reading material

any good info? how big was the article?

i saw the review of what was in this months mag, but that was the only thing i wanted to see and didnt want to bother picking it up.

so your saying its more of a "read at your local 7-11" then a "buy and take it home" deal LOL

i read it. even though i run a carb i still found it interesting.

Yeah i thought it was cool to read about our cars. But they made it seem like our computers were SOOOOO bad. Put a CAI on it and your car wont even start or something. Also they made it like putting an A9L comp was some kinda of magical cure all for our year that would make it run like perfection.

My copy came in the mail yesterday and I'm pissed. I thought they made our cars sound like junk to avoid unless you want endless headaches from any mods. The least the magazine could have done was assign a writer to the story who had some affection for the '94-'95 cars. We're driving overweight, lazy pigs that couldn't pull a fat girl on a tricycle. Did you also see the writer's response in the tech letters section where he said that our computers were an unparallelled automotive disaster? My car's got H/C/I with a stock computer and it runs/idles fine just like many others out there. '05 Mustang & SF should find a writer with the journalistic integrity to investigate and accurately report on a subject. The closest he came was with the links to websites. I can't believe that guy ever owned/worked on a '94-'95 nevermind talk to someone who has. Then there's the hypocrisy factor. '05 Mustang tells us how great the new Mustangs are and (for example) if you change the airbox you need to computer tune them. Why is a computer tune legitimate for the new Mustangs but not for the '94-'95s?