Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessobear
The problem with the Evo and Mustang is that they put the entire budget into the engine and drivetrain. Then they had to come up with the rest of the car for pennies. The Evo in particular never lets you forget that you're driving a car that's based on pretty much the worst car Mitsubishi makes. Similarly with the Mustang, I feel like there's a lot of obvious cost cutting to be able to give you what you get performance wise for what you pay.
To some people, that's fine. But to me, driving a cheap car, regardless of how it performs, just detracts from the overall experience. I think realistically I'm just way to old for either one of those cars.
|
/\ Gotcha. Can't argue too much with that mentality, to a certain extent I feel the same way (esp regarding the Evo, although the X has improved the interior compared to previous generations).
Quote:
Originally Posted by m4a1mustang
If you were talking about older Mustangs I would agree with you, but nothing about these new ones is cheap. Its every bit as good, if not better in some areas, as my Z was.
Unfortunately your view is a widely held stigma, which, while no longer true with this generation, is going to take some time for the Mustang to break.
Trust me, if Ford was still putting out Mustangs like the 2003 I had I never would have even bothered looking at the car.
|
/\ Agreed. The newest generation mustang is leaps and bounds ahead of the previous ones in fit and finish, they really turned out a nice car this time. I still think the interior is kinda bland. It just doesn't really feel sporty to me compared to the 370z, but materials wise, it's very good and worlds away from the 2003 era stangs and still better than the last gen too.
You know what turns me off the most about the stang? That dammed radio antenna. Why in 2010 are any cars still coming with one?? It really cheapens the look of the car imo. (ok, rant over now
)