01MagredC5

iTrader: (1)

In this case, he is right about the Mustang. I agree with what you are saying but you are not looking at it the right way. It was crushing sales against the fbody, and, is one of the biggest reasons GM discontinued the cars for a few years. You could buy a Mustang GT for close to the price of an optioned out V6 fbody. The Mustang also wasn't a stripper car...had some nice options. A buddy of mine got one and I told him an fbody would destroy it. He said he didn't care because he didn't feel that the extra money was worth it, and was happy with what he had. He liked sports cars but wasn't into them like most people. People like him are the reason the Mustang destroyed the fbody in sales for years.

Irunelevens

Exactly. But he won't get it.

adamantium

iTrader: (3)

lol @ posting sales rates to justify cars performance. Strong logic.

snake95

Lol @ the car with clearly superior performance not being marketed enough to stay above water when coming from a company as huge as General Motors.

The Mustangs were slower but people bought them. Whoever said it, said it best, that the 98-02 F-bodies were the best cars to never sell.

Irunelevens

You're slow too, apparently. Nobody is justifying anything. I have said several times that I personally wish they had made more power. But to Ford, the people selling and making money off the car, there was no reason to spend money increasing the power. To think that they "couldn't" is retarded.

Irunelevens

Careful, you'll get called a Ford nutswinger.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

01Mag is right. The Mustang is for guys who like sports cars w/o the sport........lmao

01MagredC5

iTrader: (1)

Not sure if this was directed at me but, Ford was smart with the Mustang. Yes, it was easily out performed...but Ford knew if they priced it right and marketed it correctly, it would dominate GM's fbody cars...and it did.

I don't think there is anyone on here, including the Ford guys, that will sit here and say the Ford was anywhere near the fbody in performance. The Fbody dominated all the way up until 2002, when it met it's demise.

The interesting thing is, the demise of the Fbody was because of sales rates of the Mustang.

01MagredC5

iTrader: (1)

Ha, I hope not. Never owned a Ford. I am just not brand loyal and tend to stick to facts. Ford knew what they were doing...

Cute joke...but like it or not, facts are facts. Ford knew what they were doing...and succeeded. Again, no one would ever question the performance gap...the fbody was in front by a wide margin.

What I think is especially cute is how you claim your 400HP car is trapping 131 N/A while still weighing over 3K pounds. Now THAT is cute. But I digress...

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

Don't be jelly.....there are reasons to why it does what it does. And I'm not the only one who has done it.


It's all about physics

01MagredC5

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, that class was slightly interesting to me in college. I paid more attention to the engineering stuff surrounding the physics though. Still doesn't change the fact that I don't believe you ran it at that power level.

adamantium

iTrader: (3)

So basically what im taking from your argument is who ever bought one of these mustangs is a retard for paying a similar price for an under performer. Judging from your sig, you were one of those retards.

So ford didn't HAVE to make a fast mustang right? They just went from pushrods to modular with an attempt to go slower. This is great, never knew this.

adamantium

iTrader: (3)

Okay? How does this even hold in argument when your talking from a consumer stand point. Its not like you own ford, that is irrelevant.

Still does not change the performance it brought to the table. If i was a retard i would've bought a mustang.

Mike Morris

iTrader: (55)

No one is a retard for buying anything. Hio said Ford could not build a n/a motor worth a crap. The retort was why do so if you product is selling like crazy. Hell I remember most of the Foxbody guys back then jumped ship to the LS1 Fbody. But again compared to the general car buying public this was not much. Most people actually thought the GT was faster. A 2 valve GT is actually meaner sounding car with catback on it lol. No one says the GT 2 valve performance was good or justified by its performance. The retort was why improve it. Hell the Fox body by 1990 was grossly out of date. But FMS sales along with the car was through the roof. Why add disk brakes to the rear,stronger trans,updated styling etc to something selling like crazy and risk upping the price and losing out. The 5.0 actually killed the average EPA Ford had to have and didn't care. SN95 was an attempt to continue that crazy craze which again worked sales wise but took a step backwards performance wise(added weight,lamer cam,lamer ecu due to drivetrain survival,tbird intake to clear the hood,and a much faster Z28 with only one motor choice instead of 4 different power combos).

Sales dictate the car.

Mustang and Fbodies are not sports cars. They are GTs/Pony cars

adamantium

iTrader: (3)

Simple then, they targeted a certain group of people and executed the plan well. Still doesn't make the car BETTER than what it is. Someone who KNOWS about cars and wants the best bang for their buck and has ties to neither company will obviously choose the f-body for its performance.

I actually LIKED mustangs, when i was really into hondas. When i sold all my honda stuff i was in the market for a car under 10k that was the best bang for the buck, why didn't i buy a mustang?

I legit HATED f-body's in high school and through out most of my life. Until i actually looked into them.

Mike Morris

iTrader: (55)

Again some people didn't like the Fbody and knew it was faster. Some people don't care. And a 2 valve stripper like a 248/GTS could be had for cheap and a lot cheaper than a stripper Z28. Some people just figured that was what mods were for or simply didn't care. If you wanted straight line performance and didn't care about the vices of a 4th gen then it was your car. A 98 Z28 was fast car back then and not much could run close to it in the straights(none of the Jap GTs could-it would be like a current SS outrunning a GTR stock to stock in 2014). Even a Supra in stock trim would get beat. And the Supra back then a 40K car. Fbody could be had low 20s. Hell of a deal.

adamantium

iTrader: (3)

This is great, but this is why ive said it before and say it again, sales numbers are irrelevant when comparing cars. Its comparing the car with opinions, not facts.


Hio saying they couldn't produce a good NA engine is a bit outlandish, but has a bit of truth. Until the VVT/vct stuff came out their modulars were pretty shitty in the NA category, and even then when they debut with the 3v it was still a **** box. I mean the 03-04 cobras saved them from that rep because they added a super charger. Not sure why they added a super charger after the LS1 cars but im pretty sure i know why.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

Then I guess you should've paid more attention to physics.

Wait till you see me run near 140 with 500hp.
They did a **** job advertising the f-cars then stop making them.......and GM paid the price for it.

Mike Morris

iTrader: (55)

I agree that sales numbers have nothing to do with performance. Only reason I retorted with it is that Hio said Ford couldn't/was not capable do it. Come now any car company can make a motor put out power reliably back then. But why spend the money developing it if there is no need for it. You are a business. You have to make money. Fbodies got a handime down motor from the big brother. Do you really think if there was no Corvette GM would have spent the money developing the LS1/LT1/L98? I don't.

Coletti said many times the blower was to kill the LS1s. No secret. 4.6s couldn't do it in n/a form

"They did a **** job advertising the f-cars then stop making them.......and GM paid the price for it."

BINGO

adamantium

iTrader: (3)

I mean for ***** sake nissan had a luxury car in the early 90s with a modular 4.5l v8 that was rated at like 50-60hp MORE than the 2v, 6 or so years before ford jumped into the modular stuff. Come on that is ******* PATHETIC. Even the new edge 2v's were rated at less HP than this motor that was in a ******* late 80s early 90s grandma luxury jap car.