Stripped Down "Poverty Specs"

[fly2low]

Not sure performance package, recaro seats and reverse sensing even qualifies as minimalist

Again I was joking about the poverty specs.

Quite surprise to see that quite a few members don't see this as "minimalist". I 'd get at least the performance package and recaro seats as a toy or track car. The reverse sensing is just practical because of the fastback has blind spots. So, in my mind, this is the performance enthusiasts' choice. Please correct me if I am wrong and which configuration I should get as an "enthusiast" Mustang.

Alternatively, you can load up the GT starting with the premium package and go north from there with the goal of creating a real GT car.

If I really go for a true "poverty spec," I'd go with a a base v6 with no option.

One more thing, I don't check this forum to often ( I wanted to get a GT350 but it is practically impossible now. I won't pay mark up and Ford will play Mopar game to have a series of "special edition" cars",anyway). I am curious if the 2.3L is perceived as a performance oriented or an economical or daily driver car? Thanks again.

About Lexus, yeah I chuckled. Our household has a couple Lexus but we have the same amount of Ford cars too.

Sponsored

 

[Asharus]

Again I was joking about the poverty specs.

Quite surprise to see that quite a few members don't see this as "minimalist". I 'd get at least the performance package and recaro seats as a toy or track car. The reverse sensing is just practical because of the fastback has blind spots. So, in my mind, this is the performance enthusiasts' choice. Please correct me if I am wrong and which configuration I should get as an "enthusiast" Mustang.

Alternatively, you can load up the GT starting with the premium package and go north from there with the goal of creating a real GT car.

If I really go for a true "poverty spec," I'd go with a a base v6 with no option.

One more thing, I don't check this forum to often ( I wanted to get a GT350 but it is practically impossible now. I won't pay mark up and Ford will play Mopar game to have a series of "special edition" cars",anyway). I am curious if the 2.3L is perceived as a performance oriented or an economical or daily driver car? Thanks again.

About Lexus, yeah I chuckled. Our household has a couple Lexus but we have the same amount of Ford cars too.

you seem to be following the same path as these guys...

http://blog.caranddriver.com/how-wed-spec-it-the-2015-ford-mustang-of-our-dreams/

nice job

 

[fly2low]

It's not just frame -- I think those seats really only work with one body type. I'm not "big boned" by any stretch -- but I'm a little over 5'10", actually have slightly narrow-set shoulders, but I go to the climbing gym to climb (strong lats) , lift (current one rep max on bench is 230-240), and do yoga (muscular butt) or some combination of all of the above five times per week. I have the whole of Europe in my heritage, but I have more height in my torso than in my legs -- my legs are built for power, not speed, and my lower back has a lot of sway back in it -- and as cool as the Recaro's are, and as much as I want to be comfortable in them... If I'm to be honest with myself about it, THEY JUST AREN'T COMFORTABLE TO ME. Even if I track my car, I'm going to legitimately need a different seat than the optional Recaros. I don't think I will ever need much more than the standard seats -- they seemed to grip my butt and shoulders very well. I never felt like I was fully "in" the Recaro seats -- I found it a little unnerving.

I am big enough, 6' 225lbs and I have 2 cars (14 Fiesta ST and '03 Mitsu Evo 8) with factory recaros (and some more cars with sport seats) and they fit just fine. The lumbar hugger on the abdomen sides is usually the problem, but maybe it is my build as I am wide on the chest (suit #48-50 and not so wide in the abdominal area #36).

 

[fly2low]

you seem to be following the same path as these guys...

http://blog.caranddriver.com/how-wed-spec-it-the-2015-ford-mustang-of-our-dreams/

nice job

I didn't even know this article existed. Thank you for pointing it out. It looks like I have the same thoughts with those C&D folks (except that I probably want a race red or orange haha). Thanks again.

 

[Asharus]

yep lol i instantly thought about that article when you mentioned recaros and reverse sensing

 

[MUSThavaSTANG]

Base Ecoboost with the 19" wheel and stripe package. And I had the stripes removed by the dealer!

