[kevracer]

I just finished reading Car & Driver Magazine's GTO vs. Mustang comparison test, which scores the GTO second (what a surprise). On the last page of the article, there is a scoring review. Interesting that the GTO outscores (or ties) the Mustang in all categories EXCEPT "the gotta have it factor," which appears to have been thrown in to assure Mustang's victory. Anyone else seen this article?

 

[Xman]

there are several topics on this aready with mega-comments about the C&D Bias.

 

[radandy]

C & D has always had their heads up ford's ass... :willy:

 

[muohio]

C&D seems to being doing a lot of comparisons lately that are swayed by a made up category. Even though I'm a Vette fan, I really don't see why the magazine has to through in a value factor so it beats the Prosche. Then they do the same thing in the GTO vs Mustang comparison. Leave it up to the readers if they see value or a need to have based on the article, don't force feed the decision. Hell, a Kia could beat an Enzo if you throw in a made up category.

 

[fffernan]

Value factor actually has a tangeble base though its like what they thought of the car then devide it by price. And for us mortals that dont have unlimited money i feel its a very good argument that magazines use. Especially since the magazines are designed to sell things, not just see what car is the best performer.

"Got to have it factor" seems to be less tangeble, where it is based almost all on opinion. However, mustangs are more in favor with the hip/MTV crowd I'd think. Sheryl Crow sings about steeve mcqueen. Britney Spears drives an old mustang in a video. Thats what they mean by got to have it. Camaros were always better performers than mustangs, but mustangs always sold more for this same reason. That is the "Got to have it factor" they talk about. If britney spears drives to an award show in a new mustang it would be liek wow thats cool, if she drove up in a GTO people would be like what the heck is that car.

-Frank

 

[Desoto GTO]

GTO vs MUSTANG

i test drove both cars, before making purchase. the magazine said that the mustang was 02 tenths faster in 0-60 and 1/4. my impressions differ, i felt the GTO to be faster and torquer. the only biased fault that this car has, they stoped making GTOs in 70, now we have a modern performance car, with some people locked in the seventies. this car is more refined, interior is no contest, driveability is no contest , yes the GTO should cost more. magazine editors are like some lawyers, ethics ethics ethics.

 

[BigJim]

:agree Ford probably paid Car and Driver off. :lol:

 

[pulsegto]

I think that C&D should have kept in mind on the value scale is what can you acutally purchase these cars for. A Mustang GT premium with leather interior and upgraded gauges (still not up to the GTO's standard of refinement but thats as close as Ford can muster) is selling here in St. Louis for over 30K. (The dealers are all charging a "Market Premium" of 2K minimum). Since you can buy a GTO for substantially less than that, the GTO is a steal. C & D did not take that fact into account on their value scale.

 

[Jondster]

Maybe along with C&D's "Gotta Have It" catagory, they should add a "Gonna Get Dealer-Raped For It" catagory.

 

[04black6mt]

Maybe along with C&D's "Gotta Have It" catagory, they should add a "Gonna Get Dealer-Raped For It" catagory.

That was priceless!

but they do look good......... from the outside

 

[WS6Vert]

That was priceless!

but they do look good......... from the outside

Give it 90 days, once you see one at every red light you won't look twice.
Kinda like the short lived allure the PT Cruiser had.