Official '11 Mustang GT vs 370z Thread

[b1adesofcha0s]

Originally Posted by GZ3

i just dont see them keeping up, i mean from the 350Z hr to the all new 370Z the diff was 306-332 crank :/ meanwhile the mustang got almost a 100RWHP upgrade from year to the next, theres clear evidence it going to get DI very soon. Any kinda advantages the Z ever had, are getting addressed...weight, IRS,

the Z would need a TT or a big badass V8....tt would be awesome but it would cost a grip....the gap between catch up is just growing and growing

well see i guessssssss lol

Yeah, but the 350Z hr didn't have this much competition to motivate a huge change. IMO after Nissan recovers from the quake damage and get everything back in order, there are big changes coming to the Z to make it competitive with cars like the 5.0 or Camaro SS. Yeah they're completely different cars, but are in the same price range and are cross shopped. They are taking away from Z sales.

[ImportConvert]

Originally Posted by b1adesofcha0s

Yeah, but the 350Z hr didn't have this much competition to motivate a huge change. IMO after Nissan recovers from the quake damage and get everything back in order, there are big changes coming to the Z to make it competitive with cars like the 5.0 or Camaro SS. Yeah they're completely different cars, but are in the same price range and are cross shopped. They are taking away from Z sales.

The only change Nissan made was to adjust production for dismal sales. Where is your source for this "big change"?

I hope there is one, too, but none looms.

[b1adesofcha0s]

Originally Posted by ImportConvert

The only change Nissan made was to adjust production for dismal sales. Where is your source for this "big change"?

I hope there is one, too, but none looms.

It's not a fact, just an opinion. I just think they need it to keep the Z alive. I've heard rumors of DI though.

[fairlady_Z]

You may wanna hold off on that 2011 Mustang... http://jalopnik.com/#!5792482/faulty...w-ford-mustang & http://jalopnik.com/#!5796207/ford-s...-transmissions

[ImportConvert]

Originally Posted by fairlady_Z

You may wanna hold off on that 2011 Mustang... Jalopnik - Drive Free or Die & Jalopnik - Drive Free or Die

Jeez. That sounds worse than I thought. I knew they had some issues, but damn!

[m4a1mustang]

Originally Posted by fairlady_Z

You may wanna hold off on that 2011 Mustang... Jalopnik - Drive Free or Die & Jalopnik - Drive Free or Die

Originally Posted by ImportConvert

Jeez. That sounds worse than I thought. I knew they had some issues, but damn!

This is actually the source of a lot of controversy on the Mustang forums. It's largely a misrepresentation of the issue at hand. This article is based on one thread on a Mustang forum with around 3,000 posts in it from around 250 different users. At least 90% of these posts are attributable to select few. The article is very vague and just assumes that these 250 posters account for the "hundreds" of "broken" transmissions, which is not true.

So far we know of one user that actually had a defective transmission, which was replaced. Unfortunately he turned out to be the type of person who would make it his personal crusade to go after Ford because of it.

The rest of the complaints are about clunky shifts, mainly when cold. As anyone who has driven a manual transmission - especially a direct-input or semi-remote style - will tell you, on cold starts the 1-2 and sometimes 2-3 shifts can be a little rough. Anyone who has been on this forum since the early days will remember all the complaints from nubs we would have to respond to because they thought that clunky 1-2 shift was a grind and something was wrong with their transmission.

That's what's going on here. Inexperienced manual transmission drivers are reporting every little clunk they hear or feel and in many cases are misdiagnosing them as "grinds." A clunk is fine. After the transmission warms up it's buttery smooth.

I have 13,000 miles on mine so far and I have not had any issues. I definitely experience a cold shift clunk on the 1-2 over the winter or on chilly mornings, but never a grind or anything truly faulty. I am an experienced driver, though, so I know not to freak out and cry to Ford because the Getrag in my 412 HP car is making a little noise.

As a Z community, we went through these complaints in '09 (remember the infamous Modshack one-liner, "is this your first car?" ), and for the Mustang community they are dealing with the same thing in 2011. The 5.0 has brought on a lot of newer, inexperienced drivers to the Mustang ranks. And it so happens that these nub owners are some of the whiniest I have ever observed on an internet forum.

Why do you think I have 24k+ posts here?

Overall I'd say the Getrag MT-82 is a fine transmission. Would it have been my number one choice? No, I'd have loved to see a beefier T56 in there with a true direct input, but it does seem like the MT82s are holding up to repeated abuse... there are a few 600-700whp cars running the stock transmission without any issues yet.

I think all this is is the 2009 370 6MT saga all over again. You have a few transmissions replaced for bum synchros (it happens) and then a lot of complaints from inexperienced drivers for things that the experienced guys know are normal. The only difference is that the Mustang is getting a lot more exposure because the nubs are more vocal and there are just more Mustangs out there (the MT-82 is used in the V6 and V8 models, so you have to figure at least 25k manual transmission 2011 models have been sold).

