Mustangs................

[S8ER01Z]

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM

It's true. They even deliver the Mustang already rusted, so you don't have to wait for it to happen on your own.

You have to be kidding me...how clueless are you? Go out and get under your car and tell me you don't have a speck of surface rust anywhere.

Wow.

[Tal]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Why do people bring that up? Ford chose a different direction to make those 1/4 times, and Camaro chose the brute force direction. The only thing that should be compared is price range. Out of all the GT500 vs. SS threads I've seen, I have yet to see someone go "That's good for over a 140+ HP, non-supercharged deficit."

Agreed, diffent people think different but a serious comparison is more about features at a pricepoint than such details. Sure details such as horsepower and gearing ratios are important, particularly for those interested in aftermarket modifications but for general comparison purposes they are nothing more than a distraction.


As for Ford's in general, I had an '84 Ranger and while from the specs it didn't seem like much the abuse that thing took while lasting 200k+ was downright impressive. It was twice the truck the '88 S-10 I later had was, and that's not even counting the thrown rod that punched a hole in the block around 100k. With any large manufacturer you can easily find people with terrible stories, I could tell you some doosies with Chevy's, Fords, Toyota's, Honda's and so forth just off the top of my head. In truth there are certain models, certain engines, etc to avoid but very rarely are there certain manufacturers that just make junk across the board. Even at the low points of the 70s and 80s the worst problems were mostly tied to price across the board and and quality problems were more related cutting corners on certain models to that were struggling to meet competitive pricepoints.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

That would be 5 star sir.

You would be wrong sir.

Edit - My bad, looks like you're right.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by S8ER01Z

You have to be kidding me...how clueless are you? Go out and get under your car and tell me you don't have a speck of surface rust anywhere.

Wow.

Not as clueless as some...

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

because she is too chubby, that is why nobody says "That's good for over a 140+ HP, non-supercharged deficit." lol

I honestly don't know what you are trying to say.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by a_Username

I honestly don't know what you are trying to say.

I'm sorry to hear that.

[Tal]

Originally Posted by a_Username

I honestly don't know what you are trying to say.

It was a poke at the Camaro being heavier than the Mustang which some like to hype (particularly Mustang fans, some them talk as if it was 1000 lbs heavier). The point was a bit obtuse and mostly silly since it really doesn't matter much at all in straight up comparisons, at least until you are modding which is a whole new ballgame.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

I'm sorry to hear that.

.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Tal

It was a poke at the Camaro being heavier than the Mustang which despite the hype (particularly by Mustang fans, some them talk as if it was 1000 lbs heavier). The point was a bit obtuse and mostly silly since it really doesn't matter much at all in straight up comparisons, at least until you are modding which is a whole new ballgame.

I got the heavier part, but that's why no one says the extra horsepower complaint about the GT500? Dumb statement if you ask me. In every GT500 thread from now on Imma say "HE'S GOT AN EXTRA 140 HP WITH A SUPERCHARGED ENGINE!!!!"

[Tal]

LOL ok, I'll stick with it doesn't look near as good and costs $10-20k more.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM

Well, since the Mustang doesn't really generate enough horsepower to endanger anybody with a front impact, how about side impact? How's the 'Stang looking there?

Why don't you look it up? You never know what manner of new and interesting information you will find. Heck, the Mustang might even have a five star frontal die impact safety rating and have some of the best side impact safety data in the industry backing that rating.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by a_Username

I got the heavier part, but that's why no one says the extra horsepower complaint about the GT500? Dumb statement if you ask me. In every GT500 thread from now on Imma say "HE'S GOT AN EXTRA 140 HP WITH A SUPERCHARGED ENGINE!!!!"

and you would be within your right to say that, because it's true. why compare cars with 100+ more HP than the other car to begin with seems OK for 111+ hp but not ok for 114+ hp lol go figure.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by syr74

Why don't you look it up? You never know what manner of new and interesting information you will find. Heck, the Mustang might even have a five star frontal die impact safety rating and have some of the best side impact safety data in the industry backing that rating.

Or they might not.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM

Or they might not.

Like I said, if you are this interested look it up.