Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
1 2 ... 4 5
7 8
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

LuS1fer

28,553 posts

114 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
Zad said:
makes my 1991 Sierra look like a stylish modern cockpit.
Not even a wheelie bin can do that. wink

peterbredde

463 posts

69 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
I test drove a standard V8 Mustang just a few weeks ago. It sounds beautiful. But even in base form it is too lacking in grip. I found it ridiculous tbh.

(I expected to have lots of fun, but I was disappointed. Small cars with big engines are much better fun.)

Edited by peterbredde on Thursday 5th July 20:53

300bhp/ton

26,483 posts

59 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
Zad said:
You can Facepalm and accuse me of being a Clarkson sheep all you like girls, but average UK pump petrol still has a higher usable energy density than US stuff. Even better if you stir in a bit of ethanol.
Do you actually have anything to back this up? BTW in many parts of the US you can buy pump E85, you can't in the UK.


Zad said:
Much though I love Ford stuff, the interior of that Mustang makes my 1991 Sierra look like a stylish modern cockpit.
Really? Sure you don't need an eye test wink



eekeekeek



LuS1fer

28,553 posts

114 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
peterbredde said:
I test drove a standard V8 Mustang just a few weeks ago. It sounds beautiful. But even in base form it is too lacking in grip. I found it ridiculous tbh.

(I expected to have lots of fun, but I was disappointed. Small cars with big engines are much better fun.)
The Pirelli P Neros they fit as standard are very poor. Americans value longevity rather than grip and like doing burnouts. I have 275/35s on mine and as you might imagine, have never had any slippage.

Small cars with big engines are not so much more fun as vastly more exploitable to their limits. You do need some driving skill and RWD experience to get the best from a Mustang and a pair of big b*lls if you want to utilise the oversteer function.

BlackPrince

785 posts

38 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
Car and Driver, which has for the last 20 years IIRC, ranked the Mustang above the Camaro, gave the nod to the Camaro because the Mustang was too harsh!

Also, while the interior of the Camaro is certainly better than the 90s one, its nowhere near as 'nice' as the Mustang at least in standard form and I don't anticipate the souped up versions being any different.

I recently drove an Audi S5, and though a lot slower and nowhere near as fun to drive as the Americans, there were other aspects that I think would be more relevant to day to day driving. The interior is really really nice, and you just get a feeling of goodwill sitting inside it compared to the Mustang/Camaro which wouldn't be as fun if you were doing the daily commute stuck in traffic 50% of the time.

Of course, you're only young once and a 30 year old doesn't look that much of a prat (compared to a 50 yr old) in a loud Camstang so one of those is my next next car biggrin
Advertisement

swerni

19,910 posts

79 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
With all those wonderful and cheap cars to choose from, why do you drive a Focus?


just curious smile


LuS1fer

28,553 posts

114 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
They keep saying how much better the new Mustang interior is but I just don't see it. I far prefer the original 2005 dash.

graemel

4,582 posts

86 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
Great cars. Always been a muscle car fan. Prefer the look of the Challenger over the Mustang and the Camaro. Looks more original 70's muscle. It is a shame they haven't joined the war. What happened to the proposed SRT10 project. Any of you guys have any real world experience of the Challenger. Is it any good ?

BlackPrince

785 posts

38 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
LuS1fer said:
They keep saying how much better the new Mustang interior is but I just don't see it. I far prefer the original 2005 dash.
That one lacks the option of a nav screen and also just looks more plasticky than the current one

LuS1fer

28,553 posts

114 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
BlackPrince said:
That one lacks the option of a nav screen and also just looks more plasticky than the current one
Easily remedied when you have a double DIN slot but on the plastic point, I'm seeing more in the later one....or at the very least the same sort of expanses.

chilled901

286 posts

46 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
midtec said:
2. For $14k I can buy a supercharger kit for the M3 that will give me 620HP for use on the track. $40k (2yr old M3) and $14k (supercharger kit) + $2k fitting = $56k. Isn't a 620Hp M3 more desirable????
Yes, comparing a car with no warranty and heavy modification to a brand new stock car makes complete sense. rolleyes


300bhp/ton

26,483 posts

59 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
LuS1fer said:
They keep saying how much better the new Mustang interior is but I just don't see it. I far prefer the original 2005 dash.
Have to say I really like this interior too. IUP MyColor worked well. But id want the red leather with screaming yellow clearcoat paint biggrin

willisit

1,382 posts

100 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
PascalBuyens said:
1LE. ZL body, but stripped out and NA engine...
That's the badger. I'd still take the ZL1 but I like the idea of a charged v8.

I've watched a few vids including Monkey's and the concencous is that the Camaro is the better car (especially concerning brakes) it just lacks silly power figure (in itself a crazy notion).

Tempted by a 2013 model with touchscreen and rear camera....

Reardy Mister

11,041 posts

91 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
E38Ross said:
Matt UK said:
300bhp/ton said:
r1ch said:
Quite weighty though, what was it, 1800 kg for the one?
Yes, but not overly so compared to other modern cars:


2010 BMW M3 Convertible auto 1905kg
2006 Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano 1753kg
2012 Aston Martin Vanquish 1739kg
2011 Jaguar XKR-S Convertible 1795kg
Indeed..

