The all new "owning americanHP" thread

Discussion in '1994 Ford Mustang GT' started by SuperlativeOne, Apr 20, 2003.

  1. Since he had all the other oned deleted why not start another one.


    2001 Mustang GT= 1/4 mile in 14.7
     
  2. Re: The all new

    Sorry, but I had no threads deleted....they just disappeared?
     
  3. Re: The all new

    Most likely since they were worthless because of SuperMoronOnes stupid post they deleted them.
     
  4. Re: The all new

    I think you got it all wrong. All your useless askew "facts" almost made all the 14 year old kids think this was a good car. Good thing I set them stright. Another reason they were deleted could have been that insted of backing up your ramblings with facts you just spouted off wanna be lame insults when you were proven wrong. I think you had a moderator delete them because you were OWNED after 99% of your posts.

    <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A> smile you are a dumbass.
     
  5. Re: The all new

    Go to page 2. They are still here. Anytime I need a good laygh I just read american HP's postings.


     
  6. Re: The all new

    Since I've never been banned, and you have been banned around 5 times, I'd say people value my opinion and facts alot more then they value yours kid...you live in a sad fantasy world.
    They were deleated because the mods are tired of seeing morons like you clutter up the boards.
     
  7. Re: The all new

    Get your facts stright. I have not been banned 5 times. Welcome to reality, your car is slow and you are not intelligent.
     
  8. Re: The all new

    LOL...you have had at least 5 different screen names and this is the only one that hasen't gotten you banned yet...lol...sad.
     
  9. Re: The all new

    I have been banned twice. once for giving DSMowner what he deserved and another for bothering the gay moderator by asking him why he feels he needs to let everybody know his sexual orientation. I always change screen names from time to time.
     
  10. Re: The all new

    You change screen names because you can't use the older ones once they are banned...you were banned because you are a tool and an idiot, not for giving somebody what they deserved...lol...
     
  11. Re: The all new

    WRONG, (but than again what's new) the user name "skippyMcZee" is still valid. Modsdriveslowcars and COTC7 was banned. I switched from fasterthanthou, to skippyMcZee to Superlative one because superlative is exactly what I am on this forum. Not like you know what it means or even how to say it.

    I still pity you. Not just because you drive a 14.7 second car, but because you are so stupid. You get owned and than turn to insults insted of facts, Good thinkin' buddy <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
     
  12. Re: The all new

    How can you "own" anybody when time and time again you give the same wrong info...? If by owning somebody you mean giving wrong numbers and biased misinformed opinions, then yes you own people all the time...
     
  13. Re: The all new

    I guess quole numbers and having proof of them is bad.

    you stupid=easy to make look stupid.

    All you can do is try to insult people over the internet insted of providing facts.
     
  14. Re: The all new

    Yes, quoting the same wrong info is bad. Who cares if it's from a magazine, if it's wrong it's wrong idiot.
     
  15. Re: The all new

    99.9% of the time people only publish facts. The .1% is the NY times. Car and driver is one of the most, if not the most respected source for automotive information. Yet according to you they are always wrong?
     
  16. Re: The all new

    They are far from being the most respected source of automotive info. And yes they are wrong. Like when they said that the mach 1 is using a 94 cobra engine...lol...way off.
     
  17. Re: The all new

    use quotes. Maybe they said that they are using the block or some other part from the 1994 cobra. This year Sport Compact Car was the "award" winning car magazine. So I guess them testing the 2003 cobra at a 13.4 second quarter mile was accurate. Most people I know respect C&D's opinions and numbers because they are "average joe" compared to the superior driving skills of R&T.


    You managed to make 1 post without making yourself look like an ass, GREAT JOB!!!!!!!! <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
     
  18. Re: The all new

    No, they said that the mach 1 used the 94 cobras engine. Which is wrong, something they do a lot. It's wrong on more then one level, let's see if you can figure it out...
    As far as then testing the new cobra (sports compact) that's a joke, even Car and Driver beat those times...lol...

    To bad you can't say the same for your post not making you look like a total ass.
     
  19. Re: The all new

    C&D has also been known to test "hype" cars. Meaning cars that are not stock, like the late model supra they tested. SCC even got a professional drag racer to run the cobra, the result: 13.4. I would have to see the article of the mach 1 to come to a conclusive judgement.


    I never use lame ass insults when proven wrong like yourself. Maybe it's because I am rarely wrong. Never-the-less you always do, making you look like a complete jackass.
     

Share This Page