Brute force/value quotient pushes the GT/Boss variants past their competitors in the class. In comparo tests done in CD and other publications, the V6 is pitted against like optioned offerings that win on technology, fresher looks and handling performance, at least according to said publications. This consistent theme indicates that the mag writers are wanting Ford to do what's necessary to compete head to head with the FR/BRZ and the Genesis Coupe.
Yeah, I don't think that's what they're saying at all. The "mag writers" simply feel that other cars are better at what they're designed for than the V6 mustang. The Mustang GT has the same level of tech as the V6 mustang, but it performs at a level much greater than ~$35k car should. The problem with the V6 is that it's exactly competitive with other cars that it competes with on price. The performance you get out of a V6 mustang is exactly the performance you would expect out of a rwd sports coupe for ~$27k. The genesis doesn't have any more technology than the mustang and the FRS sure as hell doesn't. Heck, the BRZ/FRS is marginally faster than a miata, which has been on the list pretty much forever, and doesn't have anywhere near the available tech as the mustang.
The chassis is the standout on the FRS/BRZ. You want a car that's about as quick as an M3 but for a good deal less money, you buy a Mustang GT. You want a car that feels about as good as a Boxster for a good deal less, you buy an FRS/BRZ. And if the Genesis coupe is that good, why did it not make the list?
The mustang V6 is the exact opposite end of the spectrum as the GT500. They hit the extremes and don't offer the same balance as the GT/Boss.