Muscle cars Suck

[milefile]

Exactly. He finds fault with our using American racing cars as examples, but uses a race track to spout his opinion. When he's not flat out wrong, he's contradicting himself.

Tell you what James, we'll start at my house and go to the Grand Canyon. You drive a Ka, I'll drive a Mustang. Who will get there first?

And a muscle car would beat a Ka on your precious German course. Turbo is pretty worthless if all your doing is cornering. The NA muscle would prevail. Even in the straights it would prevail against a Clio or whatever other Euroboxes you think are so superior.

It is rare, to find one so wrong, and so persistent in their errors as you.

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by James1985
i was being sarcastic you d i c k heads

Way to back-peddal. Now go away.

 

[Famine]

milefile - What do a Ford Ka and a turbo have to do with each other? A Ford Ka is an 11' long hatchback with a 1.3i 4cylinder engine - 60hp and 55lbft...

I'm pretty sure a Clio V6 will absolutely slaughter most muscle cars around most circuits - in fact the Clio V6 will absolutely slaughter most things up to and including a Ferrari 360 round most tracks (and I've seen one thrash a Lamborghini Murcielago, both driven by the same driver). 3.0i V6, 255hp, MR on a microscopic wheelbase...

But that doesn't mean muscle cars suck... In fact if I lost to a Clio V6 in ANY car I'd be reasonably pleased.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by milefile
Way to back-peddal. Now go away.

Tee You Pee.

Or, 👍

 

[James1985]

if you set up the turbo well enougth turbo lag at lower revs could of been slightly less i would prefer to do it in a British Noble

 

[milefile]

I do not believe a Clio would beat a Lambo or a Ferarri. I'd need to see some proof of that. If it could, then Lambo and Ferarri have the best scam in the world, getting people to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars when they could just get a Clio.

 

[James1985]

people are buying the name like designer lables but with cars the only reason i brought up the race track beacuse some one brought up american race cars.

 

[Famine]

Ah, the Track Car Of The Year in any European car magazine. Again I add the point that I added for the Clio V6.

Losing out on a track to this car does not mean a car sucks. This car is superb round a track and will blow away almost anything else that doesn't have serious power and no weight.

So far you've named two cars which I agree are better (on a track) than any muscle car. But your point that "muscle cars suck" is not validated by these two cars - these two cars are truly exceptional.

 

[James1985]

I no ther are many other things that make a car good apart from peformace but as this is on Gt Planet were cars are on tracks i was talking about them as if they were on race track or being driven very fast

 

[milefile]

Can you make a post wiothout a picture or a link?

 

[Famine]

Originally posted by milefile
I do not believe a Clio would beat a Lambo or a Ferarri. I'd need to see some proof of that. If it could, then Lambo and Ferarri have the best scam in the world, getting people to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars when they could just get a Clio.

It's not just "a" Clio. In fact it's only barely a Clio of any description - it shares just three panels with the regular Clio.

The Clio V6 is not without it's problems. It's turning circle is just bloody stupid - you need at least 4 lanes to be able to do a 180 degree turn in one move. There is no luggage space - you can fit a holdall under the bonnet (hood? Whatever), and whatever you can get in the passenger seat (singular). The car was designed as a track car, and such will absolutely ass-rape a big, heavy Ferrari/Lamborghini which was designed as a true Grand Tourer.

The Renaultsport Clio V6 255 costs £28,000 brand new in the UK. It's actually a quicker point-to-pointer than a Subaru Impreza (£30,000) and a Lancer Evo8 FQ300 (£35,000) - but those cars have four seats and can fit a family in.

If you go with the wife and kids to a trackday in a Scooby, you can drive there. In a Clio V6, you've got to tow it there...

(edit: and the picture James just posted is the Clio V6 Cup race car, which is lighter, has only one seat and... is LESS powerful )

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by James1985
people are buying the name like designer lables but with cars the only reason i brought up the race track beacuse some one brought up american race cars.

So you're saying Lambo and Ferarri are all image? You get better performance from a Clio?

