Vital Stats

Engine:
3.7L V6
Power:
305 HP /
Transmission:
6-Speed Manual
0-60 Time:
5.9 Seconds
Drivetrain:
Rear-Wheel Drive
Curb Weight:
3,401 LBS
Seating:
2+2
Cargo:
13.4 CU-FT
MPG:
19 City / 29 HWY
Cylinder-Envy No More



My first car was a used 1981 Ford Mustang. It was a complete piece of garbage, but it was the best I could do with $900 worth of hard-earned busboy tips. It only had one side mirror, the power steering fluid had to be filled every two weeks and there was a nail in the dashboard. I would have removed that last bit of nonstandard hardware, but whenever the Brown Bomber didn't want to turn over, touching the nail for luck seemed to work. But compared to my friends' cars, mine at least looked the fastest. Looks don't win at the stoplight, though, and my rust-colored 'Stang featured the double whammy of a 109-horsepower 2.8-liter V6 and an automatic transmission.

To say that my Mustang's powertrain was a disappointment could be the understatement of the century, but I wasn't the only V6-powered Mustang owner suffering from horsepower humiliation. It would be another 30 years before Ford would offer a V6-powered Mustang with anything more than mule muscle, but that's where we are today. The 2012 Mustang boasts a legit 305 horsepower, or more punch than the 4.6-liter V8 under the hood of the 2009 Mustang GT. I have no doubt that the 2012 Mustang is vastly superior to my 1981 shame machine, but does that 305 horsepower and a vastly improved rear-wheel-drive chassis make this Mustang one of America's great performance bargains? Hit the jump to find out.
If you've made it this far, you've probably noticed that our review vehicle is not the newly debuted and tweaked 2013 model. We generally make an effort not to review vehicles after significant changes are announced, but with so many Mustang variants available, we just couldn't publish all of the Mustang reviews we had lined up before the changes were announced. Besides, we're still a few months away from getting our hands on the newest Mustang V6, and it appears that its hardware will be largely the same as the 2012 model we sampled. 2013 Mustang V6 changes include updated front and rear fascias, new wheel options, available Recaro seats and the availability of our tester's V6 Performance Pack on automatic-equipped models for the first time. Ford hasn't announced upgraded V6 power numbers for 2013, so we're operating under the assumption that the 3.7-liter V6 will continue to pack 305 horsepower.

2012 Ford Mustang V6 side view2012 Ford Mustang V6 front view2012 Ford Mustang V6 rear view

Having said that, our Race Red tester is a budget-minded, Mustang-loving enthusiast's dream. We're talking about a base 2012 Mustang Coupe with but one option box checked: the V6 Performance Package, which adds 19-inch Argent Painted Machined aluminum wheels mated to Pirelli P-Zero 255/40 ZR 19 rubber and a host of performance improvements for just $1,995. That Ford offers this impressive package on even the most basic Mustang is commendable, and it's a must for the enthusiast on a budget.

Even with the Performance Package our tester still came in at an extremely reasonable $24,850. As you can imagine, that low MSRP means that there aren't a whole lot of high-tech standard features, but the V6 Mustang still offers a few creature comforts. Among the standard fare is a tilt steering wheel with speed controls and a rich-sounding premium stereo with an auxiliary audio input jack for your MP3 player. If you're looking for a longer list of accoutrements, you'll have to step up to the V6 Premium, which starts at $26,310 and doesn't include the Performance Package.

In the past, the V6-powered Mustangs were not only devoid of power, they also looked toothless when contrasted with the GT model. Gaudy stickers, smallish wheels and a general atrophied look just screamed "Rent me!" Ford has done a terrific job making the V6 Mustang look less like a white flag of inferiority and more like a powerful ride with some personality.

2012 Ford Mustang V6 headlight2012 Ford Mustang V6 wheel detail2012 Ford Mustang V6 taillight2012 Ford Mustang V6 exhaust tip

This look is enhanced with the Performance Package, thanks mostly to those massive 19-inch wheels that draw attention to the Stang's aggressive looks. Proof of our tester's improved visual appeal comes in the form of the many compliments we received during our week with it. Past V6 Mustangs were more likely to elicit questions like "Why didn't you get the V8?" – not what you want to hear after dropping over $20,000 on a new pony car.

