ccap41

Well, your opinion in wrong. #Ford4Life I kid I kid

Do you have an order placed on this new Camaro..? You talk an awful lot about it..

I'm going to keep it with my "soul" era(kind of..) to probably simplify it some because honestly, I want to drive everything. I want to drive everything from the 1.4l Sonic to the Prius 6.2l to the Hellcat(both of them) to the hybrid hypercars in the P1 and LaFerrari. Heck, when I was reading those van reviews/comparison and I wanted to hop in one and see what those diesels are like. I just like to see how different everything is. Like how Honda supposedly makes one of the best manual transmissions ever to the CVTs of today, I want to drive them and feel them. I want to be able to put some time behind the BMW-era that had the greatest driving feel. First gen electrics and hybrid Priuses that were probably total junk..want to drive. Genesis Sedan and Coupe? Yup. The coupe is one sharp looking car. I'm surprised it doesn't compete better with the Mustang and Camaro(or that they didn't make it to compete better with them, I should say). The sedan looks like a full on luxury car when driving past them(never been in one to judge from the interior's aspect). There is just so much I want to drive, I could just post links to EVERY manufacturer's website and say "everything". But that isn't fun.. For instance, my signature pic of the Mystic Cobra..I've never driven one! Well, Here are just a handful of cars(more performance oriented) that I'd realistically like to drive. '02 Z28/SS. I've driven a '97 LT1. Decent amount of wheel time as it was one of my best friend's but never an LS1. Never drove a GTO. I once had a salesman try and sell me an automatic(after I told him I wouldn't buy an automatic GTO)..his justification of having an automatic was so you can grab titties while driving. No joke. He actually said "you can grab titties while driving" to me...lol Absolutely fell in love with the C63 when I had my C350. AMG and how they do exhaust Oh yeah, and 450hp in a small"ish" sedan. ZL1. I wanna feel those magnet shocks. Jk, well..kind of.. It's just my Favorite 5th gen Camaro. The "grand touring" of the Camaros. I also think it's the best looking Camaro. Small, flickable, little BR-Z. Every Miata from this: To this: Aaaaaand my favorite gen and supposedly the "most BMW, BMW". I almost bought an '06 330i but I couldn't justify either the price or mileage on the ones I found. What about y'all?

I highly doubt it was for the "facts". It was probably for the condesending tone. "Literally from that article (since some did not bother to read it before commenting)."

Not if the updated 5.0 is still in progress.. Won't argue that I think every Mustang fan alive is disappointed that it gained weight but everybody knows there are economics that are involved and it always involves give and take and something had to give. Weight. Weight stuck around.. But once again you're proving my point. GM was able to do a new chassis AND engine all at once. Why not Ford? The answer is that GM has the bigger toolbox, and the fire in the belly. Ford does not. The didn't produce that engine FOR the Camaro though. They produced it for the Vette's release and it carried down to the Camaro. Obviously Ford doesn't have that luxury of having a Vette-like car to trickle things down from..they just have Lincoln..lol. So, it has its own product cycle to work through. GM definitely does have the larger toolbox, I won't argue that. You are absolutely correct about the 5th gen comparison. Stupid. My apologies.

Not if the updated 5.0 is still in progress.. Won't argue that I think every Mustang fan alive is disappointed that it gained weight but everybody knows there are economics that are involved and it always involves give and take and something had to give. Weight. Weight stuck around..

There's a pretty big number comparison that you just "conveniently" left out and that's the difference in figure-8 times. 25.0 for the '13 and 24.4 for the '16. That is a very good indication of how much the handling has improved over the previous generation."It's not just about straight-line performance and highway pulls anymore. Muscle cars have entered the era of handling." "If you're searching for every last tenth of an advantage on paper, you may find something that's faster than the 2016 Ford Mustang GT. Maybe something cheaper. But if you enjoy the experience as much as the performance, the Mustang GT is the whole package, with an exhaust that's muscular when exercised, a controlled ride, and an interior you don't have to make excuses for." I'd be a lot more interested in that quote if:-I didn't know the Mustang lost its first comparo to the Camaro already-in the same publication that wrote this, -the interior they're praising was being compared to the Zeta Camaro (a '15), not the Alpha. The Camaro is just too strong. Why are you assuming that quote was directed at the previous generation Camaro not the one they just had a comparison with, the '16? I don't see they would compare it to a car not in production when they have a '16 Camaro with them when this was written. I haven't gotten to read a comparion yet(not going to read pictures somebody posted), on what grounds did the mustang lose? I'm not trying to justify that the Mustang is a better car all around or this or that but you're the only person who is attempting to make the Mustang look bad. The writers all like it. Is it the quickest? Nope. Is it BAD? Nope. Is it a car that was VASTLY improved upon from its previous generation? Yup. Yes, this is the same publication that just rang up a loss for the Mustang to the Camaro. Doesn't that tell you something? Like..maybe..it isn't a POS like you try really hard to make it out to be? IRS does more than just improve handling. It improves the entire ride. If the '14's rode anything like my Mustangs with their SRA they were super choppy over any rough pavement, even in a straight line. Yes, you can tune IRS to do A LOT more. But it is more than just race car-like handling that can be had from IRS. Daily drivability can be made from IRS. Look what the Camaro did with their setup! They transformed a barge into a jet ski over the years with that last generation. They kept tweaking the system because it is so much more flexible.

