View Single Post
Old 06-12-2005, 06:39 PM   #9 (permalink)
GETSOMZ28
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
GETSOMZ28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,645
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatchman
Mustang rear end gear is 3.55 and the GTO is 3.46. Seems pretty much the same, even if the transmission gears are different. Super-low would be 4.10's or bigger in my book. Besides, Motive 4.10 gears are only $159 plus install, so not enough $$ to make it a deciding factor IMO.

It would be interesting to see if the insurance companies insure a 400 hp car cheaper than a 300 hp one. That would be a new one, insuring the more powerful and faster car for less. Anybody checked?

Also, I thought the Mustang pulled pretty good on top end. From 0-60 the GTO has about a half a second lead, but it doesn't gain more than around .1 second more from there up through the quarter mile. A .1 second lost from 60 to 105 I wouldn't call it a bleeder.

Bottom line is, the GTO is faster stock, so if that's what you're looking for, problem solved.
First off I was talking about the gearing in the tranny. It is substantially lower in the GT (the T56 in the GTO only has a 2.66 first gear). Also look at the difference at the trap speeds. 4-5 mph is a huge difference, which shows the GTO is putting down much more power while being heavier. The GTO has a IRS vs the GT's live rear axle, which gives the GTO a penalty on the launch.

Second, When I checked insurance on a C5 vs Stang, the Corvette was substantially cheaper (50% to be exact) while having much more horsepower. Insurance isnt base off of HP alone, but based off of demographics and a host of other things. Look who the typical Vette buyer is vs. the typical Stang buyer (mid 40s adult vs 18 y/o kid).
__________________
Scott
2004 White Titan SE CrewCab 4x4 - (SOLD)
2002 SOM Z28 - For haulin' arse

Last edited by GETSOMZ28; 06-12-2005 at 06:47 PM.
GETSOMZ28 is offline   Reply With Quote