i think the sti was not bulit for street racing or drag(evn though its good) it was bulit for speed while having excellent handling and can handle all situations such as snow, rai, and dirt. i dont see neons doing that

 

Exactly. The STi is a complete package, while the uh......Neon is a one-trick pony. You may be able to travel quick in a straight line with the Neon but you will quickly learn the limits of its platform upon hitting a corner with a little bit of "authority."

 

Please, admins, dumpster this thread. This has to be the most pointless debate ever.

 

He does make a good point.

Out of curiosity, Meilers, you don't own a Neon by any chance, do you?

 

I have video of an evo with two retards driving that obviously are not driving the $40k version pulling on a new ferrari ......
car videos are like the bible. if you look hard enough you will be able to find something to support your argument.
best way to find out is get two drivers and an srt4 and an sti with simmular mods and run them a couple times, then switch cars and run them a couple more.
or just go on an srt forum and talk **** to every one nonstop and get nothing accomplished... this seems to be the favored method of the srt peeps.

 

sure, they both suck and for some reason the owners arnt open minded enough to admit it.

 

You're absolutely right! The Mustang sucks so badly that it's been around for 41 years!

I guess your Subaru is the best car on the planet, isn't it......

 

I'd have to work pretty hard to make a bigger idiot of myself than you just did.

 

that comment almost made the cut... :banana:

 

not even close every one knows its the 1971 hemi cuda.
and yes, the mustang sucks so bad that ford has beaten that dead horse for 20 years (the first 20 were ok) because they are too affrade to make another sports car that will be rejected by the public because mustang owners buy mustangs, not ford sports cars that "want to be mustangs". You have to admit this, if ford made a sports car with the same handeling, same horse power, looked as good and the same weight but called it something diffrent for less money people wouldent buy it.
Its all personal oppinion and my oppinion is the mustang has not impressed me sence the 71 mach 1. After thats its all become the leasts ford can do to keep from loosing there fan base ( of people that cant see how infirror the car is).
so as you can see there is alot more to this statement than just the standard black and white "_____ vs sti" mr. sassy pants.

 

That's ok, because I'll be "Mr. Sassy Pants." Ready for another "sassy" comment? Since WHEN has Subaru EVER sold a car that has outsold the Mustang? Oh, wait.....NEVER.

Oh, and regarding your comments about "If it were called someone else for less money people wouldn't buy it," take a look at the GTO. The GTO is arguably the hottest name in the history of American Muscle and GM can't give those things away!

Ford is afraid to build another sports car? The Mustang ISN'T a sports car! Ford's "SPORTS CAR" is the Ford GT! And all things aside, WHY should Ford put in the R&D for another affordable RWD car when they have the Mustang? Don't you think that would be a conflict of interest? Look at the Camaro and the Firebird. They're the same car but with different bodies and badges on them. If there was only one of them, GM would've made their sales numbers that they were hoping for!

 

Meilers, considering you're too stupid to even realize when someone is joking (Notice the smiley face? It kinda looks a little bit like "") with you, I'd say that truly does qualify you as an idiot.

 

Considering the utter and total lack of sense of humor that pervades this thread (you among many) I'd say I made an honest mistake. Please, continue to shower us all with your sage wisdom as you flagellate the dead equine once again.

 

my god, are you honestly that dence?
I think you ment this comment to the voices in your head. I never once said any thing about subaru making things comprable to the mustang, to the best of my knowlage they never made a v8 front rear car.... heck, i dont think they ever made a front rear car??. I know mustang had a turbo 4cylinder front rear ... svo i think they called it.... so if subaru made a front rear turbo 4 cylinder car then i guess the voice in your head has something to base an argument off of. but as far as we go im not going to dissagree about a comment your accusing me of making.
compairing sails numbers between any model subaru and mustangs is just plane stupid they appeal to diffrent markets...
oh and did you check sails numbers over seas? where did you get your information on this? and are you counting individual years or combined sails because to the best of my recolection I have never seen a 64 impreza ( wrx, sti, or rs trim levles)
repackaged 4th gen f-body with independent rear suspension that all the f-body people looked at and said 'i dont want a gran prix'; which is what it looks like. there is big hostility between the f-body and gtp crowds.

