205 HP isn't much now, but for the time the Mustang SVO made phenomenal power for a small, reasonably priced I4 car. Weren't they actually faster than the GTs until the GT got real fuel injection?
Advice request: suggestions for a car to buy.
- Thread starter yonyon
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: yonyon
no Nissan will be considered
thats too bad, i was going to suggest the new model versa. dirt cheap and a decent commuter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9olKJ-sKQA
no Nissan will be considered
thats too bad, i was going to suggest the new model versa. dirt cheap and a decent commuter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9olKJ-sKQA
Last edited:
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang. For $22K price, it comes fully loaded including HID headlight!! That engine is a sweetheart and pumps out more horsepower than Acura TL costing $40K. Thankfully, the tech package on Mustang is an expensive option which you don't want or need.
If I were in your shoes, I would be buying dark blue base Mustang and forget any other car in that category. I never knew Ford had started equipping their base models with all the amenities.
I would genuinely like to know why you would rule out Mustang as it seems to meet many of your requirements.
If I were in your shoes, I would be buying dark blue base Mustang and forget any other car in that category. I never knew Ford had started equipping their base models with all the amenities.
I would genuinely like to know why you would rule out Mustang as it seems to meet many of your requirements.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang.
Having rented a base Mustang recently, I must say it was a pretty boring ride. The car wasn't as fast as the figures on paper would have suggested and it handled like a boat. From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang.
Having rented a base Mustang recently, I must say it was a pretty boring ride. The car wasn't as fast as the figures on paper would have suggested and it handled like a boat. From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Vikas
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang.
Having rented a base Mustang recently, I must say it was a pretty boring ride. The car wasn't as fast as the figures on paper would have suggested and it handled like a boat. From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
Performance package should firm the ride up and might make faster with 3.31 gear ratio.
http://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/features/#page=Feature7
Originally Posted By: Vikas
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang.
Having rented a base Mustang recently, I must say it was a pretty boring ride. The car wasn't as fast as the figures on paper would have suggested and it handled like a boat. From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
Performance package should firm the ride up and might make faster with 3.31 gear ratio.
http://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/features/#page=Feature7
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Ya, but then it will be parked in the winter! That package has summer only rubber.
Nothing is stopping one from getting a second set of winter wheels/tires.
But yeah, Mustangs don't make the best winter cars in general.
Ya, but then it will be parked in the winter! That package has summer only rubber.
Nothing is stopping one from getting a second set of winter wheels/tires.
But yeah, Mustangs don't make the best winter cars in general.
It is a fun ride with the track pack, my sister just bought a base 2013 base Mustang with that package. Handling is very good, although the ride is pretty rough. Her's is an automatic though. And yes, only comes with summer tires. She has been pricing all weathers and they are pretty much 900+ for a set as they are 19's.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang. For $22K price, it comes fully loaded including HID headlight!! That engine is a sweetheart and pumps out more horsepower than Acura TL costing $40K. Thankfully, the tech package on Mustang is an expensive option which you don't want or need.
If I were in your shoes, I would be buying dark blue base Mustang and forget any other car in that category. I never knew Ford had started equipping their base models with all the amenities.
I would genuinely like to know why you would rule out Mustang as it seems to meet many of your requirements.
I'm not ruling it out. I will definitely consider a base model Mustang. Seasonal tires shouldn't be a problem as I should certainly have some sort of awful car to destroy with salt by next winter. There's a shortage of used cars right now, but by summertime there should be plenty of cars that nobody wants to drive available at scrap value.
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang. For $22K price, it comes fully loaded including HID headlight!! That engine is a sweetheart and pumps out more horsepower than Acura TL costing $40K. Thankfully, the tech package on Mustang is an expensive option which you don't want or need.
If I were in your shoes, I would be buying dark blue base Mustang and forget any other car in that category. I never knew Ford had started equipping their base models with all the amenities.
I would genuinely like to know why you would rule out Mustang as it seems to meet many of your requirements.
