[BlueBlahBleh]

All I posted were facts, but my words were taken out of context. The times listed for the mustang GT auto trans. by ArcticAccord are nearly identical to the 6 speed accord. The 6-6 accord goes from 0 to 60 in the same time as the GT auto give or take 1/10th (based on multiple car reviews, which I presume are the same sources arctic accord used.) Different tracks have different times, with different drivers.

As far as the 6-6 accord doing high 13's stock, all I ever mentioned was that someone on this forum posted that time. I never said it was fact, and I didn't say that it was the "status quo" for the 6-6. I'm not calling anyone a non-believer; I never said I believed it myself.

What I did mention is that the V6 6-speed accord coupe (8th gen, stock) does have nearly identical quarter mile times to the GT mustang V8 automatic, (low 14's), and nearly identical 0-60 times (roughly 5.5 seconds give or take a tenth- depends on the source.) Those are facts.

 

[Big O's Accord]

the new mustangs look small i think..specially v6 get the GT i think ill look bigger

 

[07graphiteV6cpe]

Low 14's is fast considering my high school buddy bought a brand new 1967 396SS Chevelle hardtop in late 1966. It had the stock 325 horsepower engine with a 331 open rear and a muncie 4 speed trans. He took it to Atco Dragway in NJ and won a trophy by beating all other cars in the C strictly class with a 14 flat at 98 miles an hour.

 

[fastball]

Post this question at a Mustang site and you'll get different replies.

Post this question on a Mustang site and you're likely to get the "dude, Hondas f..kin suck, rice burners blow, buy American man, you're a looser" kind of replies.

 

[Tuanita]

Quotes:
Where do you live?
I live in Houston Texas, snow is pretty rare. and its hot about 10 out of the 12 months.
ya but the mileage kills you.
Yea, this is one of my concerns. I commute to school about 30-35 miles away. University of Houston sucks ass in certain ways..(more cons than pros.)

but i'm spending literally half as much on gas, and maintenance, and the car should last twice as long too.

Ive thought about the maintenance, its pretty obvious which would cost less to maintain, and which would last longer. Can anyone give me a more detailed perspective on how much this will cost me if it breaks down badly or something down the road?

Are you going for auto or manual Tuanita?

I plan on gettin a manual transmission, its cheaper:thmsup:

Overall, I dont think I care too much about how fast the car can go. As long as I am able to speed up and maneuver myself out of dangerous situations, I am more than satisfied. I tend to buy the car for its aesthetics both exterior looks and interior comfort. So far the mustang has the exterior and the accord has the interior vote. Its a pretty lousy point of view but I guess I dont have much use of a fast car considering I drive really slow..
Again, Im limiting myself to a car under or around 25 thousand. I dont think I can afford the v6 accord or mustang gt.

Im still struggling to decide.. Sigh
Disregarding the engine and performance specs, which would everyone go with?

 

[fastball]

Just hit me.... the Mustang still does not have curtain airbags (the current body design does not provide for it). It has side airbags in the seats, but no curtain airbags.

Just a thought to ponder.

 

[BlueBlahBleh]

Im still struggling to decide.. Sigh
Disregarding the engine and performance specs, which would everyone go with?

I really like the way the new mustangs look, but I would pick the Honda Accord i4 w/ 5-speed manual transmission. I think the 8th gen looks very cool.

I will be honest and admit that I am strongly biased towards Honda. I have a lot of experience driving Hondas but I have only driven a mustang a few times... I think Honda makes the best, most reliable engines on the road for under $30k. The accord is an affordable vehicle to maintain in the long run. A used honda accord will hold value much better than a used mustang...

I have heard good things about mustang reliability (the new mustangs, not the older ones), but again I have only driven one a few times, and I have never owned one.

Test drive them both!

 

[SD70MAC]

The only way you'll get the twin turbo ecoboost V6 in in the Taurus SHO.
Be prepared to pay $45,000 for that one!! My dream car also BTW.

Me too! It will be my next car most likely.

 

[ArcticAccord]

Overall, I dont think I care too much about how fast the car can go. As long as I am able to speed up and maneuver myself out of dangerous situations, I am more than satisfied. I tend to buy the car for its aesthetics both exterior looks and interior comfort. So far the mustang has the exterior and the accord has the interior vote. Its a pretty lousy point of view but I guess I dont have much use of a fast car considering I drive really slow..
Again, Im limiting myself to a car under or around 25 thousand. I dont think I can afford the v6 accord or mustang gt.

Im still struggling to decide.. Sigh
Disregarding the engine and performance specs, which would everyone go with?

