C5 vs. 03 Cobra
Originally Posted by Jugador
if GM chooses not to run boost that's their gig, but ford does. why pull some ricer "if i had this i would have won" s**t? race it or don't, butquitmaking excuses
No excuse made, I stated a Stock Vette would win vs. a Stock Cobra. I'm sorry dude, but unless his brother sucks behind the wheel and he's good, that's the only way. Face it man. I made the blower analogy because that's what Ford has to do to keep up with the big boys these days. I grew up a Ford person, but always hated they had their highest performance car available with a V6. I love the new GT40 that's coming out, and it's going to smoke almost anything, but again, why not go with a naturally aspirated motor like all of the other big players.</P>
they're going for smaller displacement and new technology unlike the other big players. the only way to stay alive is to keep improving, be it in price or features...thats what killed F-Bodies.
Originally Posted by Jugador
they're going for smaller displacement and new technology unlike the other big players. the only way to stay alive is to keep improving, be it in price or features...thats what killed F-Bodies.
What killed the F Bodies was sales. Mustangs always outsould the F-bodies, even when they were slower. This is the first year Mustangs have put out competitive numbers, a year in which no F-bodies are around. I won't argue for f-bodies though, as I am not a big fan of them. GM really disgraced the Corvette by putting Vette Motors in those cars. Lucky for Vette owners, they gave us a better cam, heads, and lifters. I guess they would do that for $20k more.</P>
why do you think they had poor sales? they didnt improve their styling, s**tty interior, old technology, nor price. </P>
if im not mistaken they didnt have any difference in enginespost 2000 cause they accidentally mixed them up sometimes so they just made them all the same...ask dan, i think he said that.</P>
Originally Posted by Jugador
why do you think they had poor sales? they didnt improve their styling, s**tty interior, old technology, nor price. </P>
if im not mistaken they didnt have any difference in enginespost 2000 cause they accidentally mixed them up sometimes so they just made them all the same...ask dan, i think he said that.</P>
Like I said, I'm not going to defend those cars b/c I don't like them, so don't get so pissy. They did have poor sales compared to Mustangs, check it out for yourself. Poor sales is a component of everything you stated. It's not rocket science.</P>
Originally Posted by Jugador
i know...i own joo
Nope, you showed you're ignorance and pointed out the components of what I ultimately stated. Looks like you were owned. By the way, what do you drive?</P>
how was i owned? you say their sales dropped and were vague as hell...that means i win for knowing why the sales dropped.</P>
and the irony in the statement "you showed you're ignorance"...you use the wrong word. should have been "your".</P>
ps i drive a 1976 mustang IIghia</P><edited><editID>Jugador</editID><editDate>37963.0531018519</editDate></edited>
Originally Posted by Jugador
i know...i own joo
</P>
I guess you showed yours too...joo should have been you...jack ***, lol.</P>
Wow, I can't believe you are arguing performance and you drive a Mustang II.</P><edited><editID>DontEvenTry</editID><editDate>37963.0548032407</editDate></edited>


