lol that jest shows they cant handle the power of a mustang so they need something slower like a comaro ha at least ford wasent built out of tax dollars hahaha
i bet the guy that uploaded this vid didn't know most of the mustangs in this vid had independent rear suspension... i bet he drives a honda with a engine swap
so because retarded people crash mustangs, mustangs suck? pick your car of preference and put a retard in it, they will crash it just as fast as a mustang... So ignorant
mustangs suck cause they are mustangs corvettes leaf springs and pushrods YEAH I SAID IT PUSHRODS!!!! And they kick ass and take names all day!!! Look up ZO6 vs Lamborghini!!!!
@608gamer07 GM uses them cause they are very effective..why put 2 or 4 cams into an engine when all it needs is one?...ever notice why u dont' see many modular engine fords that have done a cam swap..cause not many ppl are gona pay all that money for 2 or 4 cams.LS1's have been putting down to the wheels over 400HP with a cam only swap,,03-04 cobra's have forced induction and 4 fukin cams..and put down around 370!...dinosaurs are prehistoric too but it would still eat your ass
@ilovechevy1 Hey never said it was a bad engine setup. Just saying that the design is still pretty old but works great. I've seen people with the SOHC motors put out around 360 to the wheels with a good cam swap but like you said costs quite a bit but in the end would be worth it especially since the 2v SOHC engines come with about 235-240 to the wheels stock with is much less than the LS1 which dynos at 300 or so to the wheels.
@ilovechevy1 Ford used the best technology available to make a 4.6 compete with a 5.7 or now a 5.0 compete with a 6.2. Pound for pound by displacement, Ford puts out more power. Especially now, the 5.0 is pretty damned close to the 6.2 SS in the HP arena. 412 hp to your 426 and 1.2 litres less. Oh BTW, 03 and 04 cobras were putting down 390 rwhp off the showroom floor while they GM was trying to figure out why they couldn't sell Camaro's. They were outdated and cheap, just like their owners.
@DjGoofyG06 then how come in 93 GM had a 5.7 LT1 that waxed the first year models of the 4.6's that they put into the 96 stang GT they had a whopping 215 HP lol..compared to the LT1s 275hp..so no not more power except with the new 5.0's. around year 2000 the LS1 put down around 300 RWHP while the stang's 4.6 put down only 230RWP (at wheels)..and oh big deal a DOHC (4 cams!!) 4.6l V8 with a fucking BLOWER!! made only 390 RWHP..OOOO..so bad ass..and they came out AFTER the F bodies where stopped
@ilovechevy1 outdated and cheap?..if they where so outdated how come NO factory mustang GT from 93-2002 could outrun a factory 93-2002 camaro Z28????...stock for stock the LT1's and LS1's wrecked HAVOC at the drag strips against mustangs..fuck man..even a 98 camaro Z28 runs just as fast if not faster than 2010 mustang GT's...FORD needed a break after 2002 to heal up from all the ass kicking GM delt out..and only until 2011 have they made a fast base model mustang ..be loyal to them if u want!
@ilovechevy1 Talking to yourself now? I must have really struck a cord with you, so much so that you felt it necessary to post the same thing twice, see below. You didn't get what I was saying and keep talking about this stock for stock shit. Here is the ugly truth for ya, the new 5.0, 16 hp away from your 6.2. Translation, Chevy is outdated. I'll bet the interior is almost entirely plastic as they always were before, i know, I owned one. First and last chevy I will ever own.
@ilovechevy1 outdated and cheap?...if they where so outdated how come NO factory mustang GT from 93-2002 could outrun a factory 93-2002 camaro Z28????...stock for stock the LT1's and LS1's wrecked HAVOC at the drag strips against mustangs..fuck man..even a 98 camaro Z28 runs just as fast if not faster than 2010 mustang GT's...FORD needed a break after 2002 to heal up from all the ass kicking GM delt out..and only until 2011 have they made a fast base model mustang ..be loyal to them if u want!
@ilovechevy1 Wrecked is right!! I will agree, they are highly modifyable and it can be done cheaply. But any car can be made stupid fast. I prefer the one built Ford tough.
@ilovechevy1 and i myself have a 99 camaro SS with a twin intercooled procharger that makes 500 RWHP and runs high 10's..cobras! ..even puliied and tuned ones are a joke to me at the drag strip..yeah if u go slap a KB on it or more then u have a beast..but thats any V8..but your basic cobra with a pulley and exhaust mods needs more to run with boosted LS1's..and i noticed u are in the USAF.thats cool cause i'm in the Army..U POONTANG lol..6 month deployments and dont carry wepons in Iraq..GAY
@ilovechevy1 I understand your dissappointment. Air Force only takes people that graduated highschool and don't have a record. At least I'll have the potential for another job when i retire. I'll bet reading your resume would be kind of funny when your applying at McDonalds. Sorry sir, we kill people with cholesterol not guns.
@DjGoofyG06 ok ok..the cholesterol joke was funny i have to admit i almost fell off the couch lol...but after being in Iraq for a year and seeing u guys walk around base all day in PT's and not carrying a fire arm..like if some shit broke out on base then u guys where gona be hiding behind us.. the guys with the guns lol. it's not like u guys are always gona have time to go fire up your jets and hop in...i was like WTF...and these guys make the same amount of money we do..why..just dumb i think
@ilovechevy1 Mad respect bro but you fail to recognize that we all qualify on M-16 and some on M-9 prior to being able to deploy. I myself have shot expert marksman 3 times but again, Air Force folks are not there to be human shields, we are there to fix airplanes that save your ass in a fire fight. I didn't join the Air Force to shoot people. Ive spent 4 years of my 14 year career to date on deployments fixing planes that saved army and marine asses so you're welcome!
@DjGoofyG06 14 years in and 4 years deployed...well atleast u have'nt been dodging deployments i see lol..well u have spent more time over there than i have so props to u sir..but please for the love of god could u try to talk your ppl into keeping a weapon on them at all times and perhaps stay in uniform most of the day instead of PT's makes us Army guys call u pussies ( actually we are kinda jealous cause u guys make the same money and do half the work i'd say lol ) but thanks for saving us..
@ilovechevy1 I would never say "half" the work. I have put my time into a 165 degree sauna of an aircraft for 13 and 1/2 hours a day 7 days a week in the desert. It's pretty miserable. We all earn our check in different ways. As for keeping a weapon on us, that is decided by the CENTCOM CC, no us. As far as i know, we don't have a "reason" to have them when we have you. BTW, when i was at "a deployed location", your Army folks didn't carry weapons either. Depends on your location i guess.
@DjGoofyG06 and the army does'nt take GED's anymore only high school diplomas..they stopped doing that a few years ago..maybe the reserve still does but i'm not sure...but back to the LS1 and LT1 thing vs 4.6's...my personel experiences..i have owned 2 different LT1 cars..1 being a 93 Z28 and the other a 96 WS6 firebird (i busted the rear end at the track and sold it) but my Z28 beat the GT's 4.6 by like 8 car lenghts everytime and the WS6..i raced it against a 97 cobra and pulled hard!!
@ilovechevy1 They didn't put down 300 RWHP, they put down high 200. They were only rated for 305 hp at the fly. Sounds like your rounding up like all chevy owners do. 99-01 Cobras were putting out MORE HP than Z-28's in those years, and they were naturally asperated. You really need to check your math. Oh yeah, the 96 cobra was putting out 300+ when your camaro was putting out 275. So, to recap, 5.7 vs 4.6, Ford was winning then too. Camaros were stopped because they couldn't compete. Wake up!!
@DjGoofyG06 dude.it's a very well known fact the LS1's where highly undertaed..just like the cobras.the LS1's put down to the WHEELS on average around 300 RWHP.and the cobras put down between 370-390 RWHP..i know both sides cause i have owned 2 mustangs.so i know what slow is lol.but if u think i'm bullshitting u about the LS1's then look it up.some of them may have been dynoed in high elevation places and there they will make less power and so will any car.but the average is 300.somtimes 320!
