Author Topic: Mustang GTs (Read 1103 times)

rshubert · « **Reply #15 on:** January 04, 2005, 07:14:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hawker238
Off topic question: is horsepower a measurement of force or of energy?

It's a measure of WORK, in ft-pounds per second. (force per unit time)

A_Clown · « **Reply #16 on:** January 04, 2005, 08:43:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
Ok change one to change two. We found a pretty good priced one that is not a GT (I actually like that....cheaper all around and ALOT cheaper insurance)

It's a V6 4.3 automatic w/ 55,000 miles on it.

kellyblue book on it is $9800 and I have them talked down to $8500. It's just what I'm looking for in price and payments and they even have a pretty good bumper to bumper 2 year warrenty.

FYI the GT package adds weight which any gear head will tell you is counter productive. A pony with same equipment drivetrain and w/o the added weight if those ground affects and (non functional) spoiler, will outperform a GT.

Hard tops are lighter than soft tops because there is additional frame bracing on the soft top models.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #17 on:** January 05, 2005, 12:15:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
Ok change one to change two. We found a pretty good priced one that is not a GT (I actually like that....cheaper all around and ALOT cheaper insurance)

It's a V6 4.3 automatic w/ 55,000 miles on it.

kellyblue book on it is $9800 and I have them talked down to $8500. It's just what I'm looking for in price and payments and they even have a pretty good bumper to bumper 2 year warrenty.

Slinger,

Take it through a thorough test drive, check for any gear slippage, etc. There is nothing wrong with geting your wife a V-6. Damn right the insurance is cheaper! Just, make sure that tranny is good to go.

Karaya

Callisto · « **Reply #18 on:** January 05, 2005, 09:00:00 AM »

4.3L V6?

not 3.8L?

Gunslinger · « **Reply #19 on:** January 13, 2005, 07:45:42 PM »

OK I bought one for my wifey today she's real happy with the car I'm really happy with the deal.

Its a 2002 GT, had only 29,000 miles on it and I got it for $6k below kelly blue book. I went with the automatic because it came standard with 75k powertrain warrenty.

the only think I don't like about it.....LEATHER SEATS! but hey its her car.

superpug1 · « **Reply #20 on:** January 13, 2005, 08:18:59 PM »

I did my drivers ed in a 00 mustang GT. Failed it ounce because i raced a ricer. LOL i won!!! it had a 5 liter v8 or sumthing like that. but th gears were a bit worn ( it was a drivers ed car). but yeah the back seats are no fun, i had trouble fiting into the front seats:aok

lazs2 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 14, 2005, 08:34:07 AM »

nice car... I bought one for my last wife and enjoyed the convert aspect from time to time.

They are light in the butt.... you can't hardly drive em in the rain without spinning the rear tires from every stop. They let yu sit upright but are short wheelbase so are not that comfortable to drive for long.

well put together car with few glaring flaws.

lazs

VWE · « **Reply #22 on:** January 14, 2005, 08:59:38 AM »

Well dang! Just missed this thread... I just listed this peach yesterday. 1 owner, garadge kept, the interior looks brand new! You don't see leather in this good of shape on a 10 year old car.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #23 on:** January 14, 2005, 09:51:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VWE
Well dang! Just missed this thread... I just listed this peach yesterday. 1 owner, garadge kept, the interior looks brand new! You don't see leather in this good of shape on a 10 year old car.

thanks for the thaught but its not what I'm looking for. I really don't like that body style. I'm not sure when they changed it but I started liking mustangs again when they made the lines a little more boxy.

BTW Laz with the exception of the last two weeks we dont get much rain here. In case we do, and I havnt tried it out nore do I know nothing about it cept that its puter controled, the car has push button traction control. Like I said I dont know anything about it cept its supposed to help. Snow however, is whole other moster. In case of said snow my jeep will be the primary vehicle again.

Like I said it was what I was looking for and a good price plus its really a sharp looking car.

My brother in-law in vegas owns a grafics business and I'm gonna probably have him go wild on it. he's really creative but hates the ricer look all the same. BTW for those that live in Vegas he is really talented I'll give you his business number if you email me. My wife says he does all his pinstriping by hand.

either way I drove it to work today and had a blast.

J_A_B · « **Reply #24 on:** January 14, 2005, 10:27:04 PM »

The only thing I don't like about that body style of Mustang is the silly looking bulge in the middle of the hood. Those sorts of bulges look good on some cars, but not that one. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

J_A_B

DiabloTX · « **Reply #25 on:** January 14, 2005, 10:34:53 PM »

I freaking HATE Fords and especially Musturds (hehehe). BUT...I have to say Ford has its watermelon together over GM with the GT40 and the new Mustang. Wife and I saw a '05 GT today that was a light metallic green and it looked awesome for a Mustang. My hat's off to Ford for doing it right. Grrrrrrrr......

Gunslinger · « **Reply #26 on:** January 15, 2005, 01:49:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DiabloTX
I freaking HATE Fords and especially Musturds (hehehe). BUT...I have to say Ford has its watermelon together over GM with the GT40 and the new Mustang. Wife and I saw a '05 GT today that was a light metallic green and it looked awesome for a Mustang. My hat's off to Ford for doing it right. Grrrrrrrr......

I tend to agree with you. I liked the 90'smustang and that was the only ford I liked. I tend to hate fords myself as well. The body switch to the round one of the late 90s was hidious at best but these (the 2002) I do like. We looked at an 05 that wasnt a GT and to me up close they don't look so good. not without the grill lights. Either way it was a good deal and its a nice car for my wife (IT's WHAT SHE WANTS SO IT ELIMINATES POTENTAL BEACHING.....OR AT LEAST PUTS THE ARGUMENT IN MY FAVOR)

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #27 on:** January 15, 2005, 02:44:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
The only thing I don't like about that body style of Mustang is the silly looking bulge in the middle of the hood. Those sorts of bulges look good on some cars, but not that one. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

J_A_B

WE AGREE!

I'm sure it would please you to know that is a plastic nonfuncional air intake closed off by fake plastic solid grill-like moldings. The same is done for the side intakes.

wombatt · « **Reply #28 on:** January 15, 2005, 03:15:45 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by VWE
Well dang! Just missed this thread... I just listed this peach yesterday. 1 owner, garadge kept, the interior looks brand new! You don't see leather in this good of shape on a 10 year old car.

Hey I might just come and buy a car off ya.
But fair warning I was in the business for a number of years at
reliable Chevy and bailargeon ford which is now North central ford

eagl · « **Reply #29 on:** January 15, 2005, 03:56:56 AM »

Every time I wash my '98 trans-am I complain and gripe about all the damn scoops all over the front of the car, but... every single one of them leads to either something hot that needs cooling (brakes) or something sucking air (air filter). The bumper air scoops that feed the front brakes are nice on track days, and the functional (from the factory) cold air intake is proven to add a couple of HP on the track plus it's just cool that GM made the scoops functional without looking stupid.