2005 Mustang GT Convertible: In the Autoblog Garage Day 4
After having the Mustang for a few days and having the posts online for people to give feedback, it seems that there
are a few loose ends to tie up.
The first one that might be on everyones mind is the fuel economy. If you are truly interested in fuel economy, the
V6 Mustang might be up your alley. The GT was getting around 15.7 mpg according to my calculations. I have been all
over town in this car, and I can tell you that the sensations that you receive from liberally applying force to the
accelerator do not encourage frugal driving. It is possible to do so, because Ford has nicely included a MPG meter that
gives you a general idea of how efficiently you are driving. It is part of the trip computer/information screen that
displays in the right hand instrument pod
There is another feature that is not often discussed that does have a certain level of novelty. The Mustangs
instrument panel color can be customized by the driver using this MyColor feature. It too is accessed through the
trip computer/information screen in the right hand instrument pod, underneath the speedometer. The color is only
applied when the parking or head lights are on, meaning that any custom settings do not affect your typical daytime
reflective white letter on black background color scheme. The color can be altered by changing the values for red,
green, or blue to create any number of shades. It was a novelty to show off, but it does take time to get into the
screen to change. I just leave it on a shade of yellow to match the car, but this feature reminds me of Need for
Speed: Underground 2 for some strange reason.
Also on my list of items to address is the cars ride quality and the solid rear axle. Despite its performance
intentions, the Mustangs ride is surprisingly smooth. That smooth character does not interfere with the GTs ability
to handle aggressive driving. It does present a nice balance, especially considering its pony car heritage. I did feel
that the chassis has lost some edge by being a convertible. Like I have said before, cowl shake is not bad, and it is
certainly better than anything else in its class.
What is truly surprising is how well Ford has tuned the rear axle. A consumer would be very hard pressed to determine
that it was anything out of the ordinary. I spent some time talking to the guys over at Ford about the axle choice and
their motivation was clear. The solid rear axle is very durable and is capable of handling lots of power. Enthusiasts,
especially those who enjoy the drag strip, demand a solid rear axle. Even on the open road, there are few better ways
to put down the kind of power the Mustang is capable of. With an independent rear suspension, a lot of development time
and money has to be dedicated toward geometry and a balance must be maintained between all the different factors
involved. When you add a high power V8 into the equation, it can make the task much more difficult than it needs to be.
Previous generation Cobra enthusiasts can speak to the evils of the IRS that was fitted to that car. If you look into
the future, you can see that even the 2007 Mustang Cobra is fitted with this rear suspension, and that should say
something.
That is not to say that Ford did not put serious development time into their current rear suspension. There is one
word that I would used to describe the Mustangs platform, capable. Gone are the skittish tendencies of the previous
generation. It does not seem to matter that the rear axle is not an ultramodern independent rear setup. In all
situations, the rear end felt under control. The ugly rough road handling behavior typical of the previous generation
is not there. And having this kind of capability in a convertible, especially a four seat convertible, is
astounding. It speaks volumes for the time Ford has put into this platform and in its approach with the solid rear
axle. Overall, consider the rear axle to be a durable, well evolved asset not some blast from the past antiquity.
The same could be said for the entire car. The old Mustang was the definition of the phrase long in the tooth. The
new car, despite its retro design, is a clean slate approach to the Mustang formula. It works well on the street, and I
have no doubts that it will perform at the track. There is clearly a reason behind the new Mustangs success at the
race track; it is a very capable car. Look at Ken Gushi and his drifting Mustang. He is a young guy going up against
drivers like Rhys Millen and winning. He currently stands third in the Formula D championship. Ford is also beating out
BMW for first in the manufacturers standings for the Grand American Road Racing Grand-Am Cup. Sure, these are prepared
race cars, but the foundation is there in the consumer cars. With all this in mind, the Mustang is a terrific
performance value. Time is a wasting, however, and I must enjoy what little time I have left with it.












Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mal Fuller 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
The dash instruments (fuel, temp, battery and oil pressure) on their shared back panel represent a missed opportunity for some nice looking gauges. They sell gauges in Wal-Mart's automotive department with more sex appeal.
Reply
MikeCapone 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
"The GT was getting around 15.7 mpg according to my calculations."
I was one of those who asked for fuel economy figures. Thanks for the reply.
Reply
naggs 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
i think its worth while to note that the suspension is tuned a little softer in the convertable than the coupe.
Reply
94cruiser 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
my 1st car was a FOX body Ford, (but not the mustang) The more pics I see of the current gen. the more I'm impressed with what Ford did. I would just slightly redesign the tailights (which I think saleen did), other than that they NAILED IT!
Reply
Randall Halcomb 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
Yeah,
The rigidity of a coupe allows for a stiffer suspension without sacrificing ride quality. Of course, that's the typical compromise that convertibles must make. I thought that was the case with this car, but I have not completely researched that on my own to make such a claim.
Reply
Keith 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
Am I really big nerd for thinking the changing of the dash color is a wonderful thing? Instead of trying to find gauges, cd players, etc. that match the interior you can match the interior to whatever you want. If its not too much trouble to implement I hope we see it in more cars :)
Reply
Chris Ripplinger 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
I had a 5 speed GT for the weekend last week and averaged 18.1 mpg around town. Needless to say we also had it on I-96 "testing" the solid rear axle!! Loved the car!!!
Reply
Fazzster 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
It should be noted that the current 4.0 V6 Mustang is as fast as the last generation GT and there are now after market go fast goodies to make it even better not to mention the "Pony Package" that Ford is offering for the V6 which includes the GT's suspension and 17" wheels along with the integrated fog lights in the grill (smaller than GT). I think with gas at $3/gal, the V6 will continue to outsell the GT as it traditionally has and at the same time attract more car enthusiasts into the V6 fold....
Reply
Randall Halcomb 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
#8
The V6 should be lighter in the front, which may translate into a better balanced car.
Too bad the V6 doesn't sound as good as the V8! I'm sure an aftermarket exhaust would help in that regard.
Reply
Jon F. 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
#8 (can we get a quote button!!)
The v6 performance does not match the 99-04 v8 numbers. I can believe the best permance numbers for the v6 match the worst test numbers for the v8, but on the same given day that's not going to happen. The v6 has a weight, power, and traction disadvantage. I'm not saying the v6 is a bad car, it's certainly a sporty car with respectable test numbers. It just isn't up to par with the 4.6 yet.
As for weight v6 vs. v8 (05-06 models). The v6 has a iron block, while the v8 is AL. You're not going to see a huge weight advantage there. Most of the weight gains on the V8 are going to be in the valve train - fancy VVT - and drive train (less weight needed for torque handling). The weight savings is about 100lbs.
Reply
olderty 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
iron = Fe
Reply
Fazzster 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
if iron is Fe....what would Detroit iron be?
Reply
iQuack 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
#7 is a PHONY POST and not by iQuack. Note that ANYONE can use your name and attribute comments to you because duplicate names are permitted here.
That's why it's probably a bad idea to use your real name if it matters to you.
Blocking someone's email address after this kind of thing is like stopping 15 leaks with 10 corks because anybody can have multiple email addresses.
So beware of what assholes can do to misrepresent you on this otherwise excellent blog.
iQuack
iQuack');">Reply
Troll House Cookie 10:45PM (12/18/2005)
#12: If iron is Fe, then Ford should be FEH!
Reply