Re: The camaro doesn't suck

Discussion in '2003 Ford Mustang Mach 1' started by whiteGT, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. You are f*ckin stupid because look at the price

    Corvette:50,000$
    Mustang:20-35,000$

    Thats Right, Shutup
     
  2. GT-40 has Ford written all over it. Yet people have no respect for history of the cars and then say Ford sucks.

    It takes some balls to say it, or just plain stupidity.

    People claim that hard workin Americans made Corvettes. What about Mustangs? That was American too. Mustangs sold 1 million cars in less than two years when it was first introduced. It took the corvette 40 years to sell that much.

    In reality if you diss Ford, your pretty much dissing Chevy at the same time and vise versa. Your dissing America all together. If it wasn't for this competition between the two American companys at the time, cars of today would not be where they are at today. People are dissing other cars for their differences, yet each company (domestic and foreign) has made a difference to each other. One company would not have changed the car into the modern day car.

    Personallly I like Mustangs, but thats my preference. I like corvette and camaros too, cause they have american power in them.

    It really doesn't matter who beats who. Having a great car doesn't make you a great person. The driver makes the car perform.

    You don't have to like a car, but respecting a car that someone else likes does do good. You don't have to like, but you should respect and shouldn't hate. All cars have their purpose. The streets aren't a race track all the time.

    I could say my minivan is better than either your mustang or vette cause it has more cargo room, even if its doesn't perform well on the track.

    There is no perfect car, there will always be a better one down the road, guarenteed.
     
  3. In Motor Trend they had an SVT 0-60 in 4.7 and 1/4 in 13.00 where as 3 years earlier they had a FireHawk SLP 0-60 in 4.87 and 1/4 in 13.34. They are close and if you supercharge a Camaro or FireBird they would kill an SVT.
     
  4. thats because the engines in the Cobra are missmatched to the LS1 in the comaro/firebird. the MOD 5.4 would be the matching engine in ford to the LS1.
     
  5. If the Camaro is such a good car, then why did they sell so horribly, provoking GM to pull the car from its line? Answer that!
     
  6. They were faster, but didn't sell for as cheap, nor did the buyers like them as much.
     
  7. go ahead name a camaro that can beat the 94 ford mustang boss 10L...but maybe if the mustang wasnt around to kill camaros they'd b alright.
     
  8. How about the Camaro ZL1. At least the tires on THAT ACTUALLY HIT THE ROAD!!!

    For christ's sake, THE MUSTANG BOSS IS A CONCEPT!!!!!GOT THAT? A #$%#ING CONCEPT!!!

    Why the hell do all of the pre-pubescent teens around here instantly jump to the Boss CONCEPT every time someone questions the Mustang?

    For crying out loud, the least you could do is use the SVT Cobra as an example, THAT is faster than the Camaro SS was, however it wasn't around until AFTER the Camaro was axed.

    That said, I don't really even like either car, I'm just giving the cold, hard truth, and you need to grow up, and stop being so narrow minded and ignorant.

     
  9. "3 easy steps to a successfull post

    1. remove head from ass
    2. think
    3. post"

    practice what you preach.
     
  10. Okay, do you know why it pulled that slow of a 0-60...Fist off the tires really spin on the Stang. And the Pedals, the Accelerator is an inch lower thsn the other pedals, so you can't get wide-open throttle, now that have things to fix that, but that is why the 1/4 and 0-60 are so slow. And if you turned up the boost to 12PSI you would have like 510HP and you would kill a camaro with 12PSI, the cobra already has 450HP, 390 is at the rearwheels, all cobras are measured like that...so get your facts straight.
     
  11. you think 0-60 in 4.7 is slow???? R U on glue??? Very few Mustang models have ever been able to do that.
     
  12. NO cobras had their HP rated at the wheels you dolt. have you seen a dyno? 365-370....so get your facts straight.
     
  13. you should get your facts straigh, they dyno at 385, and if it did dyno at 370 that would be like 410 HP at the flywheel
     
  14. First of all don't belive everything you read. I know a guy that owns an 03 cobra he's taken it to the track 2se. His first time there, he was actually running really $hitty. 13.3s and 13.2s but by the end of the night he was doing much better 13.1s (13.04 best of the night), and when i went up with him the second time he continued to pull the low 13s, and by the end of that night he was running consistent 12.8s & 12.9s. Anyways the car is rated as a 13.00 but my bud can make it do better... also another friend of mine owns an 03 sti... rated as a 13.00 car also but no matter what he does he hasn't gotten better then 13.37 in fact now modded he only runs 13.1s anyways the point is.... just because some magazine said this or that doesn't mean that's how it's going to be and to really see what a car has you have to either test drive it or know of someone who has it and will give you a ride. But about your original post that if you supercharge a fire hawk that it will beat an 03 cobra, yea obviously.... blowers componsate for displacement but when both cars with nearly the same weight and gearing have forced induction (given the same psi) then it's back to displacement again and seeing as the f-body has 1.1 liters over the stang i would hope to god that it could take it
     
