Blah blah blah, can't hear you over your Canadian bacon eh?Spoken like a true Emo.
Hey man, you don't want to take any flack, try entering a thread sometime with an intent other than ****ing all over the subject matter or it's participants .....
You mean like implying that being disappointed in the 2015's straight line performance somehow equates to being poor and not being able to afford anything newer then a 10 year old mustang ?
Seems pretty clear to me.What's even better, is that most of the Negative Nancy respondents here probably won't be in a position to buy one of these bad boys for nearly a decade, if ever...../QUOTE]
Very simple. I was expecting the new Mustang to out perform the outgoing model in every performance category and if Motortrends numbers stand up it doesn't. In my opinion "just as fast' is not fast enough. I was also expecting it to be lighter, one of the stated reasons for the redesign and its not. I was also expecting 450 to 475hp. Didn't get that either. If I did we wouldn't be having this conversation. Because it would "run rings around the outgoing model."
But like said, I'm basing this on Motortrends numbers.Its possible that once the car is more thoroughly tested , and they start to hit local drag strips we find M/Ts numbers were off. Then I will very gladly say that I am wrong.
So you're saying we should drop 35k on the car then drop more money on mods to then be faster than the outgoing car?
Honestly, I don't give two ****s about the interior but want a faster mustang. I've been shopping for one for awhile and couldn't find any that I liked, but guess I 'can't afford one'
You don't know my life
^Correct, you did imply it you said it clearly. Here let me refresh your memory:
Seems pretty clear to me.
As far as "haters gonna hate" I never said I hated this car. I never condemned it . A quick search of my post history will show that I have been the exact opposite. I have been a bid supporter of this car from day one.
But you know what, Your right I'm wrong, What was I thinking expecting a car produces 435 HP and 400lbs of torque to accelerate faster the a car with 420HP @ 390lbs of torque, and being disappointed when it doesn't . . And its ok that it weighs 200lbs more the the S197 Mustangs. Even though the S197s have been panned for being overweight since 2005.
I must be crazy. But don't worry never again will I be critical (or tell the truth ) about a Ford product.
You can use my crystal ball for free, if you give glass of some of that cool-aid you have been drinking
I never said it wasn't a better car. It's clearly a better car. I just said I was disappointed in it' 0-60 and 1/4 mile times and considering it has more power and torque it should be faster. I'm pretty sure that the GT350 or SVT Cobra, or Mach 1 or whatever Ford is going to call it's HI Po version of the new Mustang will have more then 450-475 HP.All that for $33k? Are you insane? Why would Ford cannibalize the sales of the GT 350? How much power are you going to give that car? 600+? Ok so what about the GT 500? 700+ hp just so that you could pencil in that it has more HP than the Hellcat? Who the hell cares what that fat pig of a car is doing? You can keep throwing HP at a **** car and it's still a **** car with a lot of HP. The refined chassis is much more important than a potent engine. And that's what this car brings. It's about time the Mustang catches up to the technology that has been out there for years and become a good road car. Just because you say the car is disappointing since it went slower in a 1/4 by one tenth of a second (which in my mind is ludicrous in spite of all the other improvements combined) doesn't actually mean it is worse. It's a better car, no ifs or buts about it.
Well expand on what the hell does that mean? Do you mean in the last 50 years Ford hasn't been able to manufacture a Mustang that fits your needs? Or you haven't been able to locate a Ford dealership to order one to your exact specs? Because you know you can walk in tell them what Mustang you want wait for the delivery and that's it.
Also news flash: 2015 Mustang GT is faster than the 2014 Mustang GT.
After reading this response, you actually kind of sound like you might be better suited to owning a Corvette and not a Mustang?
^ That's true. This board has been quite for awhile.
I guess John Hennessey is disappointed too:
http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/meet-hennesseys-717bhp-mustang-2014-10-01
Not good. The car doesn't have an identity - what class of car is this.
It's not a BMW and certainly not a Porsche.
It'll be slower than the anything bowtie puts out... So it's competition is a 3 year old car on a different platform?
Makes no sense to me.