RE: New York show: Shelby 1000
Discussion
AdamPT said:
wow, but clearly you do care, very much....about something a bit silly. Oh well, cheerio, have a nice Easter!
Ah the old I was wrong and now it's 'silly' defence. Better than manning up I'm sure for a certain type of individual. Like the type who cuts people up and then gives them the old 'Gareth Hunt' what a wonderful breed they are........We're agreed on one thing at least, have a good holiday.
Motorrad said:
AdamPT said:
wow, but clearly you do care, very much....about something a bit silly. Oh well, cheerio, have a nice Easter!
Ah the old I was wrong and now it's 'silly' defence. Better than manning up I'm sure for a certain type of individual. Like the type who cuts people up and then gives them the old 'Gareth Hunt' what a wonderful breed they are........We're agreed on one thing at least, have a good holiday.
AdamPT said:
Ha, not at all, old fruit, not at all. The 'silly' is you being upset about what I had to say. Which you were, deny all you like. Anyway, ta ta.
What an odd chap you are. Upset isn't the word I was just correcting the stream of s
t you were spouting.If you say 'cheerio' or 'ta ta' any more it's going to start sounding a little forced......
Motorrad said:
AdamPT said:
Ha, not at all, old fruit, not at all. The 'silly' is you being upset about what I had to say. Which you were, deny all you like. Anyway, ta ta.
What an odd chap you are. Upset isn't the word I was just correcting the stream of st you were spouting.If you say 'cheerio' or 'ta ta' any more it's going to start sounding a little forced......
AdamPT said:
Stream of ??? Seriously? I stated I thought this car had a live rear axle, (I was wrong, thank you for pointing that out, I'm pleased I now know) Its different from other Mustangs.)
You also said that a live axle was outdated yet didn't state what sort of modern suspension your hypothetical sprightly German car had.suffolk009 said:
Amazingly, I know two people with mustangs. Not this particular model obviously, but the same bodyshell. What amazes me is just how BIG they are. Ludicrous. The SUV of sportscars. Built for those arrow straight roads in the mid west, no doubt.
Can't imagine how they'd be able to keep up on the B-roads of Suffolk and Essex with a well driven Mk1 MX5!
From limited experience, I disagree with both of those comments. Can't imagine how they'd be able to keep up on the B-roads of Suffolk and Essex with a well driven Mk1 MX5!
TomMc1990 said:
lets be real here guys, $200,000 is around £125,000 for 1000 Stallions... not bad, not bad at all...
Yeah, I suppose it's cheap if you consider horsepower per bucks but good & great cars are not all about excessive BHP, thankfully. Also, $200k in the States is a really a massive amount of money to spend on a home grown sports car or any Yank machine for that matter (my sister lives there, and she can turn me to tears everytime she changes cars, simply because they are so cheap). Actually, the more I think about this Mustang, the more it defeats the purpose of the Mustang's original reason for existance ie a cheap powerful sports car. Still, prior to the Veyron I never even considered there would be a production road with this sort of power, so on that basis well done Shelby.Edited by Johnboy Mac on Thursday 5th April 20:00
AdamPT said:
Motorrad said:
AdamPT said:
Ha, not at all, old fruit, not at all. The 'silly' is you being upset about what I had to say. Which you were, deny all you like. Anyway, ta ta.
What an odd chap you are. Upset isn't the word I was just correcting the stream of st you were spouting.If you say 'cheerio' or 'ta ta' any more it's going to start sounding a little forced......
wow, there is a whole lot of butthurt in this thread over the live axle thing..
most mustangs are live axle, and the article doesnt explicitly say this one is any different.
Live axles are old tech. They are simple, effective, reliable, strong and very american which is why ford still use them.
i assume the guy who referenced german suspension systems was talking about the much loved multilink system used by BMW since the early 90s, a system which was, and is, the standard for performance cars (e.g. the mk1 focus was such a good handling car thanks to multilink rear suspension, which was uncommon on FWD shopping trolleys at the time)
yes it is true that the boss 302 beat the E90 M3 'round a track (laguna seca?), but that was despite its basic rear suspension set up, not because of it.
and for what it's worth, i love the new mustang because it is the closest thing anyone really makes to proper muscle car, thanks in part to Ford's use of that rear axle.
standard disclaimer: I have not done any fact checking on any of the above, so do tell me if i got something wrong.
most mustangs are live axle, and the article doesnt explicitly say this one is any different.