I'm not ruling it out. I will definitely consider a base model Mustang. Seasonal tires shouldn't be a problem as I should certainly have some sort of awful car to destroy with salt by next winter. There's a shortage of used cars right now, but by summertime there should be plenty of cars that nobody wants to drive available at scrap value.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
^^Absolutely. The new V6 Mustangs are a joke.
From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
^^Absolutely. The new V6 Mustangs are a joke.
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
^^Absolutely. The new V6 Mustangs are a joke.
They aren't a joke but the engines powerband doesn't match the weight of the car. The 5.0s are godly. I'm not really a fan of the look of them anymore though. I liked the foxes,and the new edge cars. I put a 4v in my 2000 but winter hit so I haven't been able to drive it. It needs a custom dyno tune because I swapped in 99 cobra intake cams,headers,nitrous. It will idle but I'm not pushing it until I know it can handle my abuse.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
^^Absolutely. The new V6 Mustangs are a joke.
They aren't a joke but the engines powerband doesn't match the weight of the car. The 5.0s are godly. I'm not really a fan of the look of them anymore though. I liked the foxes,and the new edge cars. I put a 4v in my 2000 but winter hit so I haven't been able to drive it. It needs a custom dyno tune because I swapped in 99 cobra intake cams,headers,nitrous. It will idle but I'm not pushing it until I know it can handle my abuse.
The new V6 Mustang smokes even the old V8!
Quote:
0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds, quarter mile in 13.9 seconds at 100.1 mph, lateral acceleration of 0.95 g, figure eight in 25.4 seconds, and 60-0 in 110 feet -- and it's evident the Mustang overachieves in almost every major objective test
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coup.../#ixzz2FcjBXdRW
Quote:
0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds, quarter mile in 13.9 seconds at 100.1 mph, lateral acceleration of 0.95 g, figure eight in 25.4 seconds, and 60-0 in 110 feet -- and it's evident the Mustang overachieves in almost every major objective test
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coup.../#ixzz2FcjBXdRW
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Vikas
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang.
Having rented a base Mustang recently, I must say it was a pretty boring ride. The car wasn't as fast as the figures on paper would have suggested and it handled like a boat. From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
My FIL has a gorgeous dark blood red V6 ragtop, all optioned up with everything to look just like a V8 model. Very sharp looking and nice driver.
But there is no way it runs a 13.9 quarter mile. Nor does it pull .95 lateral G. Someone forgot that Ford has sent some real "ringers' to the rags for testing!
Originally Posted By: Vikas
You should seriously look at Mustang. I looked it on the web yesterday. I was shocked at what you get standard in the base Mustang.
Having rented a base Mustang recently, I must say it was a pretty boring ride. The car wasn't as fast as the figures on paper would have suggested and it handled like a boat. From what I've read, the fun Mustangs start with the Boss version and up.
My FIL has a gorgeous dark blood red V6 ragtop, all optioned up with everything to look just like a V8 model. Very sharp looking and nice driver.
But there is no way it runs a 13.9 quarter mile. Nor does it pull .95 lateral G. Someone forgot that Ford has sent some real "ringers' to the rags for testing!
C&D also recorded 13.9s quarter mile in the 2013 Mustang V6, but only 0.91g.
The vehicles tested had manual trans. I don't doubt that with a manual trans, the V6 Mustang can be pretty fun. The one I drove was a slushbox and there was just something very lethargic about its overall power delivery.
The vehicles tested had manual trans. I don't doubt that with a manual trans, the V6 Mustang can be pretty fun. The one I drove was a slushbox and there was just something very lethargic about its overall power delivery.
The manual V6 Mustang, when properly optioned, can most certainly post sub 14 second 1/4 mile times. The new GT with the track package regularly posts sub 13 second 1/4 times with trap speeds of 110+, manual or automatic. Some of the new 5.0 cars have even dipped below 12.8 stock to the rubber and into the 11's with intake/tune and drag radials. Not bad for a sub $35k car.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
My FIL has a gorgeous dark blood red V6 ragtop, all optioned up with everything to look just like a V8 model. Very sharp looking and nice driver.
