Drove a Mustang 5.0 GT V8 over the weekend.

ION08

So as the title says, this is what I've been driving over the weekend!

Most rental companies supply the bog-standard 3.7L V6 Mustang - I just had to have the 5.0 GT V8 , 420 horses of pure American muscle and what a glorious sound!

I was really impressed with the car overall but the 2 things that really surprised me where the Handling and Economy, primarily because I was expecting much worse in these two departments going by the typical "American Muscle Car" stereotype;

1. American muscle cars don't handle nearly as bad as their reputation would lead you to believe (Well this one didn't anyway) - I took it down the Pacific Coast Road which is full of twists and turns and narrow bends. I also took it for a blast along Mulholland Drive. Interestingly this model has the same solid rear axle that all Mustangs have had since the 60's, I think the new model that is coming out will have independent rear suspension for the first time. Either way, I had absolutely no complaints when it comes to the handling and I think you'd have to be a real purist (read: nitpicker) to condemn this cars ability to go around a bend!

That said, straight line power when overtaking on the Interstate is where it shines - It's like a sledge hammer! You can be quietly cruising at 65mph about (1,500rpm) then bury the pedal, the 6 speed auto drops 2 gears pretty quickly, the V8 Roars into action, it pushes you back into the seat and you'll be seeing 140mph in no time ... that's where the real smile-factor is with this car (and I'd take that over handling finesse any day of the week!!)

2. Surprisingly fuel efficient for what us Europeans like to think of as a "Gas Guzzler" :rolleyes: - I covered 820miles and my average combined consumption was 17.3 US-MPG (see pic)This translates to 13.5 L/100KM or 20.77 UK MPG

Not bad for a 5.0 V8 which I was driving rather "enthusiastically" ...

The gearbox was in "S" 90% of the time as opposed to "D".

Heck, my RX-8 was worse on fuel and had half the Power & Torque of this! (but the motor tax was reasonable so that made things sooo much better )

I'm sure that you could easily average 25mpg driving it gently on a motorway, but why would you...

It cost me about $50 to fill with Super, or $40 with Regular which got me about 250 miles per tank (until reserve)

These engines feature Ti-VCT (twin independent variable cam timing) which I suppose was doing its thing quite well.


Anyway here you go ...

TouchingVirus

Is the interior as cheap as previous Mustangs? I do have a bit of hard on for them though and will own one of the older ones at some stage in my life

biko

Not a bad way to spend the weekend, not bad at all.

TouchingVirus

Sure puts my Chrysler Sebring rental in 2009 into perspective I learned my lesson since...

punisher5112

Nice motor for some nice driving.

I say your well chuffed with yourself.
I wouldn't mind doing the same and also would love to take a blast on a proper sports bike out on them roads.

Only stuff I ever see in films or youtube sadly.

ironclaw

Was that pic taken in / near Yosemite by any chance? If so, almost certain I was in that exact spot about 2 year ago.

jimgoose

Very tidy. :cool:

Tea 1000

Nice! I had a C7 'vette 6.2 a few years back over in Florida. My biggest problem was you couldn't use it really. They're so anal about speed limits over there, state troopers everywhere. I was cruising along at 80mph like you would here, as most people here would. But after a while realised that I was overtaking everyone. No one else was doing over 70mph.
I did have fun rattling the windows of the toll booths though!

HandsomeDan

Awesome stuff, but have to disagree on consumption 13.5l/100km is a fúckload.

And don't compare with the RX - it's a joke on fuel given its power.

If ML's prius started reading 13.5l/100km he would shít himself and then die.

cabb8ge

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Awesome stuff, but have to disagree on consumption 13.5l/100km is a fúckload. ...

I don't think so, many smaller cc petrol engines average circa 8 to 10 l per 100km (30mpg) so in comparison 13.5/100km from Mustang ok.

ION08

TouchingVirus wrote: »

Is the interior as cheap as previous Mustangs?

The plastic trim around the greabox seemed a bit flimsy but overall I would class the interior as being of very decent quality. The main dashboard area is soft touch plastic and all the switch-gear had a chunky/sturdy feel to it. Quality wise I'd say 7/10 but what was impressive about the Interior was the "Wow" factor - Nice Gauges, back-lit white during the day and turn Green with Purple rings when its dark outside or entering a tunnel. Purple mood lighting inside door handles, in the footwells and even in the cup holders! and purple "Mustang" door sills that light up at night. The GT Premium models also have "Puddle Lights" that shine lights in a Pony shape. so 10/10 for these little touches that give it a little something extra.

TouchingVirus wrote: »

Sure puts my Chrysler Sebring rental in 2009 into perspective I learned my lesson since...

Most rental companies will supply standard, cloth interior, 3.7 V6 Mustangs "or similar" which if you're unfortunate enough to get burned with, will be a Sebring.

ironclaw wrote: »

Was that pic taken in / near Yosemite by any chance? If so, almost certain I was in that exact spot about 2 year ago.

No, that was along 'Big Sur' iirc.

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Nice! I had a C7 'vette 6.2 a few years back over in Florida. My biggest problem was you couldn't use it really. They're so anal about speed limits over there, state troopers everywhere. I was cruising along at 80mph like you would here, as most people here would. But after a while realised that I was overtaking everyone. No one else was doing over 70mph.
I did have fun rattling the windows of the toll booths though!

