5th Oct 2006, 22:28

IT's One of the best tranny and the problem that you are having is not usual. Try owning a chevy and then come back with comments.

10th Aug 2007, 14:55

Oh man, another guy who went with the V6. There is no substitute for the GT. A Mustang just isn't a true Mustang without the V8. I'd take an used older style GT (early 2000's or 90s) over a new style V6 Mustang anyday! They cost about the same !! At least you'll be able to hear the motor running

29th Aug 2008, 14:37

Guys who buy a V6 Mustang always seem to have a need to justify their purchase. Like saying it has a lot of torque or it has an exhaust note similar to the GT or it has 200 HP.

In my opinion, Ford should build only Mustang GT's. The V6 is not a performance car, not a race car and definitely not a muscle car.

1st Sep 2008, 10:30

"Justifying" buying a new V-6 Mustang is easy: Same awesome looks, 40% less insurance, $5000 less purchase price, same great handling, better fuel mileage and MORE horsepower than the old Fox V-8's. Why does that NEED any justification?? It seems to me that the it's justifying the V-8 that is the real issue here.

6th May 2009, 12:07

Same looks yes, but that is where the story ends. You don't get the handling package of the GT. Sorry, your Explorer based V-6 is rated at 210 HP, the last Fox body V-8 was 225. Yes it was re-rated to 205 for 1993, but that was more of a marketing trick with the Cobra than a performance difference. They were the same exact engines as the prior year power and performance wise. I won't even compare the torque figures...please!!... or the horrendous sound of that pitiful 4.0 you have... arghhhh. Mileage difference is only a couple of mpg. If you are worried about that then buy a Focus not a Mustang.

As far as insurance... 40%? Who's your company and how old are you? My difference would be about 10-15%. V-8 Mustangs are the best of the breed period. If all you want are the looks then good for you, but don't try to compare a V-6 car with a GT and say the driving experience is at anywhere near the same level.

6th May 2009, 14:47

I don't own a Mustang, never have, probably never will, but if someone is happy with their V6 - What's wrong with that?

Sounds like a more practical choice for adults - even if the Mustang isn't the most practical car out there.

6th May 2009, 17:01

It isn't. The V-6 is nowhere near as harsh and bone-jarring on rough roads as the GT. My dentist was upset when I traded my last GT. He no longer got to replace my jarred-out fillings every other week. There is nowhere I drive where I can exceed the cornering ability of my V-6, so why waste my money? Why is everyone so hung up on power you can't use? Why not buy a Viper V-10 powered motorcycle? (they do make them, incidentally).

17th Aug 2009, 10:12

I have a 05 V6 stang and so far it's been great. Fun to drive, handles good and no problems, yet power wise its no GT. But it had enough power to leave a nice tire mark. I did put a cold air intake on, and next it will be an underdrive pulley. But other than that, like my bro told me, if you want more power get a V8.

22nd May 2010, 11:41

The stock V8 Fox Mustangs were a lot of noise and a little wee bit of go compared to the S197 of this day IMHO. I am a V6 S197 owner and I drag race mine with bolt on's and an auto tranny, and I seldom lose a heads up race to a stock 5.0l fox Mustang. A bolt on 2005 V6 can certainly hold its own against the 5.0 of that era on the track, and I have the proof.

23rd May 2010, 13:35

Yeah you can take a stock 5.0 with bolt-ons. That's a fair race. Tell you what...I'll race you with my 5.0 with one simple bolt-on, the Vortec supercharger, and we'll see who is left in the dust.

23rd May 2010, 13:39

"The stock V8 Fox Mustangs were a lot of noise..."

Yeah, I'd prefer the grating 4.0 liter Explorer engine to the throaty 302 in the Fox Mustang... Riiiiiiiggggghhhhtttt...

Fox 5.0's had one of the best exhaust notes in street cars. Add a set of Flowmasters and they really sing! Stick with an underpowered 6 if you don't appreciate the real muscle and sound of a V-8.

24th May 2010, 12:31

I have yet to see an exhaust note win a race yet, but maybe some day you never know. At least the beaten fox can take pride in the sound of his car while he was creamed by a V6 Mustang...

25th May 2010, 17:11

My 5.0 Fox had Flowmasters. Not a single person EVER commented on what it SOUNDED like. My 4.0 V-6 has a stock exhaust system (although with a fake chrome pipe out the left side to match the real pipe). Nobody EVER comments on how it sounds either. What they DO comment on is its drop-dead gorgeous looks (which was MY reason for buying it). People are constantly coming up to me and complimenting the car. Virtually every person asks, "Is that a GT?" I just point to the prominent "4.0" badges on the side and say "No, it's a 6".

I don't race. I don't drive over 118mph (which the 6 is limited to, and will easily do in 4th gear). I DO drive a lot in town and I DO prefer the much softer ride. I DO like a beautiful car. I might one day buy another V-8 Mustang, but I will do it for one reason only: just so I can SAY "I have a V-8". I have yet to see a SINGLE COMMENTER give A SINGLE PRACTICAL REASON for buying the V-8 (and "faster" is NOT practical, since you can't go that fast legally ANYWHERE in the U.S.).

I wish Mustang owners would get over the "if it's not a V-8, it's not a Mustang" attitude. That's why I won't be renewing my Mustang Club of America membership this year. I've driven Mustangs since my first 1966 coupe. They are all great cars.

26th May 2010, 20:39

Uh, YEAH.. my Fox body did 60 in 6.2 seconds from a dead stop... the "6" of today does it in 6.5 at best with a manual tranny, and too bad most of you seem to want the AT that gets the car to 60 in well over 7 seconds. Plus my top speed was 141 compared to the 118 of the "6". Where would I be getting "creamed" with my Fox body? Add a K&N filter and a Flowmaster exhaust and you'll gain about 25 hp and have even more of an edge. Plus the torque is way higher than any 4.0 V-6.

Now with the 2011 Mustang there is a real V-6 under the hood. 305 HP and 30 mpg and it sounds great. Sorry for you guys who bought the last few model years of the 4.0 Mustang... your value just dropped about 40%, since the new car has 95 hp more for the same basic price you paid for your Explorer... er 4.0 Mustang.

26th May 2010, 22:45

Losing fillings every other week?

The newest GT's are so smooth and quiet I can't believe people are still complaining about "bone jarring" rides. Yes they are taut, and they handle good... that is the price you pay for performance. Any sports car will be the same. Or let me say any REAL sports car will be the same.

Like I have said before, the GT is all about the package of sound, handling and complete performance you just can't get out of a 4.0 V-6 powered Mustang. The new 2011 will be an amazing car in V-6 form though, as it retains more of the GT's abilities in improved EVERYTHING over the last years model... It even has the handling to match the impressive hp and makes buying a base Mustang FINALLY worthy. I would be hard pressed to buy a GT now with that powertrain available.

27th May 2010, 11:46

As a design professional, I like styling first and foremost. The 2005-2009 Mustang offered an incredibly true retro look that was modern, yet true to the early Mustang. I could care less about the engine or how much noise it makes. Sadly, Ford strayed from the retro look both inside and outside in the 2010 Mustang. My next car will be a Dodge Challenger.