E39 M5 1826 kg
E60 M5 1855 kg
F100 M5 1945 kg
Merc E63 1836 kg
Audi C5 V8 RS6 1840 kg
Audi C6 V10 RS6 2025 kg
Maserati GranTurismo 1880 kg
BMW 6 Series 650i Coupe 1734 kg

Even a 997 Porsche Turbo, specced as a PDK+Cab is a 1700 kg car
i fail to see why an M3 cab auto weight was stated....the M3 coupe manual would be a more "relevant" one to quote which i think is around 1650kgs.

they aren't comparable to be honest, there is no getting away from >50% more power.
The automatic gearbox weighs 250kgs more?

Who makes it, Massey Ferguson?

Zad

8,716 posts

105 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
300bhp/ton said:
Zad said:
You can Facepalm and accuse me of being a Clarkson sheep all you like girls, but average UK pump petrol still has a higher usable energy density than US stuff. Even better if you stir in a bit of ethanol.
Do you actually have anything to back this up? BTW in many parts of the US you can buy pump E85, you can't in the UK.
Yes, yes I do. I personally went to the USA with my handy NPL traceable calibrated calorimeter and took statistically diverse samples from fuel tanks across the contiguous states.*

I don't care what you can buy, you can buy hypergolic hydrazine propellant if you want. It's what people do buy that matters.


Zad said:
Really? Sure you don't need an eye test wink
Well you tell me:

Chris pictured earlier next to a 1973 Morris Marina door and a seat from my mum's Grattan catalogue of the same year.


And a 1982 Fidelity in-car entertainment system.


Or it may be one of Amstrad's designs, not sure:



I understand your allegiance to US cars, and muscle cars in general. These cars have many attractive qualities in terms of street presence and power (and plain old value for money at home in the US) but the cabin surfaces and materials aren't even in the same century as Ford Europe's designs, let alone the more expensive brands.




* None, some or all of this may actually not be true.

midtec

13 posts

81 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
chilled901 said:
midtec said:
2. For $14k I can buy a supercharger kit for the M3 that will give me 620HP for use on the track. $40k (2yr old M3) and $14k (supercharger kit) + $2k fitting = $56k. Isn't a 620Hp M3 more desirable????
Yes, comparing a car with no warranty and heavy modification to a brand new stock car makes complete sense. rolleyes
Since when have things had to make sense when you are talking about road cars with 600+Hp. You pays your money and you takes your chance, same as everything in life. If you can't afford to fix it then I guess I agree with you go with the safe option and the stock car with a warranty, but my experience has been if you do your homework and get the right mods from the right company it isn't a huge risk.

dvs_dave

3,574 posts

94 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
Zad said:
Well you tell me:

Chris pictured earlier next to a 1973 Morris Marina door and a seat from my mum's Grattan catalogue of the same year.


And a 1982 Fidelity in-car entertainment system.


Or it may be one of Amstrad's designs, not sure:



I understand your allegiance to US cars, and muscle cars in general. These cars have many attractive qualities in terms of street presence and power (and plain old value for money at home in the US) but the cabin surfaces and materials aren't even in the same century as Ford Europe's designs, let alone the more expensive brands.




* None, some or all of this may actually not be true.
Hmmm.....something tells me "clueless knob".

300bhp/ton

26,483 posts

59 months

[news] 
Thursday 5th July 2012 quote quote all
dvs_dave said:
Zad said:
Well you tell me:

Chris pictured earlier next to a 1973 Morris Marina door and a seat from my mum's Grattan catalogue of the same year.


And a 1982 Fidelity in-car entertainment system.


Or it may be one of Amstrad's designs, not sure:



I understand your allegiance to US cars, and muscle cars in general. These cars have many attractive qualities in terms of street presence and power (and plain old value for money at home in the US) but the cabin surfaces and materials aren't even in the same century as Ford Europe's designs, let alone the more expensive brands.




* None, some or all of this may actually not be true.
Hmmm.....something tells me "clueless knob".
hehe

Mark Smith

137 posts

88 months

[news] 
Friday 6th July 2012 quote quote all
I'm over in Canada on holiday and there's loads of new muscle cars on the roads here. They all look awesome and sound amazing. The rumble from the exhausts of the V8 engines is pure music. There's a lot of the originals still around as well and they look every bit as stunning now as when they were new. I'd love to have one of each model from Ford, Dodge, Chevrolet , Pontiac and use them all. They are just stunning.

BlackPrince

785 posts

38 months

[news] 
Friday 6th July 2012 quote quote all
dvs_dave said:
Hmmm.....something tells me "clueless knob".
I'm not going to comment on his comparisons to old Fords and such as it seems a bit exaggerated to me, but his comment about European Fords v. American ones is spot on.

And 300hp/ton, the new Mustang has the aluminium dash something I don't think the 05 had (I assume the one in your pic is just painted plastic).

That said, I'm not sure it matters. I used to be a stickler for interior quality and hated American cars for their absolutely shocking lack of detail in their interiors. Then I drove the 2003 Mustang GT (the first one with the 60s-looking rims) and I loved it so much that the horrible plastics and weird seating position didn't matter at all!
1 2 ... 4 5
7 8
Reply to Topic