12.04 @ 117mph
05-05-2010, 08:12 PM
#21
Wash Rinse Repeat
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 6,312
what kills me is people actually think the GT500 should be compared to the base V8 camaro....
V6 model to V6 model
GT to Z28/SS
cobra to ???? (unless you wanna pull out the stock hennessy camaro and compare it to the stock shelby mustang... that actually sounds a lot better of a comparison considering out of house hands into in house engine bays)
considering price, power, speed, and the whole package you can only compare a cobra to a corvette... regardless of the fact the cobra is a 2+2 and the vette is a 2 seater, taking everything into consideration they are the only two cars that compare with one another in their own class given the two companies
to compare a top shelf mega performance supercharged aluminum 5.4L V8 with a forged bottom end that "shelby" tweaks and mods piggybacking fomoco to a base model mass produced N/A V8 car that surfs off the assembly line in 50 times the quantity and costs over 15K less is grasping at straws in a useless argument to try and talk your side up
so that stance I actually agree with them on... doesn't matter regardless, the GT beats the SS now in the first place fair and square IN THE CORRECT COMPARISON OF MODELS
V6 model to V6 model
GT to Z28/SS
cobra to ???? (unless you wanna pull out the stock hennessy camaro and compare it to the stock shelby mustang... that actually sounds a lot better of a comparison considering out of house hands into in house engine bays)
considering price, power, speed, and the whole package you can only compare a cobra to a corvette... regardless of the fact the cobra is a 2+2 and the vette is a 2 seater, taking everything into consideration they are the only two cars that compare with one another in their own class given the two companies
to compare a top shelf mega performance supercharged aluminum 5.4L V8 with a forged bottom end that "shelby" tweaks and mods piggybacking fomoco to a base model mass produced N/A V8 car that surfs off the assembly line in 50 times the quantity and costs over 15K less is grasping at straws in a useless argument to try and talk your side up
so that stance I actually agree with them on... doesn't matter regardless, the GT beats the SS now in the first place fair and square IN THE CORRECT COMPARISON OF MODELS
Last edited by Morbid Intentions; 05-05-2010 at 08:25 PM.
05-05-2010, 08:12 PM
#22
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: arizona
Posts: 3,893
Originally Posted by BlackOnBlackSS
its a nice vehicle and all,personally I wouldnt buy it but I gotta say,although it made an improvement as opposed to last years model, its still a weak sauce performance wise...why? because the m3 manged to pull off more horsepower out of a 3.2l six cylinder, better qt. mile and 0-60 times wayy before the mustang, so ford still has some homework to finish up on this. now im not swinging nuts on the beamers behalf im just saying how it is.
LOL
ya cuz a base v6 mustang is in the same price class as a bmw m3
05-05-2010, 08:49 PM
#26
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 2,374
Not really off the top of my head. There is all kind of crap there..hah had a thread where a guy thought his turbo (maybe SC? been a while) turned backwards in reverse.
Here is one I made that a few people didn't like. Not really a good thread though.Cant remember what was even said now.
http://www.cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=135486
Here is one I made that a few people didn't like. Not really a good thread though.Cant remember what was even said now.
http://www.cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=135486
Last edited by perfect.disguise; 05-05-2010 at 08:54 PM.
05-05-2010, 09:36 PM
#27
Wash Rinse Repeat
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 6,312
Not really off the top of my head. There is all kind of crap there..hah had a thread where a guy thought his turbo (maybe SC? been a while) turned backwards in reverse.
Here is one I made that a few people didn't like. Not really a good thread though.Cant remember what was even said now.
http://www.cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=135486
Here is one I made that a few people didn't like. Not really a good thread though.Cant remember what was even said now.
http://www.cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=135486
someone should really remind them how significant these badges are....
OMG GUYS LOOK ON THE HORIZON AT THIS BEAST
SS MEANS YOU'RE DEAD!!!!
05-05-2010, 09:43 PM
#28
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 2,374
Most performance trims have had a "weak link".
SVT for exp
GM did note that the 2.4 SS was a "mistake" and switched it to "Sport" for 08.
I got the idea for that thread off this forum btw.
SVT for exp
GM did note that the 2.4 SS was a "mistake" and switched it to "Sport" for 08.
I got the idea for that thread off this forum btw.
Last edited by perfect.disguise; 05-05-2010 at 09:50 PM.
05-05-2010, 10:56 PM
#30
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 2,374
They are in comparison to the Cobras. Just seem slow when the Focus SVT competes with the Srt-4/ IRL, etc of it's time. Sure the Malibu SS is slow and ugly and shouldn't have the SS but searching dragtimes they have pulled faster times than the Focus SVT. Point was GM wasn't the only one to use a higher performance trim on cheaper cars to justify making more $$$ off of it.
Last edited by perfect.disguise; 05-05-2010 at 11:07 PM.