[Ackattack]

I was talking to a guy at work the other day, and the topic of cars came up, and he recently got an '04 Mustang GT. So during our discussion he was dogging on the F-body, and he admitted that I'd spank him in a drag race, but he bought the car for the handling not for drag racing.

So my question is do the GTs really handle any better than an F-body? I was under the impression that they both handled fairly equally, both are addequate and both can be improved on. I don't hear much talk about the rustangs handling, so I don't know much about them.

What is your feeling, knowledge, and/or experience with them handling wise in comparison to an F-body?

[Dave B]

The rear suspension on the "NEW and IMPROVED" 05 Mustang is straight out of a Camaro. Griggs racing has made a lot of money selling torque arms and panhard rods to Fox bodied Mustang owners in an effort to get their cars to handle as well as an F body. Back in 89 I bought an LX Mustang over the Camaro of the day but it was for a better power/wgt ratio, not the handling. Now I own an LT1 and yes it handles better than any Mustang (stock) and is much faster on the track. Any guy who claims that a Fox bodied Mustang can outhandle a stock Camaro/Firebird doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.

Surely the reason for crappy sales ( although 55 to 60,000 per year doesn't sound like crap to me) likely had something to do with the minimal to non existant advertising budget the General spared for the F body cars. Too bad GM. You don't make anything for me now. ( Need 4 seats so no vette and can't afford a CTS-V). Hopefully the new Mustang will be a good car. At least we know it has an OK rear suspension.