Where did all the Muscle Cars go? - Page 2

Old Guy with 87 GT · 05-22-2001, 09:21 PM

quote..."when was the last time mustangs out performed the camaro factory stock".....well wasnt that like the whole decade of the 80s and most of the 90s .....well i dont know what the currant comparisons are , the newer camaros are pretty cool and defanatly an improvment over the 80s version.i havnt really taken to the looks though,still like the mustangs look.but the new mustangs don't have t-tops(love my t tops).......all in all i love all fast cars espesually muscle cars . i dont just pick one brand of car and say all there cars are the best.becouse through the years all the american car companys have had there winners and there losers.i like all the late sixty american muscle cars....the 69 camaro ,the69 mustang ,the barricuda......i like the 70s camoros for different reason then i like the 70s mustangs(coinsidentally not a big hit with the public),there two totally different cars but i like em both.but in reality in the seventys the camaro was a better car....but in the 80s ford redeemed themselves and chevy went down hill.i know and get along with many chevy fans and most of em agree that the fox mustang was superior to the 80s camaro.less problems,handled better,faster and easyer to work on. in the 70s you could use that same discription favoring the chevy.as for the newer cars they both have advantages but there both cool.....in reality the deciding factor in witch muscle car is the fastest is whether the manufacturers decide to use the racing tech thats out there ,in there production cars. its allways been like that .the tech is there to make the cars alot faster,its just a matter of whos using it that year and how much there charging for it.....and im sorry to say it but its been awile since chevy came out with a car faster than the mustang for less money.....

n20lx · 05-22-2001, 09:33 PM

I was at the track (US 41) 2 weeks ago & wondering where the he11 all the Mustangs were. I still [lenty on the street but doen't anybody race anymore? It wasn't like there was rice there just maybe 3 other stangs. We used to rule that place. Some guys that had seen my car when they still ran Fun Fords there posed the question to me & I've got no idea. I've been to Rte.66 a few times & there not there either. Where did all the fast Northwest IN/Chicagoland Mustangs go??!?!?

Rev · 05-22-2001, 09:47 PM

Where did all the muscle cars go? I spend a fair amount of time and gas just cruising around looking for them. Hoping one might want to race. 90% of Camaros and Mustangs are built as 6 bangers. Many are driven by young ladies with no interest in performance. It's just the market place. Most people won't pay for for performance. That's why Ford and GM are lackodasical towards it. Why would they care if there's no money in it? Maybe we enthusiists should be more willing to pay for factory muscle if it were really there. We certainly pay for after market stuff..........we pay a lot.

Rev

------------------
'66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph
1/4 mi.

camaroboy · 05-22-2001, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by old guy with 87 gt:
quote..."when was the last time mustangs out performed the camaro factory stock".....well wasnt that like the whole decade of the 80s and most of the 90s .....well i dont know what the currant comparisons are , the newer camaros are pretty cool and defanatly an improvment over the 80s version.i havnt really taken to the looks though,still like the mustangs look.but the new mustangs don't have t-tops(love my t tops).......all in all i love all fast cars espesually muscle cars . i dont just pick one brand of car and say all there cars are the best.becouse through the years all the american car companys have had there winners and there losers.i like all the late sixty american muscle cars....the 69 camaro ,the69 mustang ,the barricuda......i like the 70s camoros for different reason then i like the 70s mustangs(coinsidentally not a big hit with the public),there two totally different cars but i like em both.but in reality in the seventys the camaro was a better car....but in the 80s ford redeemed themselves and chevy went down hill.i know and get along with many chevy fans and most of em agree that the fox mustang was superior to the 80s camaro.less problems,handled better,faster and easyer to work on. in the 70s you could use that same discription favoring the chevy.as for the newer cars they both have advantages but there both cool.....in reality the deciding factor in witch muscle car is the fastest is whether the manufacturers decide to use the racing tech thats out there ,in there production cars. its allways been like that .the tech is there to make the cars alot faster,its just a matter of whos using it that year and how much there charging for it.....and im sorry to say it but its been awile since chevy came out with a car faster than the mustang for less money.....

Not only did we outperform the Mustangs (in stock form) starting in the late '80's with the various 350 TPI HO motors, we also ran circles around them in corners with the WS6 & the IROC. Fact of the matter is, you put an '88 IROC with the 350 HO & you will get your doors blown off. That is, my friend, a fact.