@DjGoofyG06 and also turd monkey..the cobra and the Z28 are a class apart..the right match up would be the SS agaist the cobras..and as far as the year models around 96-97..the SS's and WS6 birds..would beat the cobras on the drag strip..why?..it's called a 6 speed manual thats why..and everybody knows usually when ford says somthing has so much HP..u got to check that shit on a dyno..except for the termis and the new 5.0's they are legitimate...a 2000 mustang GT calims 260 HP but dynos 220
@DjGoofyG06 ppl love to bring up the displacement thing...cuase guess what GM may use more displacement..but GM's engines are actually SMALLER in actual size.i mean physical size..look under the hood at an LS1 then look at a 4.6 and u will see.4.6 WAY fucking bigger ..it's a huge engine..has more cams also..and as for the cobras..a 390 RWHP DOHC V8 supercharged that makes only 390 HP should makes FORD ashamed...take a stock 98 camaro Z28 slap a procharger on it and have a 460 RWHP beast
@ilovechevy1 Ever heard of 90 degree block? Again, better technology then GM. As far as supercharging, I could do the same with a 99 cobra and get the same HP. You really need to come up with something better dude. A pully, exhaust and a chip on the 03 or 04 cobra will put out the same hp. A lot cheaper then spending $4k on a supercharger after buying the car. Have fun arguing with yourself.
@DjGoofyG06 well yeah no doubt u can do those things to a cobra and get the same HP numbers...but how much does a 03/04 cobra cost u used in good condition on the average..the average is 18-30k !!!...the average for an F body camaro in good shape..even the SS model can be had for average of 8-16k !!...so whose got more potential as far as a smarter buy..even after u buy a 6k procharger system u still not really in the price range of a good used cobra...and a procharged Z28.means a toasted cobra
@ilovechevy1 Dude, we could go on forever. Cobra's kept their value because they WEREN'T BUILT CHEAP! Look man, we aren't going to change each others minds. I love fords because I have owned both and i never had so many problems with a Ford as I did chevy. It all boils back to my original comment, pound for pound, Ford made a stronger motor, they just didn't have as much displacement as chevy to stay evenly matched but Ford fixed that now didn't they?
@DjGoofyG06 yeah i see your point on the fact that chevy's are built cheap..cause they are i will agree on it all day long..my 99 SS has only 52k miles on it and looks new..but i know if i threw a tantum inside the car i could destroy it with my bare hands..but i have also owned a few fords too..an 89 stang GT , a 97 stang GT and also a 96 tauras ( cough!) and they do have better quailty interiors and exteriors..but they was SOOOO SLOOOOW...my chevy's all hauled ass so i'm willing to sacrafise
@DjGoofyG06 and yes u are also right saying that ford has fixed the gap between power and displacement...but as much as i know the new 5.0's are a fucking beast of a mustang even better than the termis in my opinion..i would'nt mind owning one ( for my wife lol ) but looking at GM's track record of kicking mustang assees..i would'nt give up on them just yet..besides..the camaro would be faster than the new 5.0 if only GM had'nt been retarded and made it weight almost 4000 pounds..give them time
@608gamer07 and proven and faster, and better sounding, and worth more, and easier to maintain, ford engines suck, and this is coming from a cobra owner!
haha i love mustangs but that gold mustang guy was a retard leaves the front bumper with his license plate hahahaha not to smart. . . oh BTW its okay to put bmw Benz Audi but not a f**king honda HAHAHA that shit is wack dont ever say a honda is better then a stang
Want a cheap sports car that looks great and has good accerleration with strait line speed? Get a Mustang. Their is no reason to suggest that any Muscle car is better then any other. Besides Ford INVENTED the modern car w/ the mustang. The mustang was the first car that had multiple options and packages so that you could get the car that you want! If you don't like the Mustang then go elsewhere, but leave us Mustang fans ALONE.
so by your definition all muscle cars are badly engineered? and i don't get how people say they're better for drag racing, every mustang i've ever seen be launched off the line or do a burnout gets massive wheel-hop.
and anyway, any car can go in a straight line. a good car has to be able to do everything.
Bad engineering? They are better for drag racing, off roading, and they can get through corners just fine. If you got a powerful v8 under the hood you'll want to have a strong rear axle. Plus where do you keep seeing wheel hop at? All of the fastest drag cars got solid rear axles dude.
then please explain to me why cars like the ferrari 458, corvette zr1, aston martin vantage, etc. don't use this wonderous and brilliant engineering technology you speak of? surely with their powerful v8s under the hood, they need a live rear axle.
because those cars are made for douchebags that usually are snotty nosed assholes or complete pansies. Plus those cars cost alot of money. Want to turn with a solid rear axle? Power slide it, its not hard, and VERY fun.
on the contrary, i heard the old gt500 had a tendency to understeer, and would only oversteer when provoked to do so.
live rear axle is semi-acceptable in an off-roader, not acceptable in a 21st century automobile. not at all. especially not in a car that ford calls a sports car.
But wasn't the Mustang designed to be upgraded or left as is? I tdepends what the customer wanted out it.
Thats why it was the first car ever you could walk into the showroom and order how you want it, or do it yourself. Thje Mustang was/ is a blank canvas.
Thats why even now, in 2009, the mustang still has the solid rear axle, because it makes it easier for people to customise and its tougher drag racing.
why would a mustang run on pikes peak? thats a rally course,and obviously mustangs aren't rally cars.and why spend 120,000 or more on a car,when i could by a mustang for like 15,000-20,000 ,and then put only like 60,000 of upgrades in it,and make it as good,or even better than the unnessesarely expensive car
did i say that the mustang should run on pikes peak? no, my point was that any car can do anything with modifications.
and i don't get how the live rear axle is tougher for drag racing. the current gen mustang has horrendous wheel hop, something that a car with modern suspension doesn't have.
Yeah It kinda happens in every RWD cars but I dont think its because of the car, I think the drivers are dumb asses but yeah Id prefer a BMW to a Mustang for sure...
I laughed my ass off at this vid. I have a 2008 Bullitt and love it. A V8 muscle car lacks a bit of finess (gayness) that a BMW has. And I made a porsche driver wet his Depends.
wow i can see how much of a serious driver you are if you call finesse gayness...
it's funny, but when i picture mustang drivers in my mind, i think of ignorant, small minded red necks who know nothing about cars except I DON'T CARE WHAT'S COMPROMISED, GIVE ME MORE POWER NOW!!!!!
i doubt that . a porshe will rape your bullit unless its an older 02 boxster. and by the way i hate porsches but mustangs sucks so bad.. all you mustang boys care about is sound.
no man im sorry mustangs do suck, for the amount of money you pay you get, an ancient suspension, piece of junk v6 from a taurus( if you went v8 then its from a small truck) ive driven. every mustang up to a brand new super snake, the only one i could ever consider anygood at all is the roush, and to be honest you put up against a vette its done for. There are to many better cars than a mustang
Man, what I see in these clips are mainly drivers' errors. It's their fault that they can't handle the oversteer.
Of course, the biggest problem with mustang is the understeer, it usually comes suddenly and without warning at higher speeds, you think you can kill it with the throttle, you push it and it spins from understeer into a deadly oversteer but not but the speeds in your vid are rather low.
Exactly. I've owned quite a few modern mustangs and never crashed one, and so has my brother and a few of my friends, and they've never crashed one. And I live in the UK where we have loads of tight bends.