Live axles are old tech. They are simple, effective, reliable, strong and very american which is why ford still use them.
i assume the guy who referenced german suspension systems was talking about the much loved multilink system used by BMW since the early 90s, a system which was, and is, the standard for performance cars (e.g. the mk1 focus was such a good handling car thanks to multilink rear suspension, which was uncommon on FWD shopping trolleys at the time)
yes it is true that the boss 302 beat the E90 M3 'round a track (laguna seca?), but that was despite its basic rear suspension set up, not because of it.
and for what it's worth, i love the new mustang because it is the closest thing anyone really makes to proper muscle car, thanks in part to Ford's use of that rear axle.
standard disclaimer: I have not done any fact checking on any of the above, so do tell me if i got something wrong.
- dons flame proof suit*
Edited by deadtom on Thursday 5th April 22:53
deadtom said:
wow, there is a whole lot of butthurt in this thread over the live axle thing..
most mustangs are live axle, and the article doesnt explicitly say this one is any different.
Live axles are old tech. They are simple, effective, reliable, strong and very american which is why ford still use them.
i assume the guy who referenced german suspension systems was talking about the much loved multilink system used by BMW since the early 90s, a system which was, and is, the standard for performance cars (e.g. the mk1 focus was such a good handling car thanks to multilink rear suspension, which was uncommon on FWD shopping trolleys at the time)
yes it is true that the boss 302 beat the E90 M3 'round a track (laguna seca?), but that was despite its basic rear suspension set up, not because of it.
and for what it's worth, i love the new mustang because it is the closest thing anyone really makes to proper muscle car, thanks in part to Ford's use of that rear axle.
standard disclaimer: I have not done any fact checking on any of the above, so do tell me if i got something wrong.
The 1000 is based on the GT500 which has IRS, it uprates that suspension setup further.most mustangs are live axle, and the article doesnt explicitly say this one is any different.
Live axles are old tech. They are simple, effective, reliable, strong and very american which is why ford still use them.
i assume the guy who referenced german suspension systems was talking about the much loved multilink system used by BMW since the early 90s, a system which was, and is, the standard for performance cars (e.g. the mk1 focus was such a good handling car thanks to multilink rear suspension, which was uncommon on FWD shopping trolleys at the time)
yes it is true that the boss 302 beat the E90 M3 'round a track (laguna seca?), but that was despite its basic rear suspension set up, not because of it.
and for what it's worth, i love the new mustang because it is the closest thing anyone really makes to proper muscle car, thanks in part to Ford's use of that rear axle.
standard disclaimer: I have not done any fact checking on any of the above, so do tell me if i got something wrong.
- dons flame proof suit*
Edited by deadtom on Thursday 5th April 22:53
Really the 'butthurt' was more to do with the general ignorance of 'toodle pip' rather than anything to do with suspension systems. It's a little like me saying I once drove an E34 518 which was gutless and steered like a boat and therefore a brand new M5 is crap. Still we've established he hasn't got a clue what he's talking about so we can move on.
Motorrad said:
deadtom said:
wow, there is a whole lot of butthurt in this thread over the live axle thing..
most mustangs are live axle, and the article doesnt explicitly say this one is any different.
Live axles are old tech. They are simple, effective, reliable, strong and very american which is why ford still use them.
i assume the guy who referenced german suspension systems was talking about the much loved multilink system used by BMW since the early 90s, a system which was, and is, the standard for performance cars (e.g. the mk1 focus was such a good handling car thanks to multilink rear suspension, which was uncommon on FWD shopping trolleys at the time)
yes it is true that the boss 302 beat the E90 M3 'round a track (laguna seca?), but that was despite its basic rear suspension set up, not because of it.
and for what it's worth, i love the new mustang because it is the closest thing anyone really makes to proper muscle car, thanks in part to Ford's use of that rear axle.
standard disclaimer: I have not done any fact checking on any of the above, so do tell me if i got something wrong.
The 1000 is based on the GT500 which has IRS, it uprates that suspension setup further.most mustangs are live axle, and the article doesnt explicitly say this one is any different.
Live axles are old tech. They are simple, effective, reliable, strong and very american which is why ford still use them.
i assume the guy who referenced german suspension systems was talking about the much loved multilink system used by BMW since the early 90s, a system which was, and is, the standard for performance cars (e.g. the mk1 focus was such a good handling car thanks to multilink rear suspension, which was uncommon on FWD shopping trolleys at the time)
yes it is true that the boss 302 beat the E90 M3 'round a track (laguna seca?), but that was despite its basic rear suspension set up, not because of it.
and for what it's worth, i love the new mustang because it is the closest thing anyone really makes to proper muscle car, thanks in part to Ford's use of that rear axle.
standard disclaimer: I have not done any fact checking on any of the above, so do tell me if i got something wrong.
