2010 Mustang

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by Whitten

Who was it that won that little comparison you poster earlier?

Facts: Just because you say so doesn't make them so.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm

According to the "facts" your car gets worse fuel economy as a 7 liter Z06 on it's best day.

That being said, being an owner of a Mustang myself I have to inform you that you can count on the Corvette getting better fuel economy, however you can bet that the POS sickly 3 valve on getting much...much worse.

When ford steps up and puts their 5 liter direct injection in, then maybe the GT will be worth a look until then it is a waste of time.

A comment on the old 4.6 motor you had better be joking when you say that. A clarification as to which 4.6 is needed. Yes the 4.6 DOHC Terminator motor did wake up with mods are you comparing that motor or are you talking about the same years 2 valves that consistantly dyno'ed 215 rwhp on Dyno jets.

Here is another fact, I actually praised the car in my first post if you will refer back to it. If anyone is drinking the Koolaid it is you, I have owned/driven many difernent cars not the least of which was your beloved GT-500.

The facts are that the Mustang is behind the times and no manor of putting sticky ass tires on it from the factory changes the fact that when you go to a GT class race you will not see a single car out there with a SRA and if you do it will undoubtedly be a mustang tagging up the rear.

If you love your car, I happy for ya,...hell good on ya. Honestly at your age to have a car that nice is a damn blessing. I wish I could have been so lucky, but I came up the hard way and bought and built all of my cars starting with...you guessed it Mustangs, and guess what I just cancelled my order for a GT-500 mustang.

Ok bro ignore all the reviews, to each his own. i get 27mpg daily and you cant change that fact with your opinion. the mustang has proven its engine and suspension setup on the track that speaks for itself no need to go back and forth.. good day sir.

p.s: who told you how old i was? i buy all my stuff my self since i was 14. dont act like you know me budd.

[Whitten]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

Ok bro ignore all the reviews, to each his own. i get 27mpg daily and you cant change that fact with your opinion. the mustang has proven its engine and suspension setup on the track that speaks for itself no need to go back and forth.. good day sir.

p.s: who told you how old i was? i buy all my stuff my self since i was 14. dont act like you know me budd.

Geeze don't get all butt hurt this was supposed to be fun and informative, it isn't hard to figure how old you are however. And the same goes to you on acting like you know someone you judged me before you knew one thing about me. I don't own a Camaro and am not in the market to buy one currently.

I did post facts, straight out of the EPA ratings which have been updated as of this year for the new standards; there is no opinion there. That is what the manufactures report to the EPA under the EPA guidlines which are now ever more stringent. You can get any more facts than that.

I really don't care what car mags say about a car, I have driven cars that the mags and Jeremy Clarkson loved and thought they were complete crap, conversely I have driven cars that they detested (cough mustang) and thought they were fun.

As for the track which track do you speak of? Because no matter where I go I see GT's getting tromped.


Don't get pissy, just engage, no need to get your feelings hurt...especially not from a fellow mustang owner and enthusiast. I am just more capable of admitting when something is long in the tooth.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by Whitten

Geeze don't get all butt hurt this was supposed to be fun and informative, it isn't hard to figure how old you are however. And the same goes to you on acting like you know someone you judged me before you knew one thing about me. I don't own a Camaro and am not in the market to buy one currently.

I did post facts, straight out of the EPA ratings which have been updated as of this year for the new standards; there is no opinion there. That is what the manufactures report to the EPA under the EPA guidlines which are now ever more stringent. You can get any more facts than that.

I really don't care what car mags say about a car, I have driven cars that the mags and Jeremy Clarkson loved and thought they were complete crap, conversely I have driven cars that they detested (cough mustang) and thought they were fun.

As for the track which track do you speak of? Because no matter where I go I see GT's getting tromped.


Don't get pissy, just engage, no need to get your feelings hurt...especially not from a fellow mustang owner and enthusiast. I am just more capable of admitting when something is long in the tooth.

I am not getting feelings hurt at all just stating the facts to which i know to be real life, u can go on the EPA sites all you want, but i drive this car in real life and actually do get great fuel economy, what can the epa say about that? you cant admit the mustang can handle around a track as many people already know and acknowledge.

idk why you cant but you just cant. and it seems as though you were trying to say i am young and didnt buy my stuff in your previous post when you have no idea how old i am or what i have in life... sounds a bit personal no?

[Super83Z]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

So thats it? the SRA is what you were talking about in technology? i hope you havent been ignoring all the praise the mustang is getting on its handling capabilities with its old SRA, and btw you realize pushrod engines are old too right? but if it works it works right? i dont see a problem with SRA neither do millions of people or the magazine reviews so where is your point?



what now?