Im honestly tired of people in the UK thinking that the US has nothing but straight always, i'm not saying thats what you believe, but its just getting annoying. If you have never driven here, don't think that there, aren't Exceptional places to drive.
your another idiotic muscle head who thinks that brutish raw v8 is the answer to everything. try something that can go fast other than in a straight line
I don't see how they can be useless. They're a big seller in the UK and we have loads of windy and bendy roads. Go to a Ford or American car show in the UK, and the field has loads of these cars. Unless you go on a race track, who actually races each other around bends on a road anyway? These cars were built for more than just a race track. Put on one on the motorway, and it'll fly, cruise in it, and it looks fine.
well i personally believe that if you buy a car with 500 horsepower, you'd buy it to use on the track as well as the road.
i'm sorry, but a car built explicitly for straight lines is a half assed car. i can't believe that an american is trying to explain this to a brit, but it's true. a bmw m3 or ferrari 430 could drive in a straight line as well as a mustang could, but they can also dance around corners.
Again, that sort of depends on the driver. I've had to pluck BMWs out of ditches before that have lost it on bends. Same with Mustangs on a track. I've seen people thrash them around a track. The auction where I worked was situated next to a race track, and I saw quite a few Mustangs attend and test. But again, it depends on the driver,and if they know how to handle it. Not everyone that wants a 500 horsepower car, is into euro style mototsport.
The thing is, this video you've put on here, the cars have been personally modified. ..Or they're a shit driver. You telling me that every Mustang that is sold crashes on a bend?...No, you've posted videos of 4 mustangs crashing (probably driven by crap teenage drivers) Alot of people know how to drive properly and respect the car. I know alot of Mustang drivers in the carclub, and non of them have ever crashed one,...neither have I.
i posted the videos after personally driving a v6 convertible, and i thought it was complete shit. the only thing i liked about it was that at 75 mph it could turn over at just 2,000 rpm, in true american fashion. but i still find the engine terrible. i mean, i own a car with 1,000 cc's fewer displacement but with 10 more horsepower.
the whole car felt like a half-assed effort from ford. and i live in one of the only parts of america with bends (northern new jersey)
End of the day, you can say the Mustang is useless because it only goes in a straight line as opposed to a Ferrari which can go in a straight line and around bends fast. But then you can say the Ferrari is useless as acar compared to a Volvo 4x4 wagon which can do both as well as go offroad,AND carry 4 or 5 people un like a ferrari.
The Mustang isn't a useless car. It works for its purpose and terrain. It started life as a street cruiser and racer.
I'd understand you saying its useless if it was originally built to compete against eurosports cars on eurosport tracks, but it was built for American roads and for a tight budget. It works perfectly well for that the same as a Ferrari would make a shit family car.
All you do is slow down abit when you get to a bend. Wheres the hardship in that. ?Not everyone that buys a powerful car wants to take it on a race track or throw it around a bend at 80mph? Some people like to buy Mustangs to cruise on normal roads, and then up the throttle on the motorway. They work fine then. I 'd hardly call it useless. It'd be useless if the steering was fixed and didn't turn at all.
All Shelbys have have tweaked suspension and chassis components. Depending which Shelby model you buy. You can get the GT, GT-H , GT500, GT500-KR and now the Shelby Supersnake...although the GT500 KR and supersnake has the most modifications.
People like me for example would love one of the new Mustangs.I've no interest in euro motorsport what so ever .I'd take it over a BMW anyday. It looks different, sounds awesome, and goes damn fast. I would care if it was 200bhp or 1000 BHP, I like the look of them, and its a legendary marque, and for the money,they're great.
For your interest it sounds like the mustang fits you well, but im sorry they are not great for there money, thats why there depreciation is so damn low.
Again, it depends where you live. In the UK, Mustangs can still fetch good money. It can also depend on which model and year. Probably not in the US, as they're common.
Its the same here in the UK.Alot of supposed valuable Euro cars you get in the States, don't fetch as much here, because they're more common. I've seen M5s depreciate by £40,000 in two years.
Yes, but at the same time mustangs, are no where near as good a value for the car its self, look at the suspension, and drive train. normally theres about 20%-30% drive train loss in a car, mustangs from the mid 90s on have about 45%, thats nearly half the power gone, just to get the wheels to move
Its the same for alot of cars. You pay for the badge, and to drive something different.
Old classic MGs for example.Sort of like the british version of the Mustang. Cheap afordable car thats just abit of fun and easy to modify. You don't get alot for your money, but they still fetch good money.
they are pretty cars, theres no doubt about that, but exciting, i completely disagree, and for the money of any of those you could go for a st205, or sti v6, if your looking for rwd, try a lexus sc300( toyota soarer). all im saying is from my experiences, mustangs have been uncomfortable, over rated, heavy rear ended cars. there are in my openion much better cars for your money. an SLK, or lotus omega
Here in the UK, Those STi's are more expensive, and too common in the UK to be interesting. Good if you want a fast car, but just not interesting to look at. To me thats quite important, as your car spends 70% of its life parked up or travelling in slow traffic, so it may as well look interesting stationary.They also have a bad reputation for idiot drivers. And they've also got a reputation for being stolen.
im sure they are more common, but my point being that there are many more cars that as a drivers car are more apealing, and if your looking simply for a show car, then i personally would have to say though the mustang is a pretty car, it certainly is not a pretty as so many other cars, just a personal opinion. then again, i also have a 77 celica that im currently restoring
Lexus are way more expensive than mustangs as well.
The thing is, if you buy a 60's, 70's mustang, you buy it because its classic car. You're obviously not gonna buy a Lexus over a 60's Mustang if you like Classics cars. So the Mustang is gonna be better value to that person. Its relevent to the person and age of car etc as to what defines 'value'.
the sc300 is not more expensive, ive found them for as cheep as 2000 US. and im sorry, but if your looking for a classic american car,try looking at an corvette, or road runner. the road runner is rare even here and is absolutely gorgeous
Roadrunners and vettes hold fetch alot in the UK too. Although Vettes aren't that rare.
What do you class as a drivers car? I've always wondered this.
You see, I don't think that a car that grips the road like glue, and basically does everything for you is a drivers car. It doesn't test your driving skills. Where as a Mustang does. It fights back, and you have to wrestle it. I would of thought thats a drivers car.
my openion of a drivers car is not a car that does everything for you, its a car that challenges you pushes, but at the same time, feels as though its part of you, personally the only cars ive ever been able to have this feeling for is , the lotus elise( not exige, sc300( 2jz gtte), subaru sti( US spec), My dads road runner, and surprisingly enough the lancia delta integral.
We don't get the SC300 over here, so I can't really compare. Most I see have been specially imported from Japan.
Regarding classic mustangs and Roadrunners etc, alot of people buy classic mustangs as classic American cars, because of their size. We have tiny driveways in the UK, and Mustangs fit well in the drive. Roadrunners are just too damn big.
that would make since, but in all honesty over there the mustang my seem full of american pride and heritage, but in the US there a generic over played car. to have a nice classic mustang in the US its a car you wouldnt drive
Each to their own. It doesn't mean Mustangs are crap though because you don't like them. My work collegue refuses to buy a Mercedes again after the previous 2 he owned spent many days in the Garage. My Mustangs outlived his mercs, and I've the bonus of the fun of car shows and stuff.
I take it you've never seen that video where that guy crashes a ferrari 4 seconds off the starting line, going in a straight line?
You take some people who suck at driving, put them in a car and say the cars sucks. That makes no sense. Granted I have a stang and the handling is not great, that does not mean it sucks.
Say you suck at math, or english. Does that mean you suck at school?
What is the point of this video? I can go jump in a BMW and plow into other cars too if I was an idoit.
It should be called People who should have here license revoked.
Who's the idiot that made this video? You almost sounded smart with the facts you stated about the Mustang but then you compared it to Mercedes, BMW, Audi, and Honda....!? I will certainly agree that the Mustangs chassis is garbage but you can not compare a 20K USD front engine, V8, rear wheel drive Muscle car to Luxury and Economy brands. Its obvious you know nothing of cars because you don't even understand the segment the Mustang is in!
first off, the mustang v8 costs around 30k. honda sells the s2000, which is also around 30k what is the same speed to 60 and is lightyears faster around a track.
the bmw 3 series is much the same story.
granted the mustang isn't meant to compete with these brands, but there are much smarter ways to go quickly, which was my intention to explain.
for instance: i'd much rather have a 2 year used bmw 335i than a brand new mustang gt.