There's a pretty big number comparison that you just "conveniently" left out and that's the difference in figure-8 times. 25.0 for the '13 and 24.4 for the '16. That is a very good indication of how much the handling has improved over the previous generation. "It's not just about straight-line performance and highway pulls anymore. Muscle cars have entered the era of handling." "If you're searching for every last tenth of an advantage on paper, you may find something that's faster than the 2016 Ford Mustang GT. Maybe something cheaper. But if you enjoy the experience as much as the performance, the Mustang GT is the whole package, with an exhaust that's muscular when exercised, a controlled ride, and an interior you don't have to make excuses for."

Is it easier to do though? I would safely assume it is more difficult to extract 10/10ths out of a quicker car than a slower car, right? So while it definitely has the ability to be quicker it is a safe assumption that it is tougher to do, because it is quicker. I mean anything over 300hp involves a lot of driver skill, if you have a manual and all the sissy nannies turned off. That actually makes me curious. I wonder which car performs "better" with all the nannies turned on? Which electronic system is "better" or "quicker" or more adaptable?

I could never imagine spending 47k on a mustsng GT, nor a Camaro SS. SRT challenger? It just feels more right. The other two feel like they should just cost less, and they can be had for less(I know this). I don't understand all of the bashing as if anybody could drive either of these cars to 10/10ths. They made an overall better vehicle, period. Slower by a tenth or two? Apparently. But overall it's been improved by way more than those 2/10ths. And while the worst defense of a vehicle or..anything.. Is the "wait till XX comes out" but I don't think Ford will just sit back and allow the Camaro to dominate it performance-wise. I don't think they're going to just go nuts with an update but I see something like they did in '10-'11 and it was kind of a "wait and react" kind of approach. Effective? I don't know. Smart? I don't know. But they've done t before in the Mustang and also the F150 so I wouldn't put it past them.

As they should be, imo.

There are actually two things I'd like for my Escape. I want a rear cargo cover and a spoiler. Yup, that sounded pretty "ricer". Go with me though.. The spoilers that a lot of the guys on the Escape forums have is just a simple one, nothing gaudy in any way. It will make the rear end look more "Edge"-like. Also, about half of CUVs have them anyway so 99.9% of people won't even notice it's there. Oh, downside? It's about $120. The cargo cover is more like $80ish, I believe. Like so.. And the cargo cover..

I'll second that. It's definitely like a top 3 Asian/tuner car that I've always wanted. Actually, Other than an STi I think it tops the list. I've just always loved them and I think their styling was well before its time when a lot of cars looked terrible, IMO. Nice pick blackviper!

What kind does it take?Edit: oops,sorry I responded before I refreshed the page from the day before.. But like those guys said, there don't be an issue as long as it meets the requirements. If it was an issue on that kind of thing there wouldn't be quick lube shops as people would only be able to go to dealers.

I think I know what you mean.. I'm going to take a whack at it! The first car that I really fell for that had me fall for cars was an '01 Bullitt. I had to have only been 16 at the time but there was one for sale and parked in a local grocery store parking lot. Well, a buddy of mine was like, "lets stop and look at that". Okay, we did. There was just something about the body lines and size and just everything about that car when I was up next to it actuall looking at it caught me. I think that 1997-2005 era of muscle cars where it was the end of the Fbody, End of the NewEdge Mustangs and the GTO was making a come back. Exactly like you said.. I was right around that 16 years old, starting to drive and appreciate cars more. A really good friend of mine's dad had a '97 Anniversary Z/28 like the one that is pictured. He bought aluminum wheels for it and kept the original white ones boxed up so they were in mint condition too. Well, here is my list..Not sure if this is supposed to be an era of cars or one car from said era. Ohhhh well!

