineer until someone handed me a rice crispy treat made out of Cinnamon Toast Crunch – a revelation almost on par with the new IRS.]

First, I'm not going to wax poetic on the styling, because I've met a lot of journos with engineering degrees, but not a single one with a master's in design. Me? I don't have either.

What I will say is that the new Mustang looks like a New Mustang. It's both handsome and sinister, the muscle car equivalent of Christian Bale in American Psycho. It still has a long hood, a squat greenhouse, and a tapered tail, bookended by canted lights that riff on the triple-light design. It's pure "Mustang" and it looks good. Also, it's not everyday that a Bentley Continental GT driver cranes his head to scope out a Ford – even in LA – but it happened. And it happened twice.

Ford offered up two models in two different trims with two different transmissions for testing: the 5.0-liter V8 GT and the turbo'd 2.3-liter Ecoboost, both available with the Performance Pack and both available with either a six-speed manual or automatic. The convertible doesn't come out until this fall, so it was stuck on display, but that's not the obvious exception of what was on hand.

Ford didn't have a single V6 available, which says something. Specifically, "We're only keeping this mill around because it's a cheap workhorse, the MSRP will get buyers in the door, and Honolulu's rental fleets must be accommodated." The V6 is offered simply to hit a price point, and two people from Ford told me they expect the turbo and the 5.0 to make up the lion's share of sales. And for good reason.

"Go big or go home." That's all I was thinking when I started jockeying for keys. That meant a 5.0 with the Performance Pack and three-pedal setup. Let me break that down.

The 5.0-liter is a worked-over version of the Boss 302's V8. Up top, it's got a new set of heads with larger valves and more lift on both the intake and exhaust. That boosts output up to 435 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque – a gain of 15 hp and 5 lb-ft. The 302 being one of my favoritest V8s in existence, it's no surprise that it's oh-my-god-I-need-you-in-my-life-right-now good. But better. The only place it falls flat is in the aural pleasure department, which should be rectified with new pipes that'll probably be available before the fastback hits dealers in a few weeks.

Linked up to V8 is a Getrag six-speed manual with snickety-snick short throws and nicely defined slots. The clutch was the only downer, lacking a clear friction point which mussed up a few shifts. Gimme a few more hours in a GT that wasn't relentlessly abused by talentless hacks (Hi mom!) and I'm sure it'll be fine.

Keyless start, tire-pressure monitoring, and a rearview camera all come standard on every model. Optional toys include adaptive cruise control and that blinky light on the dash so you don't plow into the car in front of you ($1,195). There's also blind-spot warning, cross-traffic alert, and a muddy-sounding Shaker premium audio system for $1,795.

But allow me just save you the time at the dealer and give you the crib sheet.

You want the $1,595 Recaro seat option and the GT-specific performance package, which is an absolute steal at $2,495. That includes six-piston aluminum Brembos up front, clamping 380-mm discs (basically the same as the old GT500), reworked springs, dampers, and bushings, a thicker rear sway bar, a different tune on the stability control, ABS, and steering, plus 19-inch black wheels wrapped in Pirelli P Zeros (255/40 in front, 275/40R19 out back), and the Torsen 3.73 rear diff. That's all you need. Check the boxes. You're done. You're welcome.

The story on the inside is the same as the outside: It's more Mustang. The materials are better, the toys are numerous, the knobs are pleasant, and there's a brace of toggle switches at the bottom of the dash to swap between driving modes, traction control, and other stuff I didn't bother with. The steering wheel is right-sized, the gauges are clear, and some joker persuaded the design department to write "Ground Speed" on the speedo. Cute. But overall it's very nice, very predictable, and a pleasurable upgrade. 'Nuff said.

Shades of Hellcat came to mind during my first stint behind the wheel. Not the stomach-wrapping-around-my-spine power, obviously, but the refinement. Ford, like Dodge, has managed to make their prototypical muscle car into a surprisingly competent grand tourer. That's not to say that the GT is isolated or disconnected, it's just refined. With the windows up and the A/C pumping, I could trundle along on the highway to Vegas and back with no complaints. And with around 200 extra pounds on board for 2015, I was a bit concerned. Then I took the exit for Angeles Crest Highway and any worries about the GT's chops evaporated.

Did you hear? The new Mustang has – for the first time since that SVT Cobra – what's referred to as an "Independent Rear Suspension." This mechanical sorcery, having eluded Mustang engineers for years, is supposed to finally bring it in line with the rest of the muscle-bound sports cars in the segment. Is it good? Yes. Is it a game changer?
I'm not so sure.

Out on Angeles Crest, the size of the GT feels a bit daunting. But like all good drivers, that changes the harder it's pushed. The confidence-zapping miscommunication between the front and rear ends of the old car has largely been eliminated. The IRS smooths everything out in back, and combined with the electric steering – which gets tighter in the Sport setting – my confidence goes through the roof. Brake then turn, and the GT tucks in, takes a set, and then holds the line as I feed in the throttle. It's not maniacally explosive out of the bends, but changing the attitude with a squeeze of the gas is immediate and amazing.

From second gear hairpins to fourth gear sweepers, my faith in the reworked suspension grows, but there's still a subtle disconnect. It's like me dancing: My head doesn't know exactly what my ass should be doing. I revert to white man's overbite. The Mustang does the opposite, gripping out back and beginning to slip up front. But it's still a huge improvement and I absolutely can't wait to see how Ford tweaks it with the GT350.

On the other end of the spectrum is the Ecoboost four-pot, which, if I'm honest, I was more excited about than the GT. Coming up in the turbo import era, the eminent tweak-ability of a factory turbo has massive performance potential once the aftermarket gets a hold of it. But in its current form, 300 hp and 320 lb-ft of torque is on tap from the force-fed 2.3-liter four – more than the V6.

It's the first FR application of this engine (it's used in the Lincoln MKC, but tweaked for the 'Stang), with an air-to-air intercooler and 18 psi of boost. Ford is quick to point out that those power figures are gleaned from running 93 octane, which I don't get out in California (stuck with 91-octane piss fuel), but according to an engineer I was grilling, the Ecoboost can run on 87 octane "all day long", while losing 13 percent of its power, but retaining its peak torque

Either through consumer-advice serendipity or just bad luck, I was saddled with a non-Performance Pack, auto-equipped version of the Ecoboost, and after a morning of GT shenanigans, the let down was harsh.

Understeer through the tighter sections of one canyon road was so severe that I just stopped pushing (blame all season rubber) and power delivery was adequate if uninspiring, noticeably dipping off after 5,000 revs. The lone light was a weight drop of around 90 pounds from the GT, although with a total tonnage of 3,524 pounds, it's all but impossible to notice. However, unlike the GT, which struggled to break 14 MPG during the morning's thrashings, the Ecoboost managed 21 MPG through some fitful flogging. And that points to the real substance of the new Mustang and its variants.

If you want a competent cruiser that returns solid fuel economy, the Ecoboost is it. If you're looking to do some engine work but want to trust Ford's suspension/braking/tire/wheel combo, go with the Ecoboost Performance Pack. If you can't have a Mustang without a V8 and are eating up miles, you get the 5.0. And if you're reading this, you get the GT with the Performance Pack. (I'm not even mentioning the V6 because even Ford can't be bothered.)

With that range of engine, transmission, and package choices comes an equally broad pricing spectrum. The starting price for the Ecoboost comes in at $25,995 (again, the V6 is $23,600, but only Hertz cares) while the kitted out GT with Performance Pack I drove was knocking on the $46k mark.

That kind of breadth makes the Mustang the muscle car – and yes, occasional sports car – of the people. It's a food court on wheels, with a flavor for everyone, set to grow even further as the hotter variants arrive and it heads to Europe. With that democratization of style and substance, Ford manages (again) to make the Mustang all things to all people, without bastardizing the most important nameplate in its stable.
Sponsored

 

fender

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 6, 2014
Threads
4
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
Location
Montreal
Vehicle(s)
Mini JCW/50th LE
The guy's advice on how to order the GT with his given crib sheet made me laugh but was bang on!
 

Todd15Fastback

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Threads
80
Messages
10,527
Reaction score
3,875
Location
Atlanta, GA
First Name
Todd
Vehicle(s)
2015 Mustang GT PP Fastback
Another good read. Other than Motor Trends, I'd say they are all positive.
Indeed! Now we just need some comparison runs against some competition to get times and then Randy P. needs to drive and give his feedback. That is the one I am really waiting for.
 