sports car, in the europeian sence of the word, light nimble 2 door... mustang fits that bill. the gt is there attempt at a super car.
yep, it would be. I am just pointing out if they called it something else no one would buy it because its sub-par by todays market standards
you are such a tool I cant stand it.... so what you are saying is sence gm had two cars using the same platform that appealed to two diffrent sences of asthetic style they sold less cars than they would have if they only had one that appealed to one groups?
so dodge isnt going to make there sails numbers because they have the 300 and the magnum?

go out, get your self a brain and come on back.

 

Ok, I'm not going to stoop to your low level of calling names, but what I AM going to do is make you look like everything you insinuated that I am. In other words, I'm going to make you look stupid.

On to your comments about my being "dence," but first, do yourself a favor and take some phonix courses so you can learn how to spell words that you should've learned how to spell in the 1st grade, ok?

Nobody gives a damn about your opinions regarding the Mustang, because the Mustang on its own probably sells more cars per year than Subaru's ENTIRE line. If it sucked so bad then it wouldn't sell like hot cakes would it? No, I don't think so.

Comparing "sails?" Ford and Subaru sell sailboats now, or did you mean SALES? Again, the phonix.

Who's talking about Subaru selling a 1964 Impreza, other than yourself? Before you spout off your ignorance anymore, I suggest you re-read my post. People leave this thread less intelligent than when they got here just for having read your post.

Ok, the 4th generation F-Body NEVER had an IRS setup, and the reason that it didn't was due to the high cost of the development of an IRS setup. Considering how wrong you are, would you like to try again?

Ok, you're really starting to show your ignorance with your above comment, so I'm going to ask you to do EVERYONE here that has read your thread a favor and answer a simple question: SINCE WHEN DOES A 3550 LB CAR CONSTITUTE TO BEING A LIGHT AND NIMBLE 2 DOOR SPORTS CAR? I'm sure we'd ALL like to know!

Again, with your ignorance. I don't believe you've owned a 2005 or 2006 Mustang, have you? Who are you to judge what is "sub-par" and what isn't? The Mustang received a new platform for the 2005 year, which was based off of the Lincoln LS platform. YOU mention for the past 20 years it's been a "dead horse." Wake up. Remember the Mustang II? Yeah, that's right. The little ugly one with a 4 cylinder. EVEN THAT THING SOLD!

That's right, you hit the nail on the head. GM had two cars on the SAME PLATFORM. BOTH, the Camaro AND the Firebird were 2+2 configuration with USELESS rear seats and borderline USELESS trunks. The Chrysler 300C is a FAMILY SEDAN, while the Magnum is a STATION WAGON. That's right, the Magnum is made to HAUL. It's a lot easier to do that with a Magnum than a 300C now, isn't it!

Ok, and now, the moment of truth, since I'm such a "tool." Ready? We'll start from the beginning, "genius."

1. "dence" = DENSE

2. "comprable"= COMPARABLE

3. "knowlage"= KNOWLEDGE

4. "dissagree"= DISAGREE

5. "compairing sails"= COMPARING SALES (two in a row!)

6. "over seas"= OVERSEAS

7. "recolection"= RECOLLECTION

8. "levles"= LEVELS

9. "europeian sence"= EUROPEAN SENSE (two in a row....again!)

10. "diffrent"= DIFFERENT

11. "sences"= SENSES

12. "your self"= YOURSELF

And the money shot.........

Now THAT right there is priceless! For everything else, there's Master Card. :rotfl:

HUKT ON FONICKS WERKT FER ME! :rotfl: Now, what were you saying about "tools?"