Mustang Sales, Specialty Models

I loved that car. It had wonderful little styling touches all through the car inside and out. Things like a real wood veneer dash face, the chromed steel grating on the console, the grill intake mesh, louvered tail lights (a feature only found on the 1966 model) and the small nostril hood scoop to name a few. It had a 389 with a Carter four barrel and a two speed auto. That combination wasn't the fastest but it was fun. It would shift to second at 70 mph and the rear would do a quick slide to the side when it shifted from a little tire spin. The car was very quick from 20-25 mph and up. Ahhh, the memories.

You dodged the question again.

If you can't see the difference between the current Mustang offering relative to its past and the last GTO relative to its past then you are beyond hope or help.

You didn't ask one.

I can tell the difference, but logically your standard is invalid because it does not support your conclusions in both cases.

If you are really this dense then I feel sorry for you.

So, are you morphing the discussion into another topic again? You're like that kid in the Family Circle cartoon running all over the neighborhood.

You can be insulting, but you did not ask a question, you made a statement. I then asked a question in reply to that statment.

Logical evaluation of your standard is not changing the subject.

You must be a real treat to interact with IRL.

You are not capable of logical evaluation.

This would be a great time for the rebirth of AMC.

dwight

My Mother drove a 1979 four wheel drive Eagle for a couple of years. It was a decent car in its day and somewhat ahead of its time.

When in doubt remove all argument and leave only insult!

Talk about lacking logic...

Since you seem unable to follow along Brent, I'll post Michael's question here for the third time for your viewing pleasure...

Whatever it is someone expects from a GTO, the last one didn't deliver it. The first one did. What was different between them? Care to answer the question this time or are you just going to ignore it again? Is the question too hard for you to answer?

Naw, something more on the order of the little 1971-1974 Javelin AMX ...

Thanks for explaining your strategy. I would have never figured it out.

Give it up. He can't get his mind around the question or he does and knows the answer will sink his pretzel logic. Funny how he always ends up in this position no matter what the topic may be.

The are better models to bring back to life but AMC was ahead of the curve with the Eagle. It had four doors, great ground clearance, compact and got decent mileage. Here's more than you ever cared to know about the car:

That question was not where he was claiming I 'didn't answer one' He claimed I didn't answer a question where none had been asked, where he had made a statement, but I am supposed to magically know out which part of which post he is complaining about?

Secondly, it's irrelevant. It's like asking why did the '05 mustang sell so poorly compared to the '64 mustang?

Thirdly, it's impossible to answer. Which 'difference'? The cars probably don't even share so much as a common light bulb or screw. They just share a very basic theme.

Fourthly, I answered it multiple times, telling him it's not 1964 anymore, 40 years had passed by, that makes for a huge amount of difference. All that is left is basic concept.

Thusly, It's nothing more than distraction, nothing more than tactic.

A lot has changed with cars since 1974 and even more since 1964. Maybe practically nobody wants a hopped up family sedan any more. Note the maurader also failed on the market. It had all american chasis and base car.... no blaming it on being a foreign market platform there.

I see you've completely regressed to grade school... good day.

It would seem that way to someone such as yourself.

If that is true then we must be class mates.

It would seem that way to anybody with a little common sense.