Sponsored

OP
OP
Robinson02

Robinson02

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Threads
24
Messages
1,336
Reaction score
43
Location
Little Rock, AR
First Name
Kody
Vehicle(s)
2015 Black 5.0
Yup. I enjoyed this one the most.
 

REX-RACER

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Threads
4
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
Nice review from a down-to-earth car guys perspective. Too bad he couldn't get into the MT6 / PP / ecoboost car, that is the one review I've been missing and I really want to hear!

I found this bit to be rather salient:

From second gear hairpins to fourth gear sweepers, my faith in the reworked suspension grows, but there's still a subtle disconnect. It's like me dancing: My head doesn't know exactly what my ass should be doing. I revert to white man's overbite. The Mustang does the opposite, gripping out back and beginning to slip up front. But it's still a huge improvement and I absolutely can't wait to see how Ford tweaks it with the GT350.
Someone else in another thread mentioned this and the fact that the GT PP package uses an asymmetrical tire set up which appears to be creating under-steer. It's interesting that Ford opted to just "square" the front and rear track on the ecoboost PP so I'm curious as to how they might be tell-tale different? I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of folks w/ GT PP swapping out the front rims for two more 9.5" rims and running 275s on the front in order to cure this inherent "push" Ford seems to have oddly dialed in from the factory.
 

Wildcat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2013
Threads
18
Messages
655
Reaction score
20
Location
Tampa, FL
Vehicle(s)
2015 Focus
There's also blind-spot warning, cross-traffic alert, and a muddy-sounding Shaker premium audio system for $1,795.
Glad a reviewer said something about this, as the sound system quality was something I was interested in hearing about. Seems like it's the same muddy, bloated sound as before. Cool with me, though. Now I can skip this option without a second's thought and save 1800 bucks.

Also, it seems even more apparent from this review that the Performance pack will be a necessity on the Ecoboost.
 

Spartan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Threads
94
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
569
Location
MD
Vehicle(s)
Ford Explorer Sport
Glad a reviewer said something about this, as the sound system quality was something I was interested in hearing about. Seems like it's the same muddy, bloated sound as before. Cool with me, though. Now I can skip this option without a second's thought and save 1800 bucks.
Yep the 401A package for the life of me doesn't warrant the cost, nor should the features in it been packaged together.

That shaker pro should be a stand alone option. The Blind spot system should be packaged with the reverse park assist. The memory seats should just be a part of the premium base package.

Also, it seems even more apparent from this review that the Performance pack will be a necessity on the Ecoboost.
I definitely plan on driving an EB with PP and a GT...need to see for myself the difference/feeling. The C&D review that compared the EB PP with an Audi A5 definitely has me interested.
 

JoeDogInKC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Threads
18
Messages
1,994
Reaction score
28
Location
Kansas City, MO
First Name
Joe
Vehicle(s)
Triple Yellow 2015 GT Premium w/PP
Much better review than most of the rest. It's amazing to me how a relative newcomer to the automotive journalism field comes out with a much more coherent and meaningful review than the long-standing staples in the field. Couple this review with the Top Gear and autoblog (IIRC) reviews and my opinion is changing quite a bit for the better.
 

Sponsored

williamwally

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Threads
2
Messages
316
Reaction score
56
Location
chicago
Vehicle(s)
06 gt
Yep the 401A package for the life of me doesn't warrant the cost, nor should the features in it been packaged together.

That shaker pro should be a stand alone option. The Blind spot system should be packaged with the reverse park assist. The memory seats should just be a part of the premium base package.
+1
 

REX-RACER

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Threads
4
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
Much better review than most of the rest. It's amazing to me how a relative newcomer to the automotive journalism field comes out with a much more coherent and meaningful review than the long-standing staples in the field. Couple this review with the Top Gear and autoblog (IIRC) reviews and my opinion is changing quite a bit for the better.
Newbs have the advantage of having a fresh perspective whereas the folks that have been around longer get a bit jaded or at the very least have an altered personal level of expectation and possibly slightly more cynical perspective. The way to flatten this is instrumented testing and to a lesser degree head-to-head tests.