I did see 3 or 4 cars along the way that had been pulled by State Troopers. Guess I was lucky, other wise I'd probably have been brought straight to "county jail"

cabb8ge wrote: »

I don't think so, many smaller cc petrol engines average circa 8 to 10 l per 100km (30mpg) so in comparison 13.5/100km from Mustang ok.

I agree, especially as I wasnt giving this car much sympathy. I have gotten similar consumption out of caning a Golf GTI 2.0 TFSI

ION08

punisher5112 wrote: »

Nice motor for some nice driving.

I say your well chuffed with yourself.
I wouldn't mind doing the same and also would love to take a blast on a proper sports bike out on them roads.

Only stuff I ever see in films or youtube sadly.

Definitely do it if you ever get the chance. I was over on business but stayed the weekend just for that trip.

I did come across quite a few bikers doing the pacific coast drive.

Wisesmurf

Did you book the car in advance or did you roll up to the desk with a mustang or similar booking and see what they had on upgrade? If so what was the extra cost?

Did the LA, PCH, Big Sur, Yosemite, Napa & SF trip myself a few years ago in a V6 mustang rental. Gutless enough on the roads but sounded ok.

ION08

Wisesmurf wrote: »

Did you book the car in advance or did you roll up to the desk with a mustang or similar booking and see what they had on upgrade? If so what was the extra cost?

Did the LA, PCH, Big Sur, Yosemite, Napa & SF trip myself a few years ago in a V6 mustang rental. Gutless enough on the roads but sounded ok.

Booked it in advance from a Rental company that specialise in performance cars, they were the only ones in San Francisco that could guarantee me a GT V8 Mustang.

All other companies I tried beforehand gave me the V6 Mustang "or similar" spiel.

JoeA3

I did a similar holiday last year and I also had a Mustang! I think mine was probably the "lower powered" version but it was still a very cool car to do that road trip in!

There was a glorious roar off it when you put the foot down and it shifted along reasonably well too. The interior is fairly low rent in them from what I remember although the seats were lovely.

CoDy1

What company did you use Op?
I will be renting a car for 9 days in San Francisco taking in the West Coast and will be looking to get a V8 Camaro, Challanger or Mustang.

ION08

Beverly Hills Rent a Car of San Francisco.

Based in Union Square (Very handy location) and wouldn't you know, they also have a Camaro SS 6.2l V8

http://www.bhsanfrancisco.com/car_info/convertibles/CAMSSCVT/chevrolet_camaro_ss.html

Would definitely recommend them, they were a pleasure to deal with it.

RandomAccess

Anyone driven a modern Camaro?
http://www.chevrolet.com/camaro-zl1-sports-car.html

Would love one of those.

Jesus.

ION, if money wasn't an issue, would you think one would be suitable over here? Or would you never get to use its full power in a little Country with little roads etc like this?

ION08

Jesus. wrote: »

ION, if money wasn't an issue, would you think one would be suitable over here? Or would you never get to use its full power in a little Country with little roads etc like this?

Definitely. The LHD issue aside, I don't see why it wouldn't. It's a very practical and day to day useable car. It handles well and is very easy to drive. It's got decent power but its not as unruly as you'd expect it to be.

I wouldn't imagine it to be any less practical than say a 3 Series convertible or Audi A5.

I've been in a 6 series before and that definitely seemed more cumbersome.

This being Ireland, the only real killer would be the Motor tax and with the amount of skangers and scumbags about the place I'd say you wouldn't sleep too easy at night, whereas over there nobody would really give you a second look in one.

120_Minutes

Henry Ford III

ION08 wrote: »

Definitely. The LHD issue aside, I don't see why it wouldn't. It's a very practical and day to day useable car. It handles well and is very easy to drive. It's got decent power but its not as unruly as you'd expect it to be.

I wouldn't imagine it to be any less practical than say a 3 Series convertible or Audi A5.

I've been in a 6 series before and that definitely seemed more cumbersome.

This being Ireland, the only real killer would be the road tax and with the amount of skangers and scumbags about the place I'd say you wouldn't sleep too easy at night, whereas over there nobody would really give you a second look in one.

New Mustang will have a 2.3l 4 pot option with 305bhp, and rhd.

ION08

Henry Ford III wrote: »

New Mustang will have a 2.3l 4 pot option with 305bhp, and rhd.

Yeah I'm aware of that, I thought the question was specific to this model (which is the best looker IMO)

Also, 2.3 4 pot turbo? Nice engine but not in a Mustang (but we'll leave that for the other thread!)

ION08

Couple of pics with the roof up and engine!

Jesus.

ION08 wrote: »

Yeah I'm aware of that, I thought the question was specific to this model

It was

ION08

Also, I just edited my posts from "Road Tax" to "Motor Tax"

Surprised nobody called me out on it! :P

Big Nasty

Love them but the interior is a bit plasticy and they're too............comfortable.

That might sound odd but an old school muscle car is pretty raw. While grand for every day driving I find the modern versions a little too refined and if you're cruising on the freeway after a while you just forget what you're in. In a 60's / 70's muscle car you know what your driving every minute.