The Mustang usually looks interesting from the outside, but the same compliment shouldn't be directed to its typically bland interior. That changes to some degree with the current generation model, as aesthetics and materials have been greatly improved. A once rock-hard dash has been replaced with far cushier fare, and the cloth seats are comfortable and have plenty of side bolstering. The Mustang also earns points for ease of use, as its buttons and knobs are logically placed and easy to reach and operate. Of course, it helps that our tester was largely frill-free, so SYNC, Bluetooth and navigation were all left out of the equation. We were especially pleased with the seat comfort, which only made us want to spend more time in the cabin. The Mustang also impresses with superb visibility from the driver's seat, a claim that its Bowtie-wearing competitor most definitely cannot make.

There is no doubt that the Mustang's cabin is much improved, but this is no luxury interior. Once inside, the eyes are greeted with an ocean of stark-looking gray and black tones. The center armrest is far short of comfortable, and the plastic steering wheel is a constant reminder of the manageable MSRP (a leather-wrapped unit comes standard for 2013). While we don't expect a muscle car to have a massive trunk, the Mustang features a respectable 12.3 cubic feet of room. Unfortunately, the boot opening is small enough that larger and awkwardly shaped items likely won't fit.

2012 Ford Mustang V6 interior2012 Ford Mustang V6 front seats2012 Ford Mustang V6 speedometer2012 Ford Mustang V6 rear seats

Still, our complaints about the Mustang's interior are few, and they really don't take away from the driving experience. The 3.7-liter V6 boasts the aforementioned 305 horsepower at 6,500 revolutions per minute and 280 pound-feet of torque at 4,250 revs. This is the V6 performance that budget-minded Mustang lovers have been craving, and the result is a powerful mill that doesn't disappoint. It doesn't have the low-end torque of the brawny 5.0-liter V8 or even the asthmatic 4.6-liter V8, but it's still got plenty of punch and a redline that hits a grin-inducing 7,000 RPM.

The six-speed manual transmission is a treat as well, as the short-throw shifter clicks into a satisfying notch every time gears are swapped. Hammer the throttle from a dead stop and expect acceleration that would annihilate any stock V8-powered Fox-body Mustangs. Our AOL Autos compatriots quote a 0-60 time of 5.9 seconds, but the acceleration feels more in the mid-five-second range from behind the wheel.

The new 3.7-liter V6 does wonders for the street cred of the Mustang, but the pony car competition isn't messing around, either. The V6-powered 2012 Chevrolet Camaro boasts 323 horsepower and the 2012 Dodge Challenger counters with 305 horsepower. With each model over 300 ponies, which is the quickest to 60 mph? Again, the Mustang comes out on top, beating the Camaro by .1 second (6.0) and the Challenger by .9 seconds (6.8). That's partly because the Mustang weighs just 3,401 pounds, while the Camaro tips the scales at 3,780 lbs and the Challenger needs Jenny Craig at 3,834 lbs.



The 3.7-liter engine under the hood of the Mustang most definitely has a lot more kick than the old 4.0 Cologne V6, but don't make the mistake of thinking that this is a 9/10ths GT. The V6 is down big on horsepower and torque compared to the 5.0-liter V8, but that's not even the biggest reason scale doesn't apply to this comparison. While the V6 carries a nice soundtrack, it's absolutely nowhere near the exhilarating exhaust note of the GT. There is a certain James T Kirk/Barry White swagger that comes with eight pistons under the hood of a Mustang, and our tester just doesn't have it.

But who needs panache when you handle like a champ? The Mustang V6 takes turns surprisingly well, and the Performance Package only enhances the driving experience. The package includes a larger front sway bar and SVT rear sway bar, unique calipers with performance friction pads, a strut-tower brace, 3.31 gear ratios and unique front springs. All that hardware exists to increase stability in turns and improve braking, and the result is a very composed pony car, even when charging hard through the corners. The Mustang's solid rear axle used to be looked upon as a hindrance to handling in deference to drag strip performance and low cost, but that really isn't the case anymore. Ford based the updated axle off the last generation Mustang Bullitt, which was the most entertaining pre-2010 Mustang. There are still times when the rear feels as though it wants to hop free, but the electronic nannies help keep everything in order when your skillset can't.

