Dodge Charger
500 Watt CAFz'r
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 819
Well the mustang is just a poor person's sports car. It really isn't nice or hasn't been since the 1960's. I like them enough, but they are no better than a camaro or something of the sort. I think that this is a cheap sporty type car (or i hope it's cheap otherwise it will bomb) that would be in the price range of the mustang.
Originally posted by BooLeaN:
Well the mustang is just a poor person's sports car. It really isn't nice or hasn't been since the 1960's. I like them enough, but they are no better than a camaro or something of the sort. I think that this is a cheap sporty type car (or i hope it's cheap otherwise it will bomb) that would be in the price range of the mustang.
Well the mustang is just a poor person's sports car. It really isn't nice or hasn't been since the 1960's. I like them enough, but they are no better than a camaro or something of the sort. I think that this is a cheap sporty type car (or i hope it's cheap otherwise it will bomb) that would be in the price range of the mustang.
Ive owned both and in my opinion the mustang was made outa "pop" cans compared to the camaro!!!!
This is based on 1981 camaro/1983 mustang.
I dont know how things changed in those couple years but DAMM what a POS the ford was...
Newer camaros/mustangs, No experience [img]graemlins/dunno.gif[/img]
500 Watt CAFz'r
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 819
Fair enough. I have never driven either car, I was just going on appeal and price. Personally I have alwasy liked the Camaro better looks wise, but I realize that others will like the Mustang.
Either way, I was just trying to say that Chrysler didn't (to my knowledge) have an affordable priced "sports" car.
Either way, I was just trying to say that Chrysler didn't (to my knowledge) have an affordable priced "sports" car.
Guest
Posts: n/a
THAT'S gonna compete with a Mustang? Unlikely, unless Dodge pulls thier usual crap and slams a Viper V-10 under the hood.
Actually...it kicks it's *** and for less money.. That was your point right? [img]graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]
As a clarification - I DO think the new Mustang is wicked hot but for the same bux I would take a Magnum
[ February 12, 2005, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: Dukk ]
Yankee
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,599
I think the Charger is aimed at BMW M3 or M5, The new GTO, and the void since the Impala SS and the SHO were nixed. It does look too much like the 300
I like that Neon SRT4 it IS fast and it autocrosses well, looks good IMO.
I like that Neon SRT4 it IS fast and it autocrosses well, looks good IMO.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Either way, I was just trying to say that Chrysler didn't (to my knowledge) have an affordable priced "sports" car.
Originally posted by Dukk:
Agreed - the SRT4 competes with the Mustang [img]graemlins/thumb.gif[/img]
Actually...it kicks it's *** and for less money.. [/QB]
Agreed - the SRT4 competes with the Mustang [img]graemlins/thumb.gif[/img]
Actually...it kicks it's *** and for less money.. [/QB]
Oh yea, they also don't tell you at the dealer, but the Mustang GT's stock engine internals can handle over 600hp....just a little something I learned from DeSilva(sp?) in Toronto
Pffft...Chrysler
The only car that Chrysler makes right now that I like, and I emphasize CAR, is the Crossfire....the rest look stupid....actually, I also don't mind the Magnum.Charger,Duster,Challenger,Cuda....no match for a 70 Boss 429 same with the Camaro,Firebird,Trans Am,Chevelle,Corvette,Nova......none would touch a Boss 429....none ever did....so people saying mustangs suck, need to get thier heads checked.
The Ford GT, beats Ferrari's for less money than a Corvette...Corvette owners, you may feel free to bury your heads at any time....I wouldn't blame you.
Ever look for parts for Ford trucks in the junkyard? Hard to find eh? Hmmm...some automobile company must have done their homework, there's a lot less Fords in the wrecker than Chevy....or Dodge for that matter.
