Ford Mustang Forum banner

01 Mustang GT or 12 Mustang V6?

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
So about a month ago or so I was about to buy a ‘99 mustang GT with almost 200k miles for 5k. Glad I didn’t. I saved some more many and came across two mustangs online, both for 10k. The 01 GT has 116k miles and the 12 mustang v6 has 120k. I ran the vin numbers and the previous owners drive less than 12k miles annually so I think that’s a good note. Now my worries are mostly mpg, reliability and power. I want to daily drive this mustang but I don’t want to fill up the tank twice a week. Once a week shouldn’t be a problem and I drive about 60-70 miles a day Monday through Friday. Honestly 300 horses from a 3.7 v6 is more than plenty for me, 260 from the 01 GT is plenty too as the highest amount of power I’ve handled was 285 from a 4.3 v6 Sierra. Modification wise I may only do bolt ons as I don’t want to spend so much on a procharger or try to be the fastest guy in LA but just plenty of power to have fun. So I want to get your opinions about between these two cars, give me your thoughts and if you have any of these two cars tell me your thoughts and advice of owning one. Thank you :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,316 Posts
I'd go with the later V6 for sure, there were a lot of improvements over that decade
 

·
Registered
05 GT Premium, satin silver over red. Vortech Si-trim @ 9 psi.
Joined
·
427 Posts
Pros for the '12: Fuel economy is better by a pretty good margin and the chassis / suspension is far better IMHO.
Cons for the '12: S197s are too big and V6 exhaust noises, although at least it's not a 90° V6. Also, base engine stigma if that's something you care about.
You didn't mention which transmission you're looking for. If both are manuals, I'd pretty much call it a wash. If both are autos, I'd chalk that up as another "pro" for the '12.
Which one would do you prefer the looks of?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Pros for the '12: Fuel economy is better by a pretty good margin and the chassis / suspension is far better IMHO.
Cons for the '12: S197s are too big and V6 exhaust noises, although at least it's not a 90° V6. Also, base engine stigma if that's something you care about.
You didn't mention which transmission you're looking for. If both are manuals, I'd pretty much call it a wash. If both are autos, I'd chalk that up as another "pro" for the '12.
Which one would do you prefer the looks of?
they’re both autos, I know the new edge auto is a slug but I won’t really mind it. I love the looks of both cars and the exhaust note of the v6 is really nice in my opinion but everyone knows you can’t beat that v8 sound. This will technically be a car I will keep until the engine dies or the car gets wrecked.
 

·
Tech Advisor
2014 GT, 1967 Fairlane GTA
Joined
·
5,373 Posts
The 2012 v6 is a far superior car to the 2001 GT imo. The 2012 3.7 v6 Cyclone has 305hp at 6500rpm and 280ft lbs at 4250rpm and does 0-60 in 5.4sec. The 2001 4.6 SOHC has 260hp at 5250rpm and 302ft lbs at 4000rpm and does 0-60 in 6.1sec. The v6 has 45 more hp and is noticeably faster. The 2012 will outhandle and outbrake the older GT as well. The v6 also has a 6 speed auto vs the 4 speed auto in the GT.
I think that the 2001 GT is overpriced at $10k even if it was a Premium trim. I would definitely buy the v6. Ask Siber Express how he likes his 3.7 v6.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
The 2012 v6 is a far superior car to the 2001 GT imo. The 2012 3.7 v6 Cyclone has 305hp at 6500rpm and 280ft lbs at 4250rpm and does 0-60 in 5.4sec. The 2001 4.6 SOHC has 260hp at 5250rpm and 302ft lbs at 4000rpm and does 0-60 in 6.1sec. The v6 has 45 more hp and is noticeably faster. The 2012 will outhandle and outbrake the older GT as well. The v6 also has a 6 speed auto vs the 4 speed auto in the GT.
I think that the 2001 GT is overpriced at $10k even if it was a Premium trim. I would definitely buy the v6. Ask Siber Express how he likes his 3.7 v6.
Yeah I figured that the v6 would be the better option. You get the best of both worlds, 305hp and good fuel economy. A lot of YouTubers have praised the v6 cyclone for its reliability except their water pump failing at 100k but I think I can deal with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
I would go with the newer one. I had a 2012 V6 with a manual transmission and it was plenty fast and the fuel economy was good. I never had any major problems with it and probably had 70 or 80k miles on it when I sold it and bought a 2018 GT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I would go with the newer one. I had a 2012 V6 with a manual transmission and it was plenty fast and the fuel economy was good. I never had any major problems with it and probably had 70 or 80k miles on it when I sold it and bought a 2018 GT.
I am actually very excited to check the car out, I’m thinking of checking it out this weekend or next weekend if my schedule doesn’t pile up. I just want something with good power and that I can still modify with bolt ons. I would only do bolt ons because the parts I’ll be putting are carb compliant and don’t want to spend hundreds to let my car pass smog
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
My ‘11 V6 (first year for the 3.7L) just went over 139,000 miles and still just purrs. I did have to have the AT rebuilt at about 75,000 mi because of a bad output bearing, and got new plugs and wires at about 125,000 because of a misfire when accelerating hard up a freeway on-ramp. I consistently get 22 mpg in mostly mixed urban driving. I’m a big fan of the 3.7, and I really was sad when the 3.7 was dropped from the Mustang lineup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
My 99 Mustang six auto had almost 200,000 when a radiator hose busted, so I picked up a good hose bandage when at work, tried to limp home. Big mistake - hose blew again next to the bandaged spot - bad electric fan. However, car was running great at 200,000 miles, just getting blotches of oil in the coolant reservoir. Had engine professionally rebuilt, and trans is still going strong at 219,000 miles - I think my six would easily have gone 300,000 miles if I had not tried to limp home - gauge never read hot, but I was told it doesn't have too if the engine looses enough coolant -
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top