  15. my previous post was ment for this quote......... yea my bad
     
  16. My previous post was about this... my bad thought i quoted (instead i just replied) anyways. Oh and as far as the 03 cobra hp war goes to clear it up from what i've seen the dyno charts for the 99 cobras showed that the car didn't make the 320 horse it was sopposed to, because ford overatted their car, they lost a lot of money a) ppl lost trust, b) the 00 cobra never came out, c) more money had to be spent to get replacement parts to make the hp for the 01 cobra have 320 hp and d) i'm not positive but i would asume a recall or a compansation of some sort might of accured... anyways after that ford made a point not to make the same mistake & now are putting out numbers for the wheels which is true for the mach 1 & the 03 cobra, since v6 & gt models didn't change in power in any way they were left with the previous quoted hp at the crank... & that's that. However to add my 2 cents in......it's still sad that with 390 hp & tourqe at the wheels it still doesn't run the 1/4th faster then a base c5 vette (with less power & no blower) but only ties it.... and all is really dependent on the driver. The mustang needs to loose some serious weight
     
  17. I highly doubt thats true about the c5

    Anyway...
    you forget the cobra has that shitty independant rear suspension, as a matter of fact I saw in a magazine recently (i forget where) but they said the Mach 1 damn near tied the cobra 0-60 wise becuase the Cobra had such bad wheel hop and tricky luanches, I would like to see a Sc Mach 1 go up agianst other cars.

    With 390 Hp and torque on tap anything above 320 is just speed consuming wheel spin, now if you put stickier boots on it that would be a different story.
     
  18. "How about the Camaro ZL1. At least the tires on THAT ACTUALLY HIT THE ROAD!!!"

    the bosses tires have hit the road lots too, I don't ever recall being able to run down to my local Chevy dealer and pick up a ZL-1 Camaro, besides that john Coletti now owns and drives the Boss, for about $140,000 U.S Coletti would build you a Boss but who would pay that? (I know i would if I had it)

    They shouldn't jump to the Boss everytime someone questions a mustang, but it still shows the potential of Ford and the Mustang. 800 Hp N/a

    Simply mentioning a good Ford car that was actuallt built isn't ignorant and narrow minded.

    You could stop acting like the 10L Boss was a car created by the media that never exsisted. It's no different than a ZL-1 Camaro.
     
  19. Well that's fine you can think what you want and since i don't know any one with a c5 i can't say 100% i've seen it with my own two eyes..... but back a year ago when my bro took his 02 ss to the track he managed to pull 13.0(?) something to about 13.1(?) something so i'm pretty sure that a vette which is lighter and slightly more aero dynamic can pull of about a 12.9 12.8

    And don't get me wrong i'm not trying to dis the cobra... it's a good car, hell it's a very good car, but i expected better times with 390 horse & torque, plus the fact about haveing a close 0-60 with both cars, try to follow this: in this case both are mustangs that are very simular, one just weighs more and has a lot more power. since it doesn't require a lot of power to pull the first gear or the 2nd the 0-60s are close, the real difference i would asume in the cobra & the mach 1 would be in the high end say pulling from 80mph to 140 at that point where the gears are harder to push the cobra would pull a lot harder then the mach 1 because of it's overwhelming extra 85 horse & torque. But again i don't know anyone here with a mach 1 to compare it to my friends cobra. This is an asumption after haveing driven in the my brothers ss which is sopposed to be like an 01 cobra... which is also sopposed to be close to a mach 1, bit more powerfull i would asume and haveing been driven in an 03 cobra, i think this statement is safe to say.
     
  20. All I've gotta say is that the 2000 ZL1 was made, yeah you couldn't run down to the dealership and buy one but you couldn't do that to that boss either. And unlike the boss, chevy did come out with a ZL1 for the public. It came out in 2002, it has the LS6 and whips out 400HP and 400lbs. of torque. And this one you could run down to the dealership and buy. Oh yeah by the way all i have to say is that I don't care what people say about the mach 1 and the cobra. Yeah they say that they are better than the Z28 and SS. And also just like i read somwhere where they said that the Z28 is a piece of trash. WEll then my 00 Z28 must be a bad ass piece of S#!T for running a 12.89 stock in the 1/4 mile.
     
  21. Wow most mustang owners are dumbasses <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>... Mustangs will never have anything on a camaro ... i have a 1991 Camaro RS V8 5.0 170hp ..its weak... even still i have NEVER lost to a Mustang .... from 66 to 2004 i have raced many ...mustang GT's are jokes .... never raced a SVT but if you throw a Supercharger on a V6 camaro it will probably beat the SVT... i have a 1992 GMC syclone also.. and i have raced maybe 2 svt's ... i love looking Back and seeing there mouths drop as a little truck smashes on them ... back to the point ... Ford sucks Mechanically...and Style is lacking... they should discontinue them before they put 4 cylinders back in them...bringing me back to the lightning ... another Ford "Supercharged" vehicle claiming to be "The Fastest Production Truck" which is a total lie... dodge owns that now ... but i have raced about 4 Lightnings in my syclone and i have beat 3 and lost to 1 ... completely Stock rather then eibach suspension... all chevy has to do is go as low as ford and put superchargers on everything to make them fast...(Excluding BOSS motors from way back <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>)...
     

Share This Page