Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The 74-78 Mustangs I call the "weenie" stangs, since they were small and yes they looked like a reskinned Pintos.
And if you think the 302 from 74-82 was a joke, how do/did you feel about the 255 V8 that came in the early 80's Mustangs? For a joke of an engine I think they take the cake....they made like what...120 hp stock? Yet the 86 Mustang SVO turbo 2.3 was making 155 hp?
Worst: 1979 Saab. Love/hate relationship. Loved driving that car. Best highway car I've ever owned. Hated having something go wrong every week and trying to find someone that could actually work on it.
Best: Toss up, all Nissans. 1990 Stanza (not Sentra. I do that a lot!) my wife bought so she'd have a car that fit her, not us. 1995 Maxima. I'm still driving it, for now. Looking to replace it, but if I keep getting jerked around by dealers I'm going to keep it. 2003 Maxima. Wife's car. A tank! The single most solid feeling car I've ever driven. All three: Never need fixing until after you expect it if you know what I mean. Things I had to have done in a year take three or four on these. Some things I always expected to go out, don't. Amazing vehicles. Notice we kept her Stanza for 13 years, and mine is 12. The only reason the Sentra went away was safety. She was on the road a lot and the 90 didn't have all the airbags, ABS, etc.
Our local dealer is turning out to be not so good this time around. I might end up at Toyota for a Camry Hybrid. I like the idea of the mileage since I expect $6.99 gasoline within the next few years.
I got a chance to test drive a Omni GLH (2.2 turbo) in the mid eighties. It was a suprising quick little car that handled fairly well. The build quality was terrible. Nothing seemed to line up or fit properly, but it was a blast to test drive. I guess it was kind of the pre cursor to the Dodge Neon SRT4.
There were two versions of the GLH, the "regular" GLH and the GLH-S, and it's the latter that is sort of the precursor to the SRT-4. I'm not making this up: GLH stood for "Goes Like Hell"; GLH-S stood for Goes Like Hell Su'more." The primary difference was the GLH-S had an intercooler that raised engine output from 145 to 175 horsepower. That may not sound like much, but keep in mind that a) that's what a Mustang 5.0 was putting out in those days, and b) the GLH only weighed about 2,500 pounds. Shelby also tweaked the suspension, including Koni adjustables all around. That little monster could still embarrass some of today's sport compacts, and back then there was nothing this side of a Corvette that could touch it except for the Mustang 5.0, and the GLH-S could slaughter the 5.0 on a twisty track. There were a couple of other cars that got the Shelby treatment and the same motor, namely the Shadow CSX and the Daytona Shelby.
By the time Dodge was done tinkering with that 2.2 turbo engine, they had it spitting out 225 horsepower in 1991, where it appeared in the Spirit R/T and then a year later in the Daytona IROC R/T. Man that was a little beast of a motor. Torque steer was hellacious though -- it'd just about rip the steering wheel right out of your hand.
And if you think the 302 from 74-82 was a joke, how do/did you feel about the 255 V8 that came in the early 80's Mustangs? For a joke of an engine I think they take the cake....they made like what...120 hp stock? Yet the 86 Mustang SVO turbo 2.3 was making 155 hp?
175 actually, and then bumped up to 205 in '87. But by 1986 the V8 was also making 175HP, and got a bump up to 225 in '87, so the V8 was always top dog.
175 actually, and then bumped up to 205 in '87. But by 1986 the V8 was also making 175HP, and got a bump up to 225 in '87, so the V8 was always top dog.
I've never heard of the 255 C.I. V8 they put in Mustangs, and from what I understood, in the year of its introduction, the 1982 GT 5.0 was rated at 165 HP. It was increased to 185-200 from 1983 through 1985, then they introduced fuel injection for the 302/5.0 in the 1986 GT and that boosted the horsepower to 215, and it increased to 225 in 1987 and on. I'm not sure what the 4th generation Mustang's horsepower rating was (1993 until 2004) but I know it was up there, and with the smaller 4.7 Litre V8.
I've never heard of the 255 C.I. V8 they put in Mustangs, and from what I understood, in the year of its introduction, the 1982 GT 5.0 was rated at 165 HP. It was increased to 185-200 from 1983 through 1985, then they introduced fuel injection for the 302/5.0 in the 1986 GT and that boosted the horsepower to 215, and it increased to 225 in 1987 and on. I'm not sure what the 4th generation Mustang's horsepower rating was (1993 until 2004) but I know it was up there, and with the smaller 4.7 Litre V8.
The 4th generation was rated at 215HP from 1994 through 1998 (both the 5.0 and the 4.6), then got upped to 260HP in 1999. At any rate, I stand corrected on the HP rating of the 5.0 through the 80s. The Mustang did briefly offer a 4.2L V8 early on but I believe it was discontinued by the 1982 model year. And the SVO's 205HP rating arrived in 1985, not 1987 as I had previously stated; nonetheless the GT still had the same or higher horsepower rating than the SVO throughout the SVO's brief lifespan.
My worst car was a red 1999 Mercury Cougar. I hated that car! It gave me nuthin but problems! I bought that car brand new and once it reached 10K, every thing started to fall apart. I think that car was defective or something. The engine would get extremely hot for no reason at all and there was all kinds of electrical problems. The sunroof in that car would leak everytime it rained. The car had all kinds of transmission problems too. It was a literal piece of crap! I will never buy a Mercury again!
My best car was a silver 1996 Honda Accord that I loved to death. I kept that car for three years and traded it in for the Mercury Cougar. I traded in the Accord because it had nearly 150K miles on it after only three years. I bought that car new and even after all those miles it still drove like it was fresh off the lot. I hardly maintained that car. I got the oil changed rarely, about every 11,000 miles or so and it still drove great. I should have kept that car. It was freakin' sweet!
Those newer Mercury Cougar's were known for their poor reliability and they didn't last very long, I don't get why Mercury wanted to name it the Cougar, the car was nothing like the Cougar's of the past.
I'm sorry to hear that your experiences with the Mercury didn't turn out to be so great after all.
It got 12 mpg in the city, it got 12 mpg on the highway and moved with the speed and agility of a glacier. It DID have a good strong air conditioner, though. But running it cost 1-2 mpg.
Last GM vehicle I'll ever own.
Best: 1986 Toyota 4WD pickup.
I put 200,000 tough miles on that truck and it still ran like a Swiss watch when I sold it. Super reliable, very economical 4 cyl/5 spd. I never should have sold it.
I currently drive a 2003 Nissan Altima. It's a very comfortable, economical car. But I miss that 'Yota.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It gave me nuthin but problems! I bought that car brand new and once it reached 10K, every thing started to fall apart. I think that car was defective or something. The engine would get extremely hot for no reason at all and there was all kinds of electrical problems. The sunroof in that car would leak everytime it rained. The car had all kinds of transmission problems too. It was a literal piece of crap! I will never buy a Mercury again!
I bought that car new and even after all those miles it still drove like it was fresh off the lot. I hardly maintained that car. I got the oil changed rarely, about every 11,000 miles or so and it still drove great. I should have kept that car. It was freakin' sweet!