Oh, and there are a lot of old-guard Mustang "buy 'murrcan" owners that are just bitching because the transmission is designed by a German company and built in their Communist Chinese factory. I guarantee you if this was a Tremec (Mexico) there'd be far fewer complaints, because most good 'Murrcans have learned to accept that some goods can indeed be built in Mexico and Canada... 'cause we're attached to 'em and can supervise 'em, ya know?

[perauto]

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

This is actually the source of a lot of controversy on the Mustang forums. It's largely a misrepresentation of the issue at hand. This article is based on one thread on a Mustang forum with around 3,000 posts in it from around 250 different users. At least 90% of these posts are attributable to select few. The article is very vague and just assumes that these 250 posters account for the "hundreds" of "broken" transmissions, which is not true.

So far we know of one user that actually had a defective transmission, which was replaced. Unfortunately he turned out to be the type of person who would make it his personal crusade to go after Ford because of it.

The rest of the complaints are about clunky shifts, mainly when cold. As anyone who has driven a manual transmission - especially a direct-input or semi-remote style - will tell you, on cold starts the 1-2 and sometimes 2-3 shifts can be a little rough. Anyone who has been on this forum since the early days will remember all the complaints from nubs we would have to respond to because they thought that clunky 1-2 shift was a grind and something was wrong with their transmission.

That's what's going on here. Inexperienced manual transmission drivers are reporting every little clunk they hear or feel and in many cases are misdiagnosing them as "grinds." A clunk is fine. After the transmission warms up it's buttery smooth.

I have 13,000 miles on mine so far and I have not had any issues. I definitely experience a cold shift clunk on the 1-2 over the winter or on chilly mornings, but never a grind or anything truly faulty. I am an experienced driver, though, so I know not to freak out and cry to Ford because the Getrag in my 412 HP car is making a little noise.

As a Z community, we went through these complaints in '09 (remember the infamous Modshack one-liner, "is this your first car?" ), and for the Mustang community they are dealing with the same thing in 2011. The 5.0 has brought on a lot of newer, inexperienced drivers to the Mustang ranks. And it so happens that these nub owners are some of the whiniest I have ever observed on an internet forum.

Why do you think I have 24k+ posts here?

Overall I'd say the Getrag MT-82 is a fine transmission. Would it have been my number one choice? No, I'd have loved to see a beefier T56 in there with a true direct input, but it does seem like the MT82s are holding up to repeated abuse... there are a few 600-700whp cars running the stock transmission without any issues yet.

I think all this is is the 2009 370 6MT saga all over again. You have a few transmissions replaced for bum synchros (it happens) and then a lot of complaints from inexperienced drivers for things that the experienced guys know are normal. The only difference is that the Mustang is getting a lot more exposure because the nubs are more vocal and there are just more Mustangs out there (the MT-82 is used in the V6 and V8 models, so you have to figure at least 25k manual transmission 2011 models have been sold).

Oh, and there are a lot of old-guard Mustang "buy 'murrcan" owners that are just bitching because the transmission is designed by a German company and built in their Communist Chinese factory. I guarantee you if this was a Tremec (Mexico) there'd be far fewer complaints, because most good 'Murrcans have learned to accept that some goods can indeed be built in Mexico and Canada... 'cause we're attached to 'em and can supervise 'em, ya know?

I have never had any problems in our shop 2011 but we replaced the trans in our race car with a T-56. Under road race conditions the stock trans will over heat and fail. We did not want to add a cooler so we replaced the trans,Also a 2010 4.6 is a dog compared to a 11 5.0. On our Dyno our old shop car a 2010 GT with cams ,cold air ect only made 310 RWHP,for comparison our 11 Saleen/GT put down 371 RWHP stock.I love the Z's and G's but a stock 5.0 mustang will walk any stock Z in a strait line.

[ImportConvert]

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

This is actually the source of a lot of controversy on the Mustang forums. It's largely a misrepresentation of the issue at hand. This article is based on one thread on a Mustang forum with around 3,000 posts in it from around 250 different users. At least 90% of these posts are attributable to select few. The article is very vague and just assumes that these 250 posters account for the "hundreds" of "broken" transmissions, which is not true.

So far we know of one user that actually had a defective transmission, which was replaced. Unfortunately he turned out to be the type of person who would make it his personal crusade to go after Ford because of it.

The rest of the complaints are about clunky shifts, mainly when cold. As anyone who has driven a manual transmission - especially a direct-input or semi-remote style - will tell you, on cold starts the 1-2 and sometimes 2-3 shifts can be a little rough. Anyone who has been on this forum since the early days will remember all the complaints from nubs we would have to respond to because they thought that clunky 1-2 shift was a grind and something was wrong with their transmission.

That's what's going on here. Inexperienced manual transmission drivers are reporting every little clunk they hear or feel and in many cases are misdiagnosing them as "grinds." A clunk is fine. After the transmission warms up it's buttery smooth.

