So it's a performance vehicle, but not a performance car? But isn't it a car?? WTF?????
So it's a performance vehicle, but not a performance car? But isn't it a car?? WTF?????
Sorry, I see you were talking about the go-kart now. That was the beer in me responding before my brain.
No, my statement (read it carefully) clearly implies that those that do not believe that it is performance vehicle are idiots.
Then again, after reading that go-kart argument
Now that argument is a bit more cogent. But sadly irrelevant because:
It's still a toy. More practical yes, but as I said, if we didn't want a toy we would all be driving econoboxes and this group wouldn't exist. Besides, you're the one who started the toy argument. I was talking performance. You decided it was easier to denigrate a car for it's less practical aspects despite the fact that the argument MR2 - Mustang began precisely because of - guess what - THEIR LESS PRACTICAL ASPECTS. Guess what - I agree that the MR2 is smaller, can carry less luggage, can carry fewer people, and is not as practical as the Mustang.
Glad to know you are a better driver than the magazine testers for the mag's as well as Ford's own testers. Since you apparently know so much about cars we should all bow to your knowledge.
That thought is pointless. You may not understand why, but that's what the question was about.
But that's what the whole thing was about. The original was questioning about a Miata and a Mustang. While you may not see why someone would want to look at the wildly differrent types of vert's there are apparently those that do.
Mine personally would be a third car, so I'm trying to decide whether I want it to be able to be used as a daily driver, or purely a weekend car. That's a choice I have to think about, others often think the same way.
Okay, maybe that was a cheap shot.
You don't know what I'd like.
Or could it be that you are so blind that you don't notice that I never said ANYTHING bad about the Mustang. Or maybe you just don't want my type driving the same kind of car that you do. You know, someone that actually thinks a car with a 4-banger can be *gasp* a performance vehicle.
Nah, I can't believe that. No one would be that insecure, it would be like me saying I wouldn't want a Mustang just because there are some people that drive them that wouldn't know what a performance car was if it passed them.
Apparently I don't know what a performance car is. Because if I'm wrong saying the MR2 is a performance car then the following must be true.
Ok, you've convinced me, I give up. The MR2 is a performance car. Hmm, I seem to remember a similar argument about a Prelude. Someone remind me how that one ended....
Give me one valid, measurable reason it's not a performance car and I'll flip flop entirely on the issue.
However, you'll have to leave the go-kart idea for the my dad is bigger than your dad type arguments.
Bahha, hahah!! What HAVE you been drinking???
Okay, so what is the differences between a GT and a Mach 1??
Mach has the 4V making 305 underrated horses and a 3:55 rear. GT has the 2V making 260 horses and a 3:27 rear. Mach also has revised cams for more torque, 315 I think, than the similar 2001 Cobra was making in same motor.
So add a blower to a Mach1 and you have a Cobra...
Not quite, the '03 Cobra has forged block and internals. They also have different cams and a lower compression ratio specifically designed for forced induction. The new Cobras can easily make close to 500 RWHP with SC pulley, CAI, MAS, chip, and exhaust mods. Spend a few thousand bucks on a KB blower and 600+ RWHP can be made. The 2001 Cobra motor and Mach both use the aluminum block and higher compression ratios for NA power.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.