------------------

'81 Z-28, 383 Stroker, 11.5:1, Dart Sportsman Angle Plug heads, Weiand Team G, Holley 750 dbl pump, Comp XE-284H, TCI glide w/ 3500 stall, 4:10 posi, B&M Megashifter, MT Indy Profile S/S, and nothin left for the gas tank

Rev · 05-22-2001, 11:15 PM

Uhmm....weren't some of those IROC's boat anchor 305's?

Rev

------------------
'66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph
1/4 mi.

lazerredgtvert01 · 05-22-2001, 11:23 PM

Ok... I am a middle aged guy who is getting his first MUSTANG..I have had a dream since 1966 of owning a PONY...well I decided now is the time to lay down the 25.5k in cash for the STANG....yes i am into the retro look.....

yesterday was the "born on day" for my Mustang" as that is when the car went to the line. I even have my VIN number.had to order as there wasn't what I wanted anywhere in the Pacific Northwest..Here's something KWEL. I can trace the car once it get on the train to come west. the tracer will tell me where in the country the car is located. The was a ROUSH sitting on the dealer showroom...too much "KID" stuff for me..I just want to have my MID LIFE CRISIS in a GT VERT

****************

Lazer red gt vert premium. dk charcoal leather,black top and ..........auto. Wanted auto so I can take the car in parades and have the beauty queen ride in back. Actually the MRS. will be driving it as a work car and she had a request for auto. Something about being able to put make up on and drive at the same time. Isn't that unsafe driving LOL

Rev · 05-22-2001, 11:38 PM

Sounds gorgeous Lazer, and, oh, the car sounds OK too.

BTW, welcome to the board.

Rev

------------------
'66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph
1/4 mi.

[This message has been edited by Rev (edited 05-23-2001).]

Mercury · 05-23-2001, 01:29 AM

Camaro boy, it is official. Your a moron.

Here we go with this stock Vs stock thing. We mustangers here enough of that while arguing with each other over the 4.6 and the 5.0.

As for the 350 IROCS, they werent sh$t either. The new Camaros are DECENT cars, but I wouldnt plop that much money down for one. The Trans AMs are really nice, but unfortunatley there even more expensive.

Ummmm as for the only Muscle car Ford ever had bieng the Mustang. Get your crack from a diffrent dealer, the stuff your buying is messing with that small brain. Hmmmmmm.. ThunderBolt....Galaxie XL.....Cobra (torinio based)......The hipo Fairlanes.....Talledaga.....Lets see, the list just keeps going on and on.

As for nowadays, yes Fords main performance car is the Mustang, but you have the ThunderBIrd (Yupee car) reapperaing, the Mercury Maurader which is coming out next year, and there are more variations of the mustang alone than there are cars for the Chevy line up. Anything from 270hp Bullit to the 360 Hp Stage 3 roush to the Sean Hyland and Steeda Special editions, which crank out better times and numbers than any Chevy.

Nuff Said.

------------------
64 1/2 "D" code Red Mustang Coupe. 289, C4, 3:1 rear gear. Mallory duel point. Ported & Polished 65 heads shaved .01 with 351 windsor valves, 11:1 comp, 1.7:1 sled rockers, blue wolverine lumpy cam, modified autolite 4100 Hipo 4 barrel. And to many others to list

2000 Perf Red Mustang GT. 5spd. BBK Underdrive pulleys, Flotech off-road H pipe. Hurst T-Handle

64 1/2 red 6cyl coupe. Auto. project car.

05-23-2001, 03:40 AM

Unit 5302, I totally agree with you, you couldn't have said it any better. Another thing i believe adds to the reason people want imports is because cars like mine built from the late 70's to the mid 80's with the half-@ss emissions slap ons, smaller engines (remember the Ford 255 V8 or the Chevy (i believe 263) V8? with no power or fuel economy, shoddy build construction, hasty designing and cheap parts led to a bad reputation towards domestic vehicles, which in some cases are warranted. If i had the money for any dailer driver i wanted i'd buy a BMW or Mercedes because they're so OVER engineered, whereas domestics are usually rushed into production (just look at the slurry of recalls on most new domestic vehicles), but then again japanese cars also have their problems like any vehicle and their recalls. Another thing people don't realize is just like domestics, foreign cars also have common fail items and things DO go wrong with them. People i know also tend to think because it's "japanese" that it doesn't need to be maintained, which of course is BS also. My poison, personally, is Ford because i'm familiar with their vehicles and i just love mustangs and basically all the rear wheel drive vehicles ford builds/has built recently....also i do like the 4th gen. camaros and firebirds but just like any vehicle they have their problems.

