Jump to content
LegacyGT.com

Esquire magazine picks its '10 Most Awesome Autos'


funkpelts

Recommended Posts

Yeah, but there were a lot of people who were pissed that the Subaru made the list and not the Mustang. I like the looks of the Mustang but it's still a Ford and not very comfortable or reliable (fast either, unless you get the GT and then prepared to get a$$ raped at the gas pump and insurance).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to let you know, it is cheaper to insure a Mustang GT than a WRX. I was debating between the Legacy GT and the Mustang Gt (i know totally different cars, I also had the rx-8 in the loop). My wrx got a insurance rating of 23, one of the highest, while the mustang got a 20 and my legacy gt gets a 15.

 

And .... the gas pump might not rape you TOO BAD, because the Ford Mustangs, even on the GT, only require 85 octane. Most people probably use 87, but still, only 85 is required.... Just some food for thought :) I am glad our car is up there and SUPRISED that the mustang is not.

 

Ford sells how many mustangs a year, 100-150k and yet it isn't on that list. Welp, what do you do :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it was painful to read the sheer ignorance in that thread, it also shows off how little SOA has done to make folks aware of the performance of the LGT. <sigh> Perhaps I should recruit my sister-in-law to write Fuji Heavy a letter in Japanese to the effect that SOA is dropping the ball with their promotion of the Legacy...or lack thereof.
Ich bin echt viel netter, wenn ich nuechtern bin. Echt!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked and test drove the 03/04 Mach 1 Mustang, but it was the most uncomfortable and poorly designed interiors I have very been in. I had to stretch all the way forward and was still barely able to reach the shifter, my forehead was nearly touching the sunvisor, my legs just made the pedals - craptastic. The engine sounded sweet and I liked the way it drove, but seating comfort and interior design was so poorly done, I immediately crossed it off my list after the test drive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is absolutely the only Mustang I would ever buy:

http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/wallpaper/05/MustangGTCoupConcept10-WP.jpg

 

I personally saw this thing at the 2002? or 2003? Detroit Auto show, and it was the sex (To the point where I was like, when I get out of school, I am buying this right away). Unfortunately, the production model looks nothing like it, and Ford shot themselves in the foot.

I drove one of the new ones...worst vehicle ever. My brother in law works for Ford, he drove it too, and hated it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting reading some of those comments....seems like quite a few "men" who replied on that site think that their manhood is proportional to the car they drive!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is absolutely the only Mustang I would ever buy -snip-

 

I personally saw this thing at the 2002? or 2003? Detroit Auto show, and it was the sex (To the point where I was like, when I get out of school, I am buying this right away). Unfortunately, the production model looks nothing like it, and Ford shot themselves in the foot.

I drove one of the new ones...worst vehicle ever. My brother in law works for Ford, he drove it too, and hated it.

 

 

I have to agree with you. Completely.

Things that make the concept so much better:

Shorter wheelbase, smaller appearance.

glass roof: do-able, CDC or Saleen.

hatchback: would LOVE to have again (I had an 88 Mustang hatch), horizontal shelby/67 cougar tail lights: -1 that Shelby GT500 does NOT have these, sacriledge.

exhaust through the rear valence: throwback to 65 GT, -1 for not having

body colored headlight fairings: doable.

Nicely integrated front bumper, front hood shutline: production looks cheaper. MUCH cheaper. Body kit will approximate front bumper and ram-air hood, RKSport, IIRC...

Black pony with Chrome outline. Nice modern touch.

slick side intakes: somewhat do-able, rear quarter window scoops don't look that cool, sticking above the surface.

IRS. BIG DEAL BREAKER that it is absent on production.

Interior was much nicer on concept, even as shown in pictures.

 

 

Now my dad has an 05 Mustang convertible, with a V6, and it isn't the worst car evar, it is much better than the SN95 mustang, in terms of quality and rigidity, but falls far short of what it could be.

 

I can't believe that people are lining up to buy high-dollar versions of this car, above 40k for the shelby and saleens... Fast, maybe... but it is still limited in the Mustang's execution.

 

I would much rather have a G45 coupe, if they made one. sleeker, sexier, lighter, and probably better aparent quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amen to that. I still don't understand why they didn't do IRS on the Mustang, and then make the live axle optional as a "drag pack" or aftermarket package.

 

I haven't really bought into the whole Eleanor craze. That was a gimmick car for a movie, mostly. Personally, I think the concept is overwrought. I mean... four pairs of forward facing lights??? Just because you can does NOT mean you should.

 

The odd bump in the hood, and the late-model looking sidepipes... nah. The original shelbys without the addenda look better.

 

A mustang that will handle... I have recently gotten a bug in my brain, and I can't seem to get it out.

I want an 83-86 T-top capri unibody. Just a shell. I want the T-roof AND the capri's flared fenders.

Then in goes subframe connectors, jacking rails, and a custom fit roll bar for chassis stiffness, Front SLA Griggs Racing GR-40 front suspension, and a Maximum motorsports or Kenny Brown re-enforced/tuned Cobra IRS, which can fit with slight suggestion into an earlier fox body. Coil-over Konis or Bilsteins, SN95 Cobra brakes, or BAER/Brembo aftermarket...

 

With a rigid chassis, four-wheel SLA independent suspension sorted, and the fenders massaged to allow good rolling stock (I like the 10th Anniversary cobra wheels, split seven spoke, 17x9...), then comes the drivetrain.

 

5.0 cammer DOHC 32-valve V8, Tremec 6MT, and a nicely balanced rear end gear, and a torque biasing LSD.

 

To round out the bodywork, 85-86 Mustang GT front bumper cover and hood, with 81 Pace Car cowl induction. XGL HID replacements for the sealed-beam headlights, and acrylic covers. Mustang rear hatch (no capri bubble hatch), and 87-93 GT wing. Saleen side skirts, 93 Cobra rear bumper cover and tail lights. Some sort of front air dam lip, but that might have to be custom made. Plus a two-tone interior from the 87-93, and maybe rear-seat delete.

 

THAT sounds like a mustang that can handle, and much lighter weight than either current mustangs, or classic ones. It's either that, or some other car altogether. Like maybe a Porsche 944/968.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
isn't srt 4 --- 4 wheel drive, hence the "4" in the name??? I know that previous model years were AWD!

 

Nope. If you read the article it's going to be FWD & maybe down the road it'll be AWD. And the 4 in the name partains to the cylinders, if I'm correct.

:munch:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use