Yes, 27K starting price for a V8 Mustang but the story still remains. The S2000 is a 4cyl 2 seater, the BMW is a BMW. Neither are a "Muscle Car". People who buy Mustangs and Camaros, build them, race them, love them, are the people who are doing straight line Drag Races. Remember these are American cars built for an American past time or "Drag Racing". I agree that the BMW and S2000 are better built, and time will tell about quality but you must see facts rather then opinion.
the fact is that it takes no engineering skill to only make a car go in a straight line. stick a rocket onto a skateboard, and it would be a dragster's dream, but is it stable? of course not. bottom line: any car can go in a straight line, and you'd be nuts to buy a car that is limited to that.
Chances are that the Mustang handles better then the car you are currently driving, live axle or not. The Mustang is designed to drag, but it's also designed like any other car to be able to maneuver at highway speeds in an emergency situation (Slalom Test). For a cheap, everyday car, the Mustang performs well. Also, i don't know if you've ever tested this "Rocket, Skateboard" theory but i can assure you that it will not go in a straight line.
you're so wrong. i've driven a 2008 mustang convertible, and it was terrible. the brakes sucked, on the slightest bend i felt like i had to slam on the brakes, there was very little leg room although the car is a million feet long, and i didn't think it was too powerful. granted it was only a v6, but it still displaces 4 liters.
i drive a mazda 6s, a whole 1000 cc's less than the mustangs engine, and it makes more horsepower. and yes, it handles amazingly.
Also are there any American cars that you do like, and would own, or are you strictly an import guy that we can blame for the state of our Auto industry? I would bet that you have no concept of truth or fact. You would rather invest money into foreign markets thinking it will never affect you, take a back seat rather then speak up for change, and watch as your neighbors loose there jobs and eventually you too.
i will never buy an american car simply because it's american. that's why they're in trouble, they know there are idiots like you who would buy their cars no matter what. the only good american cars are foreign. the pontiac g8 is australian, ford fusion, mercury milan, lincoln mkz, mkx, ford edge, is japanese (mazda 6 chassis and suspension) and most saturns and chevy sedans are european.
the only 2 good american cars that are actually american are the corvette, and the cts-v.
You're just showing ignorance. GM is a worldwide brand, sharing designs, ideas, and parts with all of its brands. Why wouldn't they do that? The CTS/CTS-V platform was designed, like the others you speak of, by "Global World Rear Drive" in Australia. You must be really stupid to believe that a worldwide company wouldn't share technology. Also did you know that Ford Motor Company has been developing cars with Mazda since 1970 and that Mazda is owned by Ford making it American owned and operated.
i know exactly what i'm talking about, but ford and gm do more than share components. they take the exact car and change the body. the ford fusion has the exact same engines as the mazda 6, the same suspension, same chassis, same interior layout. the only difference is the platform is stretched by an inch. and don't think for one second that ford had anything to do with the engineering of any mazda, land rover, jaguar, or aston martin. all they did was finance it.
Also these Mustangs look modified. It wouldn't take much to crash a car if you don't modifiy the suspension and chassis, with the engine.
Like I said, I've never crashed one, and neither have any of my friends that were in the Mustang club. And I live in the UK where we have severe bends.
mhm, but look at the gt500. they just stuffed a 50kg supercharger onto the car, and didn't change anything. not even the brakes. yet, you wouldn't believe how popular that car is in america. idgi.
They're doing away with the cheaper plastics on the interior on the Mustang in 2010 as well.
The 2008+ GT500 and KRs do have upgraded brakes and suspension. I keep in contact and sometimes visit a friend of mine that imports American cars to the UK. He got hold of 2 GT500s.
Before you dig yourself a very deep grave why don't you pick up a book and read a bit about this subject. It's obvious you're about to be schooled and that ignorance will prove itself mighty in you. Learn to swim before you jump in the deep end.
You child, obviously you know nothing. The DB9 sits on the American Designed Ford VH Platform, the car was designed by Ian Callum (British) and Henrik Fisker (Danish). Henrik Fisker also designed the BMW Z8. The DB9 is the product of Ford Global. Ford designed, built, and funded the DB9, Ford is American... LoL the Elise...Toyota Powered, GM Designed and Developed...its a mutt. Again boy, your out of your league because you obviously don't EDUCATE yourself!
I've actually seen a you tube video where some guy does exactly the same thing in a ferrari. Crashed after 4 seconds of moving from the starting line, in a straight line.
I've owned Mustangs and never crashed one. It depends on hjow good the driver is.
lol that jest shows they cant handle the power of a mustang so they need something slower like a comaro ha at least ford wasent built out of tax dollars hahaha
magicninja95 1 week ago
i bet the guy that uploaded this vid didn't know most of the mustangs in this vid had independent rear suspension... i bet he drives a honda with a engine swap
JPARKERZ28 1 year ago
so because retarded people crash mustangs, mustangs suck? pick your car of preference and put a retard in it, they will crash it just as fast as a mustang... So ignorant
Mustangman001 1 year ago
hey man nice video and very true, im glad you advertised real car companies at the end of the video good job. mustangs suck!!!!!!!!!
MHAces1 1 year ago
mustangs suck cause they are mustangs corvettes leaf springs and pushrods YEAH I SAID IT PUSHRODS!!!! And they kick ass and take names all day!!! Look up ZO6 vs Lamborghini!!!!
turboc87gn 2 years ago
title correction: These people suck at driving
FullThrottleStangs04 2 years ago 2
gm still uses pushrod motors... those are prehistoric...
608gamer07 2 years ago
@608gamer07 agreed
coolerdude44 2 years ago
...but they ran forever and were cheap to maintain. Perfect engines for cheaper cars for people without a fat wallet.
Do they STILL have a pushrod motor in production? I thought they killed the last one in the 2008 or 2009 model year.
shred5 2 years ago
the 6.2L LS.. whatever number theyre on is still a pushrod.
608gamer07 2 years ago
@608gamer07 GM uses them cause they are very effective..why put 2 or 4 cams into an engine when all it needs is one?...ever notice why u dont' see many modular engine fords that have done a cam swap..cause not many ppl are gona pay all that money for 2 or 4 cams.LS1's have been putting down to the wheels over 400HP with a cam only swap,,03-04 cobra's have forced induction and 4 fukin cams..and put down around 370!...dinosaurs are prehistoric too but it would still eat your ass
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 Hey never said it was a bad engine setup. Just saying that the design is still pretty old but works great. I've seen people with the SOHC motors put out around 360 to the wheels with a good cam swap but like you said costs quite a bit but in the end would be worth it especially since the 2v SOHC engines come with about 235-240 to the wheels stock with is much less than the LS1 which dynos at 300 or so to the wheels.
608gamer07 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 Ford used the best technology available to make a 4.6 compete with a 5.7 or now a 5.0 compete with a 6.2. Pound for pound by displacement, Ford puts out more power. Especially now, the 5.0 is pretty damned close to the 6.2 SS in the HP arena. 412 hp to your 426 and 1.2 litres less. Oh BTW, 03 and 04 cobras were putting down 390 rwhp off the showroom floor while they GM was trying to figure out why they couldn't sell Camaro's. They were outdated and cheap, just like their owners.