But there is no way it runs a 13.9 quarter mile. Nor does it pull .95 lateral G. Someone forgot that Ford has sent some real "ringers' to the rags for testing!
You're forgetting the ragtop adds a couple hundred pounds to the car. Enough that it will affect performance.
My FIL has a gorgeous dark blood red V6 ragtop, all optioned up with everything to look just like a V8 model. Very sharp looking and nice driver.
But there is no way it runs a 13.9 quarter mile. Nor does it pull .95 lateral G. Someone forgot that Ford has sent some real "ringers' to the rags for testing!
You're forgetting the ragtop adds a couple hundred pounds to the car. Enough that it will affect performance.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
C&D also recorded 13.9s quarter mile in the 2013 Mustang V6, but only 0.91g.
The vehicles tested had manual trans. I don't doubt that with a manual trans, the V6 Mustang can be pretty fun. The one I drove was a slushbox and there was just something very lethargic about its overall power delivery.
This must be it. There's not much of a weight difference, about like one fat friend. But I guess it's the slushbox that muddies up the great little engine's response.
C&D also recorded 13.9s quarter mile in the 2013 Mustang V6, but only 0.91g.
The vehicles tested had manual trans. I don't doubt that with a manual trans, the V6 Mustang can be pretty fun. The one I drove was a slushbox and there was just something very lethargic about its overall power delivery.
This must be it. There's not much of a weight difference, about like one fat friend. But I guess it's the slushbox that muddies up the great little engine's response.
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Ya know, it's funny, but cars like the early 80's Mustang SVO (2.3L turbo 4 cyl) are just not made anymore.
But, they were really fun to drive. Not exactly fast at just 205HP stock. But, light and tune-able. And really fun.
Once spooled, the SVO was as quick as any stock GT or 305 IROC-Z. But it had some lag and usually trailed the LX 5.0 by a full second to 60. Bigger problem was that the SVO was something like $5000 more than an LX 5.0
By today's standards? The stock SVO, Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, XR4Ti, and even my beloved '86 Daytona Turbo Z C/S would get beat up by virtually any V6 midsize. A Camry SE would kill my Dodge.
But I never drove a manual transmission T-bird Turbo Coupe or Turbo Dodge and thought that it was slow. It's still hard for me to accept that my curent Mazda is quicker than my old Dodge was. When the boost gauge was wiggling around in the red, I would have sworn that it was seriously quick.
Ya know, it's funny, but cars like the early 80's Mustang SVO (2.3L turbo 4 cyl) are just not made anymore.
But, they were really fun to drive. Not exactly fast at just 205HP stock. But, light and tune-able. And really fun.
Once spooled, the SVO was as quick as any stock GT or 305 IROC-Z. But it had some lag and usually trailed the LX 5.0 by a full second to 60. Bigger problem was that the SVO was something like $5000 more than an LX 5.0
By today's standards? The stock SVO, Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, XR4Ti, and even my beloved '86 Daytona Turbo Z C/S would get beat up by virtually any V6 midsize. A Camry SE would kill my Dodge.
But I never drove a manual transmission T-bird Turbo Coupe or Turbo Dodge and thought that it was slow. It's still hard for me to accept that my curent Mazda is quicker than my old Dodge was. When the boost gauge was wiggling around in the red, I would have sworn that it was seriously quick.
Update: I chickened out and just bought another Fiero. I didn't get quite what I really want, but I did get a good, safe, reliable car at an excellent price. Considering the price I paid and the reason the seller offered it to me this was more like a pet adoption than a car purchase.
This is yet another example of someone asking for advice here, getting quite a bit of it, and then doing something completely different. Hopefully, I'll break the trend and have a good overall experience.
This is yet another example of someone asking for advice here, getting quite a bit of it, and then doing something completely different. Hopefully, I'll break the trend and have a good overall experience.
- Status