beware of the v6f-bodies.....haha

p.exeter_bleu · Feb 18, 2004

i was browsing the web and came across a site called v6fbody.com or something like that and everyone of those guys was claiming there 6 banger put a lickin on all sorts of "mudstains" as they call then v-8 or v6!!!!! these guys are pathetic. claiming 3 car lengths on our v6 mustangs!!!! i was looking for info on an 88 v6 camaro that my friend claims is fast, have any of you guys heard of any 3rd gen v6 fbodies being quick?

http://www.v6fbody.com/community/viewtopic.php?t=219

behold the stupidity.

'66 coupe · Feb 19, 2004

They're obviously a bunch of dumbasses.

One guy in there is talking some crap about how a s/c SS Camaro should be able to kill an '03 Cobra. But the damn cars cost about the same amount of money stock. If you want to be fair just get a Mach I, supercharge it and beat the hell out of the SS and the Cobra, then pocket the rest of the money.
Besides, I'd like to see an '04 Mach go up against an '04 SS....OH YEA!!!...Dumbasses.

My friend has a '99 V6 Camaro. I'll admit they look good on the outside and the T-top option is nice, but the interiors are just plain awful. Not only do they feel cheap, but they're also hideous. I've never raced him, so I can't help you out with the speed thing. They FEEL about the same, but I'd still rather have my Mustang if it is slower. I mean both being V6's you're not really looking for the fastest times if you buy either.

Gault · Feb 19, 2004

I am of the opinion that the design change of the Mustang in '94 killed the Carmaro/Firebird line. Who would really pick one of those over a comparable Mustang?

So far as them beating Mustangs, sure it could happen. From Gus Mahon (RIP) building a Chrysler minivan ( http://home.earthlink.net/~turbogus/index.html )that beat Corvettes and blown GTOs at the track to the video I saw of a Nissan Sentra beating a Cobra, anything can be built to beat a given car, so what? Other than the novelty of it, would you really take the Nissan or minivan over the Vette or Cobra?

ChaosStarter · Feb 19, 2004

The only thing that the V6 Fbodies have that is better than the V6 stangs are the 3800 motor. That's it. It's just a slightly better design, and it's not much more powerful. Everything else about th Fbodies SUCK.

dmsead · Feb 19, 2004

The only 3rd gen V-6 F-body that was really quick from the factory was the '89 Turbo Trans Am. Basically a Buick GNX engine in a Firebird. But with enough money, anything can be modded to go fast.

SonicBlue02-3.8 · Feb 19, 2004

the v6 camaros only have 7-10 more hp then the 99+ v6 mustangs and their curb weight is more. So yes, a race with another v6 mustang would be a good race, but against a GT stock ! Come on know these guys obviously are just stupid!

97v6Silver · Feb 19, 2004

nahh man my 4 banger is like cobra killer, stock for stock yo!

....

ice091298 · Feb 19, 2004

[QUOTE='66 coupe]They're obviously a bunch of dumbasses.

One guy in there is talking some crap about how a s/c SS Camaro should be able to kill an '03 Cobra. But the damn cars cost about the same amount of money stock. If you want to be fair just get a Mach I, supercharge it and beat the hell out of the SS and the Cobra, then pocket the rest of the money.
Besides, I'd like to see an '04 Mach go up against an '04 SS....OH YEA!!!...Dumbasses.

My friend has a '99 V6 Camaro. I'll admit they look good on the outside and the T-top option is nice, but the interiors are just plain awful. Not only do they feel cheap, but they're also hideous. I've never raced him, so I can't help you out with the speed thing. They FEEL about the same, but I'd still rather have my Mustang if it is slower. I mean both being V6's you're not really looking for the fastest times if you buy either.[/QUOTE]

actually ss's are capeable of dipping into high 12's bone stock. ive seen it at the track, those cars are grossly underrated. also, their automatics are way better than ours, stock is geared to run with the manuals in the 1/4.

as far as cheap interiors, take a look at ours. ours are almost just as bad

ice091298 · Feb 19, 2004

but yes, those guys are douchebags

ChaosStarter · Feb 20, 2004

SonicBlue02-3.8 said:
the v6 camaros only have 7-10 more hp then the 99+ v6 mustangs and their curb weight is more. So yes, a race with another v6 mustang would be a good race, but against a GT stock ! Come on know these guys obviously are just stupid!

yup, but it's when the boost comes into play, they start outperforming.

