Twin_Cam wrote: They're both retro junk. They may be fast, but they look just like they did 45-50 years ago. Only fatter. With electronic nannies. I wonder how fast they'd be without all those stupid creature comforts and active this and adaptive that...
probably.......either way they'd still prolly get beaten by a german saloon powered by satan's soul itself after just a tune.....not the point, I'd take the '11+ v6 pony car > another boosted 4cyl ANYDAY......
Yeah, traction control on a car with over 400hp for the general public is a TERRIBLE idea. 
In the Mustang you can turn the ESC and TC off, if the owners manual isn't lying.
In reply to z31maniac:
Whereas in the challenger, if it is anything like its srt charger bretheren, must be put into the "dyno mode" to prevent TCS coming down like an anvil.
bravenrace wrote:dculberson wrote:You agree with me? Really? Or was that an application for the missing sarcasm emoticon?bravenrace wrote: So as you say, you don't know what else people have in their garage, but everyone also has different motivations for what they buy.Exactly! If the guy was in a Camry none of us would look twice, but for some reason we have should look down on someone commuting in a 400hp RWD muscle car just because it's heavy? No way! That's awesome!
I totally agree with you.
yamaha wrote:Twin_Cam wrote: They're both retro junk. They may be fast, but they look just like they did 45-50 years ago. Only fatter. With electronic nannies. I wonder how fast they'd be without all those stupid creature comforts and active this and adaptive that...probably.......either way they'd still prolly get beaten by a german saloon powered by satan's soul itself after just a tune.....not the point, I'd take the '11+ v6 pony car > another boosted 4cyl ANYDAY......
German + Saloon does not compute. Maybe German + Sausage/Beer house maybe. Anyways how about the Continental Tire Series, great proving grounds for all of these cars.
dculberson wrote:bravenrace wrote:I totally agree with you.dculberson wrote:You agree with me? Really? Or was that an application for the missing sarcasm emoticon?bravenrace wrote: So as you say, you don't know what else people have in their garage, but everyone also has different motivations for what they buy.Exactly! If the guy was in a Camry none of us would look twice, but for some reason we have should look down on someone commuting in a 400hp RWD muscle car just because it's heavy? No way! That's awesome!
Wait, let me write that down...
yamaha wrote:Twin_Cam wrote: They're both retro junk. They may be fast, but they look just like they did 45-50 years ago. Only fatter. With electronic nannies. I wonder how fast they'd be without all those stupid creature comforts and active this and adaptive that...probably.......either way they'd still prolly get beaten by a german saloon powered by satan's soul itself after just a tune.....not the point, I'd take the '11+ v6 pony car > another boosted 4cyl ANYDAY......
The M3 was the benchmark for the Mustang GT. I can't remember what road course it was, but it was faster.
Twin_Cam wrote: They're both retro junk. They may be fast, but they look just like they did 45-50 years ago. Only fatter. With electronic nannies. I wonder how fast they'd be without all those stupid creature comforts and active this and adaptive that...
Again, I have a late model Mustang and I love driving it daily. I had old musclecars, grew up on them (from a built Torino 429 to a Charger and Nova based car) and had 3 1970 Mustang fastbacks, including a BOSS 302. The new one is simply a better car all around. Faster, stops better, handles better, is more comfortable, gets better fuel mileage, emits less, is safer, and looks JUST as good. It's also barely any heavier than my '70, and almost identical in size.
The new ones let you have the soul of the old ones without all the sacrifices. Dollar for dollar, they are more car. It's a win-win, in my book. And I don't appreciate the insulting attitude towards a great, inexpensive fun car, and the implications it makes about the people that do love them.
Chris_V wrote:T.J. wrote: New Mustangs and new Camaros don't have much appeal to me at all. I usually get a kick of looking at the drivers of these cars when I see them out and about. I feel sorta bad for them because they don't know what they are missing driving those types of cars.I own a late model Mustang and I've had decades of sports cars and light cars, as well as full size luxury cars and pickups. I'm not missing a damn thing and yes, you do need to get over yourself becuase you're acting like a judgemental, closed minded idiot, and I'd hope this board hasn't turned into that.
Wow. I was saying the opposite of what you think I was saying.
I don't choose to own or drive one, but those who do are free to do so. I guess I could take part of what you typed and leave out the rest and make it look like you said something you didn't as well.
bravenrace wrote:dculberson wrote:Wait, let me write that down...bravenrace wrote:I totally agree with you.dculberson wrote:You agree with me? Really? Or was that an application for the missing sarcasm emoticon?bravenrace wrote: So as you say, you don't know what else people have in their garage, but everyone also has different motivations for what they buy.Exactly! If the guy was in a Camry none of us would look twice, but for some reason we have should look down on someone commuting in a 400hp RWD muscle car just because it's heavy? No way! That's awesome!
I suspect that as long as it doesn't potentially involve a ballot box we would agree on an awful lot.. especially beer. I love IPA.
