Myths:
1. mustang isn't a fun daily driver.
I have an 07' GT Premium 5 speed manual. I love driving to and from work 8).

2. the speed 3 can come close to 0-60 of a mustang so it's just as good.
Well you are comparing apples to oranges. The 4.6L v8 is naturally aspirated. There's no turbo or supercharger on it. Put a supercharger on that v8 and the HP goes up to 440+ at the crank. That's a serious amount of horsepower. The 4.6 is a sleeping giant when you buy it, the Mazda 3 speed is wide open, maxed. You'll be hard pressed to get much more out of it.

3. You can't touch a decent mustang for under 30k and the interior sucks.
On a base model, yes.
I got mine with leather, heated seats, the computer (calculates mileage etc) deluxe interior kit, aluminum pedals and interior accents, auto-dimming mirror with compass, satellite, shaker 500 etc etc etc for 27.7k. I went in with the build I wanted (which costs 27.7) and told them I wanted to order one. They gave me one off the lot with a lot more than I wanted for same price. They had 15 sitting there and it was near the end of the quarter >8). I stood my ground and wouldn't pay any more, so they gave me what I wanted at the price I was willing to pay.

4. Mustang GT's get 14mpg.
Mines not even fully broken in yet and I'm getting 25.8 on the highway, 19.8 avg city/highway. If I stand on the pedal I get 6mpg. I only do that when I want to watch the gas gauge drop in real time 8). If you drive sane you can have fun, pay as you go, and get decent mileage the rest of the time LOL. I guarantee you won't see the advertised mileage of the mazda when you are racing it... no car gets good mileage when you push it to the limit.

5. Only old men like them and the muscle car is dead.
Go to www.mustangforums.com. We have our share of old guys but there are a lot of under 30 guys (several under 20) on that forum. It's got appeal that spans generations.... The muscle car is far from dead. People have been saying the muscle car is dead since 1975. The 2007 S197 is proof that that theory is wrong. The camaro and challengers are coming out next year, mcars are far from dead.

The only bad thing I can see about the mustang is that this car will suck in the snow and will probably still get smoked by the Camaros when they come out next year (what else is new?). I didn't buy it for winning street races or good gas mileage (I work 22 miles from home so I don't really care) but I get fair mileage, much better than an SUV so it works out. Here in Baltimore it snows once in a blue moon so I'm not too worried about it. I have an old escort I kept just for that occasion. At $700 per year for insurance, it's not such a bad burden to bear for all the enjoyment I get out of the mustang. I got it to get my adrenaline going when I need a shot

I am not detracting from the mazda 3 speed. I almost got one myself 8). The allure of the mustang was too strong and I succumbed. I have 0 buyers remorse 8). I'm sure it's a great car, mazda makes some good cars. I'm just seeing a lot of misinformation here about the mustang....

-Viza

 

The anti-Mustang sentiment isn't atypical of the import, front wheel drive crowd....

If your intent is to truly go fast, start with V8 and rear wheel drive...

The whole FWD thing started because insurance was much more expensive for a Mustang or Camaro, but you could build up a small commuter car into whatever you want and still have the low insurance (The insurance industry is on to that little ploy now...)

Glad to hear you love your Mustang...I had a great time working on the program from concept to production. (I had interior responsibilities for front cockpit and all of the restraints for S197)

 

Well. for starters. Ford and GM does not know how to make new and well designed cars. They had to change the Stang, so they base the new design off a old Stang. That is so lame. Not to mention, a Mustang rides extremely stiff and it doesn't handle well. The Cobra handles decently well, but it costs alot more then $20 grand. Admit it people, for the most part, all a muscle car does is go fast in a straight line. With the new hydrogen engines coming out, they are smoking the V-8's with displacements that are half the size. Look at the new Lexus hybrid. That is the future. I want to buy something that improves myself. Buying a muscle car gets you nowhere except a few drag race wins and a empty pocket. If that is you, go have some fun. I will stick to the more practical cars that get good mileage. I don't understand people that complain about gas prices when they own a SUV or a high powered car. It is funny. I had a 2001 Mazda B-series with a cold air intake, cat-back exhaust, performance headers, CPU mod. It was aprox. around 280 horses. It was a monster. But as soon as I saw those gas prices go-up, I got rid of it. It is called common sense.

 

i dont get it... i went from driving a 90 chirping camaro (305/700r) for several years... 400hp +turnkey crates are selling dirt cheap nowadays... muscle?in the driveway... 68 mustang fastback + 69 impala + 70 cuda all fully restored ...a never thought I would buy a POS fwd...

ive had a "fully" loaded mazda3 (non-speed) $21k (I get the s/x plan through work) for about a week now and I actually love it.