Old Guy with 87 GT · 05-23-2001, 05:37 AM

now aaa i raced a 350 iroc like two weeks ago in a time run a local drag strip ......why was he in my rear view when i crossed finish line....as for handling ..he he he....now my closing statment in my last post was that all the manufacturers can make the cars alot faster than the are....the tech for higher powered motors and better handling cars has been there...its just a matter of whos putting that tech in production cars.....chevys come out with some fast editions of the camaro,and fords come out with some fast editions of the mustang.if you use the comparison of chevys fastest 80s edition then ya it will be faster then fords basic cars.....but ford came out with some faster versions too ....ie is the chevy 350 ho iroc faster then fords 351 version mustangs....and last but not least ....when was the last time chevy offered a faster car for less money??????

Unit 5302 · 05-24-2001, 10:08 PM

camaroboy...

I haven't been reading this thread as I put my $0.02 earlier. It's obvious you are dumb as rocks.

The 1985-1992 Mustang 5.0's ate the Fbody's up. Everywhere, including handling. Actually, the 94+ Mustang GT's handle better than the Fbodies. You had a nice little edge there in 1993 though. Good job.

GM has been putting together responses for Mustang's that haven't even come out yet. The SS as a response to the 96 Cobra, the LT1 as a response to the rumor the 4.6L SOHC would be a beast availible in the 1994GT. They slap some car together, hold the nose on with duct tape (new fbody's, take a look under there some time), and ship it out so they can beat the upgrades Ford does to it's ponycar. I laughed when Chevy announced the Z06. Appearently, they felt threatened by the Cobra R, they must have gotten tired of having their asses kicked on the race tracks when the last one came out in 1995?

As far as the Fbody being too expensive, the MSRP on the Z28 is lower than the GT. There are reason's the Mustang outsells the Fbody over 3:1. They're called quality, substance, and reputation.

69fastback · 05-25-2001, 01:18 AM

Well when i am at home in Barstow there are a few muscle cars around. U will see some of them at the local burger place but those guys dont race. They are cool to talk to and hang out with even though they where all 20 years older than me and i was the only ford. The other spot is just a bunch of imports and some other things with one 5.0 that hangs out there. Why he does this i will never now. But to this day he is one of the only cars that has raced me. (I killed him by the way). I wanted to talk to him after wards but he just took of the other way. It is just like all the other places I quess. I try and talk to the other mustang guys and stuff but they think I am weird for trying to talk to them i don't understand any of it. I also love it when people have no clue of what car i drive. I always get the ? Is that a 302? I just say yeah sure something like that and laugh.

------------------
69 428 cobra jet: tons of mods.
97 f-150 5.4 xlt mark III
BUCKLE UP. SUCK IT IN.
Objects in the mirror are about to disappear...
QUICKLY!!!!!!

Old Guy with 87 GT · 05-25-2001, 05:41 AM

hay i wanted to say sorry for turning 2fasts forum into a ford chevy argument. a kinda wanderd from topic.i just wanted to counter camaroboy(seems like he omly gets on boards to bash fords).........well any way i'd have to say have faith that muscle cars will not dissapear.around here there still popular, as well as the newer ricers.i think its cool that the ricers are growing in popularity,because the are not that much differant then us .they like to cruise and like to go fast,they just prefere different cars.allthough alot of ricers are just status symbols,and some of the kids that drive them are snobby,they are actully helping to keep the enthusiasum for fast cars alive. as long as they are out there cruising and racing and showing there cars they will help fuel enthusiasum for cars ,and competition. example being around here they have actually helped bring back cruising.the more of them that show up the more peaple they provoke to come out and bring there cars.and not everybody around here think that ricers are the fastest....the result is competition and more and more people getting in on the fun.as long as theres ricers out there that look fast,and go fast then theres going to be people that want to build cars that will beat them and look better then them.