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 then how come in 93 GM had a 5.7 LT1 that waxed the first year models of the 4.6's that they put into the 96 stang GT they had a whopping 215 HP lol..compared to the LT1s 275hp..so no not more power except with the new 5.0's. around year 2000 the LS1 put down around 300 RWHP while the stang's 4.6 put down only 230RWP (at wheels)..and oh big deal a DOHC (4 cams!!) 4.6l V8 with a fucking BLOWER!! made only 390 RWHP..OOOO..so bad ass..and they came out AFTER the F bodies where stopped
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 outdated and cheap?..if they where so outdated how come NO factory mustang GT from 93-2002 could outrun a factory 93-2002 camaro Z28????...stock for stock the LT1's and LS1's wrecked HAVOC at the drag strips against mustangs..fuck man..even a 98 camaro Z28 runs just as fast if not faster than 2010 mustang GT's...FORD needed a break after 2002 to heal up from all the ass kicking GM delt out..and only until 2011 have they made a fast base model mustang ..be loyal to them if u want!
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 Talking to yourself now? I must have really struck a cord with you, so much so that you felt it necessary to post the same thing twice, see below. You didn't get what I was saying and keep talking about this stock for stock shit. Here is the ugly truth for ya, the new 5.0, 16 hp away from your 6.2. Translation, Chevy is outdated. I'll bet the interior is almost entirely plastic as they always were before, i know, I owned one. First and last chevy I will ever own.
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 outdated and cheap?...if they where so outdated how come NO factory mustang GT from 93-2002 could outrun a factory 93-2002 camaro Z28????...stock for stock the LT1's and LS1's wrecked HAVOC at the drag strips against mustangs..fuck man..even a 98 camaro Z28 runs just as fast if not faster than 2010 mustang GT's...FORD needed a break after 2002 to heal up from all the ass kicking GM delt out..and only until 2011 have they made a fast base model mustang ..be loyal to them if u want!
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 Wrecked is right!! I will agree, they are highly modifyable and it can be done cheaply. But any car can be made stupid fast. I prefer the one built Ford tough.
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 and i myself have a 99 camaro SS with a twin intercooled procharger that makes 500 RWHP and runs high 10's..cobras! ..even puliied and tuned ones are a joke to me at the drag strip..yeah if u go slap a KB on it or more then u have a beast..but thats any V8..but your basic cobra with a pulley and exhaust mods needs more to run with boosted LS1's..and i noticed u are in the USAF.thats cool cause i'm in the Army..U POONTANG lol..6 month deployments and dont carry wepons in Iraq..GAY
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 I understand your dissappointment. Air Force only takes people that graduated highschool and don't have a record. At least I'll have the potential for another job when i retire. I'll bet reading your resume would be kind of funny when your applying at McDonalds. Sorry sir, we kill people with cholesterol not guns.
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 ok ok..the cholesterol joke was funny i have to admit i almost fell off the couch lol...but after being in Iraq for a year and seeing u guys walk around base all day in PT's and not carrying a fire arm..like if some shit broke out on base then u guys where gona be hiding behind us.. the guys with the guns lol. it's not like u guys are always gona have time to go fire up your jets and hop in...i was like WTF...and these guys make the same amount of money we do..why..just dumb i think
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
Comment removed
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 Mad respect bro but you fail to recognize that we all qualify on M-16 and some on M-9 prior to being able to deploy. I myself have shot expert marksman 3 times but again, Air Force folks are not there to be human shields, we are there to fix airplanes that save your ass in a fire fight. I didn't join the Air Force to shoot people. Ive spent 4 years of my 14 year career to date on deployments fixing planes that saved army and marine asses so you're welcome!
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 14 years in and 4 years deployed...well atleast u have'nt been dodging deployments i see lol..well u have spent more time over there than i have so props to u sir..but please for the love of god could u try to talk your ppl into keeping a weapon on them at all times and perhaps stay in uniform most of the day instead of PT's makes us Army guys call u pussies ( actually we are kinda jealous cause u guys make the same money and do half the work i'd say lol ) but thanks for saving us..
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 I would never say "half" the work. I have put my time into a 165 degree sauna of an aircraft for 13 and 1/2 hours a day 7 days a week in the desert. It's pretty miserable. We all earn our check in different ways. As for keeping a weapon on us, that is decided by the CENTCOM CC, no us. As far as i know, we don't have a "reason" to have them when we have you. BTW, when i was at "a deployed location", your Army folks didn't carry weapons either. Depends on your location i guess.
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 and the army does'nt take GED's anymore only high school diplomas..they stopped doing that a few years ago..maybe the reserve still does but i'm not sure...but back to the LS1 and LT1 thing vs 4.6's...my personel experiences..i have owned 2 different LT1 cars..1 being a 93 Z28 and the other a 96 WS6 firebird (i busted the rear end at the track and sold it) but my Z28 beat the GT's 4.6 by like 8 car lenghts everytime and the WS6..i raced it against a 97 cobra and pulled hard!!
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 They didn't put down 300 RWHP, they put down high 200. They were only rated for 305 hp at the fly. Sounds like your rounding up like all chevy owners do. 99-01 Cobras were putting out MORE HP than Z-28's in those years, and they were naturally asperated. You really need to check your math. Oh yeah, the 96 cobra was putting out 300+ when your camaro was putting out 275. So, to recap, 5.7 vs 4.6, Ford was winning then too. Camaros were stopped because they couldn't compete. Wake up!!
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 dude.it's a very well known fact the LS1's where highly undertaed..just like the cobras.the LS1's put down to the WHEELS on average around 300 RWHP.and the cobras put down between 370-390 RWHP..i know both sides cause i have owned 2 mustangs.so i know what slow is lol.but if u think i'm bullshitting u about the LS1's then look it up.some of them may have been dynoed in high elevation places and there they will make less power and so will any car.but the average is 300.somtimes 320!
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 and also turd monkey..the cobra and the Z28 are a class apart..the right match up would be the SS agaist the cobras..and as far as the year models around 96-97..the SS's and WS6 birds..would beat the cobras on the drag strip..why?..it's called a 6 speed manual thats why..and everybody knows usually when ford says somthing has so much HP..u got to check that shit on a dyno..except for the termis and the new 5.0's they are legitimate...a 2000 mustang GT calims 260 HP but dynos 220
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 ppl love to bring up the displacement thing...cuase guess what GM may use more displacement..but GM's engines are actually SMALLER in actual size.i mean physical size..look under the hood at an LS1 then look at a 4.6 and u will see.4.6 WAY fucking bigger ..it's a huge engine..has more cams also..and as for the cobras..a 390 RWHP DOHC V8 supercharged that makes only 390 HP should makes FORD ashamed...take a stock 98 camaro Z28 slap a procharger on it and have a 460 RWHP beast
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 Ever heard of 90 degree block? Again, better technology then GM. As far as supercharging, I could do the same with a 99 cobra and get the same HP. You really need to come up with something better dude. A pully, exhaust and a chip on the 03 or 04 cobra will put out the same hp. A lot cheaper then spending $4k on a supercharger after buying the car. Have fun arguing with yourself.
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 well yeah no doubt u can do those things to a cobra and get the same HP numbers...but how much does a 03/04 cobra cost u used in good condition on the average..the average is 18-30k !!!...the average for an F body camaro in good shape..even the SS model can be had for average of 8-16k !!...so whose got more potential as far as a smarter buy..even after u buy a 6k procharger system u still not really in the price range of a good used cobra...and a procharged Z28.means a toasted cobra
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 Dude, we could go on forever. Cobra's kept their value because they WEREN'T BUILT CHEAP! Look man, we aren't going to change each others minds. I love fords because I have owned both and i never had so many problems with a Ford as I did chevy. It all boils back to my original comment, pound for pound, Ford made a stronger motor, they just didn't have as much displacement as chevy to stay evenly matched but Ford fixed that now didn't they?
