Just dont know

[chris26969]

Just dont know any more , i mean no stock decently priced cars do the 1/4 mile in a decent time , i mean hell alot of em do the 1/4 mile in the same time as my current car. so why get a new one? Im lookin to spend 10k but i want a N/A engine.

[KrNxRaCer00]

u can get a late 80's 5.0 Stang an with 10k, u'll be FAST. but stock...u'll be QUICK :hehehe:

[emerge]

ROFL! i cant wait to see his response on this one...

[BullShifter]

speed aint cheap

[91civicDXdude]

correction: honda speed isnt cheap.

you can build a 500hp 350 chevy v8 for about $1500 or less.

you can build a 500hp honda for 15,000 or less

[mattyoung33]

dont get a friggen mustang

[eckoman_pdx]

Which car is the 350 chevy v8 from? It's one of the older Chevy muscal cars? right? And your right, Honda Speed isnt cheep. It'd help if our USA Honda's came with the same engine they sent em out the factory door with in the JDM, right there you'd save about 3 grand in a swap.Of course, used honda are cheeper there too, I saw a pic of a used Integra type-r with "low kilometers" for like $8000. I was like Damn, why can't they be that cheep here, lol. and they also got the better front end too, lol. It figures, they get the better engine in the civics and the better front end for interga's. Also, does anyone else here with they'd kept the name Integra here,like they did in Japan, instead or re-naming it the RSX? I mean, what the hell does RSX stand for? I've always wondered why they went with a name that was just a bunch of letters. Of course, I've also wondered why we are the only continet to nessesitate a need for a luxury divison called Acura. I always thought Honda Integra sounded better.

[kidrocket]

there have been like 50 chevy cars and trucks with 350s nowadays its the camaro and corvette <well, actually just the vette now> but back in the day, chevelles, novas, el caminos, impalas, camaros, corvettes, malibus all had a 350 option im pretty sure

[edman24]

almost every chevy truck, suv, or car has had a 350 in it if built within the last 50 years. it is a very old platform, although decent when you tune it right. the 5.0 mustang is not a 350 engine. and it is not fast by any means stock. it only put down 210hp from the factory which wont get you much better times then any Si would. but of course making it faster would be a lot cheaper because it is so cheaply tuned from the factory. i mean a simple header setup on those things gives about 20hp just because the stock piece was so bad. cheap ford product as usual.

stay with the civic and work on it. you might spend a little more money to get those 11 second quarter mile times but youll look a lot better when you do it!

[BullShifter]

stay with the civic and work on it. you might spend a little more money to get those 11 second quarter mile times but youll look a lot better when you do it!

Civic dont look a lot better that many other cars, just my opinion. Civic=cheap for me. You cant beat getting a rust free & completely stock 1991 Civic Si for $200, even ran perfect. My $200 car has $6k worth of work

[chris26969]

thats cool , but im more into a car that is newer and a sportier car.

[edman24]

ok well civics sure look a hell of a lot better then any mustang ive seen. thats what i was comparing it too. and if you want to talk cheap mustangs are the worst of all. the interior is such crap it looks like daewoo built it, the engine is undertuned, it cant handle worth shit, and is a lot less reliable then any civic on the road. if you think civic=cheap then you got the wrong idea. just because one car is more expensive then the other, doesnt make it better.

[chris26969]

riiight , i never said the civic was cheap . Im saying i want a new car .. yet your views on the mustang ...well lets say alot of people beg to differ about that car. I dont know why you trash it so much .

[edman24]

of course a lot of people differ in my opinion towards the mustang. did i say everyone thought the same way as i do? but i do have proof of everything i said about that car. the 6 cylinder mustang is a joke so lets not even go there. then you have the GT. its a frickin 4.6liter v8 and it puts out what like 260hp? what is that about? our 1.8's put out 200 and thats a 4 cylinder! that is just cheap american engineering and mentality. they seem to think that making the engine bigger is the only way to get hp. idiots. and as far as the handling, my civic stock could outhandle any mustang (you must keep in mind im not talking about the high end mustangs like the cobra r's, saleens, or roush). its so sad how badly balanced and how poorly the suspension is tuned. also the interior, omg its such crap. ive found better materials at an LA swap meet in downtown. of course there are the higher end mustangs as i mentioned before but those cost upwards of 40k and for that much money you could get the much better corvette. but thats another story.

[BullShifter]

Dude, $200 is cheap!

If a POS 5.0L early '90s stang had the same amount of suspension work, I'd still smoke it on a tight autocross course. A whole different story on a road course. I think there should be a law, all cars should be RWD, AWD, or 4WD. FWD has some positives but . . .UNDERSTEER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!th an a mofo. All cars should have atleast 750HP. What yall think? That would not be practical but a whole shit load of fun, ecspecially in the snow:o