camaroboy · 05-25-2001, 08:43 AM

AHAHAHAAAA. It's obvious you guys are looking at this in a 1 sided way. You post **** about Camaro's & expect us Camaro owners to take it. The IROC weren't anywhere near boat anchors with their 245HP 350 HO in '88. Your Mustangs were running 15.0's at their best while Iroc's were constant 14.8's. So the fact of the matter is, any stock Mustang('84 & up) will get it's dorrs blown off by any stock Camaro ('84 & up). So for all you big mouths, how bout you post up some time slips & we'll see who is gonna be in the rear view

------------------

'81 Z-28, 383 Stroker, 11.5:1, Dart Sportsman Angle Plug heads, Weiand Team G, Holley 750 dbl pump, Comp XE-284H, TCI glide w/ 3500 stall, 4:10 posi, B&M Megashifter, MT Indy Profile S/S, and nothin left for the gas tank

Try Me · 05-25-2001, 08:55 AM

Camaro Boy - You know i, and many others would be coming to the weekend drags in an LS1 or LS6, if it wasn't for Chevy's over inflated price tag.

As for not worrying cause you still have the Corvette, i'm not.
It'll be a while before i can slap down $72,000 + tax on a new C-5

The Stang IS cheap by comparison to many other cars. That's why it's such a great seller. Not cheap in quality but in price. How many other cool GT cars can you buy for $26,500 and run high 13's all day long? That's what i thought

Mercury · 05-25-2001, 11:38 AM

Camaro boy, it is better to be thought a fool than to be proven one by opening your mouth.

Your on the losing side of an argument, face it. The Camaros from the 80's and early 90's, even the Iroc with the 350 sucked A$$. What, are you to embbarressed to admit it?

Okay, and if you want to get into this Rare limited edition stock VS stock issue, then the LS-1 Camaro is crap because the Mustang has the fastest stock. Does Cobra R ring a bell? Oh, and how about the wild S351 Saleens, (well not for 2000 and 2001) there wasnt a Stock Camaro that could touch them.

But I dont consider those vechiles regular production, even though there sold at Ford Dealerships with Ford warranties.

So Camaro boy, just go back into your corner, and disappear or something. You have proven your ignorance.

------------------
64 1/2 "D" code Red Mustang Coupe. 289, C4, 3:1 rear gear. Mallory duel point. Ported & Polished 65 heads shaved .01 with 351 windsor valves, 11:1 comp, 1.7:1 sled rockers, blue wolverine lumpy cam, modified autolite 4100 Hipo 4 barrel. And to many others to list

2000 Perf Red Mustang GT. 5spd. BBK Underdrive pulleys, Flotech off-road H pipe. Hurst T-Handle

64 1/2 red 6cyl coupe. Auto. project car.

Try Me · 05-25-2001, 02:08 PM

That's right CamaroBoy.
And make sure to bring the wood screws tonight at the races - you'll need 'em when i blow your doors off with my Stang

05-25-2001, 04:09 PM

I guess I'm just going to have to jump into the fray....

camarodude - gee, putting down Camaro's on a Mustang message board. That's terrible of us. I suppose on all of the GM message boards they blow sunshine up Ford's a** all day long!

What did you expect?

BTW, if you want to come down to Toronto & try a few runs with me, please feel welcome to.

Oh yeah - just keep on believing that stock late 80's & early 90's Mustangs ran only 15.0's....... Where did you get that info? Toad & Track or Car & Drivel? That's another arguement that can go on & on forever...

------------------
91 coupe
3.73's,long tubes,2 1/2" exh,ported stock t-body,ProM-77mm
cobra intake,edelbrock heads,B303,1.72 rr's
36lb inj's,tremec, & a Paxton NOVI 2000!!!
11.020 @128.95 on BFG Drag Radials (275/60/15)

Unit 5302 · 05-25-2001, 08:16 PM

I love how camaroboy has no idea what he's talking about. He seems to think the puny hp advantage the Camaro's had (in the 350TPI and the whopping 5hp with the 305TPI) somehow made for better performance. It would have, maybe, if the F body didn't weigh 400lbs more. Course, then again, the 305 and 350 made their hp a little higher up too. Kinda like a 4.6L, lol.

