10th Jul 2010, 18:23
It doesn't take much to outhandle the old Foxbody 5.0. The bar was already pretty low, so I'm not sure the 4 actually handled very well itself.
It doesn't take much to outhandle the old Foxbody 5.0. The bar was already pretty low, so I'm not sure the 4 actually handled very well itself.
10th Jul 2010, 13:36
WHAT?!?! Are you kidding me? Yeah, okay Ford puts out a base econobox Mustang 4 cylinder and then makes it handle better than the top of the line 5.0?!? I think it is you that has never driven a 5.0 Mustang. I have driven both, and the 4 cylinder rides on a much softer suspension that has smaller anti-roll bars and narrow tires. There was so much body roll around corners it was scary, while the 5.0 Mustang would stay flat and tight on corners. Night and day really between the two. Truth is the Escort of the day was a much better handling car than the 4 cylinder Mustang, as it was front wheel drive and had a better suspension setup. I sold them and have driven them all.
The 5.0 had much a much beefier suspension package that was MADE FOR HANDLING, unlike the base Mustang. There was a reason the 5.0 was an upgrade. You are just trying WAY too hard to make some argument that smaller engined cars are better. Sometimes that is true, but let's not get carried away. The top of the line Mustangs have always outperformed the base cars. It is actually funny to me that anyone would claim that anything about the 4 cylinder Mustang was as good as the 5.0... except the gas mileage of course!