I have 13,000 miles on mine so far and I have not had any issues. I definitely experience a cold shift clunk on the 1-2 over the winter or on chilly mornings, but never a grind or anything truly faulty. I am an experienced driver, though, so I know not to freak out and cry to Ford because the Getrag in my 412 HP car is making a little noise.

As a Z community, we went through these complaints in '09 (remember the infamous Modshack one-liner, "is this your first car?" ), and for the Mustang community they are dealing with the same thing in 2011. The 5.0 has brought on a lot of newer, inexperienced drivers to the Mustang ranks. And it so happens that these nub owners are some of the whiniest I have ever observed on an internet forum.

Why do you think I have 24k+ posts here?

Overall I'd say the Getrag MT-82 is a fine transmission. Would it have been my number one choice? No, I'd have loved to see a beefier T56 in there with a true direct input, but it does seem like the MT82s are holding up to repeated abuse... there are a few 600-700whp cars running the stock transmission without any issues yet.

I think all this is is the 2009 370 6MT saga all over again. You have a few transmissions replaced for bum synchros (it happens) and then a lot of complaints from inexperienced drivers for things that the experienced guys know are normal. The only difference is that the Mustang is getting a lot more exposure because the nubs are more vocal and there are just more Mustangs out there (the MT-82 is used in the V6 and V8 models, so you have to figure at least 25k manual transmission 2011 models have been sold).

Oh, and there are a lot of old-guard Mustang "buy 'murrcan" owners that are just bitching because the transmission is designed by a German company and built in their Communist Chinese factory. I guarantee you if this was a Tremec (Mexico) there'd be far fewer complaints, because most good 'Murrcans have learned to accept that some goods can indeed be built in Mexico and Canada... 'cause we're attached to 'em and can supervise 'em, ya know?

Ford still has tons of issues with their TR6060's in the GT500's. GM evolved the specs for their syncro's in 2 different revisions of the corvette TR6060 (finally going with carbon-lined synchro's). Ford blunders on. They have issues with fixing problems with that transmission IMO.

I thought the MT82 was G2G, though. Seems they might have a slight issue there, as well. It would make me nervous if I were buying a new GT/GT500.

[baldie]

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang

This is actually the source of a lot of controversy on the Mustang forums. It's largely a misrepresentation of the issue at hand. This article is based on one thread on a Mustang forum with around 3,000 posts in it from around 250 different users. At least 90% of these posts are attributable to select few. The article is very vague and just assumes that these 250 posters account for the "hundreds" of "broken" transmissions, which is not true.

So far we know of one user that actually had a defective transmission, which was replaced. Unfortunately he turned out to be the type of person who would make it his personal crusade to go after Ford because of it.

The rest of the complaints are about clunky shifts, mainly when cold. As anyone who has driven a manual transmission - especially a direct-input or semi-remote style - will tell you, on cold starts the 1-2 and sometimes 2-3 shifts can be a little rough. Anyone who has been on this forum since the early days will remember all the complaints from nubs we would have to respond to because they thought that clunky 1-2 shift was a grind and something was wrong with their transmission.

That's what's going on here. Inexperienced manual transmission drivers are reporting every little clunk they hear or feel and in many cases are misdiagnosing them as "grinds." A clunk is fine. After the transmission warms up it's buttery smooth.

I have 13,000 miles on mine so far and I have not had any issues. I definitely experience a cold shift clunk on the 1-2 over the winter or on chilly mornings, but never a grind or anything truly faulty. I am an experienced driver, though, so I know not to freak out and cry to Ford because the Getrag in my 412 HP car is making a little noise.

As a Z community, we went through these complaints in '09 (remember the infamous Modshack one-liner, "is this your first car?" ), and for the Mustang community they are dealing with the same thing in 2011. The 5.0 has brought on a lot of newer, inexperienced drivers to the Mustang ranks. And it so happens that these nub owners are some of the whiniest I have ever observed on an internet forum.

Why do you think I have 24k+ posts here?

Overall I'd say the Getrag MT-82 is a fine transmission. Would it have been my number one choice? No, I'd have loved to see a beefier T56 in there with a true direct input, but it does seem like the MT82s are holding up to repeated abuse... there are a few 600-700whp cars running the stock transmission without any issues yet.

I think all this is is the 2009 370 6MT saga all over again. You have a few transmissions replaced for bum synchros (it happens) and then a lot of complaints from inexperienced drivers for things that the experienced guys know are normal. The only difference is that the Mustang is getting a lot more exposure because the nubs are more vocal and there are just more Mustangs out there (the MT-82 is used in the V6 and V8 models, so you have to figure at least 25k manual transmission 2011 models have been sold).

Oh, and there are a lot of old-guard Mustang "buy 'murrcan" owners that are just bitching because the transmission is designed by a German company and built in their Communist Chinese factory. I guarantee you if this was a Tremec (Mexico) there'd be far fewer complaints, because most good 'Murrcans have learned to accept that some goods can indeed be built in Mexico and Canada... 'cause we're attached to 'em and can supervise 'em, ya know?

I followed that thread as well and thought it's just a few people overreacting. 10k miles on mine and no problems.