- dons flame proof suit*
Edited by deadtom on Thursday 5th April 22:53
Really the 'butthurt' was more to do with the general ignorance of 'toodle pip' rather than anything to do with suspension systems. It's a little like me saying I once drove an E34 518 which was gutless and steered like a boat and therefore a brand new M5 is crap. Still we've established he hasn't got a clue what he's talking about so we can move on.
AdamPT said:
I was going to leave it, I really was, but there is a huge difference in the analogy you have given. The Mustang model I drove (a 2010 model as I understand) is the basis of this car, albeit with vastly up rated suspension and engine. The interior was made out of some of the nastiest plastics I have come across, leather from what could only have been a very sickly cow, it rattled and was generally not a nice place to be. It didn’t handle well (I KNOW it has a different suspension system before you start)and for all that power and engine size, it was pretty average in terms of outright pace down a normal road. It did however have terrific air con, the seats were pretty comfy and the stereo wasn’t at all bad though. In my view, if they can’t get the base model right, how can they be trusted to do something special? I have driven both the lastest 520d and an M5 and believe me when I say that the 520 forms a very solid basis for the big boy’s toy at the top of the range. But that is my opinion, which you do not have to share. A point I have made ALL along is that with cars, all cars, its a matter of personal taste. I merely questioned the validity of using what could be described as a rather outdated suspension on a modern performance car. You very kindly and eloquently decided to show me the error of my ways and pointed out that this super-duper Mustang has a different suspension from the rest of the Mustang range (bar the GT500). I am now more knowledgeable than I was when we started this, but I do question your maturity when you are patently unable to have a bit of friendly banter and debate. That you like Mustangs is terrific and I applaud you for your passion. But please, to infer I don't know what I am talking about because I have a differing opinion is somewhat juvenile. Cheerio!
I love how this guy keeps saying cheerio and ta ta as though he is walking away from and argument and taking the higher ground, but keeps coming back for another bite 
In Motorrad's defence, you don't know what you're talking about as you jumped in right away spouting nonsense about live-axles that this car doesn't have, and continued to go on about them even after you were initially corrected.
SSBB said:
AdamPT said:
I was going to leave it, I really was, but there is a huge difference in the analogy you have given. The Mustang model I drove (a 2010 model as I understand) is the basis of this car, albeit with vastly up rated suspension and engine. The interior was made out of some of the nastiest plastics I have come across, leather from what could only have been a very sickly cow, it rattled and was generally not a nice place to be. It didn’t handle well (I KNOW it has a different suspension system before you start)and for all that power and engine size, it was pretty average in terms of outright pace down a normal road. It did however have terrific air con, the seats were pretty comfy and the stereo wasn’t at all bad though. In my view, if they can’t get the base model right, how can they be trusted to do something special? I have driven both the lastest 520d and an M5 and believe me when I say that the 520 forms a very solid basis for the big boy’s toy at the top of the range. But that is my opinion, which you do not have to share. A point I have made ALL along is that with cars, all cars, its a matter of personal taste. I merely questioned the validity of using what could be described as a rather outdated suspension on a modern performance car. You very kindly and eloquently decided to show me the error of my ways and pointed out that this super-duper Mustang has a different suspension from the rest of the Mustang range (bar the GT500). I am now more knowledgeable than I was when we started this, but I do question your maturity when you are patently unable to have a bit of friendly banter and debate. That you like Mustangs is terrific and I applaud you for your passion. But please, to infer I don't know what I am talking about because I have a differing opinion is somewhat juvenile. Cheerio!
I love how this guy keeps saying cheerio and ta ta as though he is walking away from and argument and taking the higher ground, but keeps coming back for another bite In Motorrad's defence, you don't know what you're talking about as you jumped in right away spouting nonsense about live-axles that this car doesn't have, and continued to go on about them even after you were initially corrected.
Whats not to like about a car with VW Veyron levels of power, is a practical 4 seater, looks good and if it's like all the other Mustangs, is easy to drive, all for ~ 10% of the price of the ugly dub 
When it's delivered, if you don't like the interior plastics, simply send it to a trimmer and have it covered in cow
When it's delivered, if you don't like the interior plastics, simply send it to a trimmer and have it covered in cow
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff