Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > General Discussions > General Chat
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-03-2006, 04:07 PM   #16
Cliffy
CF Loafer
 
Cliffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NE Hampshire, England, UK
Posts: 8,441
Number one...allday long!
__________________


Please click here for the rules prior to posting, and here to introduce yourself!

Artwork courtesy of Gregg, aka Voda48
Cliffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:09 PM   #17
What
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Costa Nocha
Posts: 652
Believe it or not, "#1" sucks. Drive it. It sucks. It only looks good.
Choosing #1 because of looks? Yes. History? No.
All of you are ricers. History doesn't enhance the driving characteristics/performance of a car.

All of you are ricers.

What are the specs on #1? The year? You don't know. You just know that it looks good.

All of you are ricers.


I choose #2 because I value a car's performance and ability.
I am not a ricer.
What is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:17 PM   #18
chris_knows
๑۩۞
 
chris_knows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada Status:Trying to find my ish
Posts: 7,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
Believe it or not, "#1" sucks. Drive it. It sucks. It only looks good.
Choosing #1 because of looks? Yes. History? No.
All of you are ricers. History doesn't enhance the driving characteristics/performance of a car.

All of you are ricers.

What are the specs on #1? The year? You don't know. You just know that it looks good.

All of you are ricers.


I choose #2 because I value a car's performance and ability.
I am not a ricer.
Actually, I have looked at the performance specs of the top Mustang. It's a 1965, and has either a 331cid Shelby Tuned Small Block, making 410 HP, a 408cid Shelby Tuned Small Block producing 475 HP or a 427cid Shelby Tuned Aluminum SB with 575 HP...And it's got a DVD player and 10 disk changer...the 1994 more advanced than the 1994 Shinoda doesn't have that lol...
__________________
chris_knows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:18 PM   #19
Car destroyer
Banned
 
Car destroyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
Believe it or not, "#1" sucks. Drive it. It sucks. It only looks good.
Choosing #1 because of looks? Yes. History? No.
All of you are ricers. History doesn't enhance the driving characteristics/performance of a car.

All of you are ricers.

What are the specs on #1? The year? You don't know. You just know that it looks good.

All of you are ricers.


I choose #2 because I value a car's performance and ability.
I am not a ricer.
yeah my brotha!!!!!!!! thats it stick it to um
Car destroyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:23 PM   #20
What
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Costa Nocha
Posts: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris_knows
Actually, I have looked at the performance specs of the top Mustang. It's a 1965, and has either a 331cid Shelby Tuned Small Block, making 410 HP, a 408cid Shelby Tuned Small Block producing 475 HP or a 427cid Shelby Tuned Aluminum SB with 575 HP
So at the most, it's making 290 modern horsepower. With a garbage transmission.

The only reason I'd like to own that car is because of the value.
What is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:25 PM   #21
Cliffy
CF Loafer
 
Cliffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NE Hampshire, England, UK
Posts: 8,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
So at the most, it's making 290 modern horsepower. With a garbage transmission.

The only reason I'd like to own that car is because of the value.
Would you like a shoval? or maybe a JCB?
__________________


Please click here for the rules prior to posting, and here to introduce yourself!

Artwork courtesy of Gregg, aka Voda48
Cliffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:35 PM   #22
chris_knows
๑۩۞
 
chris_knows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada Status:Trying to find my ish
Posts: 7,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
So at the most, it's making 290 modern horsepower. With a garbage transmission.

The only reason I'd like to own that car is because of the value.
The thing about that car is the handling isn't too great and it makes you feel good about yourself trying to keep the tail in line at about 4 miles an hour...ParaphrasedFT lol...Who knows from where?
__________________
chris_knows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:38 PM   #23
PontiacFan27
CF Extraordinaire
 
PontiacFan27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Grove City, PA
Posts: 1,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
So at the most, it's making 290 modern horsepower. With a garbage transmission.