15's at best

There are a lot of 13sec stock and near stock 5.0 owners that will argue that.

Rev · 05-25-2001, 08:39 PM

Being somewhat ignorant about those IROC's, could someone elaborate on which ones were 305's and which were 350's. My brother had an '89 (I think) that I'm pretty sure was a 305. It ran OK, but nothing to write home about. Guessing mid-low 15's.

Rev

------------------
'66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph
1/4 mi.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Watkins Glen - Tribute To Muscle Cars	Rosco	Ford Show & Go	0	09-06-2003 03:45 PM
Nostalgia Muscle Cars	cometbfx	Blue Oval Lounge	0	01-19-2002 03:16 AM
What't your top 5 fav muscle cars	tireburner163	Blue Oval Lounge	25	01-07-2002 03:38 AM
Thinking about selling 2 Impractical Cars to Build One!	Mercury	Blue Oval Lounge	17	10-19-2001 06:42 PM

05-22-2001, 09:21 PM	#1
Old Guy with 87 GT Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Posts: 379	quote..."when was the last time mustangs out performed the camaro factory stock".....well wasnt that like the whole decade of the 80s and most of the 90s .....well i dont know what the currant comparisons are , the newer camaros are pretty cool and defanatly an improvment over the 80s version.i havnt really taken to the looks though,still like the mustangs look.but the new mustangs don't have t-tops(love my t tops).......all in all i love all fast cars espesually muscle cars . i dont just pick one brand of car and say all there cars are the best.becouse through the years all the american car companys have had there winners and there losers.i like all the late sixty american muscle cars....the 69 camaro ,the69 mustang ,the barricuda......i like the 70s camoros for different reason then i like the 70s mustangs(coinsidentally not a big hit with the public),there two totally different cars but i like em both.but in reality in the seventys the camaro was a better car....but in the 80s ford redeemed themselves and chevy went down hill.i know and get along with many chevy fans and most of em agree that the fox mustang was superior to the 80s camaro.less problems,handled better,faster and easyer to work on. in the 70s you could use that same discription favoring the chevy.as for the newer cars they both have advantages but there both cool.....in reality the deciding factor in witch muscle car is the fastest is whether the manufacturers decide to use the racing tech thats out there ,in there production cars. its allways been like that .the tech is there to make the cars alot faster,its just a matter of whos using it that year and how much there charging for it.....and im sorry to say it but its been awile since chevy came out with a car faster than the mustang for less money.....

05-22-2001, 09:33 PM	#2
n20lx Registered Member Join Date: Sep 1998 Posts: 495	I was at the track (US 41) 2 weeks ago & wondering where the he11 all the Mustangs were. I still [lenty on the street but doen't anybody race anymore? It wasn't like there was rice there just maybe 3 other stangs. We used to rule that place. Some guys that had seen my car when they still ran Fun Fords there posed the question to me & I've got no idea. I've been to Rte.66 a few times & there not there either. Where did all the fast Northwest IN/Chicagoland Mustangs go??!?!?

05-22-2001, 09:47 PM	#3
Rev Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Houston, Tx. Posts: 3,887	Where did all the muscle cars go? I spend a fair amount of time and gas just cruising around looking for them. Hoping one might want to race. 90% of Camaros and Mustangs are built as 6 bangers. Many are driven by young ladies with no interest in performance. It's just the market place. Most people won't pay for for performance. That's why Ford and GM are lackodasical towards it. Why would they care if there's no money in it? Maybe we enthusiists should be more willing to pay for factory muscle if it were really there. We certainly pay for after market stuff..........we pay a lot. Rev ------------------ '66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph 1/4 mi.

05-22-2001, 11:15 PM	#5
Rev Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Houston, Tx. Posts: 3,887	Uhmm....weren't some of those IROC's boat anchor 305's? Rev ------------------ '66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph 1/4 mi.