5-SpeedStallion · Feb 20, 2004

ice091298 said:
actually ss's are capeable of dipping into high 12's bone stock. ive seen it at the track, those cars are grossly underrated. also, their automatics are way better than ours, stock is geared to run with the manuals in the 1/4.

as far as cheap interiors, take a look at ours. ours are almost just as bad

As far as I know, the only stock F-body to run in the 12's STOCK was a stripper '99 Z-28 that ran a 12.98 or something and has been the poster-child F-bod since. It is DEFINATELY not a common occurance. A good driver would hit 13.1-13.3 or so, which is what Mach 1's do with good drivers. Also, a Mach 1 with new shifter (i.e. Tri-ax) hit 12's in the 1/4. The cars are virtually equal 1/4 wise. After the 1/4, I think the LS1 pulls based on trap speed, but it is TOTALLY a driver's race. You are correct though that their auto's are far superior to ours, however, if you think our interiors are almost as bad, you haven't ever sat in an F-bod, or a Vette (for a 50k car, the interior is horrible). Everything is shared with Malibu's and stuff. Even the NEW Vette has the sameish steering wheel as a Malibu according to the mags.

nomuffler · Feb 20, 2004

ChaosStarter said:
The only thing that the V6 Fbodies have that is better than the V6 stangs are the 3800 motor. That's it. It's just a slightly better design, and it's not much more powerful. Everything else about th Fbodies SUCK.

Do you know what a suspension is? Look at a 4th gen camaro parked next to a V6 stang, which is gonna handle better? Then go research suspensions. The 3800 is a good motor, they've had well over 30 years to make it that way. A '97 V6 camaro (my brother's) weighs in at 3033 pounds, heavier than a fox, but much lighter than a SN95. I like the interior more on my brothers camaro than in my dad's '00 stang, but neither window works and the A/C sucks. And the key Fob doesn't work. Basicly, from what I've seen, There are two types of suspenions in 4th gen camaros ('soft' and 'hard' both are harsh) both of them are double wishbone fronts/ torque arm pahnard bar rear and thus very much superior to the mustang's suspension. And perhaps the reason the f-body dailed. As far a V6 camaros go, you got 3800 and 3500. 3500 sucks the big one, 3800 and it's a drivers race aginst a V6 stang. There are no good stock V6 3rd gen camaros. They used the 2.8 back then which works best as a boat anchor.

ice091298 · Feb 20, 2004

5-SpeedStallion said:
As far as I know, the only stock F-body to run in the 12's STOCK was a stripper '99 Z-28 that ran a 12.98 or something and has been the poster-child F-bod since. It is DEFINATELY not a common occurance. A good driver would hit 13.1-13.3 or so, which is what Mach 1's do with good drivers. Also, a Mach 1 with new shifter (i.e. Tri-ax) hit 12's in the 1/4. The cars are virtually equal 1/4 wise. After the 1/4, I think the LS1 pulls based on trap speed, but it is TOTALLY a driver's race. You are correct though that their auto's are far superior to ours, however, if you think our interiors are almost as bad, you haven't ever sat in an F-bod, or a Vette (for a 50k car, the interior is horrible). Everything is shared with Malibu's and stuff. Even the NEW Vette has the sameish steering wheel as a Malibu according to the mags.

ive actaully seen a few stock ss's hit high 12's, im not saying every single one of them do. granted it depends on track conditions, but ive yet to see a stock mach 1 run lower than a 13.6 at the track. as far as interiors, our cars are made with the same crappy materials, just a lil better designed. ive taken a z28 out for a test drive, and only thing i can say about it compared to ours is taht it feels somewhat cramped, and bad locations for controls. ive always said that domestic cars tend to lack in refined interiors, imports have always been ahead in that matter. now the svt focus, theres a great interior in a domestic.

'66 coupe · Feb 20, 2004

nomuffler said:
I like the interior more on my brothers camaro than in my dad's '00 stang,

It's all personal preference. The Camaro Interior is just too box-like for me. From the middle of the dash, to the hideous steering wheel, it's hard for to imagine who would actually want to sit inside the car rather than just be outside looking at it.
The thing I also like about the Mustangs is that if you pay the extra money for a Mach or Cobra, you don't get the same interior as the V6. You actually get something unique. I haven't seen anything special in the Z28's or SS's.

'66 coupe · Feb 20, 2004

ice091298 said:
ive always said that domestic cars tend to lack in refined interiors, imports have always been ahead in that matter. now the svt focus, theres a great interior in a domestic.