I found though the best way to judge a car for myself is to use the mag reviews as a guide and then go put my butt in the seat! :D
 

Fox9350

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2013
Threads
21
Messages
947
Reaction score
28
Location
Boston, MA area
Vehicle(s)
1993 5.0 GT (former car)
Another strong review. I think the proof will be when more reviewers and actual owners get these in their hands and people start tracking them. I won't be surprised to see mid to high 12s consistently from good drivers and many happy owners. I think this is going to be a great car.
 

Whiskey11

Kill ALL the Cones!
Joined
Oct 19, 2013
Threads
2
Messages
523
Reaction score
102
Location
US of A
Vehicle(s)
2016 Ruby Red Base GT/PP
Nice review from a down-to-earth car guys perspective. Too bad he couldn't get into the MT6 / PP / ecoboost car, that is the one review I've been missing and I really want to hear!

I found this bit to be rather salient:



Someone else in another thread mentioned this and the fact that the GT PP package uses an asymmetrical tire set up which appears to be creating under-steer. It's interesting that Ford opted to just "square" the front and rear track on the ecoboost PP so I'm curious as to how they might be tell-tale different? I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of folks w/ GT PP swapping out the front rims for two more 9.5" rims and running 275s on the front in order to cure this inherent "push" Ford seems to have oddly dialed in from the factory.
That was me.

There are TWO things that Ford did to this car to promote understeer in wildly unhealthy ways.

First was tire stagger on the GTPP, second was the significantly wider rear track than the front track which is true of ALL S550 cars. The IRS pushed the rear wheels out an inch wider than the front. That wider track may not seem like a whole lot but it reduces that lateral weight transfer which doesn't load the tires up as much. This means more rear grip compared to the front which is the very definition of understeer.

WHY Ford did it is beyond me, probably to try and make the car put power down coming out of corners better but what it means for the enthusiast and aftermarket is more parts to throw at the car. It will take a bit more work to get these cars balanced out than the S197 which had a closer (but still not perfect) front to rear track width ratio.

The other thing that really strikes me as lazy on Ford's part is 275's and 255's for PP cars. Dear Ford: Don't fear the tire. When a 1LE comes shod in 285's on 20x10 and 20x11 wheels all the way around at a price point that the PP is going to hit easily, Ford should have taken a page out of their book and DID THE SAME. The car now has the weight to need these bigger wheels and tires and it is really hindering these cars in performance tests.
 

RocketGuy3

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2014
Threads
36
Messages
1,254
Reaction score
718
Location
TX
Vehicle(s)
2021 Mach 1, 2016 Cayman GT4
That was me.

There are TWO things that Ford did to this car to promote understeer in wildly unhealthy ways.

First was tire stagger on the GTPP, second was the significantly wider rear track than the front track which is true of ALL S550 cars. The IRS pushed the rear wheels out an inch wider than the front. That wider track may not seem like a whole lot but it reduces that lateral weight transfer which doesn't load the tires up as much. This means more rear grip compared to the front which is the very definition of understeer.

WHY Ford did it is beyond me, probably to try and make the car put power down coming out of corners better but what it means for the enthusiast and aftermarket is more parts to throw at the car. It will take a bit more work to get these cars balanced out than the S197 which had a closer (but still not perfect) front to rear track width ratio.

The other thing that really strikes me as lazy on Ford's part is 275's and 255's for PP cars. Dear Ford: Don't fear the tire. When a 1LE comes shod in 285's on 20x10 and 20x11 wheels all the way around at a price point that the PP is going to hit easily, Ford should have taken a page out of their book and DID THE SAME. The car now has the weight to need these bigger wheels and tires and it is really hindering these cars in performance tests.
... Doesn't almost every powerful RWD (and many AWD) car have wider rear tires? I mean everybody generally seems to want to do more to stick the rear tires. It's a huge part of the reason mid-engine and rear-engine layouts exist.

As I read your comments, it sounds like praise to me, in spite of the negative context you're saying it in.

Also, R&T didn't seem to have any trouble kicking the tail out when they wanted to have some fun.
Sponsored

 
 




Top