Originally Posted by ChrisRyan
I agree the ST's are sweet but I am more than happy with my SE. Cheaper to insure, maintain and operate vs. the ST. The reason I would look at a more performance oriented car is for the, well...performance. Then everyone makes the jump to well you have an ST but you should of gotten a Mustang with that oh so sweet 5.0. Now we got a can of worms opened up to which I say if you want performance and MPG then get a 2 wheeler. Liter bike fast is bliss.
There's some good points here... but there's a trade off.
I doubt the SE is THAT much cheaper to insure. Of course it's going to get a bit better mileage but the ST is still a 30mpg car when you do a lot of highway driving.
Comparing it to a Mustang, or suggesting that someone who buys an ST should have got a 5.0 is just silly. My wife has a 2011 5.0. I wouldn't even THINK about driving it in the winter. We have a truck that she drives in the winter and we put the Mustang away. Plus she only drives about 25 miles per day.
Me on the other hand, I drive 120 miles/day. An ST is PERFECT for me. I can drive it year around, it will be an amazing daily driver. Decent mileage and fairly cheap insurance. Amazing seats, comfort, and great visibility (Also absent in the Mustang). We recently took my 2003 SVT Focus on a 2500 mile trip because I didn't want to deal with the poor visibility in our Mustang (nor did we want to put the miles on it).
Suggesting someone get a crotch rocket instead of an ST? I don't think I have to even go there. A car like the ST is a great choice for a large number of people that drive a lot, want something sporty, and can maybe only have one car.