05-22-2001, 11:23 PM	#6
lazerredgtvert01 Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: vancouver,washington USA Posts: 2	Ok... I am a middle aged guy who is getting his first MUSTANG..I have had a dream since 1966 of owning a PONY...well I decided now is the time to lay down the 25.5k in cash for the STANG....yes i am into the retro look..... yesterday was the "born on day" for my Mustang" as that is when the car went to the line. I even have my VIN number.had to order as there wasn't what I wanted anywhere in the Pacific Northwest..Here's something KWEL. I can trace the car once it get on the train to come west. the tracer will tell me where in the country the car is located. The was a ROUSH sitting on the dealer showroom...too much "KID" stuff for me..I just want to have my MID LIFE CRISIS in a GT VERT **************** Lazer red gt vert premium. dk charcoal leather,black top and ..........auto. Wanted auto so I can take the car in parades and have the beauty queen ride in back. Actually the MRS. will be driving it as a work car and she had a request for auto. Something about being able to put make up on and drive at the same time. Isn't that unsafe driving LOL

05-22-2001, 11:38 PM	#7
Rev Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Houston, Tx. Posts: 3,887	Sounds gorgeous Lazer, and, oh, the car sounds OK too. BTW, welcome to the board. Rev ------------------ '66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph 1/4 mi. [This message has been edited by Rev (edited 05-23-2001).]

05-23-2001, 01:29 AM	#8
Mercury The Redneck James Bond Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Fayetteville NC Posts: 1,707	Camaro boy, it is official. Your a moron. Here we go with this stock Vs stock thing. We mustangers here enough of that while arguing with each other over the 4.6 and the 5.0. As for the 350 IROCS, they werent sh$t either. The new Camaros are DECENT cars, but I wouldnt plop that much money down for one. The Trans AMs are really nice, but unfortunatley there even more expensive. Ummmm as for the only Muscle car Ford ever had bieng the Mustang. Get your crack from a diffrent dealer, the stuff your buying is messing with that small brain. Hmmmmmm.. ThunderBolt....Galaxie XL.....Cobra (torinio based)......The hipo Fairlanes.....Talledaga.....Lets see, the list just keeps going on and on. As for nowadays, yes Fords main performance car is the Mustang, but you have the ThunderBIrd (Yupee car) reapperaing, the Mercury Maurader which is coming out next year, and there are more variations of the mustang alone than there are cars for the Chevy line up. Anything from 270hp Bullit to the 360 Hp Stage 3 roush to the Sean Hyland and Steeda Special editions, which crank out better times and numbers than any Chevy. Nuff Said. ------------------ 64 1/2 "D" code Red Mustang Coupe. 289, C4, 3:1 rear gear. Mallory duel point. Ported & Polished 65 heads shaved .01 with 351 windsor valves, 11:1 comp, 1.7:1 sled rockers, blue wolverine lumpy cam, modified autolite 4100 Hipo 4 barrel. And to many others to list 2000 Perf Red Mustang GT. 5spd. BBK Underdrive pulleys, Flotech off-road H pipe. Hurst T-Handle 64 1/2 red 6cyl coupe. Auto. project car.

05-23-2001, 03:40 AM	#9
84stangLX Guest Posts: n/a	Unit 5302, I totally agree with you, you couldn't have said it any better. Another thing i believe adds to the reason people want imports is because cars like mine built from the late 70's to the mid 80's with the half-@ss emissions slap ons, smaller engines (remember the Ford 255 V8 or the Chevy (i believe 263) V8? with no power or fuel economy, shoddy build construction, hasty designing and cheap parts led to a bad reputation towards domestic vehicles, which in some cases are warranted. If i had the money for any dailer driver i wanted i'd buy a BMW or Mercedes because they're so OVER engineered, whereas domestics are usually rushed into production (just look at the slurry of recalls on most new domestic vehicles), but then again japanese cars also have their problems like any vehicle and their recalls. Another thing people don't realize is just like domestics, foreign cars also have common fail items and things DO go wrong with them. People i know also tend to think because it's "japanese" that it doesn't need to be maintained, which of course is BS also. My poison, personally, is Ford because i'm familiar with their vehicles and i just love mustangs and basically all the rear wheel drive vehicles ford builds/has built recently....also i do like the 4th gen. camaros and firebirds but just like any vehicle they have their problems.

