why is this considered a supercar anyway....?

Discussion in '1994 Ford Mustang GT' started by hondalover, May 17, 2004.

  1. no hard feelings but what a waste of material with this 5 liter engine.... 5 liters and 43hp per liter... damn it is this a 1932 flat head or what?? I know it is a cheap car and technology in the engine makes it more expensive, but this sounds ridiculous, look at the M3, 3.2L and over 300hp, Porsche GT3 3.6L, over 350, Honda S2000 2L 240hp below $30,000.00, come on, is this suposed to be a sports car or grandma's car????? 5 wasted liters there.... shame shame...
  2. Re: why is this considered a supercar anyway....?

    This car is 13k cheaper than an s2000. The s2000 was not even around that long ago. That could mean something and I know a m3 cost more than that. The s2000 is also very weak with torque. I guess the 5 wasted liters went to torque. Why dont you compare your s2000 to a new mustang like a 03/04 cobra? They are closer in price than this and the s2000
  3. Re: why is this considered a supercar anyway....?

    i agree, i think this topic is stupid. 285 ft ibs of torque is alot. it was the beginning of a new body style so cut them some slack, look at them now, coming out with a car around 20 grand with 300hp, and it all started with this lil beauty. they also make extensive kits for this that bring it up to 350+ hp in under $4000. bad year for the stang, dont hate.
  4. heck yes!!!! mustangs suck!!! i mean Germany and Japan are making cars that are very well engineired cars with 100 hp/litre and over!! while crap like this have big engines and no power!!!!!
  5. YEs and this was 1994 and also just caseu they can get more power out of a smaller engine dont mean amer. cant either

Share This Page