improper handling rwd cars with big thirsty V8s will never die.

They are cars that are fun to drive. There's nothing like taking a turn with a solid rear axle and the ___ wants to stick out and get infront of the nose but that's when you fight the wheel and play with the throttle so you can make it out of that corner without wrapping your car around the light pole.

Gripping around a corner is cool, but not as much fun. That's why my next car will be one of that. I wouldn't mind the V6 since it has pretty good performance and economy and the $18,995 price (after $1,000 rebate) is a darn good deal.

 

you know what made me lose respect for the mustang?

last year, car and driver when to VIR with about a dozen different cars to set laptimes with them to see which cars live up to their sporty pretentions, and the mustang gt (300 hp v8 rwd sports car) lost to a chevy cobalt ss supercharged (205 hp, supercharged 4cyl ff sport compact)

so stock vs. stock...with a 95 hp advantage, and a drivetrain advantage, the mustang LOST! not a bad loss, it was within seconds if i recall, but still, ouch.

 

quote car and driver:

Amazingly enough, that performance made the Cobalt SS 0.3 second quicker than the 300-hp Ford Mustang GT. The Mustang was actually a couple mph quicker than the Cobalt on the straightaways, but the Ford suffered from weak brakes and a floppy chassis. After only two laps, the brakes started to give ground and the soft suspension allowed the car to move around too much to go quickly through the high-speed esses of Sector Two. The Cobalt averaged 4.7 mph faster through that part of the track. On the plus side, cornering grip and balance were decent. With more suspension control, the Mustang would have taken better advantage of these attributes.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...-lap-2006.html

 

This thread has veered WAY off from when I last posted.

I came in to make two points, and I don't think either has been refuted (other than "lol ford=crap" and comparison to Fords that came out years before the intro of the tC). One, a glass roof is a design concept that predates just about anything made in the last twenty years. Two, the current Mustangs (especially the GTs) are great cars for what you pay.

Everyone here (including me) bought a Scion because it's an outrageous value - you get a lot for what you pay. I've moved on to a new car that does the same thing: gives you a great motor and competent chassis for a steal of a price (especially used like I bought mine). I think it's a shame that people are dismissing Ford with broad statements like "everything Ford makes is crap except for their trucks". Whatever sins of Ford's past there may be, their current offerings deserve a look.

As ScionGeneration above me and some other have put it, Mustangs can indeed turn. Further, the aftermarket support offered by Ford and 3rd-parties is incredible. The SVT catalog is every bit as extensive as the TRD one, and maintains your warranty. Hell, they sell a turn-key, stripped-and-caged racing-spec Mustang out of their SVT catalog that you can buy and be competitive in the Grand Am racing series. They are still the most-winning marque in motorsports.

I also won't go so far as to say a Mustang GT is the be-all-end-all of cheap speed. A current Civic Si, Mazdaspeed 3, VW GTI, and Chevy Cobal SS could all keep up (or come close to keeping up) with a GT on a road coarse (eg Virginia International Raceway) for the same or less price out the door. But they benefit from sharing a FWD platform with mass-produced siblings, so they amortize their platform cost out. To get into RWD chassis, you are looking then at a Miata or Solstice (which I will probably own next when I have a longer drive) which despite excellent dynamics probably would post lower times on a full road course (though they would destroy a 'stang in autocross). To match with a RWD chassis, you are then looking at an RX-8 or a 350z, both of which start 2-3 thousand dollars more.

My point is (and I know the OP probably did not mean it this way), that automotive design does not begin and end with the studio at Scion HQ. Neither does performance for your dollar. We're all enthusiasts here, so let's appreciate the cars that deserve it. I'll go ahead and stop there, since I myself have gone way far afield.

 

I think I can live with the 0.3 second difference.

It really boggles my mind how many people knock on the Mustang for poor handling when their FWD car handles worse.


The Cobalt is nice but it just about reached its performance limit. However the Mustang still has barely scratched the surface. The Stang can be made to handle better or be an excellent drag car. FWD is inferior in every single way to a RWD, except maybe in parking lot races where tops speeds reach in excess of 30mph

 

yeah, well, VIR ain't no parking lot race. this was a real high speed race track with high speeds (the cobalt made it to 117 mph), and generally, the higher priced more powerful cars made the better lap times with some of the exceptions being the lotus elise, and the dodge charger srt-8.

and the mustang was at it's limit and so was the mustang as far as stock goes. sure, since the mustang is rwd, it has more potential, but still, losing in a v8 rwd car to a ff s/c'ed 4 cyl is rather embarrissing.