05-23-2001, 05:37 AM	#10
Old Guy with 87 GT Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Posts: 379	now aaa i raced a 350 iroc like two weeks ago in a time run a local drag strip ......why was he in my rear view when i crossed finish line....as for handling ..he he he....now my closing statment in my last post was that all the manufacturers can make the cars alot faster than the are....the tech for higher powered motors and better handling cars has been there...its just a matter of whos putting that tech in production cars.....chevys come out with some fast editions of the camaro,and fords come out with some fast editions of the mustang.if you use the comparison of chevys fastest 80s edition then ya it will be faster then fords basic cars.....but ford came out with some faster versions too ....ie is the chevy 350 ho iroc faster then fords 351 version mustangs....and last but not least ....when was the last time chevy offered a faster car for less money??????

05-24-2001, 10:08 PM	#11
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	camaroboy... I haven't been reading this thread as I put my $0.02 earlier. It's obvious you are dumb as rocks. The 1985-1992 Mustang 5.0's ate the Fbody's up. Everywhere, including handling. Actually, the 94+ Mustang GT's handle better than the Fbodies. You had a nice little edge there in 1993 though. Good job. GM has been putting together responses for Mustang's that haven't even come out yet. The SS as a response to the 96 Cobra, the LT1 as a response to the rumor the 4.6L SOHC would be a beast availible in the 1994GT. They slap some car together, hold the nose on with duct tape (new fbody's, take a look under there some time), and ship it out so they can beat the upgrades Ford does to it's ponycar. I laughed when Chevy announced the Z06. Appearently, they felt threatened by the Cobra R, they must have gotten tired of having their asses kicked on the race tracks when the last one came out in 1995? As far as the Fbody being too expensive, the MSRP on the Z28 is lower than the GT. There are reason's the Mustang outsells the Fbody over 3:1. They're called quality, substance, and reputation.

05-25-2001, 01:18 AM	#12
69fastback IRAQ VET Join Date: Feb 2000 Location: high desert California Posts: 1,480	Well when i am at home in Barstow there are a few muscle cars around. U will see some of them at the local burger place but those guys dont race. They are cool to talk to and hang out with even though they where all 20 years older than me and i was the only ford. The other spot is just a bunch of imports and some other things with one 5.0 that hangs out there. Why he does this i will never now. But to this day he is one of the only cars that has raced me. (I killed him by the way). I wanted to talk to him after wards but he just took of the other way. It is just like all the other places I quess. I try and talk to the other mustang guys and stuff but they think I am weird for trying to talk to them i don't understand any of it. I also love it when people have no clue of what car i drive. I always get the ? Is that a 302? I just say yeah sure something like that and laugh. ------------------ 69 428 cobra jet: tons of mods. 97 f-150 5.4 xlt mark III BUCKLE UP. SUCK IT IN. Objects in the mirror are about to disappear... QUICKLY!!!!!!

05-25-2001, 05:41 AM	#13
Old Guy with 87 GT Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Posts: 379	hay i wanted to say sorry for turning 2fasts forum into a ford chevy argument. a kinda wanderd from topic.i just wanted to counter camaroboy(seems like he omly gets on boards to bash fords).........well any way i'd have to say have faith that muscle cars will not dissapear.around here there still popular, as well as the newer ricers.i think its cool that the ricers are growing in popularity,because the are not that much differant then us .they like to cruise and like to go fast,they just prefere different cars.allthough alot of ricers are just status symbols,and some of the kids that drive them are snobby,they are actully helping to keep the enthusiasum for fast cars alive. as long as they are out there cruising and racing and showing there cars they will help fuel enthusiasum for cars ,and competition. example being around here they have actually helped bring back cruising.the more of them that show up the more peaple they provoke to come out and bring there cars.and not everybody around here think that ricers are the fastest....the result is competition and more and more people getting in on the fun.as long as theres ricers out there that look fast,and go fast then theres going to be people that want to build cars that will beat them and look better then them.

