I know it's a Mustang.. but it's new.. and quick! (Page 7/17)
Performance1 MAY 09, 02:14 AM

quote
Originally posted by Pontiaddict:

Since the 200 gross hp they had translates to about 145 net hp. They're not exaclty a ball of fire.

[This message has been edited by Pontiaddict (edited 05-09-2002).]


ROLMFAO......I like how you used that...LOL!!!

JonnyK....eat your words.......LOL...hahaha

falconhulk MAY 09, 08:20 AM
WTF is wrong with me? Nothing really. Performance1 thinks that all cars not GM are trash. I know this from a bunch of recent threads. All young guys think that the cars they own/are familiar with are the best. The truth is you learn a lot when you get older. You learn you were wrong most of the time. In this case its written down for history. He spends a lot of time argueing invalid points. I own cars from Dodge, Ford, and Pontiac. I love them all. There are boards on the net for every type of car. Each board says the same thing about other brands. BTW Pontiaddict I think you confused "falcon" with "johnnyk". I have a mustang but it has a 350hp bored 302.

[This message has been edited by falconhulk (edited 05-09-2002).]

JohnnyK MAY 09, 02:04 PM
Also, I never said a Mustang from the 60's is going to be a speed demon. I'd be like Performance1 to think a car from the 60's is going to match up with a car from the 80-90's stock for stock..
Formula MAY 09, 02:33 PM
i've drove a 2001 gt on a backroad and i thought it handled pretty good. it might not be a ferrari but i bet it handles better then a plymouth breeze


btoth MAY 09, 04:10 PM

quote
Originally posted by Formula:
i've drove a 2001 gt on a backroad and i thought it handled pretty good. it might not be a ferrari but i bet it handles better then a plymouth breeze



That's what I'm saying. The GTs handle pretty darned good! And especially for a cheap car and one that size. It may not out-handle a BMW or Audi... but look at the price difference! And considering that the Bullit (sp?) edition comes with Brembo brakes, it probably stops pretty well too. The stock V6 Mustangs though, they could benefit from some better suspension. But if you're getting a Mustang, it should have a V8 shouldn't it? Otherwise what's the point?

Formula88 MAY 09, 04:24 PM

quote
Originally posted by artherd:
Oh baby, imagine what a modern LT-5 type motor would make?! IF GM applied everything they can do to the pushrod boat anchors, to their 4-cam motors? Look out. 4valves, variable cam timing, all the gee gaw 100hp/litre stuff, with *5.7litres!* Me likes too


GM's already done that. The Northstar XV12. Variable intake. Variable cam timing and phasing. 7.5 Litres. 750HP!! Packaged in the size of a typical V8. Sure, just an engineering excercise, but proof the General can do it. Now if they'd just put it in something that'll get wrecked, so I can buy one out of the junk yard and drop it into my Formula!

Pontiaddict MAY 09, 05:16 PM
Caddy changed the heads on the Northstar to a design that could accept a variable cam timing system. (2k models and newer, I believe. Might be 2001 models) Also northstar tooling is able to support up to a 5.4 liter displacement.

The XV12 is supposed to go into production, though with less hp and probably installed in some land barge like the Escalade or an Eldorado.


quote
Originally posted by btoth:
The stock V6 Mustangs though, they could benefit from some better suspension. But if you're getting a Mustang, it should have a V8 shouldn't it? Otherwise what's the point?

The majority of Mustangs being sold are v6 models. That's the problem.

Performance1 MAY 09, 07:55 PM

quote
Originally posted by falconhulk:
WTF is wrong with me? Nothing really. Performance1 thinks that all cars not GM are trash. I know this from a bunch of recent threads. All young guys think that the cars they own/are familiar with are the best. The truth is you learn a lot when you get older. You learn you were wrong most of the time. In this case its written down for history. He spends a lot of time argueing invalid points. I own cars from Dodge, Ford, and Pontiac. I love them all. There are boards on the net for every type of car. Each board says the same thing about other brands. BTW Pontiaddict I think you confused "falcon" with "johnnyk". I have a mustang but it has a 350hp bored 302.

[This message has been edited by falconhulk (edited 05-09-2002).]


WTF ....You need to shut the F*CK UP!! Quit putting words in my mouth motherf*cker, I NEVER said any car that isnt GM is trash...you REALLY need to STFU....Say youve noticed that through other threads??? I said that I do not like FORD and that the ONLY thing they have to offer thats worth your money is thier SUV line. Thier older Mustangs are more respectable than the new crap. Matter of fact, I have more respect for Toyota than GM. So QUIT puttin words in my mouth, dumbf*ck.

"All young guys think that the car they own/are familiar with are the best"
????? JESUS CHRIST!!! Your REALLY f*ckin pushin it, I NEVER said that nor do I EVEN THINK THAT.....god damn dude....Ive never driven a Supra, RX-7, ect.....but do I think that GM is superior??? NOOOOO......Ill say it again, QUIT putting words in my f*cking mouth man....QUIT

Arguing invalid points?.... what is that suppose to mean??? The point is Mustangs are NOT sports car, the Fiero IS. Thats they main disagreement, acually...not disagreement, more like I am trying to inform someone.

So a word....QUIT puttin f*cking words in my mouth motherf*cker.....I HATE dipsh!ts that do that....thier ALL over the place, even here.

JohnnyK MAY 09, 08:22 PM
Sigh.. we've got another one

Anyways... the mustang wasn't designed to be a "true" sports car, but it evolved into one in 1 year.. The fiero was designed to be a econo car, and then evolved.. whats the diff?

Performance1 MAY 09, 10:10 PM

quote
Originally posted by JohnnyK:
Sigh.. we've got another one

Anyways... the mustang wasn't designed to be a "true" sports car, but it evolved into one in 1 year.. The fiero was designed to be a econo car, and then evolved.. whats the diff?


We got another one what?...******* that puts words in peoples mouths to make them think differently? Yes.

Anyways, you are correct, it was not designed as a "true" sports car. Yet, it is still not a sports car to this day. It is a "muscle car"...the SVT might handle better....but still a muscle car. I know the ass end on the Camaro slides out really easy....I almost crashed cuz I am used to my Formula. But I have never driven an SVT, only a 95-96 Mustang V6, and that thing was pretty squirrly. But you have to remember, I was brought up by the Fiero....by that I mean Im only used to mid-engine, rear-wheel drive, fully-independent suspension, and rack n pinion setups.....and that Mustang I drove was NOTHING compared to the Fiero.

So the SVT is a ballz out car with many mod-applications, yet not a sports car.....muscle.

[This message has been edited by Performance1 (edited 05-09-2002).]