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 yeah i see your point on the fact that chevy's are built cheap..cause they are i will agree on it all day long..my 99 SS has only 52k miles on it and looks new..but i know if i threw a tantum inside the car i could destroy it with my bare hands..but i have also owned a few fords too..an 89 stang GT , a 97 stang GT and also a 96 tauras ( cough!) and they do have better quailty interiors and exteriors..but they was SOOOO SLOOOOW...my chevy's all hauled ass so i'm willing to sacrafise
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@ilovechevy1 I would never admit to owning a taurus, ouch! My hat is off to you sir. lol
DjGoofyG06 1 year ago
@DjGoofyG06 and yes u are also right saying that ford has fixed the gap between power and displacement...but as much as i know the new 5.0's are a fucking beast of a mustang even better than the termis in my opinion..i would'nt mind owning one ( for my wife lol ) but looking at GM's track record of kicking mustang assees..i would'nt give up on them just yet..besides..the camaro would be faster than the new 5.0 if only GM had'nt been retarded and made it weight almost 4000 pounds..give them time
ilovechevy1 1 year ago
@608gamer07 and proven and faster, and better sounding, and worth more, and easier to maintain, ford engines suck, and this is coming from a cobra owner!
tuugfo 1 year ago
@608gamer07 If its not broke dont fix it
MrBigblackG 8 months ago
@608gamer07 and more suited for low rpm torque. ohc engines are only good for gas milage and higher revs. pushrods are perfect for drag.
1911harbinger 1 month ago
@1911harbinger Huh? I don't think the '13 GT500 with 650hp and 600lb-ft going 200+mph is just good for high revs and gas mileage.
608gamer07 1 month ago
:58-1:10....wtf is wrong with that guy
Blownpony01 2 years ago
haha i love mustangs but that gold mustang guy was a retard leaves the front bumper with his license plate hahahaha not to smart. . . oh BTW its okay to put bmw Benz Audi but not a f**king honda HAHAHA that shit is wack dont ever say a honda is better then a stang
ilyaf88 2 years ago
@ilyaf88 my honda nsx will destroy a fuckin shitstang.
racingchamp101 2 years ago 2
coolernoob44 whatcha got to run?
streetcarforums 2 years ago
This is the perception we have about muscle cars. they can´t curve, no handling.
fdxnaoseinomes 2 years ago
well, judging by the current breed of muscle cars, and looking down the family tree, i'd say it's true.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
@fdxnaoseinomes YOUR A CHINK IMPORT LOVER
mudslingers513 1 year ago 2
You want a handling car? Get a Roush Mustang.
Want a cheap sports car that looks great and has good accerleration with strait line speed? Get a Mustang. Their is no reason to suggest that any Muscle car is better then any other. Besides Ford INVENTED the modern car w/ the mustang. The mustang was the first car that had multiple options and packages so that you could get the car that you want! If you don't like the Mustang then go elsewhere, but leave us Mustang fans ALONE.
Roushfan5 2 years ago
live rear axles are stronger and are better for drag racing, plus whats a good muscle car without one?
FordNissanChevy 2 years ago
so by your definition all muscle cars are badly engineered? and i don't get how people say they're better for drag racing, every mustang i've ever seen be launched off the line or do a burnout gets massive wheel-hop.
and anyway, any car can go in a straight line. a good car has to be able to do everything.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Bad engineering? They are better for drag racing, off roading, and they can get through corners just fine. If you got a powerful v8 under the hood you'll want to have a strong rear axle. Plus where do you keep seeing wheel hop at? All of the fastest drag cars got solid rear axles dude.
FordNissanChevy 2 years ago
then please explain to me why cars like the ferrari 458, corvette zr1, aston martin vantage, etc. don't use this wonderous and brilliant engineering technology you speak of? surely with their powerful v8s under the hood, they need a live rear axle.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
because those cars are made for douchebags that usually are snotty nosed assholes or complete pansies. Plus those cars cost alot of money. Want to turn with a solid rear axle? Power slide it, its not hard, and VERY fun.
FordNissanChevy 2 years ago
on the contrary, i heard the old gt500 had a tendency to understeer, and would only oversteer when provoked to do so.
live rear axle is semi-acceptable in an off-roader, not acceptable in a 21st century automobile. not at all. especially not in a car that ford calls a sports car.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Comment removed
anthonyrocksworldz 2 years ago
key word is "with the proper upgrades".
with the proper upgrades, the suzuki sx4 wooped every other car at pikes peak.
the point is that you shouldn't have to buy a car and then are expected to assemble it yourself.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
But wasn't the Mustang designed to be upgraded or left as is? I tdepends what the customer wanted out it.
Thats why it was the first car ever you could walk into the showroom and order how you want it, or do it yourself. Thje Mustang was/ is a blank canvas.
Thats why even now, in 2009, the mustang still has the solid rear axle, because it makes it easier for people to customise and its tougher drag racing.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
why would a mustang run on pikes peak? thats a rally course,and obviously mustangs aren't rally cars.and why spend 120,000 or more on a car,when i could by a mustang for like 15,000-20,000 ,and then put only like 60,000 of upgrades in it,and make it as good,or even better than the unnessesarely expensive car
anthonyrocksworldz 2 years ago
did i say that the mustang should run on pikes peak? no, my point was that any car can do anything with modifications.
and i don't get how the live rear axle is tougher for drag racing. the current gen mustang has horrendous wheel hop, something that a car with modern suspension doesn't have.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
What a dumb fuck. 1.48 60ft here with adj Strange struts and a set of $200 rear control arms.
How is that for 'old' technology at the track?
aus1121 2 years ago
Yeah It kinda happens in every RWD cars but I dont think its because of the car, I think the drivers are dumb asses but yeah Id prefer a BMW to a Mustang for sure...
alshara3 2 years ago
I wouldn't. I've had more fun in Mustangs than BMs.
I suppose it depends where you live. If you live in the US you see Mustangs all the time, and BMs might seem exotic.
In the UK where I live, BMs are just like millions of others on the roads, and Mustangs are something different.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
lolllllzzzz
goofypowerallday 2 years ago
I laughed my ass off at this vid. I have a 2008 Bullitt and love it. A V8 muscle car lacks a bit of finess (gayness) that a BMW has. And I made a porsche driver wet his Depends.
4801jeff 2 years ago
wow i can see how much of a serious driver you are if you call finesse gayness...
it's funny, but when i picture mustang drivers in my mind, i think of ignorant, small minded red necks who know nothing about cars except I DON'T CARE WHAT'S COMPROMISED, GIVE ME MORE POWER NOW!!!!!
you fit that bill rather well. congrats.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
i doubt that . a porshe will rape your bullit unless its an older 02 boxster. and by the way i hate porsches but mustangs sucks so bad.. all you mustang boys care about is sound.
dddjjf 2 years ago
mustangs dont suck, the dumbass who made this video does!
carmgn56 2 years ago 3
no man im sorry mustangs do suck, for the amount of money you pay you get, an ancient suspension, piece of junk v6 from a taurus( if you went v8 then its from a small truck) ive driven. every mustang up to a brand new super snake, the only one i could ever consider anygood at all is the roush, and to be honest you put up against a vette its done for. There are to many better cars than a mustang
unincideal 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
mustangs suck??? fuck you!!!
konzooz21523 2 years ago
These drivers are horrific and should turn in their licenses immediately! Dumbasses!
shred5 2 years ago
Man, what I see in these clips are mainly drivers' errors. It's their fault that they can't handle the oversteer.
Of course, the biggest problem with mustang is the understeer, it usually comes suddenly and without warning at higher speeds, you think you can kill it with the throttle, you push it and it spins from understeer into a deadly oversteer but not but the speeds in your vid are rather low.
sspope 2 years ago
just about all of them hit it before the car is straight....ofcourse it's going to bite you back
99gsx4g63 2 years ago
Exactly. I've owned quite a few modern mustangs and never crashed one, and so has my brother and a few of my friends, and they've never crashed one. And I live in the UK where we have loads of tight bends.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago 7
Im honestly tired of people in the UK thinking that the US has nothing but straight always, i'm not saying thats what you believe, but its just getting annoying. If you have never driven here, don't think that there, aren't Exceptional places to drive.
unincideal 2 years ago
This car owns, shut your fudgepacking mouth.