T.J. wrote:Chris_V wrote:Wow. I was saying the opposite of what you think I was saying. I don't choose to own or drive one, but those who do are free to do so. I guess I could take part of what you typed and leave out the rest and make it look like you said something you didn't as well.T.J. wrote: New Mustangs and new Camaros don't have much appeal to me at all. I usually get a kick of looking at the drivers of these cars when I see them out and about. I feel sorta bad for them because they don't know what they are missing driving those types of cars.I own a late model Mustang and I've had decades of sports cars and light cars, as well as full size luxury cars and pickups. I'm not missing a damn thing and yes, you do need to get over yourself becuase you're acting like a judgemental, closed minded idiot, and I'd hope this board hasn't turned into that.
You didn't say: " I feel sorta bad for them because they don't know what they are missing driving those types of cars. " ?
Meaning, they don't know anything about cars by choosing to drive them? If they knew what they were missing, they, like you, would not choose to drive them? I drive the kinds of cars you like and I STILL like driving the Mustang. I like BOTH kinds, not just one.
z31maniac wrote: And I know there is a general hatred toward larger wheels here, but what are you going to run 16s with 70 series tires? The car is so big you HAVE to run giant tires to maintain any sort of grip.
z31maniac wrote: In the Mustang you can turn the ESC and TC off, if the owners manual isn't lying.
Oh, you can definitely turn it off...
In reply to Chris_V:
great looking Mustang!
Knurled wrote:z31maniac wrote: And I know there is a general hatred toward larger wheels here, but what are you going to run 16s with 70 series tires? The car is so big you HAVE to run giant tires to maintain any sort of grip.
But then again some people think Miatas need giant tires
In reply to Chris_V:
T.J. wrote: Then I tell myself to get over myself and realize they can like and drive whatever they choose to.
Dude, whatever. Take the chip off your shoulder and enjoy the hell out of your Mustang and whatever other cars you have. I'm perfectly fine with that as I stated way back on page two.
If they hadn't designed it on that big car platform and made it a bit smaller, it might be my favorite of the three.
I sort of agree. My main beef with it visually is that it seems to have about 6" too much, vertically, from front to back.
After a few years i heard it said in some magazine or other that the designers were forced to have a certain height at the front core support with that platform and then had to make the rest of the car proportional to that. So i think it's possible there were even some people on the design team who felt the same way we do.
But it seems like the SRT Cuda may end up being smaller and bother us less that way.
Here is an idea to make the camaro smaller, when they redesign in the next few years, build it on the ATS platform.
T.J. wrote: In reply to Chris_V:T.J. wrote: Then I tell myself to get over myself and realize they can like and drive whatever they choose to.Dude, whatever. Take the chip off your shoulder and enjoy the hell out of your Mustang and whatever other cars you have. I'm perfectly fine with that as I stated way back on page two.
You are backpedaling mightily. You made a statement and can't own up to it. Did you or did you not say you feel sorry for us because we "dont' know what we are missing?" You can't say E36 M3 like that and not expect to get called out on it.
neon4891 wrote: Here is an idea to make the camaro smaller, when they redesign in the next few years, build it on the ATS platform.
That's actually the plan. Though there has been talk of one size down from that (the same platform the Code130R concept car was built off of)
neon4891 wrote: Here is an idea to make the camaro smaller, when they redesign in the next few years, build it on the ATS platform.
Funnily enough, that's exactly what they are doing!
DirtyBird222 wrote: German + Saloon does not compute. Maybe German + Sausage/Beer house maybe. Anyways how about the Continental Tire Series, great proving grounds for all of these cars.
Satan's Engine = the v12TT.......proof that not only diesels make stupid power and torque from tuning. Very very far from the price range though.
Honestly, I'll be watching the jumbo shrimp disappear and become a normal sized shrimp......I might decide I like seafood by then.
Chris_V wrote:neon4891 wrote: Here is an idea to make the camaro smaller, when they redesign in the next few years, build it on the ATS platform.That's actually the plan. Though there has been talk of one size down from that (the same platform the Code130R concept car was built off of)
The Code 130R is based on Alpha mini. It's the Kappa (Solstice/Sky) platform replacement that was shelved when Pontiac and Saturn were kicked to the curb.
Next gen Camaro is indeed slated for Alpha. The next CTS will be on Alpha+ (one size up).
If they can keep the weight of the next Camaro close to that of the ATS (~3400lbs), Chevy may have a contender on their hands.
I had a suspicion that the Code 130 was next gen Camaro related... Wonder how long it will take, 2015?
I like them both. Had fun in a new Camaro with obscene power upgrades recently. Felt like I was back in high school. Those engines rev so freely and can make so much power. And for a Camaro enthusiast, I like the new Mustang enough to park one in my driveway. Will probably end up with a Focus ST over either one.
You'll need to log in to post.