 

[fly2low]

BTW I am curious if the V6 is still even competitive given the existence of the 2.3L, unless you really2 go to the (aforementioned joke) "poverty specs." Truly
, curious

 

[Highwayman]

Base GT PP and Recarros. Great combo for me. Then again, I'm a big fan of KISS. If I could of got it with less crap, I would of.

 

[Asharus]

the v6 still has a lot of creature comforts standard, like keyless entry/push button start, backup camera, bluetooth, HIDs, LEDs all around, etc.

i wouldnt find it hard to justify 24k for a base v6 myself if money was an issue.

look at all your other options at 24k. a scion FRS/subaru BRZ, honda civic si. ugggghh

 

[Trackaholic]

BTW I am curious if the V6 is still even competitive given the existence of the 2.3L, unless you really2 go to the (aforementioned joke) "poverty specs." Truly
, curious

From what I've seen, the performance numbers of a stock V6 and stock EB are about the same (that's 0-60, 1/4 mile, etc.).

The EB will have an advantage when it comes to mods and fuel economy.

The V6 has the advantage (IMO) of being naturally aspirated and pulling strong to redline, plus having a better exhaust note, plus being less complicated overall.

Both are great choices depending on what you are after.

-T

 

[mikeyjobu]

I am big enough, 6' 225lbs and I have 2 cars (14 Fiesta ST and '03 Mitsu Evo 8) with factory recaros (and some more cars with sport seats) and they fit just fine. The lumbar hugger on the abdomen sides is usually the problem, but maybe it is my build as I am wide on the chest (suit #48-50 and not so wide in the abdominal area #36).

Well I'm a 34 waist and a 41-42 chest for a suit -- some of my favorite jeans are still 32's. Something about the optional ones for the 'stang this year just don't work for me -- my lower back and shoulders both felt pinched, and the lower half of my back never touched the seat -- no support at all there. At least there's some airflow -- just not at all what I was hoping for.

 

[Asharus]

in defense of the recaros, people here have said that their "fit" has improved over time, much like a baseball glove. so it does require somewhat of a break-in.

or it could just be that they're getting used to it..

 

[mikeyjobu]

Speaking for myself, I'm not bashing the Recaro's - I wish I was convinced I wanted them - I did until I sat in them....

 

[GordieBobfish]

Obviously I don't have 3.73's, but I could imagine that that would be a real pain in highway cruising. In my old S197 I had a 2.73 final drive -- at a 55-60 mph highway cruise, the engine would be spinning about 1200 rpm, and it was glorious. Now the engine is always above 1500 rpm at highway speeds, sometimes as high as 2000 rpm when just cruising along, and I keep feeling like the engine is getting mad at me for abusing it so much. Where does the engine sit at 60 mph with 3.73's? Above 2000 rpm? I'd be terrified of taking it on any long highway cruises for fear of overtaxing the engine, letting it run that high for 20 straight hours with nothing but stops to fill up for gas.

So I decided to test this on the way home.

At 60 mph the revs are ~1900

At 75 (a typical cruising speed in traffic on the hwy I travel) the revs are right at 2250.

Neither of these should be considered taxing on an engine with a factory fuel cutoff of 7000 rpm (which likely indicates closer to 8000 rpm is still in the designed safe zone).



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fly2low]

I just test drove again. This time 2 cars. Was looking for a GT performance package GT with recaro but wasn't available. so basically I drove:
1) a manual gt premium (with a tall rear end)
2) a manual ecoboost premium with performance package and recaro (shorter rear end).

Call me crazy but the the torque from the 2.3l is quite "practical" on the streets. Call it a blasphemy, but I didn't feel that this particular gt much faster than this particular ecoboost. Honestly, somewhat disappointed with the GT as it didn't have that "punch" like the S197 Boss 302, but maybe blame it to the tall rear end. The ecoboost with a lighter front end felt more balanced.

All the test drives were in Sport + mode. I really need to think what I really want. There is no wrong choice here, just a matter of one's preference.

Just my 2 pennies worth of honest opinion.

Sponsored