By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Besides owning 4 Subarus over the past 12 years, I also own a mint condition 1983 MUSTANG GT. I purchased it brand new, have stored it every winter, and perform my own maintenance and modifications.
While I enjoy my 03 Outback wagon and 99 Legacy GT sedan, there is no more joy than the look on the face of my 9 year old son, and his friends when we go to soccer on Saturday morning in the Mustang.
A Subaru cannot come close to a thumping 302 cid V8 with a holley 4bbl carb and dual flow master exhausts, tweaked-out motorcraft suspension, and will easily put down 100 feet of rubber.
That's what goes through my brain, dude!
I know the Soobs can't match you on laying strips, but WRXs have been known to eat Mustang GTs for lunch....
Craig
Craig
But maybe you're talking about a preference for the V8 sound. That's the only thing I can think of that may be "better", but all of this is subjective anyway...
Jim
edit: found this http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html which suggests an 8.0 second 0-60 for the automatic version. Dunno if that's what yours is. I purposely buy Subarus because they DON'T put down 100 feet of rubber, but you obviously have the right idea and have both kinds of cars so you can choose which car for whatever mood you're in.
I understand both sentiments, though, because the V6 Mustang always has been a dog but I like american V8s just fine... have owned several. '83 Mustang was pre-EECIV... so what 175 HP stock? the SVO was faster that year for sure.
~Colin
Jim
p.s. Just for the record, there's a guy with a convertible Cobra, 2002ish I would guess, manual transmission (believe me, you can tell) with an aftermarket exhaust, who drives down a 45 mph arterial road with me every work morning at 4:30 am (read: 45 mph limit at 4:30 am = 60+ mph). I have turned off my radio and rolled down my windows to listen to that thing. It is an absolutely beautiful sound. So, I appreciate a V8 also from time to time.
Jimmy - you are correct that the newer generation Subarus will beat my Mustang (along with a lot of other cars). However, when I bought it in 1983, it was fast for it's time.
Colin - lowered springs, factory traction bars touching the frame and a set of yoko avs equals no wheel hop. I put down 94 feet of posi tracks in front of my neighbor's house (at his request). His kids are still talking about it!
I was very into the "muscle cars" of the 80s, which included the Camaro, Firebird, Mustang GT and SVO, Shelby Charger, and my favorite -- Dodge Daytona Turbo Z. The Daytona only had 146HP at the time, but was still pretty fast -- I think it had 0-60 times in the low 7 second range. Hard to believe my Outback XT wagon is faster than most of those 80s muscle cars now!
Craig
Cheers Pat. ( Ducks and runs)
And yes, I expect better discernment from people in those positions.
Jim
IIRC my Shelby had 197 HP, 212 lb-ft of torque. 14 lbs of intercooled boost and enough torque steer to shame a Saab!!
Google is your friend.
Well, you asked...
Bob
You're absolutely right, Bob, and if I see that that idiot fan, who STARTED the melee and caused Artest to do what he did, when, unprovoked, Artest wouldn't have done such a thing (unless you're calling Artest, etc. thugs because you have concrete evidence that they are out starting fights on a regular basis), if I see that fan put in jail, then there is some degree of equity in the whole thing, but the fan should be held to a much tighter standard because he clearly started the whole thing. Do you mean to tell me that you think chaining a deer up to a tree and then shooting it and calling it hunting is accurate and fair? I am NOT a fan of professional sports for this exact reason. The suspension is just an attempt by the team owners to "show our fans that we care about them" when all they really want is their money. I think professional athletes are overpaid, but this is completely separate from that. This was unfair.
Jim
Bob <who is obviously not a fan of most NBA players>
Regardless, of what the fan said... these players are trained, taught and given awareness that there are trash talking, insults, curses and everything esle a fan can think of to get you out of your game (mentally). But it's just that... a game. As far as I'm concerned, I'm not the one making milliones to run up and down the court. But I pay to be entertained and because I'm a sports fan. There is no reason for a player to leave the court grounds and attack a fan in the seats. Would you have said any different if it was the player who insulted the fan and the fan run out of their seat unto the court and start a fight? The fan would be arrested and charged with assault & battery, get thrown out and even banned from the stadium/arena. Well, why can't the same punishment apply to the player? Because he makes millions? Puleeaassee......
Expect massive lawsuits coming from fans to the arena, security, team owner and the players who got involved in the scuffle.
You can leave the ghetto but the ghetto never leaves you!!!!
To overcome a problem, you must first admit you have a problem. They're in denial, still. Firing Mees set them back another 2-3 years from a full recovery.
NBA thing was ugly. I prefer college hoops anyway. They don't serve beer at the MD games any more, so this type of incident isn't common anymore.
-juice
Nicholas
Ditto that. I almost never watch the NBA.
Bob
A drunk fan goes overboard and it's a recipe for disaster.
They need better security.
-juice
Regardless, of how it started, it was out of control.
I think professional athletes should behave professionally, not as street thugs. While there is no excuse for the fan to have done what he did, there's even less of an excuse for Artest to flip out and attack.
They are professionals, and should be held to a higher standard, as all professionals are.
But hey, we pay for them, maybe this is what we want.
tom
-juice
It is sad when football is less violent isn't it.
Check out the engine.
Bob
must've narrowed the rear axle.
~Colin
Jim
http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=101280
http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=101281
Bob
A slap on the wrist and his 15 min. of fame
--of course, it would be crazy to ignore that the camry is also a far superior vehicle from a technology and reliability standpoint.
~Colin
Bob
http://www.pantip.com/cafe/ratchada/topic/V3113325/V3113325-2.jpg
http://www.pantip.com/cafe/ratchada/topic/V3113325/V3113325-1.jpg
Bob
~Colin
Bob
~c
Stylish Toyota seems like an oxymoron. Leave that up to Scion and stick to conservative sedans that sell like hot cakes.
Lexus, on the other hand, could use a boost. The new GS is a start.
That Isuzu looks strange, honestly. Almost like a home-built one-off.
-juice
Craig
Toyota- boring, but comfortable and reliable. For a lot of people, what more could you ask for? ;-)
tom
Jim 8~)
Conservative cars have more staying power, they tend to be more timeless and age more gracefully.
-juice
Just because it's conservative, does not mean it's good or "timeless;" not by a long shot.
Bob
That's what I meant.
If you saw a Camry it's a bit harder to date it accurately.
-juice
Cheers Pat.
The last two generations of Camrys have gone down hill.
-juice
Conservative cars have more staying power, they tend to be more timeless and age more gracefully
I read Juice's post and was thinking to myself, yeah just like the Forester, which has changed little since its intro 7 years ago.
Then I saw Pat's comment on Toyotas:
they will always look what they are, frumpy, bland and boring
and realized that many people probably think that way about the Forester ;-)
-Frank