Questionable modifications: pictures inside!

  • Thread starter Thread starter -Fred-
  • 38,925 comments
  • 3,292,613 views
Ah Greenwood.đź‘Ť


I figured it was either Callaway or Greenwood. I thought about them after I posted though.:lol:


Memory..Don't forget it :dunce:


--

EDIT: Which rapper mentions his Greenwood Corvette in a rap song?


I know the answer..I cannot lie!:sly:


sir-mix-alot-white-corvette.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Never heard of it, but apparently they make some fast cars. It's still ugly, though. :yuck:
 
Jesus H. Christ, Stephen..first that Range Rover ya ruined it, now this beaut?
bentley2.png

Seriously. Well, some may like it but still. I do not approve it.
_____

JESUS CHRIST
Op4gXeB0.jpg


Ugh, this is ugly. Yet somehow I like it >_<
002-30.jpg
 
Last edited:
mustang fanatic
What exactly do you mean by that?
Click to expand...
I mean they're lardass boats, inferior in every way to their immediate predecessors, unless you get the very specific trim levels that Ford put real effort into as opposed to just throwing truck engines onto a chassis designed for cars that weighed 700 pounds less. Their main positive is that they aren't as bad as the aircraft carriers that followed, and that they look nice.
 
Tornado
I mean they're lardass pieces of junk, inferior in every way to their immediate predecessors, unless you get the very specific trim levels that Ford put real effort into. Their main positive is that they aren't as bad as the aircraft carriers that followed.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but you are without a doubt the only person in the world who thinks that.
image.jpg

You're saying that this isn't beautiful?
 
mustang fanatic
I'm curious as to knowing what makes you think that isn't a good car.
Click to expand...
Style way over substance (meaning the same deep cave interior that is impossible to see out of that you deal with with the new Camaro, as an example). Built at the time where Ford's quality (along with the rest of the industry) was taking a nosedive when everyone figured out they could charge you extra for it. Fundamentally the same car as the one 5 years prior in terms of underlying design, except it weighed ~700 pounds more and most of that was dropped out front. If you got a Boss, you got a car where Ford went all out to make sure you had the entire package. Handling, power, acceleration, looks. If you got a Mach 1, you got a sticker/wheel package and had to pay extra for everything else.
 
Tornado
Style way over substance (meaning the same deep cave interior that is impossible to see out of that you deal with with the new Camaro, as an example). Built at the time where Ford's quality (along with the rest of the industry) was taking a nosedive when everyone figured out they could charge you extra for it. Fundamentally the same car as the one 5 years prior in terms of underlying design, except it weighed ~700 pounds more and most of that was dropped out front. If you got a Boss, you got a car where Ford went all out to make sure you had the entire package. Handling, power, acceleration, looks. If you got a Mach 1, you got a sticker/wheel package and had to pay extra for everything else.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that makes a Mustang a bad car in general, but whatever.

Let's get back to the topic of this thread, shall we? :D
 
The Mustang sucks as car yet is arguably one of the most popular sports car platforms in the world....
 
Last edited:
I meant to say "yet", I got auto corrected.


I originally started typing something else and that didn't get edited out.
 

Latest Posts

Back