• Cars v2
    2,003 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Hell Strike;17803285]I'm not sure if i've posted it before, but this is my Mustang GT, my daily driver. 1995, last year for the 5.0L 302 V8 too. 218k miles, on the same engine and it still runs beautifully. pic: [img]http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p92/suicidalvoters/P1270974.jpg[/img] [img]http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p92/suicidalvoters/P1270975.jpg[/img] you can see above the right headlight where my cousin wrecked it into my dad's truck while still in the driveway. dad tried to hammer it out and did a respectable job but as you see it's still quite noticeable. ):[/QUOTE] Such unnecessary first cars, you American's drive.
[QUOTE=Dip;17811662]Such unnecessary first cars, you American's drive.[/QUOTE] It's a mustang GT, lol... What's unnecessary about it, it's about average power wise except it sucks a lot more gas.
[QUOTE=DrMortician;17811675]It's a mustang GT, lol... What's unnecessary about it, it's about average power wise except it sucks a lot more gas.[/QUOTE] Average? No it's not. Not at all.
Yes it is.
[QUOTE=BLU Sandvich;17811772]Yes it is.[/QUOTE] But it isn't. A 5.0 Litre V8 petrol engine that produces 200 HP? Who really needs that besides race car drivers?
Race car drivers are better off with a 2.0 litre 4 pot producing 200 hp. [editline]05:31PM[/editline] No one needs a 5.0L V8 producing 200 hp, it's just wasteful.
[QUOTE=Doozle;17812004]Race car drivers are better off with a 2.0 litre 4 pot producing 200 hp. [editline]05:31PM[/editline] No one needs a 5.0L V8 producing 200 hp, it's just wasteful.[/QUOTE] This is the point I'm trying to prove. Doozle, are you English?
Yes.
That mustang just screams [B]OOOOVERCOMPENSAAATING[/B] honestly, it would be a better car with a turbocharged/supercharged 4 cylinder engine
[quote=van-man;17813409]that mustang just screams [b]oooovercompensaaating[/b] honestly, it would be a better car with a turbocharged/supercharged 4 cylinder engine[/quote] F20c [editline]06:43PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Dip;17812026]This is the point I'm trying to prove. Doozle, are you English?[/QUOTE] The only point you are proving is that you are an average communer and have no passion for cars that aren't your average run of the mill FWD 1.2l hatchback. We love cars, you just happen to ride in them. Keep on going Mustang :smug:
[QUOTE=edberg;17813656]F20c [editline]06:43PM[/editline] The only point you are proving is that you are an average communer and have no passion for cars that aren't your average run of the mill FWD 1.2l hatchback. We love cars, you just happen to ride in them. Keep on going Mustang :smug:[/QUOTE] Everyone has different tastes in cars, just like music. I'll have you know I think my little 1.6 FWD focus has soul and I love her to pieces. Just because I like a FWD car does not make me an inferior driver. (I have to admit I'd love a go in something big and muscley and RWD, but I wouldn't swap my hatchback for the mustang). Also I think you spelled commoner wrong.
[QUOTE=Dip;17811662]Such unnecessary first cars, you American's drive.[/QUOTE] It was actually my dads and he barely drives it anymore due to recent gas prices, and the only reason I get to drive it is because it gets the least gas mileage and I'm the one that drives the least.
[QUOTE=metallics;17813902]Everyone has different tastes in cars, just like music. I'll have you know I think my little 1.6 FWD focus has soul and I love her to pieces. Just because I like a FWD car does not make me an inferior driver. (I have to admit I'd love a go in something big and muscley and RWD, but I wouldn't swap my hatchback for the mustang). Also I think you spelled commoner wrong.[/QUOTE] And that's great, I hope you enjoy thousands of future miles in your awesome car. But it's retarded to go and say that your car is overkill, unnecessary and that you shouldn't be driving it unless your a racecar driver.
[QUOTE=edberg;17813656]F20c [editline]06:43PM[/editline] The only point you are proving is that you are an average communer and have no passion for cars that aren't your average run of the mill FWD 1.2l hatchback. We love cars, you just happen to ride in them. Keep on going Mustang :smug:[/QUOTE] Oh dear. If I had no 'passion' as it were, I refer to it as an interest, then why on Earth would I be in this thread? Plus what do you know about me? I have no clue about your preference in car, and do not have the need to decide for you which cars you like. I choose not to go on about my particular preference's in cars for the sake of everyone else's bordem. But certain 1.2L "average run of the mill FWD hatchback" cars are far better. But you wouldn't know that as all 1.2L hatchbacks in America are rebadged 2002-2005 Daewoo Kalos'. I personally wouldn't want to be seen in one of those anytime soon.
I like how you said you weren't going to spew your opinion on everyone and then continued to do just that. And in my personal experience the only good car sub 2 liter that I have driven is a certain older 1.3l car.
