Joined
·
1,903 Posts
Check this out for a good laugh.
http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?threadid=88498
http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?threadid=88498
Listen to these idiots
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Joined
·
3,976 Posts
uuuh hh i think i can beat one.... uhhh.. im not sure.. uuhhh.. i think the 2000 models were faster. uhh.. duhhh.. cobra... fast.. duhh.. true 320hp.. duuhhhhh... anemicly slow N/A versions.. duhh.. my 88 gt beat a vr-4 duhh.. (he was probly racing an N/A and the na didnt wanna race)
those guys are fuckin idiots. i dont understand why the uneducated continuously speak to the uneducated for knowledge..
just plain hick dumb
those guys are fuckin idiots. i dont understand why the uneducated continuously speak to the uneducated for knowledge..
just plain hick dumb
Joined
·
1,903 Posts
Those guys are about the most uneducated bastards I have ever heard. That has got to be the worst discussion board EVER. I have checked out the LS1 board, the Supra forum, and the Z car forum. These guys are actually really cool and knowledgeable.
"I have yet to see a VR4 or RT/Turbo do better than a 13.9 quarter."
WTF is up with that?
Where is the guy on this board who owns the 2001 GT, that actually knows what he is talking about, so that he could set these idiots straight. They give every Mustang owner a bad name.
"I have yet to see a VR4 or RT/Turbo do better than a 13.9 quarter."
WTF is up with that?
Where is the guy on this board who owns the 2001 GT, that actually knows what he is talking about, so that he could set these idiots straight. They give every Mustang owner a bad name.
Joined
·
2,611 Posts
Come on, the 88 with the exhaust? That's got to be good for low 11s....
um...
um...
Joined
·
1,255 Posts
they aren't all idiots...
A few comments: The horsepower on those cars was upped at some point (1994 or 1995???) from 300 to 320. The 320 horsepower cars were good for high 13's no problem at the track, at about 101-102 mph. I've seen them do that, plus that's what all the magazines got consistently at the time. Whether a totally stock '88 GT with exhaust is going to "kill" a high 13 second car (or even low 14 for the 300 h.p. early car) is questionable. But, I don't want to argue about Mitsubishis. The biggest problem when it comes to smack on those cars is that everyone mistakes the pathetically slow and anemic naturally aspirated 3000's and Stealths for the twin turbo versions, and every punk in a Honda, S-10 "SS", and V-6 Camaro will say they've "smoked one of them VR-4's before", assuming that they're all twin turbo cars just by looking at the wheels. It's hard to tell the difference on the street between the topline turbo cars, and the model range just below them. It is true, weight (they're a healthy 3,800 lbs) and parasitic drag from the AWD switchgear takes all that horsepower and neuters it quite a bit. They were always known as sport "tourers", not sports cars, because of their weight and size.
A few comments: The horsepower on those cars was upped at some point (1994 or 1995???) from 300 to 320. The 320 horsepower cars were good for high 13's no problem at the track, at about 101-102 mph. I've seen them do that, plus that's what all the magazines got consistently at the time. Whether a totally stock '88 GT with exhaust is going to "kill" a high 13 second car (or even low 14 for the 300 h.p. early car) is questionable. But, I don't want to argue about Mitsubishis. The biggest problem when it comes to smack on those cars is that everyone mistakes the pathetically slow and anemic naturally aspirated 3000's and Stealths for the twin turbo versions, and every punk in a Honda, S-10 "SS", and V-6 Camaro will say they've "smoked one of them VR-4's before", assuming that they're all twin turbo cars just by looking at the wheels. It's hard to tell the difference on the street between the topline turbo cars, and the model range just below them. It is true, weight (they're a healthy 3,800 lbs) and parasitic drag from the AWD switchgear takes all that horsepower and neuters it quite a bit. They were always known as sport "tourers", not sports cars, because of their weight and size.
Joined
·
1,915 Posts
umm...yeah
you've got to be kidding me. The first line i read said something about a v6 sohc twin turbo. WTF is that? If your gonna talk shit on a car you might as well atleast know the basic facts about it. Yes the cobra is in the same league as the VR4 and TT. But look at it like this, the SIX CYLYNDER DOHC 3/S'S will most of the time beat GT's especially 96-98. Those people piss me off. Especailly the guy that tried saying that VR4's aren't even sport cars due to their weight.
you've got to be kidding me. The first line i read said something about a v6 sohc twin turbo. WTF is that? If your gonna talk shit on a car you might as well atleast know the basic facts about it. Yes the cobra is in the same league as the VR4 and TT. But look at it like this, the SIX CYLYNDER DOHC 3/S'S will most of the time beat GT's especially 96-98. Those people piss me off. Especailly the guy that tried saying that VR4's aren't even sport cars due to their weight.