 

No, I don't think so. The twistier track is the cobalt's home turf, not the mustang.

 

Again, the cobalt platform is amortized out among the thousands of boringmobiles they sell, so you can afford to put more time into setup. We also don't know things like tire choice (the stock Pirellis on the GT are crap) and other things. I find issue with the "weak chasis" description, as they praised the chasis when they named the 05 and 06 'stangs to their 10-best lists. Still, stock-for-stock the did Cobalt did incredibly well. My point about it as a platform stands, however.

As far as racing goes, they are kicking ___ in the Grand Am series right now against both Acura TSXs, Porche 997s, and BMW 330s, so it's certainly a worthy platform in a class where things are evened out. Grassroots Motorsport had a pretty good article on them in their October 2007 issue.

 

as far as wheels and tires and suspension goes, car and driver requested that every vehicle they tested come with all the factory performance upgrades avaliable, i.e. wheels, tires, suspension, intakes or whatever. for some reason the dodge charger srt8 came with all season tires, but everything else came with summer tires i believe.

again, this wasn't a track of just twisties. the cars with high performance engines like the vettes, and porsches, and ford gt did very well with their 400-500 hp engines and such.

and the mustang shares parts with the lincoln ls/ jaguar something doesn't it? they had time to develop it a bit.

 

Mustangs out here in San Diego ca, get spanked by V-6 camaros all the time let alone the new camaro coming out next fall with 400hp. Mustangs are wack loud as hell when soupped-up and still get smoked.

 

I have both cars a 07 scion tc and a 93 gt... Those who say a mustang is slow and will not turn have not been in one set up correct.. Also if done correctly the sound is not that loud and will give a nice hp increase I like the scion or else I would not have bought it.. I have had a lot of mustangs and a pre 99 v6 is slow.. The 87-93 gt were the quickest pre 99 models... I have put a lot into the 93 it still gets ok gas mileage but it is not about the gas mileage.. That is was why I bought the TC.. It has good looks and seems to get pretty good gas mileage...

 

the mustang looks very nice.
great car imo

 

yea ok buddy

 

speaking of the new Camaro, I'm sure it will sell well the first couple of weeks, after that expect them to collect dust on show rooms since not too many people will be able to afford it.

400hp LS2 engine, independent rear suspension... expect the V8 to be in the low to mid 30 grand (not including dealer markups for the first couple of months) and the V6 to sell for the same price as a fully loaded V8 Mustang.

Would I buy it if I had the money? Yes

But I'd rather put the extra $10,000 in mods in a Mustang



If Toyota was smart, they should make a RWD car with the Tundra's V8 and compete with the Mustang and Camaro instead of giving us a RWD Corolla with a pathetic engine.

Cheap RWD Japanese cars just don't sell well in the U.S. I remember Nissan 240SX rotting on dealer showrooms in the 90's. Sure there were the kick **** RX7, Supra, 300ZX... but hardly anyone could afford them.

 

ok its time for an all wheel drive scion

 

don't they know its not japan here? we hardly have enough dangerous mountains for the touge. and the places that do, hardly anyone lives there.

drifto!!!

 

Not exactly. The LS platform has double wishbones on all four corners and an independent rear. The mustang has a solid rear with a 3 link connection and McPherson struts in the front. They are distant cousins at best.

Did you even read my post a few back? Don't knock on a car without doing you homework; draxcaliber is doing it right. First, v6 Camaros never beat v8 Mutangs of the same generation. It just did not happen. V8 Camaros were faster than V8 mustangs stock-for-stock and generation-for-generation, but they did that with usually .7-1 liter of extra displacement. Ford had at least a 3-1 sales advantange over the Camaro/Firebird throught their respective runs, so GM had had to offer something more. I can't wait to see what GM brings to the table with the new design next year. Ford is supposed to release an updated Mustang to compete. It's a great time to be an enthusiast :-).

 

Since this thread is off topic and back on topic

Did you guys see this today? It was on MSN homepage.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...portsSays.aspx

Apprently, Scion is more reliable than Toyota in Consumer Reports magazine.

 

meh, when toyota's come with a cruise control that randomely catches fire, even when the vehicle has been sitting idle for some time, then i'll say they are slipping.

 

Oh yeah, I forgot this benz had the glass roof...the new Lexus ES has it now too-- looks just like the tC's