mustang
#12
10-13-2009, 10:32 AM
Haha i dont see why you would even post this kind of news, im sorry you have to be in the review mirror now
#13
10-13-2009, 07:01 PM
well, guys, maybe he has a point. in today's economy, and in order to downsize and save, we have to make sacrifices..... 
and that would be a major downsize
and that would be a major downsize
#15
10-13-2009, 07:11 PM
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 973
The Mustang, I mean.
#16
10-13-2009, 08:26 PM
ok guys i kno u guys kno a gt is a v8 and is not nearly as slow as the camaro was so y was this such a bad move any way i love the car
#17
10-13-2009, 08:55 PM
You are correct, The your mustang is faster then your Camaro. As long as you keep compairing your V8 to V6's you should be happy. But at 215 HP you would be smart not to compair it to a 94 V8 Camaro. You are about 70 HP shy of the LT1. No worries I am sure there are a lot of bolts ons that should get you close to a bone stock Camaro.
Last edited by Gorn; 10-13-2009 at 09:17 PM.
#18
10-13-2009, 09:02 PM
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The 'Burbs of Chicago
Posts: 18,306
#19
10-13-2009, 09:04 PM
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Brag NC (no longer in iraq)
Posts: 2,200
Not trying to knock on your new ride but you did just pick up one of the worst 5.0 stangs ever made. The 94-95 body had some electrical problems and the pistons in the 302 where not as strong as they had been in the pre 93s. Also the car was a good bit heavier then some of the older stangs.
#20
10-13-2009, 09:04 PM
"who can trash your mustang? with a twinkle in his eye? trash it out of the way, enough to make you cry? the musicman, ooh the musicman can"
sorry, just couldn't resist.
sorry, just couldn't resist.