Ain't that the truth. There is a kid around here who has been driving around a GT and trying to race everything in site. He raced a guy with a z28 and lost, then the guy he raced bought an ls1 and he tried racing him not once, not twice, but three times. How does he expect to beat the ls1 when he can't even beat the z28?? And the worst part is he doesn't even own the car. Daddy owns a dealership and he gets to drive around anything he wants. The thing still had dealerplates on it.AustinGT said:
Joined
·
1,176 Posts
I really found the part where someone said a modded 3000 is a handfull to drive very funny. Like a high horsepower Mustang is going to hook up without slicks. LOL. I have driven high horsepower RWD cars with street tires, now that is a handfull.
Ray
3SI member 1222
Ray
3SI member 1222
Joined
·
2,986 Posts
I'd rather have a "heavy pig" than run a ratty ass piece of shit Mustang. A stock '88 Stang GT vs. a stock VR-4? Someone must be smoking some good shit. I think my 21-speed trek mountain bike could take one of those.
I don't see why anyone would bother with one of them when you can get an LT1/LS1 for about the same price that would smack a GT/Cobra into recession. If speed is the main line the newer F-body is by far the superior choice for the dollar.
I still love the video of the AAM VR-4 beating the shit out of the modded Rustang with big slicks in the street races. People like that are the reason I am building my VR-4 with some big turbos (in the planning stage of custom exhaust manifolds to support "different" turbos). I want those rednecks with their disgusting snarling exhaust and huge ass hoods to wonder what is wrong with their unrefined rustbucket when they get torn up by a little V6 after all of the money they have dumped into their car. People that drive Mustangs are generally a redneck or unnervingly retarded. As daily driver/beater they are semi-decent(I guess they are good for something).
I'm also waiting for Ford to finally get a real design team on their Mustang project. I think it's about time they take the play-dough away from those poor little kindergardeners that have been modeling their cars. The mustang looks worse every year they try to do something to it. I'm convinced the Mustang is just an elaborate joke from Ford Motor Company and the people that buy them just haven't caught on yet. I'm not impressed
I don't see why anyone would bother with one of them when you can get an LT1/LS1 for about the same price that would smack a GT/Cobra into recession. If speed is the main line the newer F-body is by far the superior choice for the dollar.
I still love the video of the AAM VR-4 beating the shit out of the modded Rustang with big slicks in the street races. People like that are the reason I am building my VR-4 with some big turbos (in the planning stage of custom exhaust manifolds to support "different" turbos). I want those rednecks with their disgusting snarling exhaust and huge ass hoods to wonder what is wrong with their unrefined rustbucket when they get torn up by a little V6 after all of the money they have dumped into their car. People that drive Mustangs are generally a redneck or unnervingly retarded. As daily driver/beater they are semi-decent(I guess they are good for something).
I'm also waiting for Ford to finally get a real design team on their Mustang project. I think it's about time they take the play-dough away from those poor little kindergardeners that have been modeling their cars. The mustang looks worse every year they try to do something to it. I'm convinced the Mustang is just an elaborate joke from Ford Motor Company and the people that buy them just haven't caught on yet. I'm not impressed
Joined
·
303 Posts
You can be as hard on owners that don't know what you're talking about all you want, but give the cars a little bit of credit. Its not like they're piles of shit, I mean granted they don't have the same luxurious level of comfort offered by 3s's, but they are still nice, and relatively fast cars. Beyond that, the aftermarket pushed the 5.0 into an incredible power/CI engine, and they're headed in the same direction with the 4.6. Its much more expensive with the OHC engine, but its nothing R&D won't overcome with time. From the factory they won't push 300 HP at the crank like the 3s's, but 2-3k dollars will put them way beyond that, and buying an old 5.0 Mustang over a 3s of the same era will quite possibly save you that much money. The owners suck as a general rule, but I think the cars deserve some credit.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!