I'm not a big mustang fan, but I'm digging the front but don't like the back.
ps: i have attached front view but not showing.
ps: i have attached front view but not showing.
2005 Mustang, what do you guys think?
1 reading
Jhapa
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Joined
·
7,703 Posts
No better yet, a 2005 silvia. Just the sound of 240sx means that we're gonna get dicked somewhere down the line when they become available to the u.s. Like recieving a general purpose engine without turbo or something240240240 said:
Have you guys ever noticed:
200sx= 2.0L(well at least the ser)
240sx= 2.4L
300zx= 3.0L
I dunno maybe it's me that see's these things or i'm just putting out some useless well known info :12dunno
Joined
·
914 Posts
its something they needed to do, the chassis itself is a lot better than the one out now... it was made is 1979 and used till 2004. Thats pretty lame if you ask me, but for the price of a mustang GT(my friend got one at 20500 fully loaded brand new) what else can you get(as far as a new car goes)? Would you rather drive a fwd neon? or a gay looking '04 MR2
Joined
·
174 Posts
imo the new mustang is ugly as hell esp the front. I think they are going to see a huge decline in sales this upcoming year because of the redesign.
All the mustang guys i know say its ugly as hell and that they wouldn't buy.
All the mustang guys i know say its ugly as hell and that they wouldn't buy.
Joined
·
7,703 Posts
The mustang has always been a good selling car for ford, it has a HUGE loyal fanbase. It has and will always be america's pony car. Even if it looked like shit and came with a stroker diesel it would make some noise. The car may just come out pretty good or i'm afraid more bloated and luxurious cuz it does look bigger. I'll hold my judgements upon performance when it's actually tested.
Joined
·
817 Posts
whats with the retro cars all being hideous. the PT cruiser, new beatle, the new thunderbird. they all tried to capture 40+ year old styling and failed miserably at it. thank god the GTO was based off of an exisiting car or it would probably have looked like crap too.
Joined
·
730 Posts
i hate the clutch and shifter on stangs. the clutch has so much resistance to get it down. its ridiculous.
I like heavier sprung pedals personally, not neccasarily with the clutch, although that can make it easier to modulate how fast you slip it out when you're drag racing.
When the pedals have more resistance its a lot easier to modulate how much throttle, you give the car and how hard you brake, but i have 14 ee(wide) feet, and tree trunks for legs, so it might just be me. I hate cars with the pedals super close as well, I like em spaced but even, i hate how with most cars the gas pedal is sunken in lower then the brake, makes heel toeing alll but impossible
When the pedals have more resistance its a lot easier to modulate how much throttle, you give the car and how hard you brake, but i have 14 ee(wide) feet, and tree trunks for legs, so it might just be me. I hate cars with the pedals super close as well, I like em spaced but even, i hate how with most cars the gas pedal is sunken in lower then the brake, makes heel toeing alll but impossible
Joined
·
7,703 Posts
I'd like to see you drive a miata! You'd press all three pedals with one foot :gaylaugh****** said:
It's not that there isn't legroom but thier put together so close and perfectly for heel-toe technique, rx7's are the same way too. It took me a while to get used to how close and small my pedals were but right then and there is how I learned the heel-toe techniques instantly. It's definately nothing you get used to overnight, i'd say give a week or two. If you've only test driven these cars then yeah people will assume that thier something wrong here with the pedal placement or size
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
