Mustang GT 5.0 premium STARTS at $34,000.
Focus ST starts at $24,000. To hit $34,000 you gotta add every available option, plus all taxes and dealer fees...![]()
#36
██████████████████Originally Posted by Jeremy Clarkson
Vote Yes To Create A 3rd Gen 2.0 TSI Section!
#37
Mustang GT 5.0 premium STARTS at $34,000.
Focus ST starts at $24,000. To hit $34,000 you gotta add every available option, plus all taxes and dealer fees...![]()
#38
#39
There are way better cars out there for $34k. Under $30k I'm sure it gives the "usual suspects" run for their money.
BTW the original R was a 4cyl supercharged car. Early 1990s and early 2000s where V6 kinda decades. Now it's turbocharged 4 bangers across the board. More power better mpgs and lighter cars.
They need to drop 2.5T in the future Rs and call it a day.
"Your pants too tight,your wheels too bright"
#40
That Mustang is a good example of what I'm talking about. I think that as far as the modern pony cars go, Ford did a better job look wise than Chrysler (Challenger, too big) and Chevy (Camaro, high belt line, ugh). That said, I don't like the Mustang either, but it does look better than the other two IMO. Mustang= Good performer for the money, maybe deals can be had, don't want. So, if you buy by the numbers, I envy you, life is simple. But for those that have to like the whole package, the devil is in the details.
Last edited by Burnette; 09-02-2012 at 08:24 PM.
#43
Let's see, 5 door hatch. Turbo. Manual. Yeah no direct comparison at all. My wife drove the MS3 and liked it, and this is after driving the "almighty" R32 for the past 4 years. Just because the MS3's interior doesn't live up to your expectations doesn't mean others find it just fine.
Professional wiener dog herder/craft beer drinker
#44
Professional wiener dog herder/craft beer drinker
#45
That light blue car is just ugly. Yeah, Hardcore4life talked much smack, then disappeared. He promised pics and a review. After the buzz subsides and they get more, I'll test drive one for kicks.
#47
#48
Exactly. I am sure the Turbocharged Focus' targets were the GTI, MS3, and WRX - plus some euro models. Initials reviews claim the ST has the best amenities and comforts. I have yet to read a favorable review of the WRX or MS3's interior-- this was always the GTI's strong point.
#49
Anyone who just shops by numbers is doing it wrong.
To the OP: For what it's worth, I'm strongly considering a Focus ST, but I will also look at a WRX and a GTi. I've owned two GTI's and a 2004 R32 previously, so I know those well enough to just focus on the ST and WRX for a comparison.
I was able to drive a base ST yesterday and thought it was pretty good. The suspension was well controlled. Shifter felt very good. I'd want the Recaros, definitely. Not sure yet about full leather and whether I want/need HIDs. Some things to consider...
Last edited by Max Rebo; 09-02-2012 at 08:47 PM.
Oddfellows Local 726
#50
Huh, i don't have my St because the HID delays, i paid 29.850 for a fully loaded ST3, whoever pay $34.000,- for an ST2 needs to go to other dealers...
http://www.cars.com/for-sale/searchr...rce=TRAIL_HEAD
fully loaded st2 goes for $27.000,-
#51
WTF $34k?
MSRP is like $24k. Who is optioning a Focus up almost 50% above the base price?
#52
The Mustang GT offers great bang for the buck- but some people like smaller cars, they like cars with practical hatch areas.. maybe they need four doors?
Cars/trucks/SUVs/Vans all have their own personality.
Some vehicles may be more fun to drive to different drivers even if they lack the performance stats.
That being said ..$34k for a Focus ST that starts ate $24k?
I don't understand why people want to load up performance cars with lots of added cost and weight luxury features.![]()
|˙˙ʇǝuɹǝʇuı ǝɥʇ uo ʇxǝʇ uʍop ǝpısdn ɯopuɐɹ pɐǝɹ noʎ :ǝɯıʇ ǝǝɹɟ ɥɔnɯ ooʇ ʎɐʍ ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ןןǝʇ oʇ ʍoɥ˙˙˙|http://hotlinktest.com/
#53
OK, really want to know what new owners think about the car HC4L, so post pics and comments when it comes in. I forgot, what color are you getting?
#54
#55
HC4L, BAM! You got the Scream! Cool, even better. With you on the heated seats, thought it was a gimmick until we got the Murano in '05 and the Jetta in '07, way to go in the cold.
Thanks for replying, keep us up to date.
For the Mustang fans, I wouldn't be so harsh as to judge mustang buyers, people are people, it's a decent car for the money, but numbers be danged, if you don't like a car, you don't like it.
#56
Yeah.. heated seats are nice. I'll give you that one.![]()
|˙˙ʇǝuɹǝʇuı ǝɥʇ uo ʇxǝʇ uʍop ǝpısdn ɯopuɐɹ pɐǝɹ noʎ :ǝɯıʇ ǝǝɹɟ ɥɔnɯ ooʇ ʎɐʍ ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ןןǝʇ oʇ ʍoɥ˙˙˙|http://hotlinktest.com/
#58
#60
The Mustang is more fun to drive than any current FWD, so there's that too.
At $24k loaded it would make some sense. The base GT starts at $27k, so a $34k Focus is stupid.
Some day you guys who a defending the Focus over the Mustang for the same price will see how silly you sound.
#61
#62
This video is pure hype, but the ending is funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgsS3zMrlEs
#63
#65
It's just a matter of personal preference.
I honestly hate the "this is the best performance value and buying anything else is stupid" argument.
A front wheel drive performance hatch can make more sense as a package - especially up north.
Let me ask you this- Which would you rather drive now; a 2003 Ford Mustang GT or a 2003 Ford Focus SVT?
|˙˙ʇǝuɹǝʇuı ǝɥʇ uo ʇxǝʇ uʍop ǝpısdn ɯopuɐɹ pɐǝɹ noʎ :ǝɯıʇ ǝǝɹɟ ɥɔnɯ ooʇ ʎɐʍ ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ןןǝʇ oʇ ʍoɥ˙˙˙|http://hotlinktest.com/
#66
What part of 4dr hatchback didnt you understand???
How hard is it to understand, that when people need 4drs, they are looking for cars w 4drs. Not a faster 2dr for same money. Mustang can be a great bang for the bucks, but its a coupe. This dude needs 4drs, Let me repeat it again FOUR DOORS!!!
I would understand if you are talking about a sedan, but a coupe![]()
"Your pants too tight,your wheels too bright"
#68
#69
Anyone who likes or buys a new 2013 Mustang is OK in my book, have at it.
What is silly is that, with over 290 million people in this country, some still can't understand that a neighbor will like or dislike things opposite of themselves. Shocker.
#70