Problem with new mustang

Discussion in '2005 - 2009 Specific Tech' started by spanky442, Feb 3, 2004.


  1. shatner saves

    shatner saves New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ...or free public schools, or good doctors, or human rights....

    And there are a lot of countries in the world that are very unstable because of the price of oil. There are fluctuations in the cost of oil that might mean $0.10 in the price of a gallon of gas or no more overtime at the refinery in countries like the US. For smaller countries where pertoleum is the prime resource, it means a difference of whether or not the average joe gets to eat or has a job or whether or not the stock market is going to crash this month.
  2. Ron Jeremy

    Ron Jeremy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Messages:
    753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The countries which I mentioned here all have human rights and free schools and good doctors and good hospitals. They have this because of their oil revenues.

    I am not talking about citizens of these countries who remain in these countries and who don't come here to the U.S.. I am talking ONLY about people who left these countries and who have come here to the United States to live and to work here who end up going back to their country of origin. Some of these people save up their money and go back to their countries. They live way better off by going back to their countries with the American dollars which they worked for and saved. They can do lots of things there with the money and they can live better than they can here. That's what I've been trying to say in here for the last few posts. I am not referring to people that are from these countries who didn't come to the United States. Please understand who I am talking about here. I know many people who came here to the U.S. and who saved up a few dollars and who went back to their country of origin (like Brazil, Eastern Europe and some of the Middle Eastern countries) and they are doing better off in their country of origin than they would if they still lived here in the U.S.. they made enough money to have a better life in their own country than they could here. That's what I am trying to say here. Please understand this. It is not a myth or a lie. it is the honest truth. There are some places to live which are better than the U.S.. Most of these countries are tax havens for middle class people who came to America and made a few dollars who want to have a better lifestyle and who want to live somewhere where the quality of life is better.
  3. falchulk

    falchulk New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ron brazil has death squads that extermante the homless and abandoned children. Saudi Arabia, UAE, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Dubai have terrible quality of life. All of these countires + greece, france and spain are the cheif exporters of terrorism. In the middle eastren countries 2% of the population live well. The rest hate the goverment controlling them and making them poor. They blame the USA for proping them up. It's not easy to have so much hate when you are comfortable. While the quality of life is much better in the Euopean countries mentioned, its not a place I would want to live. Greece has a huge anti american sentiment. There has been may Americans beaten and robbed in the last 5 years. All the while they put the person down for being an american. You just dont hear about it here. I dont know where you are getting these ideas.
  4. spanky442

    spanky442 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I hear what you say about the Middle East and South American countries. Life there is bad and they do have terrorist. They hate the U.S. because unfortunately we supported them during the cold war in order to keep Russia out. After the cold war the U.S. stopped supporting them and started to go after them. They feel threatened by the U.S. It is wrong what they are doing and as is the responsibility of the U.S. to stop these people now. The U.S. is now is a position where the whole world looks up and says whats next, or where do we go from here? That is the responsibility of being the richest most powerful government in the world. As far as the problems in Europe, none of those countries support terrorism. They may not have supported the Iraqi war, but they were all behind the U.S. 100% on 9-11. As far as beating and anti-american sentiment, you find that everywhere. It happens here all the time, foriegners here are constantely getting robbed and beat-up. Also, we all know that racism and anti-sentiment are big problems here in the U.S. People here look down on others just like other's look down on Americans when they go to there countries.
  5. falchulk

    falchulk New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Spanky, they dont support terrorists. There is and has been a large terror network in those countries since the cold war. At that time, they were provided "under the table" aid by the USSR. These countries have been fighting terrorism long before 9-11. They have had muslum extremists since the 70's. I think you misunderstood and thought I meant they were directly supporting it.
  6. spanky442

    spanky442 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes I did misunderstand. But they have networks everywhere. They are even here too. Its just a matter of finding them. Yeah, that's why they hate us so much now. We used to support them to keep the Russians out, know that the Russian's are gone we are going after them. The U.S. kinda dug a hole for itself, but that was the only way.
  7. falchulk

    falchulk New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The terrorists in Europe and Lebanon were funded by the USSR not the USA. They were provided military and technology training. The US did fund some anti russia stuff that has screwed us in the end. I was specifically refering to terror cells that have been attacking the france, spain, and greece.
  8. spanky442

    spanky442 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, I think we both have the same point. Sometimes you have to help your enemies in order to get the big fish.
  9. shatner saves

    shatner saves New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Saying greece, france and spain are chief exporters of terrorism is a slight overstatement. They do have thier own domestic terrorism issues, but then, so do the US and Canada. Remember the OKC bombing? That one was perpetrated by a white anglo-saxon protestant, ex gulf war veteran. And he considered himself a patriot. AND he didn't do it alone.
  10. SVTdriver