Only reason I picked it is because I needed a car in one day because I got a new job that required me to drive an average of ~90-100 miles a day. Camaro was going to put a huge dent on my fun money. Come to think of it my monthly payments on the mazda 3 are almost the same as my gas bill for the camaro.

had 2.7 miles on it when i drove it off the lot and it now has almost 500 miles in the past week. I only filled my tank once. and its still half full...

most likely going to go to my kid i dont have when 09 camaros come out. fun stuff

 

No offense Mazda Guy....but you don't know what you're talking about with respect to the design of the Mustang, or Ford's capability to design a good vehicle. I worked on the S197 program from 2001-2006. The S197 wasn't originally based on a Mustang at all....It started out loosely based on the Lincoln LS chassis (DEW98) and evolved from there. (A very good chassis by the way) The solid rear axle was maintained, but updated with the 4-link suspension....Professional driving reviews have been very favorable about the performance and handling of the new Mustang. The Mustang rides very similar to my 3 (and would probably be a little softer than the MS3) The Ford Fusion recent won JDPower & Assoc Appeal award beating out Camry and Accord in it's segment....I'd say that's quite the endorsement for good design/execution.

You are right that people with vehicles that get poor mileage shouldn't complain. (although they have every right to) That's why I think the Mustang makes a great fun car, or if you don't drive a ton of miles or in much snow, why not use it as a daily driver? I'm typically the only one who uses my car, and my wife has a wagon for use when we need to pick up something big....so the small rear seat doesn't bother me at all.

Can you provide a link to this 300 hp 2.3L Hydrogen vehicle that goes faster than 0-60 in 5.0 seconds....? I've never heard of it.

I'll be choosing the Mazdaspeed3 next year because of the mileage (I drive 24,000-30,000 miles/year) and because I drive in the snow a ton.....Not because it performs better (either in the straight or through the corners.) I believe the MS3 has the base Mustang by about 0.1-0.2g through a corner, a small margin that wouldn't be observed by the average driver. A Shelby GT500 outperforms the MS3 in every single way possible (it's not even close to a fair comparison, in my opinion.)

RWD is superior to FWD....There is a reason that every single high end motorsport competes with RWD or AWD (not FWD) vehicles....yes there are certain classes that run FWD, but by and large the RWD vehicles are faster (both accelerating and through the corners.) RWD separates the steering and acceleration components of force exerted on the tires. There is only so much tractive effort available to the tires. If you combine both steering and acceleration into the same tire patch, you will begin to spin the tires sooner than if the front tires are steering (entire contact patch devoted to this effort) and the rear tires are pushing the car through the corner. It's purely a matter of physics.

 

Well actually it is a car made by either Toyota or Lexus. It is a hybrid that goes 0-60 in the 5 second range. In regards to the Mustang. The mustang exterior looks were based off the original Mustang. Yes, the new Mustang is a big improvement. Yes, I know physics as well. If I was still racing I would pick a larger displacement vechicle any day. But for going to point A to point B it saves alot dough. It just doesn't make any sense. Even if I was a rich man, I still would buy cars that got good mileage. Reminder, the Fusion has the same chassis, tranny and I4 engine. lol. The Shelby Gt500 outperforms pretty much everything! Don't take any offense to my views. I am just on a tangent. I have a freind that bought a 2002 Mustang over a Mazda 6. Now he is paying $200 for insurance. Nearly $300 a month on gas. Plus the $12,000 he payed for it. I am paying $66 for full coverage insurance. 212 a month payment. Plus about $100 for gas in a month (1,500 miles per month). Now he is starting to hate the Stang. Thats is my whole point. Many people don't look at the costs of owning a car. It is a big investment to purchase and to operate. Ok I think I am annoying myself now. So, I think I will shut my piehole. Speaking of which. Pumpkin pie sounds delicious!

Now onto my thought of pumpkin pie. Sara lee can take her pie and shove it up.... To be continued!

 

Let me chime in here as someone who just traded his brand new 06 Mustang GT for a Mazda 3. I was glad to do so.
Look the Mustang is fun to drive, there's no doubt of that, and despite posts here to the contrary, it does handle very well. It pulls .89 on the skid pad stock and that's not bad fellas. I don't know about the previous generation Mustang, I don't think it handled that well. I personally liked the retro body design and I liked the throaty growl of the V8.

Now, lets to get to what I didn't like about it because obviously since I only kept it for 12 months and got rid of it there must have been some problems. Viza may like the interior and everyone is entitled to their opinion but for my money the interior of the Mustang is cheap and not very well thought out. He's just purchased that car so the new hasn't worn off yet. I was the same way, but then after a couple of months I was sitting there thinking "Good God, this is the best Ford can do for nearly 30 grand?" Aside from the retro instrument cluster the rest of the interior was apparnelty given alsmost no thought. It was like a hodge podge of generic slap together parts. It was not user friendly and there was "no" attention to detail. I don't know how many other cars you've owned Viza but if you want to see what I mean spend a couple of hours in the Mazda interiors, or Toyota or even some of the new Saturn stuff. The Mustang interior is in fact cheap. Typically the response you get about this is that you aren't buying an interior you are buying the performance of the car and if they put a better interior in the car it would be to expensive. My response to that is at 30 thousand dollars Ford could have done a lot better. For my taste the "Interior Upgrade Package" was a joke. First of all, if you have to sell an interior upgrade package as an option that tells me Ford already realized their interior was lacking. Show me another car where there is an option called "interior upgrade"? The problem was the upgraded interior was so gaudy and tacky that you were better off getting the base interior. I didn't at all like the big plastic chrome dashboard, it was hideous.