Ford engineers have added electronic power steering to the Mustang in 2011 to improve fuel economy. An electrified tiller tends to conjure up images of a numb and uninspiring feel, but that generally isn't the case with this Mustang. The steering is quick and precise and offers some level of feedback, though there are moments when it does feel artificially weighted.



When Ford introduced the new V6-powered Mustang, The Blue Oval promised 31 miles per gallon on the highway. The thought of a 300-horsepower vehicle offering 31 mpg sounds too good to be true, but our experience with the Mustang suggests it's a legitimate claim. The 31 mpg number is only possible with the optional six-speed automatic transmission, but our manual-equipped tester is still rated by the EPA to achieve 29 mpg on the highway and 19 mpg in city driving. We managed 24.2 mpg during our time with the Mustang V6, but could have squeezed out a few more miles per gallon if it weren't so much fun to drive hard.

There was a time when buying a Mustang V6 might have signified you were more interested in looks than performance. After spending a week behind the wheel of this latest iteration, we can say that stereotype is no longer valid. The 2012 Mustang now features an impressive V6, a terrifically sorted chassis and fuel economy that's as good as some mid-size sedans. Add in a base price under $23,000 and you're looking at a genuine performance bargain.

While it's not fair to cars like the Hyundai Genesis Coupe, Subaru WRX and the Chevrolet Camaro to declare the Mustang the best performance value on the planet, its name certainly deserves to be included in any discussion on the topic.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 220 Comments
      The Steve
      • 2 Years Ago
      It's hilarious how far the Mustang has come in less than 15 years. I had a '97 Ford Mustang V6. It had the 3.8L with 150 hp / 215 ft-lbs. The new 3.7L has more than double the power of that old V6, and 90 hp more than the '97 Mustang GT. So yeah, I don't there's much shame in opting for the V6 anymore.
        Josh
        • 2 Years Ago
        @The Steve
        Exactly. That should show you who the superior American automobile company is. There was a time back in 2003 when to get sequential taillights I'd have to splice in this convoluted piece of wiring and hopefully not blow the solenoids/relays in the car. Now Sequential tails are standard on the base V6. That's the difference between Ford and other car companies; at least in the Pony car market - they know their customers.
      You Sexy Bitch..
      • 2 Years Ago
      that probably wasn,t the cars fault,who ever owned it before you probably beat the hell out of it , what do you want for $900 bucks? Gee
      momwuf
      • 2 Years Ago
      I have no doubt that today's V-6 packs more punch than the writer's 1981 V-6, but I still say if you're gonna get a Mustang "pony up" the extra money and get a V-8. Seriously, if you're getting a Mustang and are worried about fuel mileage, you need to get a Focus. I test drove 2012 V-6 and was disappointed in the power, sound and feel of the car. It was stunning to look at, but disappointing to drive. I love the body style and looks from the outside, but the inside was uncomfortable and it didn't ride very well. I wound up buying an '09 Mustang GT with a V-8....very low mileage and a manual transmission (love changing gears!). It handled better and rode better. I only drive Ford's and LOVE my Mustang!!! I'm sure there are people out there who don't really know the difference that will get the V-6 and love it....more "power" to them!
        It's me!!!!!
        • 2 Years Ago
        @momwuf
        better like paying more in insurance for the GT,thats the bad thing!
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        miketim1
        • 2 Years Ago
        Wait so you got to drive it already ? Wow !
          ShutoSteve
          • 2 Years Ago
          @miketim1
          This fall - Oh so you turn 16 in the fall? We'll hold a party for you. A going away party of sorts.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @miketim1
          [blocked]
        onewayroll
        • 2 Years Ago
        You need to pull your fat lip over your face and swallow.
        Sean
        • 2 Years Ago
        Strong troll.
        chris
        • 2 Years Ago
        A FWD car with no sporting intentions built into the chassis is more fun to drive an a RWD pony car with an (new-found) emphasis on handling... Riiiiiiiiight.
          chris
          • 2 Years Ago
          @chris
          than* a RWD pony car...
        benzaholic
        • 2 Years Ago
        Cuz a 300hp front wheel driver is always so much more rewarding than a 300hp rear wheel driver. Yeah, sure. For all I know, the not yet available Accord may be a much better choice than a V6 Mustang in many ways, but I so seriously doubt that Fun to Drive is one of them.
        sqparadox
        • 2 Years Ago
        I see we have a fan of torque-steer with us today.
        jack
        • 2 Years Ago
