Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 3,001
The GT Premium is a 4.6l v8 with 315hp.... and nearly 3 grand cheaper though. I know which I'd prefer.
Hertz Mustangs in the US
- Thread starter Scuzi
- Start date
The GT Premium is a 4.6l v8 with 315hp.... and nearly 3 grand cheaper though. I know which I'd prefer.
Oh, for the love of.....
It's supposed to be a cheap, reliable, boulevard cruiser. Not a tyre shredding, highly strung animal that requires a major service every six seconds. Yes, they should put a better engine in it - they have one, in fact. It's part of the Cyclone family of engines, it displaces 3.5 litres, has direct injection and is about 1479.3% better in every single way than the old Cologne motor. But they haven't used that motor yet for the 'stang because the old 4.0 Cologne is very cheap, still gets by even the California hippy brigade's emissions requirements and makes just enough power for the car to keep out of its own way.
I really do wish that Ford would get on and stick the Duratec 35 in there, if only to get everyone to shut up with the "why does this enormous engine only produce 1 horsepower?" comments.
I wouldnt pay more than 25k for a mustang even if it had a V10 in it. The car as a whole just aint that good tbh. Great as a cruiser in america and not much else imho.
In fact its just like harley davidson. If I hired a bike in the US it would have to be a hardley, but theres no way i'd buy one over here.
In fact its just like harley davidson. If I hired a bike in the US it would have to be a hardley, but theres no way i'd buy one over here.
The 2010 will finally have normal suspension I think
it would be a impressive car, if it wasn't for ford's constant budget cutting.
I wish they built them with the same thoughts as the 60's modnel's, they were amazing car's for their time.
Now their just plastic fantasic, which is a shame.
Going to IRS with the current Mustang would have added weight, complexity, cost and lost them a lot of ruggedness for no tangible benefit. Ford claim it would have added $5k to the list price of the car - I'm not sure it would really be that much, but it'd certainly not be a small sum. And it's not as if there aren't plenty of ways to locate a solid axle properly so the handling can be tip-top - the Mustang as standard uses a Panhard rod, but you can always change that for something more exotic if you want without having to spend a fortune.
'Antiquated suspension'....*sigh* At least it doesn't suffer from atrocious axle tramp like the US market manual 'box M5 huh?
Is the m5 american version build in america to get around the stupid emison laws, that stop the us car market being destroyed by forgien cars or is it a german built import?
And i have to agree to disagree with you on the solid live axle being just as good as a fully independant suspesion, mainly because the shelby addition i believe comes with a semi or fully independant suspension if i read the review correctly.
I honestly believe that us market is aimed differrently than the eu market, the Us enjoy big engined loud cars that will get them 0-60 fast, whilst the eu lot love to go round coners fast.
This results in different builds, the solid rear suspension allows less travel under heavy acceleration improving 0-60, whilst the independant suspension allows power to be delivered more efficantly to the wheels whilst in corners improving coner stablity and speed.
Built in Germany, not on US soil. They let them have a manual 'box (Europe apparently didn't merit getting that choice....), but you can't fully disable the DSC system and it has to limit the power in order to minimise the problems with the rear end when launching from a standstill. Even that isn't quite successful, if the car that I saw in Seattle with its rear wheels hopping away is anything to go by.
You know in Bullitt, early on in the car chase when McQueen backs the Mustang up and the rear wheels are just bouncing like mad? Looked almost exactly like that, but with a bit less smoke and sounding nothing like as good.
I didn't say "just as good", I said there would be "no tangible benefit". And there wouldn't, not for the market the car is aimed at.
That'll be why they all buy BMWs and Japanese cars rather than American cars then.....oh, wait....
Part of the reason why the Big Three are in such dire straits is because the people in the home market just aren't buying enough of their cars. This despite them having some pretty decent kit right now.That'll be why they all buy BMWs and Japanese cars rather than American cars then.....oh, wait....
No their chossing foriegn cars over american carsfor the following reasons:
*image, its everything in america, Nothing says your a big shot than a mercades, bmw, or audi.
* Build quality, Europe/ japanese cars are built to last, whislt some american cars (chrystlar i believe) actually design expensive parts to fail, also multiple lawsuits have been made against many american car companies for using sub par equipment.
*safety, European and japanese cars have to pass strict saftey requirement's to be sold in eu, and asia markets. The american companies do nto have to pass test, and do not have to broadcast test.
One company had doors that would fling open during a accident, ejecting passagers.
*Bang for buck, forgien cars come with a lot more gadets and safety feature's than the american cars in general.
* Fuel econamy, the big thre like big ineffective v6 and v8, whilst the forgien companies are getting better mpg and more power out of smaller engines.
The above reasons are why most of the american car companies are suffering with their current market.
I was talking about the suspension alyout, not the other reason for car comapnies to die.
A person does not generally choose a car by what suspensition system is used on the rear wheel's.
Citation needed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 9,946
- Location
- London UK
Out of interest have you driven many Mustangs, or are you opinions based on what you have read/heard on the net?
I drove the previous shape before the current model.
Well hell, the SN-95 was released in nineteen-ninety-*******-four! It's not surprising that you'd look back on it slightly less than favourably now. Was it a V8? And if so, was it a pre-'96 V8 that used the venerable 302ci small block (great engine, but rather surpassed since) rather than the newer 4.6 litre Modular motor?
Having said that, they did fit IRS to the SVT Cobra R of that generation. And that generated some fantastic numbers on the skidpan. It was just a bit of a shame that it cost more than the competing Corvette....
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 9,946
- Location
- London UK
Wouldn't mind seeing some facts to back all that up, and that would be for the majority of US cars not the odd exception.
Well mine manages to go round corners rather well at speed so that kinda kills that myth.
So far most of your comments are flawed.
A lot of places here pump 98/99 RON. You think BMW get 507hp from an M5 on 95 RON?
I'm not sure it's fair to say it kills it, to be honest. Most Americans consider performance in a straight line first and then cornering second.
Related to the OP, if you've hired a "Mustang or Sebring" from Hertz there's a 99% chance you'll get a normal V6 Mustang or a Sebring, and more than half likely it'll be Sebring.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 6,703
- Location
- Pembrokeshire
I thought US regular petrol was about about 5 RON less than European equivalents?
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,055
- Location
- In my penthouse, Park Ave
There's 87/89/91 but I think that's PON rather than RON.
