- Aug 5, 2006
- 31
- 1
- 0
This has been a question on my mind for some time now. I've always been quick to bash people who buy rice burners, or other inexpensive imports, and sink thousands of dollars into them making them a better car - both mechanically and aesthetically. Example - Buy a $10,000 car, sink $15,000 into it (parts, labor, paint, etc) now you have a $25,000 car when you could have just bought say...a Mustang GT. Now which out performs which in the above theoretical arguement is hard to say, but the principle remains.
We know the current statistics of the GT500 and Mustang GT, so I'll use these two for the posed question: How much would it cost you to upgrade the Mustang GT both mechanically and aesthetically (parts, labor, paint jobs) to run in the same class as the GT500?
A fun qestion which lacks hard stats on one side: How much do you believe it will cost your Mustang GT to have a definitive edge on the conceptual/soon-to-be produced Camaro and Challenger - if any upgrades are needed that is?
This question may take time to think should you choose to throw a figure down, there are alot of possible upgrades that would be involved as well as a good knowledge of car mechanics and price values.
Hopefully we can get some opinions down!
We know the current statistics of the GT500 and Mustang GT, so I'll use these two for the posed question: How much would it cost you to upgrade the Mustang GT both mechanically and aesthetically (parts, labor, paint jobs) to run in the same class as the GT500?
A fun qestion which lacks hard stats on one side: How much do you believe it will cost your Mustang GT to have a definitive edge on the conceptual/soon-to-be produced Camaro and Challenger - if any upgrades are needed that is?
This question may take time to think should you choose to throw a figure down, there are alot of possible upgrades that would be involved as well as a good knowledge of car mechanics and price values.
Hopefully we can get some opinions down!