My friend just got a Lancer, and she paid just about what I paid for my Mustang. The interior in that car isn't anything special. But like I said, she paid about the same amount of money as I did.

When people say imports have better interiors, there's probably a tendency to think about examples that are into the $20k's; well above the range of a V6 Mustang. And even though GT's are in the same range, you're not paying for comfort when you buy a GT.

I've honestly never heard anyone complain about crappy domestic interiors when it comes to Lincolns, Cadillacs,...Hell even the new F150. But for some reason the more affordable domestics have cheaper interiors than their more expensive foriegn counterparts? Give me a break.

nomuffler · Feb 20, 2004

[QUOTE='66 coupe]It's all personal preference. [/QUOTE]
of course.
There were two slightly different 4th gen interiors, pre and post 1997(might be off byb a year). I wouldn't consider either of them boxy, the third gen yes but not the 4th. Camaro's interiors have always sucked. The stock stuff in my '78 is horrible, quality of material is fine (for a car with 300,000+ miles anyway) it's just that it looks thrown together, I guess they didn't have "ergonomics" back then. There's nothing wrong (to me) with the stang's interior, it's just not driver-centric like the late model camaro's. I guess I kinda like that.

ice091298 · Feb 20, 2004

[QUOTE='66 coupe]I've honestly never heard anyone complain about crappy domestic interiors when it comes to Lincolns, Cadillacs,...Hell even the new F150. But for some reason the more affordable domestics have cheaper interiors than their more expensive foriegn counterparts? Give me a break.[/QUOTE]

my old corolla (96) had a better designed interior than my mustang. the fit and finish on my mustang cant compare to the old corolla, and i bought the toyota with 92,000 miles on it. i paid 15000 for the stang with all the rebates, and i figure the corolla to have cost roughly the same new w/o any incentives.

mustang50v8 · Feb 20, 2004

[QUOTE='66 coupe]They're obviously a bunch of dumbasses.

One guy in there is talking some crap about how a s/c SS Camaro should be able to kill an '03 Cobra. But the damn cars cost about the same amount of money stock. If you want to be fair just get a Mach I, supercharge it and beat the hell out of the SS and the Cobra, then pocket the rest of the money.
Besides, I'd like to see an '04 Mach go up against an '04 SS....OH YEA!!!...Dumbasses.

My friend has a '99 V6 Camaro. I'll admit they look good on the outside and the T-top option is nice, but the interiors are just plain awful. Not only do they feel cheap, but they're also hideous. I've never raced him, so I can't help you out with the speed thing. They FEEL about the same, but I'd still rather have my Mustang if it is slower. I mean both being V6's you're not really looking for the fastest times if you buy either.[/QUOTE]

there is no such thing as a 2004 camaro, not even a 2003 camaro. 2002 was the last year of the camaro and fireturkey

'66 coupe · Feb 21, 2004

mustang50v8 said:
there is no such thing as a 2004 camaro, not even a 2003 camaro. 2002 was the last year of the camaro and fireturkey

Yea...umm...that was my entire point.

I mean...GM AXED THE F-BODY?!!! REALLY?!! I mean that was like the greatest performance car to ever hit the streets. Especially if you got the V6. There's no way they would've killed that car. You have to be kidding me.

CManT1914 · Feb 26, 2004

[QUOTE='66 coupe]Yea...umm...that was my entire point.

I mean...GM AXED THE F-BODY?!!! REALLY?!! I mean that was like the greatest performance car to ever hit the streets. Especially if you got the V6. There's no way they would've killed that car. You have to be kidding me. [/QUOTE]

LOL, I love stangnet's forums. Those guys are idiots. If Camaros are SOO great, then why aren't they STILL around? We should all go in there and talk trash in their own forums.

beware of the v6f-bodies.....haha

p.exeter_bleu

'66 coupe

Gault

ChaosStarter

dmsead

New Member

SonicBlue02-3.8

New Member

97v6Silver

it came to $4.56 and i got $0.44 change from a 5,

ice091298

New Member

ice091298

New Member

ChaosStarter

5-SpeedStallion

nomuffler

Member

ice091298

New Member

'66 coupe

'66 coupe

nomuffler

Member

ice091298

New Member

mustang50v8

Member

'66 coupe

CManT1914

New Member

Similar threads

beware of the v6f-bodies.....haha

New Member

New Member

it came to $4.56 and i got $0.44 change from a 5,

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency