17th Jun 2009, 15:37
Okay, you need to drop this... You are not even reading the comments. No one is saying you made up your figures for mileage. Really, who cares that you got such ridiculously low mpg in your cars. Not my problem. And who is a "boy racer"; I just like the whole package of the GT Mustang as it is complete and not a wannabe car. I don't sit in traffic every day and stare at the backs of Camry's either, so not sure what your point is there. Why don't you go write a positive review of your car on your own thread and we'll all leave you alone okay?
17th Jun 2009, 15:29
First, the 4.0 is NOT faster than a 5.0. The '85 that you quote as 5 more HP than your 4 cylinder fusion... Since when does a 4 cylinder Fusion put out 205 HP? The Mustang was 210 HP in 1985. 0-60 was 6.4 on the '85 if you knew how to drive one. You had the AT in the '90, so yeah it was slower, but still about the same as any 4.0 5-speed,and by the time you got to 100 the 6 cylinder would be unrecognizable in the rearview mirror.
The '86 was a bit faster, because even though it was rated at 200 hp, it still had 280 lb. ft. of torque and the FI cars were snappier off the line. Of course you have to get the real version of these cars, which is the 5-speed traction lok set up.