Discussion in '1970 Ford GT70' started by RadoMan, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. I had heard about this car, but never seen it before. it resembles the GT40, but obviously has differences. that 6 cyl. in such a light car will be able to really go, I bet.<!-- Signature -->
  2. Re: cool

    its ugly and under power. is hard to like it<!-- Signature -->
  3. Re: cool

    I think it's neat looking too, except for those headlights. Underpowered? For a 1970, non-muscle car, it's got a great 0-60 time.
  4. Re: cool

    yeah i agree with monkey its very fast for the year 170 which car had a topspeed of almost 250 inthat year? i dont thiunk so much like now and a acceleration like this wwwwwwwwooooooooooowwwwwwww
  5. Re: cool

    take a look at the other cars of the time before you call it a ugly and underpowered car
  6. Re: cool

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from MontoyaFan</i>
    <b>its ugly and under power. is hard to like it</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Stupid IMO.<!-- Signature -->
  7. Re: cool

    nissan u r a moron. cars back then were beautiful. i happen to own a 1971 corvette LS-5 big-block all original corvette. it is a very beautiful car with classic lines and styling. this is just pathetic. it is ugly and underpowered. whoever had the idea of putting a v-6 in this, should be shot and all who think that 155 mph top speed is awesome. my uncle got his 68 dodge charger up to 145 mph. all u need r more gears, and wider ratios.
  8. Re: cool

    hey retard what you can't think or something, or just dumb. take your car off roading and see who would win even in straight line on gravel, we won't count corners or even bumps. enyway how much faster is your car i would say the most only a second. so shut up. they need the car light so it won't brake on them during bumps.
    i think ford knows what they are doing more than a 5 year old who thinks bigger is always better.
  9. Re: cool

    I like it.

Share This Page