Home | Wiki | Live Chat | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

Articles I find [Peronal blog reviewed a mustang similar to mine]


#61

Ah. My bad @vmo. Didn’t see it was a reply to an earlier post.

I’m American. Half the cars I see on the streets are probably heavier than 1800 kg, and if I remember the 3000GT correctly, some of them had twin turbos and AWD, so, they’re still scary.


#62

If a car is less than about 3500 lbs, I’d consider it light (depending on what type of car it is, of course.)

For reference, my 1986 Mustang is about 3000 lbs, and my brother’s 1987 Camaro is about 3200 lbs (or about 1450 kg) And a 1967 Mustang GT is about 3400 lbs. My daily, the 2004 Alero is around 3000 lbs.


#63

I have two friends with a 3000GT. Both Vr4 twinturbo. One from 1994, and other from 1997. Great cars.


#64

Well, there’s the difference between America and Europe in one sentence :poop:

To me, anything above 1500kg (3300 lbs) is really heavy (depending on type of car). Horsepower is taxed, being light isn’t.


#65

How many cars on sale today, Europe, America, Asia, is under 1500kg.
I’m not talking about the smallest ones. Golf class and above.


#66

The ‘smallest ones’ (Mazda 2, Hyundai i10, etc) are 1000 - 1100kg. The Sandero I’m driving is 1140kg.

Small sedans, like Mazda 3 class, are usually between 1300 and 1500kg. Even the Renault Kangoo, the box (literally) my dad is driving, is 14xx kg.

And for sports cars, Miata, GT86, …

So there’s plenty of choice :stuck_out_tongue:


#67

Rob: dunno if you count Aust in that mix but the bulk of our car segment which is thankfully still larger than the SUV segment would be the compact Hatch class. About a third of car sales would be that class, including Golf, Civic, Mazda3, i30, Elantra, Fiesta, Corolla etc. All those cars would range from 1250-1350kg.


#68

Implying muscle cars will ever be like they used to.

Muscle cars are dead and have been since the 70’s, attempts to bringing them back in the 80’s and 90’s never worked properly.


#69

I think part of that would be because we look for nostalgia in those things, but it’s actually very much better and feasible to make… Better cars.

Unless you happen to like cars that objectively perform inferior on every metric :wink:


#70

Well, pretty much every Golf out there, including his class, everything from Japan that’s the size of a 3 series, etc etc etc, many many many cars.

Let’s hope not. Everybody is only nostalgic for Powerful v8’s and sexy looks, not for the awful brakes, non existant handling, poor safety and dreadful economy


#71

What I obviously meant is the focus on practical / daily performance and the FR layout with V8’s.
New brakes are gonna come with it naturally and so are the rest.

V6 and AWD doesn’t work, and modern ones trying too hard to be sports cars.


#72

But is there any new muscle car currently, or only pony cars called muscle cars because of the lack of the latter? I’d say that makes your complaint a bit irrelevant, as ponies had 6, and maybe even 4 cylinders in their golden era (I don’t exactly remember about I4s). I might be wrong, as I’m not very much into American cars, but I’d say that muscle cars died out - GTO, Road Runner and 442 died with their brands, but where are Torino, Chevelle and muscle Charger? The only remnant of them is some stupidly styled Merc E-class (but I must admit, it can have some serious power).


#73

Inline 6 was ocasionally the base trim for Pony cars and available for muscle cars, but there was usually a base V8.


#74

My parents used to have a Saab 9000, the weight on that is between 1410-1475kg.


Today that is a normal weight for a Golf class car. If it has V6 and AWD they go over 1500kg.
Cars today have so much extra; airbags, electric this 'n that, they are heavier than they used to be.
If you modernised a '69 Mustang or Charger, they would probably mass 2000-2200kg.


#75

You might have got me wrong, I’m not saying a car is bad because it’s over 1500kg. It’s just so much weight you need to compensate for with extra power, which you’re paying a lot of extra taxes for.

That whole safety thing, if you ask me in today’s cars they could throw out most of it for weight reductions. I have no concerns going flatout (150-170kph) on the Autobahn all day long in the Sandero, which for today’s standards isn’t the safest thing. It’s not like we’re talking 1950s cars.


#76

I’d say it was a few years back. Makers noticed that their cars are getting riddiculously heavy so they started making them lighter somehow. Golf VII is lighter than Golf V for example. But what’s far more interesting for me - when you calculate power/weight ratio of Golf I vs Golf V (excluding R variants and taking the lack of an estate in the first gen) you’ll get nearly the same results :smiley:


#77

Being safer in a crash means nothing to lots of people if it gets totaled after one accident. I’ve had friends whose cars were written off in accidents smaller than a couple of the ones my car has been in. Not to mention the rise in upkeep costs and more complicated maintenance. It’s why I say the late 90s and early 2000s had the best cars. They still have airbags and multi point fuel injection (except the USDM Chevy Metro 3 cylinder), but are more durable and cheaper than new cars. Plus, parts have been around for so long that many are dirt cheap to repair.


#78

HUGE AUCTION of 700 classic cars!
To start on July 15, 2017
Located in Norwalk, Ohio, USA


#79

##Jumpin’ Chargers!
It’s a double-feature! Article, and Spectacular Video

(and yes, the Charger used in the jump was just a clapped-together purpose-built stunt car.)


#80

Fairly Accurate review of what is essentially the coupe version of my mustang.