El Kabong

Like Lutz, I like Elon Musk, in an anti-heroic kind of way. He can be a jerk, but we all cheer for Tony Stark in the movies too, right? And unlike some, I think that Lutz is scary accurate in his assessment of the situation, both from a financial and personality perspective: Tesla has succeeded to this point largely on the backs of people who are bound and determined to do things differently. That, and attracting like-minded clientele has been their saving grace to this point. But with the Bolt, GM has made a pretty strong move to keep Tesla shut out of the lower end of the market, and this will hurt them eventually. The wild card here is Elon Musk: how much of his money and himself will he drive into his project before he calls it a day? Regardless of the outcome, he will be regarded as the greatest automotive outsider since the Brass Era days when the industry was just finding its legs. For this he should be applauded.

I am aware that some folks are using the S550 to have a bit of fun at the expense of Ford trolls. I've taken a peek in over at MT and what some folks are posting over at Mustang6. Frankly, they all deserve it, and it was fun reading. But even approaching the situation with a dispassionate eye, you just knew that Ford was going to wind up having to de-emphasize affordable performance with this car, because it is so completely at odds with the two guiding principles they have been using to guide the company: One Ford and EcoBoost. The question is whether or not you feel that they are doing the right thing by doing so. Personally, I don't. Think about it: this car doesn't perform as well as he Camaro. Ok, so it's going to be a kind of Grand Tourer then, right? Well, maybe... but I'd take those claims a lot more seriously if they were to put it up against, say, a Scat Pack Challenger. If any pony car is going to be a GT, it's going to be the one with the roomier interior, complete with Italian flair. And yes, the Mustang will sell well. Ford will continue to be aggressive about pricing, and life will go on. But it won't go on as well as it could have.

Not if the updated 5.0 is still in progress.. Won't argue that I think every Mustang fan alive is disappointed that it gained weight but everybody knows there are economics that are involved and it always involves give and take and something had to give. Weight. Weight stuck around.. But once again you're proving my point. GM was able to do a new chassis AND engine all at once. Why not Ford? The answer is that GM has the bigger toolbox, and the fire in the belly. Ford does not.

I'm not assuming. Read the article. He straight-up says it: "Get in a fifth-generation Camaro (even the SS 1LE), and you're reminded constantly that you're sacrificing for performance. In the Mustang, not so." As for why he never used the '16 Camaro as a comparison point, I have a theory. It's called, because the comparo showed how dominant the Alpha Camaro is. "I haven't gotten to read a comparion yet(not going to read pictures somebody posted), on what grounds did the mustang lose?" All of them, pretty much. But you'll have to read the pictures to see. "I'm not trying to justify that the Mustang is a better car all around or this or that but you're the only person who is attempting to make the Mustang look bad." -uh... Once again, read the pictures. And don't try to make me out to be the only guy taking potshots at the thing. The Interwebs are ablaze with scathing criticism. Styles and tone vary, but the general consensus is that Ford just got royally panted, with no real fix in sight.

There's a pretty big number comparison that you just "conveniently" left out and that's the difference in figure-8 times. 25.0 for the '13 and 24.4 for the '16. That is a very good indication of how much the handling has improved over the previous generation."It's not just about straight-line performance and highway pulls anymore. Muscle cars have entered the era of handling." "If you're searching for every last tenth of an advantage on paper, you may find something that's faster than the 2016 Ford Mustang GT. Maybe something cheaper. But if you enjoy the experience as much as the performance, the Mustang GT is the whole package, with an exhaust that's muscular when exercised, a controlled ride, and an interior you don't have to make excuses for." I'd be a lot more interested in that quote if:-I didn't know the Mustang lost its first comparo to the Camaro already-in the same publication that wrote this, -the interior they're praising was being compared to the Zeta Camaro (a '15), not the Alpha. The Camaro is just too strong.

Ccap: I get that IRS improves handling. But who cares about handling if you lose acceleration? Can't they do like Chevy did, and improve both?

It is cold. Snow fell last night. Yuk.

It's not terribly difficult to learn to launch a car to 60. The Camaro SS will do this 6/10 faster than the Mustang GT PP. That's a huge gap.

Ford's strategy for this car is to move as many of them as they can because it's the only product using the platform. The fact that the product is constrained by price limits how much development they could put into it. And yes, I remember hearing that at least some of the hard points from the old S197 were carryover. As far as Ford's position in the market and brand strategy goes, this is probably the best they can do in this segment and remain profitable. They are no longer interested in mainline V8 engines, they have little need for RWD, and they have no luxury brand to trickle tech down from. The problem for Ford is that GM has all these things. And if the Giulia platform has legs, Mopar will in due course. The previous Mustang was a result of laziness in developing product. This one is the result of limitations in what the company can realistically do.