[QUOTE=Apocalypsox;17816888]I like how you said you weren't going to spew your opinion on everyone and then continued to do just that. And in my personal experience the only good car sub 2 liter that I have driven is a certain older 1.3l car.[/QUOTE] By that, I meant list all the kinds of car's I like and disslike. To show I like more than 1.2L hatchbacks.
[QUOTE=Dip;17816964]By that, I meant list all the kinds of car's I like and disslike. To show I like more than 1.2 hatchbacks.[/QUOTE] I'm not bothered by your preference in cars, I'm bothered by how you basically said "if you aren't a race car driver you shouldn't be in a fast car".
Well you should have included the rest of that post as your opinion, because it was still boring. Your mastery of the American automobile market is amazing sir, I applaud you. Really.
[QUOTE=edberg;17817012]I'm not bothered by your preference in cars, I'm bothered by how you basically said "if you aren't a race car driver you shouldn't be in a fast car".[/QUOTE] this I don't ever drive fast or even get up to speed fast, but I like knowing that the power is there if I need/want it. and 20mpg isn't [i]that[/i] bad.
[QUOTE=Hell Strike;17817072]and 20mpg isn't [i]that[/i] bad.[/QUOTE] What? Yeah it is, a huge portion of SUVs have something higher than that.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;17817149]What? Yeah it is, a huge portion of SUVs have something higher than that.[/QUOTE] it's still affordable with my families income. and the fact that i don't drive often doesn't hurt either.
I'm a big Jeep fan. I want this for my first car: [img]http://www.mediabistro.com/agencyspy/original/2007-jeep-wrangler-4drs.jpg[/img] Or this: [img]http://reparent.blog.uvm.edu/images/jeep-renegade.jpg[/img]
The lower thing looks like a toy. Really I thought the point of a Jeep was to have a car that can withstand the rapture and come back there With that car you are crying when some rain starts falling or branches attack you.
Well, I am planning on traveling the world. So, if that's the case, I'll name it "Rolling Bomb-shelter." No promises, though. I like Rolling Thunder or War Machine.
[img]http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/11/1113_supercars/image/saleen_slide-1.jpg[/img] Fucking beast car. Now here's my dream car. I don't care if it handles like shit, this car looks like a man's car. Girls will want to fuck you a million times if you get this car, because it's that awesome. [img]http://www.digitalcorvettes.com/corvette-photos/data/508/1969-corvette-4.jpg[/img] 69' Corvette Stingray.
[QUOTE=Tukimoshi;17818354][media]http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/11/1113_supercars/image/saleen_slide-1.jpg[/media] Fucking beast car. Now here's my dream car. I don't care if it handles like shit, this car looks like a man's car. Girls will want to fuck you a million times if you get this car, because it's that awesome. [media]http://www.digitalcorvettes.com/corvette-photos/data/508/1969-corvette-4.jpg[/media] 69' Corvette Stingray.[/QUOTE] If you want a chick magnet. then you'll need a Italian sportscar
[QUOTE=Dip;17811896]But it isn't. A 5.0 Litre V8 petrol engine that produces 200 HP? Who really needs that besides race car drivers?[/QUOTE] 200hp? Rofl, my 3.3 is making 240. My 1.3 was making over 200. 200hp is no where near excessive for that big of a car. It's just enough to make it move comfortably in traffic. [editline]08:03PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Hell Strike;17817072]this I don't ever drive fast or even get up to speed fast, but I like knowing that the power is there if I need/want it. and 20mpg isn't [i]that[/i] bad.[/QUOTE] 30 years ago you could get better gas millage with equal power. So yea it's pretty shitty. [editline]08:05PM[/editline] [QUOTE=evilking1;17817635]The lower thing looks like a toy. Really I thought the point of a Jeep was to have a car that can withstand the rapture and come back there With that car you are crying when some rain starts falling or branches attack you.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't put much faith in jeep, at least ones made in the past 20 years. Our cherokee's leaf spring mounts rusted away from the chassis, leaving the car pretty much unrepairable unless you wanted to build a frame under it. And it was well taken care of.
[QUOTE=DrMortician;17818941]200hp? Rofl, my 3.3 is making 240. My 1.3 was making over 200. 200hp is no where near excessive for that big of a car. It's just enough to make it move comfortably in traffic.[/QUOTE] Horsepower isn't everything, there's also torque :eng101: Even though i know a guy who owns a ford like Hell Strike's and they are unbelievably slow, compared to what's under the hood. Also that 1.3 liter you mention is either Super/turbo-charged or have very low amount of torque.
[QUOTE=metalhead121;17817595][img]http://reparent.blog.uvm.edu/images/jeep-renegade.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Someone played a little too much halo when making this...
the Renegade concept is amazing, and has four wheel steering.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.