1965coupe
Member
Dan_Soprano said:Just like Mopeds and Fat Chicks, fun to ride till your friends see you!
Dan_Soprano said:Just like Mopeds and Fat Chicks, fun to ride till your friends see you!
03GTconv said:Well this is going to make you guys rolling in a 99-04 GT kinda mad......
My buddy just went and had is brand new Cobalt SS dynoed....... 225 Fwhp...!!! What.....!! He said he was taking out some mustangs and wanted to see y lolol....Well we found out lol
Dammit!!! Dammit all to hell!!!
DBMSTNG said:take johnny who is 20 years old and living on his own. what would he buy on a limited budget? a fully loaded 225whp for $22k loaded or a Mustang GT that starts at $25k. then factor in the insurance costs associated with each. gas mileage is another issue. most, not all, of those fast 4cyls, get better gas mileage than a V8 car.
BlackArtemis said:I still find it ****ty an srt-4 can handle more power from the factory than our blocks can.
AmBo said:What is he raggin' on ***** ass 96-98 non-pi stangs? Tell him to pick on some FI stangs and see how well he runs. Apples to Apples baby.
True, but many 4/6cyl cars are making 250+hspwr for cheap and less weight. The mustang is a good car with its 300 hspwr that can run a 13.5 stock (awesome drvr), but take off 300 lbs and it would be an easy 13.1-13.5 car on avg.Gearbanger 101 said:Ohhhh, I don't know. I think the new stangs do pretty well with the 300hp they've been graced with. How many stock from the factory rice burners in the same price range as the Mustang can you think of that will run mid-13's or better?
The only one that comes to mind for me is a Subaru WRX STi and it's far more expensive than a Mustang GT.
Perhaps....but it's a big car and with bigger cars come bigger weight. Don’t think other manufacturers are doing any better. Take a look at the 350Z for example. Sure it makes great power for only 6-cylinders, but it’s just as tubby as the Stang and a dimensionally smaller car to boot. Sure you're getting high horsepower 4-cylinders like the SRT4 and the Cobalt SS, which have decent power levels with lower weight, but in order for them to pull it off, they had to build it around "half-a-car". People are complaining about the S197 Mustang being too heavy and not having enough horsepower, but at least it was a purpose built car with its own platform. If anything, it should be the SRT4 and Cobalt owners that should be going out of their minds. You've got to hand it to Dodge and GM. Give the public a few more horsepower, a flashy body kit and some shiny wheels and then strap it to the most basic, inexpensive bottom of the barrel car in their line up, then give it a new name...all while charged buyers twice the price for it. And on top of that have they've convinced potential owners to feel good about it. Now that's marketing strategy!big T said:True, but many 4/6cyl cars are making 250+hspwr for cheap and less weight. The mustang is a good car with its 300 hspwr that can run a 13.5 stock (awesome drvr), but take off 300 lbs and it would be an easy 13.1-13.5 car on avg.
Jackie Chan said:you have posted in multiple threads trying to talk **** about my livelihood. what is it you do for a living? just continue being the average loser, upping your post count stategically by answering every gear, cai and catback thread in tech....
thomas91169 said:i find it ****ty that ford cant figure out how to build motors that CAN handle that much power stock. aside from the Cobras, Lightnings and GT, every other car gets screwed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?