A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Ford Mustang
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Another magazine comparison - '05 Mustang GT vs Suburu WRX



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 19th 04, 06:30 PM
Bill Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Another magazine comparison - '05 Mustang GT vs Suburu WRX

January 2005 issue of Automobile Magazine has a comparison of "who builds
the most entertaining $25,000 car." The 5-page article was purposefully
written from Washington D.C. to give it a political-type slant, kind of
weird. Instead of having a bunch of editors vote on the various categories
to determine a winner (like Car & Driver did in the GTO-Mustang GT comparo),
this article attempts to split the car-buying public into two groups, and
then assume to know which car would suit their preferences in each area. As
a bit of fun, they talk about results from the "pollsters," and which way
they claimed to vote in certain areas. It seems the Mustang GT is portrayed
as the "red" or conservative choice, and the Suburu is the "blue," or
liberal choice. :-)

I think this comparison is more valid than the GTO and Mustang, because the
cars cost the same. The Mustang and GTO are more alike physically for sure,
with the V-8s, rear drive, and American roots dating back to the 60s, but
does a car buyer choose between the two really?

On the other hand, WRX and Mustang GT cost the same, and have the same
purpose (i.e. performance matters first, everything else second), so these
cars are in direct competition on the showroom floors.

I actually preferred the Car & Driver comparison, because they declared a
winner and a loser. That subjectiveness stirred conversation and was fun to
debate. This article sadly doesn't declare a winner and a loser. The
closest they come to a conclusion is to say that "more people will cast
their lot with the Mustang." Duh. They add that the Mustang is "an
American icon and an emotional touchstone for the faithful," while the WRX
"will appeal more to the reality-based community."

The only areas they go out on a limb and declare a winner are the obvious
ones:

- Looks. "We're not going to stand here and tell you the WRX looks better
than the Mustang..."

- Sound. "We're not going to ask you to belive it [the WRX] sounds better,
because it doesn't."

- Sex appeal. "We'll not claim that the WRX will do a hell of a lot in the
way of introducing you to members of the opposite, er, party. Because it
won't. Unless they're techno-nerds, die-hard foreign-car fans, or members
of some clannish Southern California subculture, most Americans like
Mustangs better." :-)

I should also point out a couple nitpicks about possible inaccuracies in the
article:

- they say the EPA Highway figure for the Mustang is 20 mpg, while the
Suburu is 27. This is wrong - the Mustang EPA is actually 25. They go on
to say that the Mustang's mileage dips "into the twelves and lower in the
city." ??? I don't believe that at all. Car & Driver averaged 16 mpg
during their test, which was pretty much all extremely hard driving,
including track sessions. (I've never seen less than 15 mpg personally in
13 years of driving 5.0 Mustangs.) Meanwhile, the only thing they say about
the Suburu's mileage is that it is 27 EPA Highway. I have a friend who's
owned a WRX for a couple years now, who doesn't drive the car hard, and
tells me that he averages about 18 mpg overall. So the Automobile Magazine
article is a bit biased in this area, and they conclude by saying if you opt
for the WRX you can "bask in the eternal moral value of lower consumption."

- they say the Mustang GT weighs 3600 pounds. Road & Track says 3510. Car
& Driver says 3575. Motor Trend says 3520.

- they say the wheelbase has been increased 7 inches. Isn't 6 inches the
correct figure?


Bill J.
95 GT


Ads
  #2  
Old December 19th 04, 08:35 PM
Backyard Mechanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bill Jones opined in :

> January 2005 issue of Automobile Magazine has a comparison of "who
> builds the most entertaining $25,000 car." The 5-page article was
> purposefully written from Washington D.C. to give it a political-type
> slant, kind of weird.



Like the guiness commercial.. "Brilliant!"

Though that article isnt available on the web site, the review of the 2005
is, and it goes along with most others... thumbs up!

http://automobilemag.com/reviews/041...ng/index2.html

Also check out the wallpaper they've put up... they act like it's art, and it
is... but not suitable as a "That's my Baby!" screensaver or background -
TOO artsy!

>
> - they say the Mustang GT weighs 3600 pounds. Road & Track says 3510.
> Car & Driver says 3575. Motor Trend says 3520.
>
> - they say the wheelbase has been increased 7 inches. Isn't 6 inches
> the correct figure?
>


Rounding in both cases, close enough.

--
- Yes, I'm a crusty old geezer curmudgeon.. deal with it! -
  #3  
Old December 19th 04, 09:05 PM
Backyard Mechanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

AZGuy opined in :

> If
> you were to believe the car mags, autos are so much better each year
> that if you worked backwards a 1968 model car would have to have been
> little more then a wooden axle with two stone wheels pulled by a fleet
> of gerbils.
> --
>


Hmmm ... I dont need some magazine to tell me that, I have seen it for
myself!



--
- Yes, I'm a crusty old geezer curmudgeon.. deal with it! -
  #4  
Old December 19th 04, 09:28 PM
Bill Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"AZGuy" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:30:48 GMT, "Bill Jones" >
> wrote:
>
>>I actually preferred the Car & Driver comparison, because they declared a
>>winner and a loser.

>
> You mean you can't read an article and figure out for yourself which
> would be YOUR preferred car but have to be told?


Why do you ask that question? I simply said I preferred a comparison
article to declare a winner and loser. And in the next sentence, which you
snipped out, I explained why - because it makes for conversation and debate.

Yes, I read the article, and know that I prefer the Mustang. I don't have
to be told. I just like the writers to stick their necks out and give their
opinions. That's exactly why I read newsgroups and forums like this - to
hear other folks' opinions...

> "wins" around to keep the ad money flowing in from all the makers. If
> you were to believe the car mags, autos are so much better each year
> that if you worked backwards a 1968 model car would have to have been
> little more then a wooden axle with two stone wheels pulled by a fleet
> of gerbils.


hehe. good one!

Unfortunately, I agree with the magazines that say that modern cars are
better in almost every way than their predecessors. I have owned lots of
cool cars: 1965 Corvette 396 4-speed convertible, 1971 Oldsmobile 4-4-2
W-30 4-speed, 1974 Z28 4-speed, 1974 Triumph Spitfire, 1981 Z28 4-speed,
1984 Z28 5-speed, 1987 Mustang GT 5-speed, and my current 1995 Mustang GT
5-speed. I recently drove a 2005 GT 5-speed, and without hesitation, I
would say it's easily better than any car I previously owned.

But then again, I may be different than a lot of Mustang owners in that I
really just use the car as a daily driver, and don't mod it much at all. I
might swap out the shifter or perhaps experiment with different computer
flashes (if I buy a new '05 GT), but I think I'd probably be pretty happy
with it the way it comes from the factory.


-Bill J.
95 GT

> --
> Jim
> '88 LX 5.0 (now in car heaven)
> '89 LX 5.0 vert
> '99 GT 35th Anniversery Edition - Silver
> Mods to date - Relocated trunk release to drivers side,
> shortened throttle cable, PIAA Driving lights.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mustang Kicks A Goat. News At Eleven. [email protected] Ford Mustang 25 December 18th 04 02:48 AM
Mustang Fever All Over Again Jim S. Ford Mustang 12 December 13th 04 10:11 PM
NEWSFLASH!! John Coletti, SVT Head, "Retires" [email protected] Ford Mustang 1 December 13th 04 06:48 PM
Confused! - 1968 Mustang Conv. lower ball joint?? Jeffery Ford Mustang 3 December 8th 04 03:56 AM
Ford Mustang Magnaflow Exhaust FastAutoSports Ford Mustang 20 December 3rd 04 12:00 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.