        "funner" - FTL
        ShutoSteve
        • 2 Years Ago
        The fail is strong in this one. Yes, Mommy's Accord will be lots of fun to drive to and from school with your learners permit. Try not to get confused by all the other cars - Just remember that even though you're in a beige mobile, you're still a person. A fat person. But a person nonetheless.
        Papi L-Gee
        • 2 Years Ago
        "Funner." I lol'ed before voting you down.
        Elmo
        • 2 Years Ago
        I told you guys this was Gua. But none of you listened to me.
          chris
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          To ShutoSteve: Gua = previously-named troll.
          ShutoSteve
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          The hell is Gua?
          Elmo
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          Phillip Gua ring a bell?
          Krishan Mistry
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          Oh yes, Phillip Gua the Fat. Why anyone would want to indicate their obesity in a username is beside me, looks like he learned from his mistake with his new troll account. Actually, no. Same ****.
        are.esstee
        • 2 Years Ago
        I'm not sure if you japcrap lovers realize the difference in power to the road in 300HP FWD and 300HP RWD, but its major. Not to mention torque steer, power through corners, weight distribution. But yea, keep telling us how great your moms next car will be. Honda hasn't produced a fun car since the S2000, sadly.
        It's me!!!!!
        • 2 Years Ago
        if you like slow, dull, boring,gay cars............................. sorry,the Mustang is just far better than any civic.....
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        Making11s
        • 2 Years Ago
        "Why not make it with a classic muscle car design, but turn it into a FWD based AWD, 3000 pound coupe with turbo 4 and 6 motors" Because those classic muscle car proportions come from the RWD layout. It's a case of form following function. Keeping those proportions on a FWD vehicle would be a wasteful addition of size and weight.
        Dean Hammond
        • 2 Years Ago
        Acid, you back? 400 reliable horse power 0-60 in 3 flat, 11's in the rain...Fun? questionable, Reliable...may wish to check your facts there...interior...pure taste, ride quality, now were talking, road noise...ditto, tin can doors...ditto....different cars and clientel completely....
          AcidTonic
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Dean Hammond
          I replied to the one above before I saw this.... Nope not me. We're still good since you now know it wasn't me. Remember I owned a Cobra so I'm not exactly anti-mustang.
        Car Lovin' Engineer
        • 2 Years Ago
        Yeah Rant Master, it's really hard to see where you're coming from. The numbers you must be assuming don't add up at all to the actual situation. The modern muscle cars, and the Mustang in particular, do many things very well and offer extreme bang-for-the-buck, more so that the other cars you mentioned. It seems you're making gross assumptions. Ford already DOES make hot hatches (Focus ST and Fiesta ST), why would they replace the Mustang?? It sells very well and LOTS of us want RWD, thank you very much.
        Jay Co
        • 2 Years Ago
        Yeah you clearly have no stance to judge this new mustang till you drive one. Granted the reason why the v6 is limited to 113 is primarily for insurance reasons to keep those costs down. a simple aluminum or carbon fiber driveshaft and tune one these cars turn these cars into undoubtable sport cars that can reach 150 without a problem. And theres no argyuing that the performance pack v6 mustang out lapped the sti, wrx and nearly the evo... and being on the tight twisty track that anualy test their cars on, the limited high speed didnt serve as much of a hinderance to the mustangs times ( despited mouncing of the limiter for 3-5 second if i recall the article when they reach the end of the straight away). Goes to show the amazing handling this car is capable of. a handful of people are using this car for autocross b/c of its great balance of power and handling. And if the mustang gets eco boost engines in the near future you can say good bye to everything else. b/c imagine the potential of a tt v6 from the factory, if would undoubtably wipe your STI off the market.
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 2 Years Ago
        People said the same thing in the 70s, and in the 80s, Ford planned to make the next Mustang FWD, but didn't after fans voiced their displeasure. That FWD Mustang became the Ford Probe, and guess what happened to it. They discontinued it because more opted for the Mustang. So, if anyone here needs to "get with the times", it is you!! It's not the 90s anymore. Get with the times bra!! On top of that, you are comparing two cars that are not even intended to compete with one another.
        Rollingdoughnut
        • 2 Years Ago