Now there's no doubt that the nornally aspirated 4.6 motor in the Mustang is a stout motor and that there is potential there for better performance. True enough, but I hope you have a large bank account if you intend to do something like that. Adding aftermarket performance mods to the new Mustang is an expensive propsition to say the least which you will soon find out viza if you pursue that. Just to add a cold air intake is going to easily cost you in the neighborhood of $600 or more. This is because of the tune. If you add a CAI to the car you will have to retune the motor and that means a few hundred more dollars for the computer to do that. Everything about the new Mustang is expensive, expect the interior. lol

If you're getting 19 mpg on average you have to be granny driving the thing, that's just the way it is. I never met anyone with a new Mustang getting that good a mpg around town. Average was about 14 to 15 unless you drive like an idiot everywhere.

Finally, don't fool yourself into thinking that a 4 cylinder motor can't beat a V8 muscle car. It can easily be done, that's not a big secret anymore and if you don't know that where have you been. I fully appreciate the performance capability of the Mustang, it's a fun car to drive. But it's overpriced and over rated and that's from someone who's owned one buddy.

Finally, don't fool yourself into thinking you stood your ground and got a good deal. The sales manager was not standing there, hands in pocket, head down and dejectedly kicking a stone thinking "Shucks that guy really screwed us over." as you drove off. What was it you said, they had 15 GT's on the lot. Think about that. They got their money, trust me. You got the payment you wanted, that's great. But you didn't pull a fast one on the dealer or get some unheard of great deal. Everyone loves to tell that story, it's almost never true. Look I hope you really enjoy your Mustang, I really do. But as someone who just got rid of one I felt I should address some of the flat out inaccuraccies in your post.

 

Wow. I don't really know what to say here besides "You have no idea what you're talking about".

First of all I came to this forum to read some about the Mazdaspeed3. I am looking at getting one next year maybe but i have never seen so much misinformation in one thread.

I guess I can start by saying that you did not have a 2001 Mazda B series pickup with anywhere near 280hp. Not with the mods you listed. (I can't believe no one picked up on that one) Those mods on that truck are good for maybe 20-30hp. If that. That trucks has like what, 150hp? If you had the 6. No way you were close to your 280hp claim.

Hydrogen engines? Yeah that's right around the corner...

The Mustang is actually a pretty decent handling car but since you have no first hand experience with them (I can tell) you make a stupid generalization. Duh...Muscle cars can't handle. Technology all the way man..." Mustangs make some of the best road racing cars. Ever heard of the Rolex Grand Am Cup??? Technalogically deficient Mustangs there are mopping up the likes of M3s/RX-8s/etc.... Get a clue. What the hell is technology anyway? Please explain to me why a 4 cyl Turbo is more "advanced" than a Modular 3 valve 4.6 V8? Because it's smaller?

"The Cobra handles decently well but it costs more than 20grand" What are you even talking about?

Mpg? Anyone with any performance car should not be complaining about Mpg. BTW, if you mash the gas on ANY car, you are getting about 5 MPG. Do you think if you have the petal to the floor in a Mazdaspeed3 you are getting the anywhere close to the advertised mpg??? Think again. Any car at WOT is getting terrible gas mileage.

 

What car has a 5.1ltr engine?

What are you even talking about? On a Road course? The RX-8 does handle brilliantly no doubt there. But it really depends what you're talking about.
The rotary engine is an interesting concept but I don't like it at all. The engine is VERY peaky (it doesn't get to max hp until 8500rpm for christ sake!) and you have to rev the hell out of it to get it into it's power band. That engine has pretty much nothing down low. It also has 159ftlbs of ground thumping torque. Fantastic. On a road course where it can keep it's revs up it's ok but try daily driving one. It's a pain.

Not to mention all of the quality issues they have had with the rotary. There is a reason you find it in only one car. It is made to burn oil (so you have to keep checking your levels). They also had some kind of weird flooding problem if you only ran the car for a short time and the shut down and try to restart.

Oh, and because you love mpg, it gets worse mpg than the Mustang does. All 1.3 gas guzzling liters!
Great technology by the way...

Fantastic! Please find me some proof of this! I bet it's closer to about 7 seconds (as reported by a few magazines).

Once again proving you know not what you speak...

 

I had the 4.0 Liter, V6 Engine rated stock at 207 horses.