If by GT350 you mean GT350R, then yes, I'd probably expect Ford to beat the Z/28. Gumball tires and all that. But regular GT350? Not so sure. Probably, but they will make much as much mention of the interior and refinement as they will the actual driving experience. It's fighting a six year-old interior, remember. The Z/28 commanded the price it did because it was a track special. Not even the biggest GM fan would put up its straight-line numbers as justification for the price. But it was the on-track stuff that sealed the deal. Just ask MT-they were the ones who made it a Best Drivers Car. Perhaps the most unsettling part of this discussion is that we have to cite an out-of-production Camaro as one that a new Mustang can conceivably beat in a conparo. There are inexpensive 400hp cars, and there are 400hp cars where you get what you pay for. The S550 Mustang, at mid-thirties grand, is both. Sadly.

Well, I will admit that Ford has the game rigged their way for potential sales. When your base model is geared to fleet sales then you have a decent shot at that title. Sad, but the Camry approach often works on that front. But the lack of development on this car is astounding. I called them out for the live axle for years, but when they finally ditch it they wind up with a car that's SLOWER in a straight line? C'mon. Ford would have been better off throwing some of those pre-tax profits into making this a fully-baked product.

Pretty slim pickins from my birth year... guess I'll have to go with a Pontiac Trans-Am with the Super Duty 455. It was decently quick, and it was a smogger engine to boot.

"The independent rear suspension setup definitely improves the car's handling, but the weight gain slows it down, and on the track there's more pitch and roll than we'd like. Looking back into the archives at a 2013 Ford Mustang GT with the Performance package we tested confirmed some suspicions: 0-60 mph in 4.4 seconds, quarter mile in 12.7 seconds at 111.9 mph, and a figure eight of 25.0 seconds at 0.77g average. Weight difference? 207 pounds per our scales in the old-timer's favor. "If you lined up with an 'old' Mustang at your local drag strip (let's pretend it's stock, too) we're talking more than just a nose ahead. The older and lighter Mustang will be trying to show you some taillights. Just don't eat a big meal beforehand." Well, it's official: Ford has developed a brand-new Zeta Camaro, only perhaps slower to 60. This is why you let engineering do your product line, not marketing. Wowzers

Link: http://m.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/2016-ford-mustang-gt-first-test-review/

Twenty-five billion dollars. Ho. Lee. CRAP. If this turns out to be the case then not only will their bid to be the world's #1 automaker be at an end, they will almost certainly have to merge with another automaker to keep up on tech and R&D. Did someone see a guy in a black turtleneck lurking around?

Ya... I'm sure the guys writing the checks who agreed to them had nothing to do with it. Next up: see what Ford does.

In theory, no. But they can be idiots about it. I'll do my due diligence and price it out though. Should be interesting.

Thanks man, but while I have faith in you being a pretty smart guy, I have less faith in dealerships dealing with warranty issues. Until Mopar revises their own requirements I'll just toe the line and be thankful that I'm still coming out ahead on fuel costs

Yup. If you don't get your oil changes done at the dealer the only lube they recommend is Pennzoil Platinum Synthetic Euro L. Not exactly cheap, and not too easy to find if you don't live in a larger area. I learned quickly-I now have a stash.

Oil for the truck. Turns out it uses a VERY specific synthetic formula. It's the first thing I discovered about it that I don't like.

I would upvote this multiple times if I could.

Ya, it seemed pretty solid, but sometimes numbers can be deceiving.

Hey, it's Back to the Future Day, right? So what better way to celebrate than to talk about the man behind the (time) machine. No, not Doc Brown. Link to the weirdness here: http://blog.caranddriver.com/back-to-the-future-the-rise-and-fall-of-the-delorean-motor-company/

I'm not a finance brainiac, but it sounds pretty good. Anyone who cares to explain it in more detail is free to. Here's the link: http://www.automobilemag.com/features/news/gm-reports-record-quarterly-pre-tax-profit-of-3-1-billion-for-q3-2015/

I'm not so much a displacement snob as a cylinder-count snob. I like my drivetrains smooth and torquey, and the last two cars I've owned packed LS3s. Right now I'm in between fun rides and have a turbo V6... diesel. Three whole litres of it. Still, torque