        EPA website: 2012 WRX Sti 6 spd, PREMIUM fuel required, 17/23mpg, 19 combined 2012 Mustang V-6 6spd, regular fuel, 19/29mpg, 22 combined
          Josh
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rollingdoughnut
          Ford? Try the entire industry. High-compression, high winding 4-cylinders w/ big turbos aren't exactly the bastion of fuel economy. At least Ford gives you the option to use regular in their GT; Subie will just void your warranty.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rollingdoughnut
          [blocked]
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rollingdoughnut
          [blocked]
        Making11s
        • 2 Years Ago
        You're arguing against the existence of something that doesn't really exist anymore. The WRX costs nearly as much the Mustang GT 5.0, a car that is quicker than an M3 and nearly as fast around a the track. The Impreza, which is priced more closely to the V6, is slower to 60 and probably around the track too. Regardless, you're comparing apples to oranges. Mustangs and Camaros are pony cars. Pony cars are coupes built on mid-size RWD platforms. WRXs and WRX STis are sport compacts, as in someone started with a compact car and turned it in to something sporty. Not only does the Mustang not compete directly with any Subaru, but your personal point of reference is comparing a car from 2001 to a car from 2009. You can compare just about any car from 2001 to just about any car from 2009 and see that the 2009 car is more refined.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Making11s
          [blocked]
        Elmo
        • 2 Years Ago
        Uh oh, Acid is back under another name, only now he's going to overpraise the crap out of Subarus.
          Dean Hammond
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          apologies Acid, I jumped to the same conclusion....thankfully you dont have a long lost twin....
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          [blocked]
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          [blocked]
          AcidTonic
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Elmo
          @Rant Master I'm not the Mitsu fan boi, I'm the AWD fan boy. Considering there's 4 inches on snow on the ground outside right now I'm justified. BTW the 3000GT sucks in my opinion too :). And I'm building a 2G DSM not an Evo. Same engines though but I'm throwing in a completely forged rotating assembly. 500HP has been done on the stock block and it's not crazy at all ;). @Dean No need to apologize. You stopped calling me a troll so we're good now :)
        Rollingdoughnut
        • 2 Years Ago
        http://www.caranddriver.com/features/lightning-lap-2011-ndash-feature-ndash-car-and-driver/features/lightning-lap-2011-ndash-feature-ndash-car-and-driver-lightning-lap-2011-ll1-class-page-2#Ford Mustang V-6 Link to the lightning lap test of the Mustang V-6. I don't own a Mustang, yet, but given the performance it's hard to argue with the write up. Understeering WRX Sti or perfectly neutral Mustang.....hmmmmmm.
        • 2 Years Ago
        [blocked]
        Jeff Tripp
        • 2 Years Ago
        I was with you until you said "FWD based." NO NO NO NO NO
        Krishan Mistry
        • 2 Years Ago
        The fail is strong with this one. A V6 stang is nearly as fast in a straight line as a $10k more expensive, uglier looking and equally crap interior STI, while beig a tad better on gas despite 2 extra cylinders. Throw in some corners on a track, and where your FWD biased AWD car is just understeering, the Mustang is balanced and poised, not understeery, and being RWD, a tap of the gas can move the car on the perfect trajectory without fancy torque vectoring diffs desperately trying to quell 4wd understeer. A Civic Si, MS3, as mentioned, might win on interior volume against a coupe, but would be stuck watching the Mustang's signature taillights get smaller and smaller. Boy racers with Jap hatches might not be slow anymore, but Yank rwd muscle has now discovered a new athleticism too.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Krishan Mistry
          [blocked]
      Big Squid
      • 2 Years Ago
      The drive shaft is made of empty Sprite cans superglued to each other. I would not buy one because Ford cheaped out and put in a seriously underengineered drive train. I would be embarrassed to own one knowing it was speed-limited to the point where it could be outrun by a rental Hyundai. That speedometer might as well read 1,000 miles per hour -- it's just for show anyway.
        XJ Yamaha
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Big Squid
        You're an idiot. You now think you're an expert because you saw an article about some jackass who took the speed limiter out of his base model v6 and busted the drive shaft that wasn't made for the abuse he put it through. That moron should have bought a GT if he knew anything about anything, or at least modded the v6 to handle such abuse.
          Dean Hammond
          • 2 Years Ago
          @XJ Yamaha
