<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"                                2001 Ford Mustang GT       Base price     $22,730       2001 production volume     est 45,000*       Engine     sohc V-8       Horsepower (SAE)     260 bhp @ 5250 rpm       Torque     302 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm       Suspension, f/r     ind/live axle       Brakes, f/r     10.9-in. vented discs/ 10.5-in. discs       Tires     245/45ZR-17       Curb weight     3305 lb       0\u201360 mph     6.0 sec       1/4 mile     14.7 sec @ 96.4 mph       Braking, 60\u20130     131 ft       Skidpad     0.86g       Slalom     63.7 mph       Ford Mustang GT   Let&amp;#039;s get something straight right now: The Mustang GT is not a sports car. It&amp;#039;s not even a grand touring car, despite the GT initials that adorn it. It&amp;#039;s a musclecar, with the forte of straight-line speed, achieved by big horsepower and even bigger torque; the kind of V-8 power that makes leaving a pair of long black stripes from a stoplight as easy as falling in love.   Everything about this car is loud \u2014 from the engine, to the exhaust, to the Mach 460 sound system, to the car&amp;#039;s styling. Redesigned in 1999 to look more like a Mustang from the &amp;#039;60s, the 2001 brings more styling tweaks, including blacked-out headlamps and a huge air scoop on the hood. While these styling cues give the GT a more menacing face, the hood scoop is blocked off (providing absolutely no power gain whatsoever). The scoops in front of the rear wheels also have no functional benefit.   Mustangs have always been about performance, and this one carries on the tradition. No doubt some Mustang purists are still having trouble sleeping at night over the loss of the 302, replaced in 1996 by the modular sohc 4.6-liter V-8. Back in 1996 that engine produced 215 bhp. Skip forward to present day and our GT test car has a full 260 bhp at 5250 rpm and 302 lb.-ft. of torque at 4000. This means that the GT is one quick car. Its 0 \u2013 60-mph time of 6.0 seconds is 0.8 sec. quicker than the last GT we tested (R&amp;amp;amp;T, April 1996). Handling has improved, too. The 2001 GT tops the old Mustang in the slalom \u2014 63.7 mph versus 62.1, and the skidpad \u2014 0.86g vs. 0.80g (245/45ZR-17 Goodyear Eagles, front and rear, no doubt help).   Unfortunately, Ford has not addressed many of the problems enthusiasts have with this car, including a lack of independent rear suspension and a strange seating position that&amp;#039;s too high. But while I heard gripes about the shifter&amp;#039;s long throws and strange shape, I personally will be upset the day they get rid of this angled-to-the-left lever. The trunk has useful space but with an opening that is much too small, though the rear seat does have a split/fold-down ability. But what happened to the bolstered front seats of the GTs of the 1980s? The current ones are flat as a board.   Despite being a musclecar, the GT handles the twisty stuff just fine. The Quadra Shock rear setup keeps the rear planted, and you really have to work to make the tail slide out. Steering is a bit ponderous, and the car isn&amp;#039;t as fond of changing directions as, say, a BMW M3, but there is enough sport in the car for all but the most hardcore back-road chargers.   At $24,165 for the Premium edition (including a 6-disc in-dash CD player and stylish Bullitt wheels), the Mustang GT provides incredible bang-for-the-buck. And included in that admission price is the awesome sound emitted from the GT&amp;#039;s large-diameter dual exhaust pipes. Rev the GT hard up to 5000 rpm, lift the throttle \u2014 and then rejoice in the burbling and popping, for there is nothing like the sound of an American V-8.    \u2014 Mike Monticello "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18724/mustang-roundup-2001-ford-mustang-gt/>