Wow, that's a lot of segments to go through.. Some kind of confuse me a long the way like.. Linconln? I assume Lux? Or where does a CLA fall? I'll definitely have to go trough one of these.

You think ANY X3 buyer is worried about drag racing a mustang? You think that is even on their radar? At $54k, you're at Jeep Grand Cherokee Summit V8 pricing.... a vehicle just as fast, far more capable off-road, more luxurious, and roomier. If you spend $53k on a BMW X3, you just have to admit that you're only after the badge. You are the most clearly biased, arrogant, condescending, closed-minded admin I have ever seen. You ask if any X3 buyer is worried about drag racing, and then in the same post talk about a Grand Cherokee's off-road capability as if anybody actually exploits it. Unbelievable. Seriously? Drew? ..I'm not on all sorts of different forums but I feel like he is pretty fair and very, VERY rarely do I sense condescending-ness. If I do it is because the other poster is being a jack off and he's actually being polite about it. Guarantee there is a much larger % of people taking a Grand Cherokee off road than there are X3's at drag strips or racing anything, in general. Just say'n.

This $h! happens to me DAILY. On my way to work I pass a middle school and high school. Well there is a road that intersects the road I'm driving on which is about a half mile till the schools. VERY rarely do they actually get up to speed and 90% of the cars that pull out turn into the schools. I've passed cars there by just maintaining 55mph on a handful of occasions.

People buying CUVs aren't after the "drive of a BMW". 99% of people buying CUVs are after the roominess, larger-than-a-car, and...other things have nothing to do with what us entusiasts are after in a vehicle. So it might as well be a Ford Escape or Toyota Rav4 with an expensive badge to the customer. Those consumers probably don't even know which wheels are powered or by what engine if powering said weels(I4, V6, I6). I couldn't imagine spending 54k for something the same size(or very similar) as my Escape.Yes Yes Yes.. The interior is going to be a major step up from a Ford but 33k more than what I paid? Nope. For how the average CUV driver drives their CUV? Nope.

I read something like this at Motor Trend last night. Very intriguing.

Or....one could say that they are just too damn scary fast today. ...touche'...

It's just WAAAAAY to time intensive of work to try and real-world test everything. Plus, there would be no consistancy. Too many factors effect fuel mileage.

I'm more in the sound-snob bunch. Between sound and how the power actually feels while driving make a good engine to me. To what blackviper8891 said, the only real 4cyl that has sounded good to me is those flat 4's. Burble is about the best description to me, they burble with aftermarket exhaust. Now there are SOME 4cyls that don't sound bad but that doesn't mean they sound good. A lot of Ford's 4cyl that I've heard sound like crap to me. The new RS sounds pretty good though(from the one video I've hears/saw). But the high end 4cyl do tend to sound a little better, like the CLA AMG. That's another one that sounds pretty good..for a 4cyl.. Also, I'm completely in love with the 4.6 in the Mustangs. Be it 2, 3, or 4V they all souns wonderful to my hears. Yet, none of them really have a lot of the low end, daily driving balls that I prefer in an engine. My current 2.0T doesn't have the top end but plenty of low end tq that I use on a dialy basis. I love the powerband in my 2.0T. As for displacement.. the number shouldn't mean anything if it isn't delievered correctly. For me, I want a lot of low end and mid range. Rarely is my foot on the floor for anything I'm driving daily. So, for instance, if I had some beefy 454 under the hood but(go with me here) it revved like the new 5.2 Ford and had nothing below 3200rpm..then I don't care for it nearly as much as a little 2000cc producing instant torque at 1500rpm. But sound-wise.. V8 no doubt about it.

Ya know, I always assumed we were the same age, but I didn't actually have proof until now. I'll race your stock fox body in my stock Monte Carlo SS! Both are slower than 4-cylinder family cars now... Haha I always had the feeling too. I think it was your tech-ness and taste in other things portrayed somebody roughly the same age as myself. I didn't know it was actually late 80's thought. Decent years..lol Oh jeez. It's amazing how quick average cars have gotten. I mean our average cars would make those pretty sweet 80's cars look stupid.. and we don't drive anything extragagant. They were just damn slow back then! lol