The only reason I'd like to own that car is because of the value.

Since when is 290 bad? The new Mustang GTs only make 300 40 years later. Besides, SN-95s are ugly no matter what fancy doo-dads and body kits you put on it.
__________________
PontiacFan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:45 PM   #24
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
Believe it or not, "#1" sucks. Drive it. It sucks. It only looks good.
Choosing #1 because of looks? Yes. History? No.
All of you are ricers. History doesn't enhance the driving characteristics/performance of a car.

All of you are ricers.

What are the specs on #1? The year? You don't know. You just know that it looks good.

All of you are ricers.


I choose #2 because I value a car's performance and ability.
I am not a ricer.

You're an idiot. I've owned and raced Mustangs of that vintage. I own a couple of the cars that Mustang is BASED on, one of which is about to be a daily driver. I've also driven and raced Fox and SN95 mustangs. I'll take the older one every day of the week and twice on sundays. the Foxes and SN95s are compromises, and actually have WORSE suspension and brakes than teh older ones. Since you have to mod any of them to be good, i'll take the one that looks better to start with. the earlier one is lighter, so it takes less power to make fast. That PARTICULAR early one is a clone, not an original (the oversize whels give it away, as well as the non stock color scheme). Which means that it will have a more modern engine and suspension, and most likely upgraded brakes. I personally liike the bigger brakes teh early mustangs had, both for oveall stopping ability and modulation, espeicaly when running modern tires like that one is.

the older one has timeless style, the newer one doesnt'. the newer one has a lot of electronics that are a pain to diagnose and repair when they fail. the older one is an appreciating classic that will be worth more while you own it, while teh SN95 is a depreciating modern car worth less every day.

Oh, and sorr to say, as a restorrer and customizer of vintage and classic cars, history DOES enhance the driving experience. And driving a well kept classic is VERY rewarding, and fun.

Again, you're a small brained moron, but that should be expected from an ignorant pile of trash like yourself.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:46 PM   #25
What
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Costa Nocha
Posts: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by PontiacFan27
Since when is 290 bad? The new Mustang GTs only make 300 40 years later. Besides, SN-95s are ugly no matter what fancy doo-dads and body kits you put on it.
The new Mustangs have a much better transmission than the 60's sh*t. And I said that the car was making AT MOST 290 hp. Most likely, it's making a modern day V6 200.
What is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 04:47 PM   #26
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Car destroyer
yeah my brotha!!!!!!!! thats it stick it to um

Hey, 12 year old! Grow up! You don't know shit about cars, so your opinion here is worthless.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 05:24 PM   #27
Lizard King 6B
CF Enthusiast
 
Lizard King 6B's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hell
Posts: 148
No. 1
No thinking required
__________________
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I cannot accept,
And the wisdom to hide the bodies of those people I had to
kill today because they pissed me off.
Lizard King 6B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 05:30 PM   #28
99integra
CF's Florida boy
 
99integra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 6,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Car destroyer
yeah my brotha!!!!!!!! thats it stick it to um
F*ckin retard..
__________________
Current whip: walking
99integra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 09:13 PM   #29
What
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Costa Nocha
Posts: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
Your opinion here is worthless.
His opinion isn't wortless to me. I want to know what he has to say.
What is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2006, 10:04 PM   #30
Benson
seeking snappy title.
 
Benson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pythias
No, number 2 is nothing THAt special, but it is "ok" yes it is a Boss Shinoda, with a 5.8? I believe? But come on, that classic Shelby GT350 is just amazing, people see a decent amount of SN-95's on the road, eventhough that one would stand out, the Shelby takes it, easily.
Haven't seen one around here ever.

Oh and What, a lot of older transmissions are still really good and still used in modern day drag racing and are still beat on. MoPars 727TF was one of the best transmissions during the muscle car era and is still used today.

Last edited by Benson : 07-03-2006 at 10:11 PM.
Benson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.