LukeXgamer 2 years ago 3
your another idiotic muscle head who thinks that brutish raw v8 is the answer to everything. try something that can go fast other than in a straight line
unincideal 2 years ago
And I know the US has more than just astraights, I've been over there.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
LIke i said, i wasnt claiming that you didnt know that, just seems like thats the general belief in the UK
unincideal 2 years ago
oh look gaydude44 knows how to make a video wow CUNT!
carrollabc 2 years ago
And not a very valid or convicing one.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
lol
carrollabc 2 years ago
Mustangs do suck. Rouche one does not though, because it at least hasn't got a prehistoric rear suspension.
PauliusBa 2 years ago
actually it does, but unlike shelby, they tweaked the diff and the sway bars, dampers, and shock absorbers to make it work better.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
What about Shelby? Does it still have a 'live' rear axle?
PauliusBa 2 years ago
yes, but they were tweaked for drag racing, not for performance or spirited driving.
so they only work in a straight line, which renders them useless.. any car can go in a straight line.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
I don't see how they can be useless. They're a big seller in the UK and we have loads of windy and bendy roads. Go to a Ford or American car show in the UK, and the field has loads of these cars. Unless you go on a race track, who actually races each other around bends on a road anyway? These cars were built for more than just a race track. Put on one on the motorway, and it'll fly, cruise in it, and it looks fine.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
well i personally believe that if you buy a car with 500 horsepower, you'd buy it to use on the track as well as the road.
i'm sorry, but a car built explicitly for straight lines is a half assed car. i can't believe that an american is trying to explain this to a brit, but it's true. a bmw m3 or ferrari 430 could drive in a straight line as well as a mustang could, but they can also dance around corners.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Again, that sort of depends on the driver. I've had to pluck BMWs out of ditches before that have lost it on bends. Same with Mustangs on a track. I've seen people thrash them around a track. The auction where I worked was situated next to a race track, and I saw quite a few Mustangs attend and test. But again, it depends on the driver,and if they know how to handle it. Not everyone that wants a 500 horsepower car, is into euro style mototsport.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
The thing is, this video you've put on here, the cars have been personally modified. ..Or they're a shit driver. You telling me that every Mustang that is sold crashes on a bend?...No, you've posted videos of 4 mustangs crashing (probably driven by crap teenage drivers) Alot of people know how to drive properly and respect the car. I know alot of Mustang drivers in the carclub, and non of them have ever crashed one,...neither have I.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
i posted the videos after personally driving a v6 convertible, and i thought it was complete shit. the only thing i liked about it was that at 75 mph it could turn over at just 2,000 rpm, in true american fashion. but i still find the engine terrible. i mean, i own a car with 1,000 cc's fewer displacement but with 10 more horsepower.
the whole car felt like a half-assed effort from ford. and i live in one of the only parts of america with bends (northern new jersey)
coolerdude44 2 years ago
End of the day, you can say the Mustang is useless because it only goes in a straight line as opposed to a Ferrari which can go in a straight line and around bends fast. But then you can say the Ferrari is useless as acar compared to a Volvo 4x4 wagon which can do both as well as go offroad,AND carry 4 or 5 people un like a ferrari.
The Mustang isn't a useless car. It works for its purpose and terrain. It started life as a street cruiser and racer.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
I'd understand you saying its useless if it was originally built to compete against eurosports cars on eurosport tracks, but it was built for American roads and for a tight budget. It works perfectly well for that the same as a Ferrari would make a shit family car.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
All you do is slow down abit when you get to a bend. Wheres the hardship in that. ?Not everyone that buys a powerful car wants to take it on a race track or throw it around a bend at 80mph? Some people like to buy Mustangs to cruise on normal roads, and then up the throttle on the motorway. They work fine then. I 'd hardly call it useless. It'd be useless if the steering was fixed and didn't turn at all.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
All Shelbys have have tweaked suspension and chassis components. Depending which Shelby model you buy. You can get the GT, GT-H , GT500, GT500-KR and now the Shelby Supersnake...although the GT500 KR and supersnake has the most modifications.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
People like me for example would love one of the new Mustangs.I've no interest in euro motorsport what so ever .I'd take it over a BMW anyday. It looks different, sounds awesome, and goes damn fast. I would care if it was 200bhp or 1000 BHP, I like the look of them, and its a legendary marque, and for the money,they're great.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
For your interest it sounds like the mustang fits you well, but im sorry they are not great for there money, thats why there depreciation is so damn low.
unincideal 2 years ago
Again, it depends where you live. In the UK, Mustangs can still fetch good money. It can also depend on which model and year. Probably not in the US, as they're common.
Its the same here in the UK.Alot of supposed valuable Euro cars you get in the States, don't fetch as much here, because they're more common. I've seen M5s depreciate by £40,000 in two years.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
Yes, but at the same time mustangs, are no where near as good a value for the car its self, look at the suspension, and drive train. normally theres about 20%-30% drive train loss in a car, mustangs from the mid 90s on have about 45%, thats nearly half the power gone, just to get the wheels to move
unincideal 2 years ago
Its the same for alot of cars. You pay for the badge, and to drive something different.
Old classic MGs for example.Sort of like the british version of the Mustang. Cheap afordable car thats just abit of fun and easy to modify. You don't get alot for your money, but they still fetch good money.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
i agree, but that idea in its self proves my point, mustangs are not value. not in comparison to the better cars you can actually get for cheaper.
unincideal 2 years ago
It depends what you want out of a car at the end of the day. I wasn't a massive fan of my 95 Mustang, but my 70,71 and 78 Mustangs I loved.
If you want a boring mundane everyday family car, then yes, you can get better for less money, but don't expect anything exciting or different.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
they are pretty cars, theres no doubt about that, but exciting, i completely disagree, and for the money of any of those you could go for a st205, or sti v6, if your looking for rwd, try a lexus sc300( toyota soarer). all im saying is from my experiences, mustangs have been uncomfortable, over rated, heavy rear ended cars. there are in my openion much better cars for your money. an SLK, or lotus omega
unincideal 2 years ago
Here in the UK, Those STi's are more expensive, and too common in the UK to be interesting. Good if you want a fast car, but just not interesting to look at. To me thats quite important, as your car spends 70% of its life parked up or travelling in slow traffic, so it may as well look interesting stationary.They also have a bad reputation for idiot drivers. And they've also got a reputation for being stolen.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
im sure they are more common, but my point being that there are many more cars that as a drivers car are more apealing, and if your looking simply for a show car, then i personally would have to say though the mustang is a pretty car, it certainly is not a pretty as so many other cars, just a personal opinion. then again, i also have a 77 celica that im currently restoring
unincideal 2 years ago
Lexus are way more expensive than mustangs as well.
The thing is, if you buy a 60's, 70's mustang, you buy it because its classic car. You're obviously not gonna buy a Lexus over a 60's Mustang if you like Classics cars. So the Mustang is gonna be better value to that person. Its relevent to the person and age of car etc as to what defines 'value'.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
the sc300 is not more expensive, ive found them for as cheep as 2000 US. and im sorry, but if your looking for a classic american car,try looking at an corvette, or road runner. the road runner is rare even here and is absolutely gorgeous
unincideal 2 years ago
Roadrunners and vettes hold fetch alot in the UK too. Although Vettes aren't that rare.
What do you class as a drivers car? I've always wondered this.
You see, I don't think that a car that grips the road like glue, and basically does everything for you is a drivers car. It doesn't test your driving skills. Where as a Mustang does. It fights back, and you have to wrestle it. I would of thought thats a drivers car.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
my openion of a drivers car is not a car that does everything for you, its a car that challenges you pushes, but at the same time, feels as though its part of you, personally the only cars ive ever been able to have this feeling for is , the lotus elise( not exige, sc300( 2jz gtte), subaru sti( US spec), My dads road runner, and surprisingly enough the lancia delta integral.
unincideal 2 years ago
So an old roadrunner handles differently to an old Mustang? ( I've never driven a roadrunner)
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
We don't get the SC300 over here, so I can't really compare. Most I see have been specially imported from Japan.
