I'd want to bring another car into play: the Mirage Turbo/Colt GT. Its curb weight is 2545 pounds. Although the stock engine has only 135 hp, you could easily swap the engine for a 4G63T that has 210 hp stock and (at least) slightly over 400 hp heavily modified. The handling is excellent! The downside is that it's very rare and a FWD. For more info look at
-Andy
Ford no longer offers the 5.0 in the Mustang, hasn't for years. The guy was asking about NEW cars, not used in any event. I have owned several late model Mustangs GT's convertibles and I can assure, you except for the first 1/16 of a mile off the line, the
4.6 is a much better performing engine, in standard trim and it only need 87 octane fuel. A dual cam 4.6 is available in the Cobra if one wants to impress the corvette drivers and a dual cam 4.6 with a supercharger is available in the SVT for those that find it necessary to win ALL the races with anything up to $20,000 more than its drive home price of less than 30K. But for the average guy a GT, at a drive home price of less than 20K, is a bargain. That, and RWD, is why the Mustang is number one in sales, and has been for many years ;)mike hunt
Charles Perry wrote:
More so that any FWD 'Sports car.'
mike hunt
Liam Devl>
They haven't had a Mirage turbo in the US since the very early '90's. The first car I bought was a (then new) 1987 Mirage Turbo. If I recall it had around 112hp or so but weighed considerably less than the above and it seemed to favor nice rough dirt roads as it's playground. Drove the thing to death for 180k miles and replaced a clutch, brake light relay, and a few odd oil changes. I wonder why they aren't that reliable now. Sheesh.
I'm not telling him which to buy, but that was my point. Why pay Mustang V8 prices for 4's and 6's. What I told the guy was drive them all and get a drive home price, then decide. As I told you before the most often asked, and decisive question, when I was in retail was; 'How much is my month payment?' LOL
mike hunt
MDT Tech® wrote:
That's will be my next Mustang Convertible, if i live that long. Teh 2005 coming in mid 2004 will be built on a version of the chassis on my 2002 V8 Lincoln LS and the T-Bird, but will have the new three valve 4.6 V8. I had a chance to drive the coupe that was at the NYC auto show. It has a different interior than the production model. By the way the 2003 I have now is no more a 'fox' chassis than was the Lincoln Mark VIII was that was also derived from the old 'fox' ;)
mike hunt
Pahs>
No 4 door car can claim be a sports car and they stopped making the Impreza coupe a long time ago - don't think it got to the USA and I don't think they made a STi or 22B version even though it was the original WRC car and made their name - the 4 door has never been as successful as it's too heavy to be a sports or WRC car. The lack of real input from the driver again means 4wd are not sports cars, performance yes, sports no. Totally de-skilled, anyone can drive them fast on dry tarmac, that's why the WRX is the car of choice for UK thieves as a getaway car - they don't need someone on the firm that can handle a real car. Traffic cops advice to a friend with a Sierra Cossie RS (late 80's early 90's euro Ford 4x4 turbo) 'If in doubt just plant your foot to the floor on the go pedal and it will go round'. Also supposed to be quite good for ram raiding as they can get quite a good speed up across the width of a narrow town street (car of choice yet again for UK thieves - three out of not many, stolen in one county last month).
About 10 years ago 3 out of the 4 wrecks I saw one snowy night were
4x4's, a Mitsubishi Shogun on it's roof (SUV's don't spin they roll), a Ford Scorpio 4x4 backed into a telegraph pole, a FWD metro had made a new gap in a hedge and a Ford Sierra XR4x4 was 5ft off the road on top off a hedge - think it had spun and mounted the hedge backwards. I was in a RWD Celica and knew conditions were bad - the car had given me due warning long before it could become a major drama. FWD and 4WD just lets the idiots that can't drive move off and gain speed, so they can go to the scene off their accident.Still here? In answer of the OP.
How much more is a base 350Z? A few bucks more will make that whole list and an unimpressive WRX look sick - unless you can get a STi, 22B or some other real one but most have been or will be nicked. Besides
+WRX and EVO are ugly brutes - sports cars have a style that the EVO and WRX lack.-- Peter Hill
Can of worms - what every fisherman wants. Can of worms - what every PC owner gets!
well that all nice peter but the rsx-s does seem to fall short in my experience against the wrx. my old lady's sedan seems to best both of my sister's coupes : an rsx-s and a golf vr-6 the STi version is available but when i can still get clean a eclipse gsx so cheap.......i prefer to build to suit my wants.
