2018 MY Mustang rumoured changes
12-15-2016, 03:58 AM
#21
Adminut
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maple Tree, Branch #2 above the rope swing
Posts: 5,722
That you somehow think 250HP in the 80's is low is beyond me, 250HP is a TON of power, more than you ever need on the street, then or now. To suggest that the 80's was just decals is just flat out insulting. I get that you're into fuel injection and computerized auto trannys and all that, but really now A 4V HO 305 5 Speed with traction loc is just stickers ? That's just plain ignorant.
It's not about the horsepower numbers or stats on paper, it's about how they drive. I get to drive my car, a computer drives yours. There is a difference.
It's not about the horsepower numbers or stats on paper, it's about how they drive. I get to drive my car, a computer drives yours. There is a difference.
And those 80's cars weighed more than the Titanics anchor...more weight, less power to weight ratio, worse handling and braking.
Finally, I have three pedals on the floor and six speeds I can pick myself, and it drives just fine.
Good to have opposing viewpoints, I see yours, don't agree with it, but I understand where you're coming from, and certainly respect that.
I don't think being ignorant is accurate either, I presented my argument with facts, not emotion.
So you were saying how you wish Ford would stop trying to relive the muscle car era and move in a different and newer direction but you would rather drive a car from the 80"s or earlier? What do you want a new tech and much more reliable, comfortable, better handling and performing car with all the comforts today's consumer wants. Or a old, unreliable, hard to get parts for, bad on gas, and poorly designed car from the 80's?
12-16-2016, 09:04 PM
#23
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Slave Lake, AB
Posts: 6,871
12-16-2016, 09:09 PM
#25
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Slave Lake, AB
Posts: 6,871
I guess my perception of a Muscle Car is a car with a lot of horsepower. The late 60's and early 70's was obviously the Muscle Car era and although there were some great Sports Cars afterward, I really don't think another Muscle Car showed up till very recently. I think in 2007 when the GT500 popped up with 500 horsepower, a new era of muscle was bred.
12-16-2016, 09:19 PM
#26
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Slave Lake, AB
Posts: 6,871
Horsepower does not a muscle car make. I shouldn't need to explain this to you, as you already know this. I understand that you are partial to the newer, being that you bought into that style - however the classics are the classics for a reason.
That you somehow think 250HP in the 80's is low is beyond me, 250HP is a TON of power, more than you ever need on the street, then or now. To suggest that the 80's was just decals is just flat out insulting. I get that you're into fuel injection and computerized auto trannys and all that, but really now A 4V HO 305 5 Speed with traction loc is just stickers ? That's just plain ignorant.
It's not about the horsepower numbers or stats on paper, it's about how they drive. I get to drive my car, a computer drives yours. There is a difference.
That you somehow think 250HP in the 80's is low is beyond me, 250HP is a TON of power, more than you ever need on the street, then or now. To suggest that the 80's was just decals is just flat out insulting. I get that you're into fuel injection and computerized auto trannys and all that, but really now A 4V HO 305 5 Speed with traction loc is just stickers ? That's just plain ignorant.
It's not about the horsepower numbers or stats on paper, it's about how they drive. I get to drive my car, a computer drives yours. There is a difference.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_car
Now a Sports Car is a whole different story. Too me most Mustangs fit in the Pony Car category.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony_car
250hp would have been lots in the 80's but by today's standard just doesn't cut it. While it may be "enough" for some, it's not enough for me. It's not about stats it's about what I hear and feel when I push the gas pedal to the floor.
12-16-2016, 09:56 PM
#27
CMOC Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Barrie
Posts: 289
12-17-2016, 05:36 AM
#28
Adminut
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maple Tree, Branch #2 above the rope swing
Posts: 5,722
That twin turbo V8 rumour has been floating around for a while, there was even some speculation it would make its way to the Raptor, its an awesome looking beast (the twin turbo V8 that is, and well, the Raptors pretty sweet too.)
The twin turbo V8 would be a better candidate than the Ecoboost for the Raptor anyway, I still need to see one/ drive one for real.
Nice to have some healthy debate and differing opinions and viewpoints, at the end of the day, everyone loves the Mustang, no matter the year, and thats why we're here.
The twin turbo V8 would be a better candidate than the Ecoboost for the Raptor anyway, I still need to see one/ drive one for real.
Nice to have some healthy debate and differing opinions and viewpoints, at the end of the day, everyone loves the Mustang, no matter the year, and thats why we're here.
12-17-2016, 08:24 AM
#29
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Slave Lake, AB
Posts: 6,871
My guess is we'll see a twin turbo V8 in the next GT500, when it comes. I can do with out the hatch or notch, I do like the style of the the S197 and the S550. Having said that, I have owned a Fox body hatch and notch, and really liked them, but not on the new styling ques.
12-17-2016, 10:56 AM
#30
Adminut
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maple Tree, Branch #2 above the rope swing
Posts: 5,722
I'm wondering if the GT350 might only have couple of years of production , similar to the Boss 302. Makes no difference, got the one I wanted, even if the computer does all the work.