Regarding classic mustangs and Roadrunners etc, alot of people buy classic mustangs as classic American cars, because of their size. We have tiny driveways in the UK, and Mustangs fit well in the drive. Roadrunners are just too damn big.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
that would make since, but in all honesty over there the mustang my seem full of american pride and heritage, but in the US there a generic over played car. to have a nice classic mustang in the US its a car you wouldnt drive
unincideal 2 years ago
So you hate on Mustangs? Well what do you drive?
Timothayyy 2 years ago
I do like European cars better, but the Mustang's still the best of the American bunch. (No matter if a Vette can smoke an Enzo)
AndrewNoNumbers 2 years ago
100% agreement, friend. Mustangs are crap. Glad I have a Mercedes. Those videos - LMAO.
TargetRender 2 years ago
Each to their own. It doesn't mean Mustangs are crap though because you don't like them. My work collegue refuses to buy a Mercedes again after the previous 2 he owned spent many days in the Garage. My Mustangs outlived his mercs, and I've the bonus of the fun of car shows and stuff.
I take it you've never seen that video where that guy crashes a ferrari 4 seconds off the starting line, going in a straight line?
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
?!?!
You take some people who suck at driving, put them in a car and say the cars sucks. That makes no sense. Granted I have a stang and the handling is not great, that does not mean it sucks.
Say you suck at math, or english. Does that mean you suck at school?
What is the point of this video? I can go jump in a BMW and plow into other cars too if I was an idoit.
It should be called People who should have here license revoked.
ncaatrackstar 2 years ago
Who's the idiot that made this video? You almost sounded smart with the facts you stated about the Mustang but then you compared it to Mercedes, BMW, Audi, and Honda....!? I will certainly agree that the Mustangs chassis is garbage but you can not compare a 20K USD front engine, V8, rear wheel drive Muscle car to Luxury and Economy brands. Its obvious you know nothing of cars because you don't even understand the segment the Mustang is in!
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
first off, the mustang v8 costs around 30k. honda sells the s2000, which is also around 30k what is the same speed to 60 and is lightyears faster around a track.
the bmw 3 series is much the same story.
granted the mustang isn't meant to compete with these brands, but there are much smarter ways to go quickly, which was my intention to explain.
for instance: i'd much rather have a 2 year used bmw 335i than a brand new mustang gt.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Yes, 27K starting price for a V8 Mustang but the story still remains. The S2000 is a 4cyl 2 seater, the BMW is a BMW. Neither are a "Muscle Car". People who buy Mustangs and Camaros, build them, race them, love them, are the people who are doing straight line Drag Races. Remember these are American cars built for an American past time or "Drag Racing". I agree that the BMW and S2000 are better built, and time will tell about quality but you must see facts rather then opinion.
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
the fact is that it takes no engineering skill to only make a car go in a straight line. stick a rocket onto a skateboard, and it would be a dragster's dream, but is it stable? of course not. bottom line: any car can go in a straight line, and you'd be nuts to buy a car that is limited to that.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Chances are that the Mustang handles better then the car you are currently driving, live axle or not. The Mustang is designed to drag, but it's also designed like any other car to be able to maneuver at highway speeds in an emergency situation (Slalom Test). For a cheap, everyday car, the Mustang performs well. Also, i don't know if you've ever tested this "Rocket, Skateboard" theory but i can assure you that it will not go in a straight line.
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
you're so wrong. i've driven a 2008 mustang convertible, and it was terrible. the brakes sucked, on the slightest bend i felt like i had to slam on the brakes, there was very little leg room although the car is a million feet long, and i didn't think it was too powerful. granted it was only a v6, but it still displaces 4 liters.
i drive a mazda 6s, a whole 1000 cc's less than the mustangs engine, and it makes more horsepower. and yes, it handles amazingly.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Also are there any American cars that you do like, and would own, or are you strictly an import guy that we can blame for the state of our Auto industry? I would bet that you have no concept of truth or fact. You would rather invest money into foreign markets thinking it will never affect you, take a back seat rather then speak up for change, and watch as your neighbors loose there jobs and eventually you too.
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
i will never buy an american car simply because it's american. that's why they're in trouble, they know there are idiots like you who would buy their cars no matter what. the only good american cars are foreign. the pontiac g8 is australian, ford fusion, mercury milan, lincoln mkz, mkx, ford edge, is japanese (mazda 6 chassis and suspension) and most saturns and chevy sedans are european.
the only 2 good american cars that are actually american are the corvette, and the cts-v.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
You're just showing ignorance. GM is a worldwide brand, sharing designs, ideas, and parts with all of its brands. Why wouldn't they do that? The CTS/CTS-V platform was designed, like the others you speak of, by "Global World Rear Drive" in Australia. You must be really stupid to believe that a worldwide company wouldn't share technology. Also did you know that Ford Motor Company has been developing cars with Mazda since 1970 and that Mazda is owned by Ford making it American owned and operated.
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
i know exactly what i'm talking about, but ford and gm do more than share components. they take the exact car and change the body. the ford fusion has the exact same engines as the mazda 6, the same suspension, same chassis, same interior layout. the only difference is the platform is stretched by an inch. and don't think for one second that ford had anything to do with the engineering of any mazda, land rover, jaguar, or aston martin. all they did was finance it.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Also these Mustangs look modified. It wouldn't take much to crash a car if you don't modifiy the suspension and chassis, with the engine.
Like I said, I've never crashed one, and neither have any of my friends that were in the Mustang club. And I live in the UK where we have severe bends.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
mhm, but look at the gt500. they just stuffed a 50kg supercharger onto the car, and didn't change anything. not even the brakes. yet, you wouldn't believe how popular that car is in america. idgi.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
Actually they did tune up the brakes and suspension on GT500, GT500KR.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
they didn't. they didn't even upgrade the brakes until a couple of model years.
based on the reviews i've seen for the 2010 mustang gt500, though, the new ones have none of these problems, and look really cool.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
They're doing away with the cheaper plastics on the interior on the Mustang in 2010 as well.
The 2008+ GT500 and KRs do have upgraded brakes and suspension. I keep in contact and sometimes visit a friend of mine that imports American cars to the UK. He got hold of 2 GT500s.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
Before you dig yourself a very deep grave why don't you pick up a book and read a bit about this subject. It's obvious you're about to be schooled and that ignorance will prove itself mighty in you. Learn to swim before you jump in the deep end.
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
you obviously know nothing if you think that a mazda 6 is just as american as a corvette.
mazda is not american, their engineers are japanese thus making them japanese.
next thing you'll tell me the aston martin db9 is american, or the lotus elise is malaysian.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
You child, obviously you know nothing. The DB9 sits on the American Designed Ford VH Platform, the car was designed by Ian Callum (British) and Henrik Fisker (Danish). Henrik Fisker also designed the BMW Z8. The DB9 is the product of Ford Global. Ford designed, built, and funded the DB9, Ford is American... LoL the Elise...Toyota Powered, GM Designed and Developed...its a mutt. Again boy, your out of your league because you obviously don't EDUCATE yourself!
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
lmfaooooo i said that as a joke, you must be an idiot.
this will be my last reply.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
so now you're trying to be clever by covering your stupidity up as a joke...HA nice try.
Ryantravisaol 2 years ago
I've actually seen a you tube video where some guy does exactly the same thing in a ferrari. Crashed after 4 seconds of moving from the starting line, in a straight line.
I've owned Mustangs and never crashed one. It depends on hjow good the driver is.
hawksleyart01 2 years ago
take down the video and repost it maybe it will work!
aviy93 2 years ago
Your video's audio got disabled! Take it down and repost it!
kevin12567 2 years ago
i tried but it still doesnt work.
the track was supposed to be mr brownstone by guns n roses.
coolerdude44 2 years ago
The drivers suck.
spenqs 2 years ago