Emil
New Member
The M5 and E55 are great cars, no doubt about it but how can you compare them to cars costing 1/2 the price? Not a real fair comparo.
I'm very happy with my junker .
I'm very happy with my junker .
Irv said:JpJr
You're sounding ignorant.
Your - denoting ownership.
You're - a contaction of you are
A keyboard is a dangerous thing when you're trying to sound intelligent.
I agree with what you're saying there, but I wouldn't call the older Mustangs junk, because cars should be judged in context with their time, not in context with cars more modern. They were pretty good for their time, far better than GM's F-platform (which isn't saying much). It's just that the SN95's time was up, big time. Also, a little trivia, the old tooling for the floor pan of the SN95 was over 25 years old, and WORN FLAT OUT. Assembly line workers I spoke with during a Rouge plant tour said that they were forced to sometimes hand-fit the floors to its surrounding chassis because of the tools had fallen so far out of tolerance. It's not so much that the new GTO and Charger forced Ford's hand. It's that the fox dna in the SN95 was flat-out dead from production wear, and they were faced with the fact that the old girl was cooked.yes its true not to compare, but there are inexpensive cars that are built great,, not slapped together...under the guise of extra power,,, its especially true when you buy something quality made,,, long after you pay for it, you are left with the feeling did i get what i paid for,,, you can only floor it so much before you say,, ,hey is this thing any good?? my daughter has the little echo hatchback,,, of course its an ugly little car by comparison,, but you would not believe the quality toyota puts in to it,,, its really quite remarkable. american cars are getting better because they have to in order to compete....we all win,,,, i owned older corvettes , big block and small blocks,,, older chrysler muscle cars,,, etc,, most of them overheated, and were crap.... compared to some cars of today,,, thats all im saying.... im trying to buy a ford gt,,,,red with white stripes,,, but every dealer i talk to wants a fortune over retail which is 139 u.s. their markups are stupid,,,,
Irv said:JpJr
You're sounding ignorant.
Your - denoting ownership.
You're - a contaction of you are
A keyboard is a dangerous thing when you're trying to sound intelligent.
CatmanJJ said:"contaction", isn't it contraction?
brothers??? what a load of nonsense,,, dont get religious on us now!!!!!CatmanJJ said:I agree, I never went around dogging the 5.0s because I knew better. I thought we were all brothers here, to some extent, I guess not.
RandyB said:I had originally intended on buying a Z06 but just couldn't justify the car you get for the price, and decided to buy a new daily driver this go around and wait for the next Cobra to replace my '98.
Drive some other cars and get some needed perspective. Demand more for your hard-earned money. It's not just about the most hp.
well,,, if you tried you couldnt be more wrong. the new body dates back , but the mechanicals are light years ahead of the old platflorm... its not that anyone is trying to make people feel bad,,, its that the new car has seen tremendous advancements. using the lincoln frame is a huge step forward, ,, i owned a mustang convertible, because i just felt like putting the top down one summer,,,, i couldnt wait to get rid of it,,, there is only one way to describe that car,,,, junk,, pure and simple.....interior was horrible, and boring,,,, the car rattled like crazy, parts came off in my hands,, and on and on,,,for someone who loved the old mustangs of the sixties,, it was really dissapointing.its not like the latest is the greatest,, its that the previous was so bad, that its nice to see a major improvement,, not just a cosmetic one either... im sure there will be first year bugs,,, and many complaints about the new one in time,, but it is a huge step forward in, quality that cant be denied,,,, in my opinion anyway....shadowland2000 said:Sure are alot of fools in here, always jumping on the latest bandwagon, and trying to make every else feel inferior. First it was the F-bodies, and now it's even the former stangs. Few points I would mention:
The Fox body on the 94-2004 stangs is hardly the original Fox body. It is significantly more rigid for starters. The 2001 Cobra does .9 lateral G's, while the 1992 Mustang GT only got .82. Very few cars do in excess of .9 G's.
The twin cam 4.6's are still capable of way more RPM's, and almost all serious sports cars these days have twin cam engines.
No doubt the 2005 is more refined, but I think everyone is putting way to much into this. I love the 2005's myself, and will be getting one in a year or so, but they are not that big a leap like you all think.
RandyB said:I agree that the cheap hp from minor Cobra upgrades is nice, but it still isn't anywhere close to the car that the z06 is, even if it will beat one in a straight line. The same goes with the '05 Mustang GT.
It's a 'you can't get there from here' type thing. The biggest problem I had with the Corvette was the interior and overall build quality. Other than that, the car is a great performer all around. The C6 probably closes the gap significantly on these little annoyances.