Mustang owner claims Mustang Hotter than any Ferrari
05-26-2005, 01:12 PM
#31
Junior GTcars Poster
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 275
Rep Power: 707 
^hey the guy talking about his sn95 95 stang wasnt "Last50h_302" or whatever is it?? 
-Jay
-Jay
05-26-2005, 01:15 PM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Z28 MeTaL HeAd
^hey the guy talking about his sn95 95 stang wasnt "Last50h_302" or whatever is it??
-Jay
-Jay
:thumbsup maybe, im not supposed to say
05-26-2005, 01:31 PM
#33
Junior GTcars Poster
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 275
Rep Power: 707 
-Jay
05-26-2005, 02:02 PM
#34
~~ Hardcore Newb ~~
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: York Region
Posts: 111
Rep Power: 704
Originally Posted by 2tone_93gt
let me guess, you would take a 1989 GT mustang over that 
sorry, Ferrari is a Ferrari.. there are some hot stangs out there.. but when talking in regards to Fox bodies and sn95s, im sorry.
sorry, Ferrari is a Ferrari.. there are some hot stangs out there.. but when talking in regards to Fox bodies and sn95s, im sorry.
05-26-2005, 05:12 PM
#35
Experienced GTcars Poster
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 1,518
Rep Power: 732
Originally Posted by Stang6589
A supra is just over priced rice!!!!!
05-26-2005, 05:17 PM
#36
Average GTcars Poster
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Waterloo/Mississauga
Posts: 491
Rep Power: 711
Originally Posted by 2tone_93gt
funny thing is, your 65 is mint...
but if you were a regular mustang guy, you wouldnt trade it for an enzo
but if you were a regular mustang guy, you wouldnt trade it for an enzo
The 65 I would not trade.
05-26-2005, 05:19 PM
#37
Average GTcars Poster
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Waterloo/Mississauga
Posts: 491
Rep Power: 711
Originally Posted by B6T
Yeah I can see how you would say that if all you knew about was carbs and live axles.
05-26-2005, 05:36 PM
#38
Experienced GTcars Poster
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 1,518
Rep Power: 732
My point is that if you actually knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't have said that a Supra is over priced, or rice. I just don't see how you can say that a car which can make well over 750hp with 3.0L of displacement and stock internals is "over priced rice". So what if they have shitty traction, I guess that's because the suspension is designed for more then just straight lines. That car was pretty impressive and had lots of technology considering it came out in the early 90's. But I guess since you can't buy one for $3000 like you can with a 5.0L, I guess it is overpriced.
If you want to see a riced out Supra, go to the JRP meet tomorrow.
If you want to see a riced out Supra, go to the JRP meet tomorrow.
05-26-2005, 09:18 PM
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
$30 K for a 93 supra seems still steap. + more for modding to make the 750 RWHP on stock internals....
nice cars, pricey...
and id still take a Ferrari despite the 10 second supra in F&F beating one.
nice cars, pricey...
and id still take a Ferrari despite the 10 second supra in F&F beating one.
05-26-2005, 10:02 PM
#40
Average GTcars Poster
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Waterloo/Mississauga
Posts: 491
Rep Power: 711
Originally Posted by 2tone_93gt
$30 K for a 93 supra seems still steap. + more for modding to make the 750 RWHP on stock internals....
nice cars, pricey...
and id still take a Ferrari despite the 10 second supra in F&F beating one.
nice cars, pricey...
and id still take a Ferrari despite the 10 second supra in F&F beating one.
05-27-2005, 02:54 PM
#41
~~ Hardcore Newb ~~
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 97
Rep Power: 703
Originally Posted by 2tone_93gt
funny thing is, your 65 is mint...
but if you were a regular mustang guy, you wouldnt trade it for an enzo
but if you were a regular mustang guy, you wouldnt trade it for an enzo
wow regular mustang guys must be pretty smart then
they wouldnt trade one worst handling, worst braking, you can argue that most stangs especially 80s,90s mustangs are possibly the ugliest things on the road, shitty interiors, seats thats are like couches, did i mention handles like a pig? Who the hell cares how fast it is.
Now tune a ferrari, and see how many mustangs can keep up. Well how many mustangs period can anyway when lets say an enzo is stock? 0-100mph in 6sec flat.
so the enzo motor is a detuned f1 motor, 3L all motor. The track version makes almost 1000hp. out of 3L. not 5 or 4.6 or whatever. They have the most advanced techonology in them, best traction controls, they weigh nothing. On top they rev to 18-19 thousand rpm.
hahaha, lets see a pig like a mustang rev only half... hahaha... that motors probably gonna shake all its bolts off the engine and the car.
Last edited by biggy; 05-27-2005 at 02:57 PM.
05-27-2005, 03:12 PM
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by biggy
wow regular mustang guys must be pretty smart then
they wouldnt trade one worst handling, worst braking, you can argue that most stangs especially 80s,90s mustangs are possibly the ugliest things on the road, shitty interiors, seats thats are like couches, did i mention handles like a pig? Who the hell cares how fast it is.
Now tune a ferrari, and see how many mustangs can keep up. Well how many mustangs period can anyway when lets say an enzo is stock? 0-100mph in 6sec flat.
so the enzo motor is a detuned f1 motor, 3L all motor. The track version makes almost 1000hp. out of 3L. not 5 or 4.6 or whatever. They have the most advanced techonology in them, best traction controls, they weigh nothing. On top they rev to 18-19 thousand rpm.
hahaha, lets see a pig like a mustang rev only half... hahaha... that motors probably gonna shake all its bolts off the engine and the car.
they wouldnt trade one worst handling, worst braking, you can argue that most stangs especially 80s,90s mustangs are possibly the ugliest things on the road, shitty interiors, seats thats are like couches, did i mention handles like a pig? Who the hell cares how fast it is.
Now tune a ferrari, and see how many mustangs can keep up. Well how many mustangs period can anyway when lets say an enzo is stock? 0-100mph in 6sec flat.
so the enzo motor is a detuned f1 motor, 3L all motor. The track version makes almost 1000hp. out of 3L. not 5 or 4.6 or whatever. They have the most advanced techonology in them, best traction controls, they weigh nothing. On top they rev to 18-19 thousand rpm.
hahaha, lets see a pig like a mustang rev only half... hahaha... that motors probably gonna shake all its bolts off the engine and the car.
05-27-2005, 06:06 PM
#44
Junior GTcars Poster
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton Ontario
Posts: 228
Rep Power: 703
I have only test drove a handful of Rustangs in my day and although they are modestly impressive in a straight line, I doubt very highly they could do much in corners and they do ride like tanks at the best of times so which is better?
Do the ing math.
Do the ing math.
05-27-2005, 06:11 PM
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Strokerace
Theres about $500,000 difference in the price tag too.So I hope to hell its better in all area's. This is like trying to compare apples to banana's.
mustangs, a poor mans vette