" the 4 door has never been as successful as it's too heavy to be a sports or WRC car."
well that may be true for scoobie but i remember tommi kicking butt for a long, long while in his 4 door mitsu. either way that makes no difference, we both know that the WRC version of the WRX is built by prodrive and is a half a million dollars (U.S.) so why bring that up?
" The lack of real input from the driver again means 4wd are not sports cars,performance yes, sports no. Totally de-skilled, anyone can drive themfast on dry tarmac,"
yeah, i'll try to remember that when i'm drifting the eclipse through a foot of fresh powder next winter :) really though, your statement is overly broad. what center and rear differential are fitted and how much power is on tap? i thought long and hard about the race transmission going into the eclipse and if i should go with a spool or a 4 gear spider. the 4 gear won out based on it being kinder to the rest of the driveline but still i have more than enough power to break traction up front allowing the viscous coupling to direct power to the rear and provide good old fashioned throttle induced oversteer on demand. a sharp stab at the brakes followed by lots of throttle tends to bring the rear around as well. wouldn't this constitute driver input, or am i all wet here?
"Traffic cops advice to a friend with a Sierra Cossie RS (late 80's early
90's euro Ford 4x4 turbo) 'If in doubt just plant your foot to the floor on the go pedal and it will go round'."yes, i remember this one...2.3l turbo ford yes? if i recall, didn't dunlop purchase an entire fleet of these for the purpose of tire testing? it was supposed to be very close to neutral and quite a sweet car.
"I was in a RWD Celica "
rear drive celica....wow! what vintage?
" FWD and 4WD just lets the idiots that can't drive move off and gain speed, so they can go to the scene off their accident."
yeah, but what about us idiots who can drive? you guys don't really get much snow, so i doubt you're really prepared when it does happen (much like when a freak storm hits texas.) i actually dig driving on snow. it helps me unlearn all of the bad habits i've picked up in good weather. i switch over from a set of 235/40/17 yokohama's to a
205/55/15 hakkapeliita 1 and just kick it! most of the guys who have your attitude regarding AWD have no seat-time in AWD cars.....
For starters, I don't have a "paddock". ;)
Falling asleep through 's post...
Think I don't know this?
From what I know that swaps between the two, my statement still stands
Right and wrong. You're thinking about the Colt C10, I'm thinking about the C50. The C10 is the earlier model. And I agree, that old Colt was as solid and bullet proof as reinforced steel. Sigh...
Mine was the more contemporary hatchback, not the box with a nose stuck on it as were the later models. (pics of mine are available if needed). I remember they had a great ad though, where the guy plants his foot on the gas and his face melts slowly backwards into the seat. hehe
None are even close to being a sports car, but of the choices, I'd probably easily put the Acura at the top. Quality is very nice. The Hyundai is surprisingly good, though. The Eclipse is a better-looking Grand Am, unfortunately. The 240hp Nissan Altima might fit in there as well, and it'd probably be the fastest of the bunch. As long as you don't mind putting a different set of rear tires on twice a year, I'd seriously look at RWD cars. 15-second FWD cars are nice enough for what they are, but they're still all slow. ...and FWD. :) Snow tires on a RWD is better than all-seasons on a FWD.
And snows on a FWD?
Having had both FWD and RWD in the snowbelt I'll stick with snows on my RWD Miata over Snows on any FWD. Why? Not only is it a hell of a lot more fun but I tend to get places where the FWD's just simply give up.
That's why girls like Mustang GTs--they get their thrill in beating the boy racers with less money to put into a car.
On the street you get to pick your victims. Road conditions and possible traffic as well as reliable timing and maybe nitrous can change things fast. Hot dog on the track.
My RSX-S is a mix of characteristics, as any car is. It ain't slow and it ain't particularly fast. I prefer the hatchback, a stick, a small car and a fairly tight suspension. I like a WRX and find the STI with European tune to be verrrry interesting. Also the EVO VII (sans air conditioner!).
For my driving I get 29.5 MPG, which is pretty respectable, and Honda reliability and long life. For beating cars I have a ZRX if I am in a bad mood. Zero to 60 in 3 seconds amuses even me. We all need at least 4 vehicles, anyway.
Me
RSX-S ZRX 1200R F350 7.3 TurboVan
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required