05-25-2001, 08:43 AM	#14
camaroboy Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Ottawa Posts: 15	AHAHAHAAAA. It's obvious you guys are looking at this in a 1 sided way. You post **** about Camaro's & expect us Camaro owners to take it. The IROC weren't anywhere near boat anchors with their 245HP 350 HO in '88. Your Mustangs were running 15.0's at their best while Iroc's were constant 14.8's. So the fact of the matter is, any stock Mustang('84 & up) will get it's dorrs blown off by any stock Camaro ('84 & up). So for all you big mouths, how bout you post up some time slips & we'll see who is gonna be in the rear view ------------------ '81 Z-28, 383 Stroker, 11.5:1, Dart Sportsman Angle Plug heads, Weiand Team G, Holley 750 dbl pump, Comp XE-284H, TCI glide w/ 3500 stall, 4:10 posi, B&M Megashifter, MT Indy Profile S/S, and nothin left for the gas tank

05-25-2001, 08:55 AM	#15
Try Me Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 465	Camaro Boy - You know i, and many others would be coming to the weekend drags in an LS1 or LS6, if it wasn't for Chevy's over inflated price tag. As for not worrying cause you still have the Corvette, i'm not. It'll be a while before i can slap down $72,000 + tax on a new C-5 The Stang IS cheap by comparison to many other cars. That's why it's such a great seller. Not cheap in quality but in price. How many other cool GT cars can you buy for $26,500 and run high 13's all day long? That's what i thought

05-25-2001, 11:38 AM	#16
Mercury The Redneck James Bond Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Fayetteville NC Posts: 1,707	Camaro boy, it is better to be thought a fool than to be proven one by opening your mouth. Your on the losing side of an argument, face it. The Camaros from the 80's and early 90's, even the Iroc with the 350 sucked A$$. What, are you to embbarressed to admit it? Okay, and if you want to get into this Rare limited edition stock VS stock issue, then the LS-1 Camaro is crap because the Mustang has the fastest stock. Does Cobra R ring a bell? Oh, and how about the wild S351 Saleens, (well not for 2000 and 2001) there wasnt a Stock Camaro that could touch them. But I dont consider those vechiles regular production, even though there sold at Ford Dealerships with Ford warranties. So Camaro boy, just go back into your corner, and disappear or something. You have proven your ignorance. ------------------ 64 1/2 "D" code Red Mustang Coupe. 289, C4, 3:1 rear gear. Mallory duel point. Ported & Polished 65 heads shaved .01 with 351 windsor valves, 11:1 comp, 1.7:1 sled rockers, blue wolverine lumpy cam, modified autolite 4100 Hipo 4 barrel. And to many others to list 2000 Perf Red Mustang GT. 5spd. BBK Underdrive pulleys, Flotech off-road H pipe. Hurst T-Handle 64 1/2 red 6cyl coupe. Auto. project car.

05-25-2001, 02:08 PM	#17
Try Me Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 465	That's right CamaroBoy. And make sure to bring the wood screws tonight at the races - you'll need 'em when i blow your doors off with my Stang

05-25-2001, 04:09 PM	#18
SisuStang Guest Posts: n/a	I guess I'm just going to have to jump into the fray.... camarodude - gee, putting down Camaro's on a Mustang message board. That's terrible of us. I suppose on all of the GM message boards they blow sunshine up Ford's a** all day long! What did you expect? BTW, if you want to come down to Toronto & try a few runs with me, please feel welcome to. Oh yeah - just keep on believing that stock late 80's & early 90's Mustangs ran only 15.0's....... Where did you get that info? Toad & Track or Car & Drivel? That's another arguement that can go on & on forever... ------------------ 91 coupe 3.73's,long tubes,2 1/2" exh,ported stock t-body,ProM-77mm cobra intake,edelbrock heads,B303,1.72 rr's 36lb inj's,tremec, & a Paxton NOVI 2000!!! 11.020 @128.95 on BFG Drag Radials (275/60/15)

05-25-2001, 08:16 PM	#19
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	I love how camaroboy has no idea what he's talking about. He seems to think the puny hp advantage the Camaro's had (in the 350TPI and the whopping 5hp with the 305TPI) somehow made for better performance. It would have, maybe, if the F body didn't weigh 400lbs more. Course, then again, the 305 and 350 made their hp a little higher up too. Kinda like a 4.6L, lol. 15's at best There are a lot of 13sec stock and near stock 5.0 owners that will argue that.

05-25-2001, 08:39 PM	#20
Rev Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Houston, Tx. Posts: 3,887	Being somewhat ignorant about those IROC's, could someone elaborate on which ones were 305's and which were 350's. My brother had an '89 (I think) that I'm pretty sure was a 305. It ran OK, but nothing to write home about. Guessing mid-low 15's. Rev ------------------ '66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph 1/4 mi.