Tuanita:

Based on what you need, here's what I'd recommend. Visit the Ford.com and Edmunds.com to get feature & pricing info. You could get a 2010 Mustang V6 Premium, has 5 spd MT, ABS, Stability Control, Synch (bluetooth & iPod integration), power seats, multi-color ambient lighting, Alloys, 500W sound system, Sirius radio for $23,995 MSRP (is $22,175 dealer cost). Add another ~ $600 for transportation to both figures, and deduct the $1,000 Ford cash incentive. So with some additional negotaiting, you could probably buy that car for around $22,500, well under your $25K budget. That would leave you some extra to buy additional options if you wanted.

Also, the Mustang V6 will have more power than your Accord I4, and just about as much as an Accord V6. When I drove the 2009 Mustang V6 AT all over Arizona, I got about 29 MPG highway.

Talk to the dealers, test drive the Mustang V6 & V8 - it's a great car. If you're still undecided, rent one from Hertz for a day or two. If you decide to go with the Mustang, I think you'll be pleased.


Good luck! Cheers.

 

[cajun]

Just hit me.... the Mustang still does not have curtain airbags (the current body design does not provide for it). It has side airbags in the seats, but no curtain airbags.

Just a thought to ponder.

The Mustang gets 5 stars for front hits and 5/4 stars (front/rear seat) stars for side impact. Not an issue.

 

[postmortem]

Me too! It will be my next car most likely.

Taurus SHO is overweight, currently it has over 4200lbs... but otherwise terrific car

 

[turbodave]

Taurus SHO is overweight, currently it has over 4200lbs... but otherwise terrific car

It's a larger car than the Accord, and with AWD (which always adds several hundred more pounds over a standard drive line).

 

[SD70MAC]

Taurus SHO is overweight, currently it has over 4200lbs... but otherwise terrific car

So what? If I wanted a 2500lb car I'd buy a fit. I personally like a car bigger than a cracker jack box as im 6'4".

 

[Magiconthetire]

So what? If I wanted a 2500lb car I'd buy a fit. I personally like a car bigger than a cracker jack box as im 6'4".

Co-signed, Im not 6'4 though lol

 

[CDsDontBurn]

So what? If I wanted a 2500lb car I'd buy a fit. I personally like a car bigger than a cracker jack box as im 6'4".

:lmao: +1 :thmsup:

 

[alain]

13.9 1/4 miles from motorweek

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2752a.shtml

ENGINE: 3.5-liter V6

HORSEPOWER: 271

TORQUE: 251 lb feet

0-60 mph: 5.8 seconds

1/4 mile: 13.9 seconds @ 101 mph

60-0 mph: 126 feet

EPA: 17 mpg city/ 25 mpg highway

Mixed loop: 22.1 mpg

Energy impact: 17.1 barrels oil/yr

 

[BlueBlahBleh]

13.9 1/4 miles from motorweek

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2752a.shtml

ENGINE: 3.5-liter V6

HORSEPOWER: 271

TORQUE: 251 lb feet

0-60 mph: 5.8 seconds

1/4 mile: 13.9 seconds @ 101 mph

60-0 mph: 126 feet

EPA: 17 mpg city/ 25 mpg highway

Mixed loop: 22.1 mpg

Energy impact: 17.1 barrels oil/yr

:lurk:

 

[nolefan32]

Just an FYI, the V8 Mustang hasn't been rated very kindly over recent years by Consumer Reports. The V6, on the other hand, gets better reliability ratings overall, though I find it interesting that it takes a 4-liter engine to put out only 210 hp, whereas the Accord V6 (7th gen) is only 3-liter and manages 244 horsepower. CR also describes the Mustang V6 as "coarse", so the V8 is definitely the better engine, though you'll run the risk of your mechanic enjoying it more than you do.

If it's a big American muscle car you're interested in, consider the Dodge Challenger. It's competitive to the Mustang in most performance areas, and its drivetrain has gotten a lot kinder reliability reviews. It's also priced about the same.

 

[BlueBlahBleh]

Just get another Honda Accord - for under $30 grand they defy the laws of physics and have awesome resale value. :banana:

 

[nolefan32]

Just get another Honda Accord - for under $30 grand they defy the laws of physics and have awesome resale value. :banana:

Well yeah, that would be my first suggestion too. I mean, I definitely love mine. But again if you're really stuck on an American muscle car, consider the Challenger.

BTW, I failed to mention that the Challenger has the added panache over the Mustang that there aren't nearly as many of them on the road yet. The Mustang has the same problem as the Accord, they're friggin' everywhere you turn and so some consider them to be ho-hum, nothing special.