 

[Famine]

Oh and I forgot, the Clio runs out of steam at 155mph (I believe the Vmax is 163mph). Ferrari 360 Modena makes it to "186mph+" and the Murcielago 205mph. That kind of speed is another one of the things people pay for...

 

[milefile]

But according to James speed doesn't matter. So a Clio can corner better than a Ferarri?

 

[Famine]

Depends which Ferrari you're talking about, I guess.

Edit: And which Clio...

 

[F1man]

The '69 (I think) Camaro that is being put into GT4 does not suck....

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by James1985
if you set up the turbo well enougth turbo lag at lower revs could of been slightly less i would prefer to do it in a British Noble

OK, I can counter the Noble, too. Why are you still trying to prove your idiotic point when it is so easy to debunk?

Who ever said I don't know about Nurbergring? Who ever said Americans were scared of it? You're making yourself look even more of a fool with every post.

By the way, what is your native country?

 

[wana b drifter]

i haven't read this whole tread but heres goes....ok muscle car are very cool. there all fast and most handled pretty good for there time. the cars that really sux are those mg's and old little pos's that that. there VERY slow and don't handle good at all. they need a lot of work to be good at anything because stock there good at nothing.

 

[Duke]

Actually that's not true either. The MGB handles decently, and the MGB-GT hatchback is quite a hot little car. 80 hp doesn't have to suck in a tidy little package like that. The Triumph Spitfire is a true pleasure to drive and the TR-6 is not as nimble but it has some grunt from the 6 cyl engine.

Don't be as one-dimensional as James1985 apparently is.

 

[wana b drifter]

thats just what i think, cuz my dad a pretty nice mg he was work n on for a friend and handled very bad and was very slow too. but i do like the Jensen Interceptors. they look very cool and Jensen Healey's look to be pretty cool to.

 

[Famine]

Mmmm, Triumph Spitfire...

My dad nearly destroyed one on a rally in Chatsworth - his navigator forgot to mention a 7-tonne ornamental stone fountain as he barrelled towards it at 100mph an 1am...

Then he did destroy one when a van pulled out of a side-turn 8 feet in front of him (at 50mph) - he's got plastic ossicles (bones in the middle ear) as a result of that crash.

Anyway, yes... Car enthusiasts, as I said earlier, should appreciate each and every car on it's merits, and occasionally recognise their spontaneous hate. I hate the Audi TT more than words can capture - although I appreciate every good bit of it, I just hate the car. But to denounce an entire section of cars - especially so when you're unaware of most of the cars in that section - is nothing short of racism. Anti-american cars is racism, anti-Japanese cars is racism - irrational hatred based on nothing more than the country of origin...

 

[milefile]

I wonder how many muscle cars James can even name.

He'll just post a link.

 

[Famine]

One of my favourite cars ever (other than the '69 Camaro Z28 which is gorgeous) is the Plymouth Superbird... Absolute cracker - although something tells me I wouldn't want to be seen driving one

Muscle cars - especially the older ones - stir something primeval in the human spirit IMO. And I'm a Brit!

 

[milefile]

1970 Mach 1 with a 351 Windsor. Or maybe a 1970 340 Dart GT.

I seriously hoe to pick up an '05 Mustang, at least a GT, hopefully an SVT. If not then, then someday.

 

[Famine]

(snip)

 

[Driftster]

Superbird. Ugliest car ever produced in america.

 

[Duke]

Oh, you silly silly boy.

 

[Injected8706]

I was reading through and saw some stuff about Muscle Cars being gas hogs. There are, compared to the cars of today. Todays cars, compared to those from 30 years ago, can produce TWICE as much power, with HALF as much gas, due to the advancement of technology. The same goes with the handling... muscle cars SHOULDN'T be able to handle as well as todays cars because of all the advancements in suspension.

Question for James- How do you know that muscle cars don't turn... have you driven one???

 

[Driftster]

oh yeah, a masterpiece right there.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by Injected8706

Question for James- How do you know that muscle cars don't turn... have you driven one???

How do you know Mars exists? Have you ever driven it? Or similar analogy?

I'm sure he's seen at least some video somewhere.