Dodge Charger
#51
I appologize, I did not mean to to jump down your throat.
Your love of Chevy's and my love of Fords and Dukks love of Dodge are all irrational, because anybody that's been around the industry knows they ALL SUCK.
I just happen to like fords for reasons you've already heard, although in the back of my mind I know Imports are better than domestic anyway.
Your love of Chevy's and my love of Fords and Dukks love of Dodge are all irrational, because anybody that's been around the industry knows they ALL SUCK.
I just happen to like fords for reasons you've already heard, although in the back of my mind I know Imports are better than domestic anyway.
#52
Originally posted by chevy truck guy:
o and brandon this is going to knock ya right off your chair. so grab on. im working at a ford delearship on ford brand vehicles. so what you got to say to that.
o and brandon this is going to knock ya right off your chair. so grab on. im working at a ford delearship on ford brand vehicles. so what you got to say to that.
Still doesn't mean you know how there put together, what makes em tick, problems they had with production.
I'm not trying to be rude Tyler, but I've worked around the stuff my whole life, worked on cars, worked in factory's building parts for cars....I've spoken with engineers and I've been the mechanic that fixes the stuff.
Basically everything I've seen in my years around the automotive industry has turned me off buying GM products...ive been in the Oshawa GM plants...truck and car plants....I know how there put together....I know the problems they have with parts on the line and how they fix the problems....if you, had seen the things I've seen in GM, you'd be of the same oppinion as me.
And you know what, I know people that work for Ford, I know people that worked for Chrysler.....it's the same thing everywhere.
But I believe fords are simply better vehicles....there engineered better, they are, usually, easier to work on and like the Jap stuff, they don't break down as much as a Chevy in my experince.
Anyway, work in the industry for a while, gain some experince, watch and listen very carefully to the stuff that goes on, get involved in some of the politics of working around the automotive industry.....give it a little time...I think you'll be genuinely disgusted by the crap that goes on.
I'm done, before I get booted.
#53
Originally posted by Jeepbeats:
Hey Brandon, not to split hairs but: http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml
Out of the top 50 musclecars tested, the 1969 Boss 429 came in 18th spot.....
Hey Brandon, not to split hairs but: http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml
Out of the top 50 musclecars tested, the 1969 Boss 429 came in 18th spot.....
a Ford still took number 1.
Besides, that's not comparing apples to apples.
You've got different writers testing different cars.....just because joe blow of Motor Trend did a 13.67 in a 429....what hapens when joe schmoe drives the same car? Different R/t's and E/T's.
oh and my mistake...there were only 500 of the 70 429's built.....not the 69. there were 859 69's.
#54
Your point was that nothing could ever touch the 70 Boss 429, my point was that is wrong. This list that i linked to was compiled by Muscle Car Review Magazine, a pretty well respected source. Granted some numbers may have been generated by "sleeper" factory cars that were tweaked on a bit prior to testing back in the day, as some companies were known to do. Also, some drivers may get different times with the same vehicle depending on their abilities, true. My point is that in all of the years that I have been going to car shows, I am always impressed by a nicely restored/restified/modified machine, be it a bow-tie, blue oval, or Mopar machine. A nice ride is a nice ride, to write off one marque due to personal preference is silly, imo.
#55
Originally posted by Brandon:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jeepbeats:
Hey Brandon, not to split hairs but: http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml
Out of the top 50 musclecars tested, the 1969 Boss 429 came in 18th spot.....
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jeepbeats:
Hey Brandon, not to split hairs but: http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...s-50fast.shtml
Out of the top 50 musclecars tested, the 1969 Boss 429 came in 18th spot.....
a Ford still took number 1.
</font>[/QUOTE]Technically, the Cobra was Ford powered, but in all reality it was made by AC, and tuned by Carroll Shelby. It had its roots in Britain, much like the Sunbeam Alpine, that later had Ford V-8's installed, to become Tigers......
#56
Originally posted by chevy truck guy:
o and brandon this is going to knock ya right off your chair. so grab on. im working at a ford delearship on ford brand vehicles. so what you got to say to that.
o and brandon this is going to knock ya right off your chair. so grab on. im working at a ford delearship on ford brand vehicles. so what you got to say to that.
Wasn't the Ford Cobra powered?
I own a stang, but that does not mean that I have tunnel vision. I actually like the look of the new Charger along with the new Vette. A lot of the new cars out there catch my eye now...except for those damn gas saving things..those little econo boxes drive me crazy. Makes me want to walk over and push it over
[ February 14, 2005, 08:17 PM: Message edited by: fazes ]
#60
Alberta sucks then.....all you need here in ontario is a grade 12 and 4 years apprenticeship.....depending on what kind of mechanic you want to be......there is more than one kind of mechanic.....like besides having to be in the military, you need some college to work on Tanks.