With the trac pack option which the Mustang needs to even hang with the Camaro. I see no one wants to post the Mustangs stats w/o the trac pack option.

you said it yourself:

Motortrend june 2009 Pony Car War!:
"Finishing in second place...Ford Mustang GT

Who came in first? You know how the saying goes "2nd place is just the first loser"

[Super83Z]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

I am not getting feelings hurt at all just stating the facts to which i know to be real life, u can go on the EPA sites all you want, but i drive this car in real life and actually do get great fuel economy, what can the epa say about that? you cant admit the mustang can handle around a track as many people already know and acknowledge.

idk why you cant but you just cant. and it seems as though you were trying to say i am young and didnt buy my stuff in your previous post when you have no idea how old i am or what i have in life... sounds a bit personal no?

So only the Mustang can get better than advertised fuel economy? Wouldn't it be logical to assume every other car could also get better numbers than the EPA lists? The EPA ratings are determined using a controlled testing procedure, so all cars have the ability to get higher MPGs. They are there for comparison's sake.

[ArcAngel]

Originally Posted by Super83Z

With the trac pack option which the Mustang needs to even hang with the Camaro. I see no one wants to post the Mustangs stats w/o the trac pack option.

you said it yourself:




Who came in first? You know how the saying goes "2nd place is just the first loser"

I dont understand why you and guys like whitten come in here to bash a car. This is the other car section, and if you read the OP post its about how he likes the way it looks. Your pissing match about how the Camaro is .2 sec faster and blah blah doesnt mean much to anyone beside Camaro Junkies. The average driver who will not take it to the track could care less. You guys are just being rude in an other wise civil discussion between , mustang guys, camaro guys and even 370z guys. So if you can add to the discussion in a good light go post in another thread!

[ArcAngel]

Originally Posted by 1320junkie

I like the one on the right

I like the red with the rims on the black car, those nickel 19inches are sweeeet!

[Tactical Z]

Lmao, Camaros dont have ABL but Mustangs do.

[ArcAngel]

Originally Posted by Tactical Z

Lmao, Camaros dont have ABL but Mustangs do.

dont open up that can of worms! LOL

[KILLER74Z28]

Very cool. So, how does she run?

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by Super83Z

So only the Mustang can get better than advertised fuel economy? Wouldn't it be logical to assume every other car could also get better numbers than the EPA lists? The EPA ratings are determined using a controlled testing procedure, so all cars have the ability to get higher MPGs. They are there for comparison's sake.

yes it would i agree in real life people can get higher numbers than the epa states, this is with every car and this is also a real world fact. like i have been repeating over and over

"silly is the man who argues against reality"

[lil_chef]

if the camaro had a track pack option you guys would complain if it wasnt used during a PERFORMANCE test. the fact of the matter is the mustang has one and when it comes to a performance test it should be used, considering anyone that pays attention to them would likely order the option.

a separate point is i can get a mustang with the track pack option for under or close to 30k making it cheaper than the camaro...........

i also dont understand the gas mileage argument..... are you running out of things to pick on? everyone knows most cars get above the EPA guestimate but it also all depends on how you drive.....

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by lil_chef

if the camaro had a track pack option you guys would complain if it wasnt used during a PERFORMANCE test. the fact of the matter is the mustang has one and when it comes to a performance test it should be used, considering anyone that pays attention to them would likely order the option.

a separate point is i can get a mustang with the track pack option for under or close to 30k making it cheaper than the camaro...........

i also dont understand the gas mileage argument..... are you running out of things to pick on? everyone knows most cars get above the EPA guestimate but it also all depends on how you drive.....

the irs so so many light years ahead i dont see how thats not a track pack in itself. plus the extra 111hp as if the camaro had no advantage you guys are dismissing the mustangs handling for a track pack?


it's funny chef he keeps insisting on telling me what mpg i get in the car that i actually own and drive lol

[Whitten]

Originally Posted by ArcAngel

I dont understand why you and guys like whitten come in here to bash a car. This is the other car section, and if you read the OP post its about how he likes the way it looks. Your pissing match about how the Camaro is .2 sec faster and blah blah doesnt mean much to anyone beside Camaro Junkies. The average driver who will not take it to the track could care less. You guys are just being rude in an other wise civil discussion between , mustang guys, camaro guys and even 370z guys. So if you can add to the discussion in a good light go post in another thread!

I did add, look at my first post. Don't like what I had to say then don't read it. By the way never once did I say one thing about the Camaro...not once.

In response to the rest of these erroneous questions I submit the following proof.

http://www.plainvid.com/v/7024978