    SVTdriver Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2001
    Messages:
    3,425
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There are whack jobs in every country. It just usually ends up being the middle easterners that do the best job of getting in the news.
  11. falchulk

    falchulk New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am not talking about domestic terrorism. Look it up on the net or go to a library. This is recent history and everybody seems to be amazed by it. Muslum extremists have been in these countries for 20 years or more. Spain especially had a huge mess on its hands. I dont mean that the legitimate goverments are exporters. What i mean is that terror is exported from within their borders and has been for a long time.
  12. sunburst gold

    sunburst gold Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Mustang is hardly a Thunderbird, which right from the start (of new production) was called soft, a cruiser, etc. The coming GT, if they pull it off for $25K, will be the best bargain out there, and there's such a long built-in market for these cars that they'll last and last--at least until we're too old to care or there's no gas left to burn.
  13. BurlyStang

    BurlyStang Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2000
    Messages:
    637
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Can I get an AMEN!?

    "Mustangs are reliable cars, I don't know of many cars out there that can take the abuse that these cars do and still make it through everyday driving. How many of us beat the **** outta our cars every time we get in them and they still get us were we need to go (with regular maintanence)."

    I'm one of those guys. I'm shocked that I haven't been able to break it yet. If Ford can hold to that standard, our beloved Mustang will never be shelved.

    Who cares about gas mileage? If I were worried about that, I would buy a gas-electric hybrid.
  14. 65conv50

    65conv50 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why get a hybrid?? Their mileage is lousy for what it is. A recent news article here said that the Honda got 37 MPG. My wife's big heavy V6 '93 Thunderbird got 32, and my Formula gets 29 on the highway. That's a tiny increase for the hybrid, considering you're giving up space, power, handling, etc..
  15. shatner saves

    shatner saves New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I care about milage to a point. If the mustang got, like, 10 city/15 highway, forget it.
  16. 65conv50

    65conv50 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Agreed!! It should get at least 25 hwy/18 city in the hottest versions to be viable. After all, you gotta buy gas AND make payments. (and insurance, etc)
  17. Ron Jeremy

    Ron Jeremy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Messages:
    753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I get 17 mpg overall right now with my 2002 V6 Mustang. I don't do very much highway driving. I drive mainly here around town. When I used to do highway driving I would get 22 mpg overall.

    And my 2001 GT gets about 18-19 mpg overall.
  18. shatner saves

    shatner saves New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I generally see about 24-26 on the highway, doing a steady 75 mph. My car is lowered and I have a full MAC exhaust, including H-pipe with cat's. While increased fuel economy wasn't my goal when installing these parts, it sure is a nice side effect.
  19. spanky442

    spanky442 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, something with bad MPG is not worth buying. You're not going to want to drive it because it will cost to much between montly payment, insurance, maintaince, and fuel. Oh lets not forget tax. Fuel economy is a big issue today. Why would someone pay $25K + for a new Mustang with poor MPG when there are plenty of other car out there with good performance and good MPG. But, from what I read about the 05 its MPG is supposed to be the best in a mustang ever and its also more environmentally friendly.
  20. 65conv50

    65conv50 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    22 on the highway, eh? That's what my present 65 Mustang got on the highway when it was an I-6, back in the 60s & 70s. My first 65 (V-8 289 4V "gas guzzler") got about 21 on the highway. As long as you kept it above about 70.

    My current Formula with LT-1 & 6-speed (and tall rearend gears) gets about 28 on the highway - again, have to keep it above about 75 to get that, and you have to downshift below 60 so the mileage drops badly at lower speeds, down to about 20 in town.

    It would seem to me that makers could improve on that - after all, 10 years ago the big, heavy Thunderbird was getting 32 on the highway - even the V-6. And that's with an inefficient automatic trans.

Share This Page