          heres the reality, the driveshaft is designed and blanced to be basically 100 % reliable within Factory specs, that just happens to be where the limiter comes in, after that point rotational imbalnces increase expodentially and if pushed too hard the inevitable happens, that said theres always a "fudge factor". Another fact is the guy that You Tubed his experience had probably done more than one run, and i would go so far as to say the car had been HAMMERED on a constant basis. So, note to people that mod cars....if you want to evade potential, albeit RARE drivetrain failures, do yourself a favor and replace the driveshaft....how hard is that, SERIOUSLY, and any modder with HALF a brain would know that to begin with anyways.
        Rollingdoughnut
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Big Squid
        When you remove the speed limiter that the factory put there for a reason, you should consider upgrading some of the hardware as well. It's not built as a GT, but a base V-6 Mustang. Factory engineering can't prevent stupidity.
        kcroc10077
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Big Squid
        Because of that video AB posted a few weeks ago? You have no idea what was done to that car previously. Basing your position on it is all kinds of stupid unless you have additional information. I haven't heard any but if you have some please share.
          Dean Hammond
          • 2 Years Ago
          @kcroc10077
          squid, you need to get out more...research that "investigation" and get back to us....and research exactly how many driveshafts there have been and then cross reference MODIFIED cars....Rousch has blowers on 6 cylinders, serious horsepower and ZERO failures...the onus can be laid solely at the feet of owner abuse....
          Big Squid
          • 2 Years Ago
          @kcroc10077
          Not just because of the video. You can read about cheap Chinese drivetrains on Mustang-specific forums like Stangnet, on general car sites like Jalopnik, and even on Fox news, and the NHTSA is investigating them. Sure, all of those people are ganging up on poor old Ford for no reason at all. I say only this: Go ahead and buy one if you like it. It's your funeral.
      Muttons
      • 2 Years Ago
      '87 Mustang Sedan. 88hp 2.3L 4 Cyl. Beige... I win...
      farscape
      • 2 Years Ago
      That interior is awful. Is it made from recycled gray tupperware?
        DC Mike
        • 2 Years Ago
        @farscape
        If you actually went to a dealership instead of looking at pictures on the internet you'd know that it's actually soft -touch and aluminum.
        Josh
        • 2 Years Ago
        @farscape
        Sure, the very same low grade Hyundai has been charging $35k for in their Genesis.
          NightFlight
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Josh
          If you are referring to the sedan, you are out of your mind because it has a great interior. The GC has a decent interior as well.
      Big Squid
      • 2 Years Ago
      Hyundai Genesis Coupe sounds better and better. And it doesn't check out at a PATHETIC 113 miles per hour!
        ryanandrewmartin
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Big Squid
        Not to mention, the new Genesis got turned up a notch or two on the ugly knob.
        Elmo
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Big Squid
        For a grand less than a Genesis Coupe 3.8 Track, you could get a Mustang GT.
        It's me!!!!!
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Big Squid
        big? the genisis was made to compete against the GT mustang,NOT the v6.......................and the v6 still looks & runs better than the hyundai pos.
      nismokid02
      • 2 Years Ago
      The only thing I can't stand is the interior. Seriously? Light gray plastic? They could of at least used some darker plastics to hide the fact.
        kcroc10077
        • 2 Years Ago
        @nismokid02
        I don't know why you were down voted. That interior looks like A$$. You know it, I know it, and everybody knows it. Look at the interior of the Focus. Ford can do better
        Brian
        • 2 Years Ago
        @nismokid02
        I wish that automakers would all stop using the light gray interior. It looks cheap in every car that it is used in.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        chris
        • 2 Years Ago
        "These days you need digital speedometer so you know exactly how fast you are going..." Really? Do you also need a digital watch to know exactly what time it is? I've experienced digital gauges on cars and motorcycles and I'll gladly take analog any day of the week. You may prefer digital numbers, but no one NEEDS digital numbers to know exactly the information they're reading, unless they're really that blind and/or lazy.
      ryanandrewmartin
      • 2 Years Ago
      EASILY the king of the V6 Pony cars. Would be my pick of the three hands down. Followed closely by the Challeneger,. You'd have to offer the Camaro to me WELL under MSRP for me to even consider it.
    • Load More Comments