My e36 M3 is cheaper than a therapist and more effective. That is all.
CobraJoe
cobrajoe
That 318 can make a LOT of power without major trouble or expense.
I have a serious jones for some plaid seats. The first manufacturer to offer a new crew cab pickup truck with two plaid bench seats, gets my money.
What about the torque ratios!?! Someone, please think of the torque ratios! How can they make this decision without a spreadsheet showing the torque ratios? I need to take a nap.
Maybe they’re looking for something more grounded to the ground?
I guess I don’t understand his platform that well, but I thought he took votes more from the Repubs than from Dems?
How true. When I owned a 1990 Mustang LX 5.0, and regularly got 27mpg on the freeway when traveling - traveling from SF to central Oregon, going up and over the Siskiyous, people were usually incredulous about my fuel economy. Twice I got 31mpg.
You don’t get attacked by Florida Man. You become him.
For low speed urban regimes, it’s all about weight. You’re using fuel to accelerate a mass, then throwing the energy away in braking. Smaller M means less KE.
Avanti for VP!
I’ve never spun my tires at the end of the longest straight in top gear, so....... never.
And a Commander obviously has military experience. Yes.
My life is now complete
1969 Mustang Boss 429. Because 429. Because Boss.
Third Party Candidate - the bell tanker - it embodies the can do attitude, it’s home grown and self made, and it doesn’t care about your stupid speed and safety laws. All things I can get behind.
It’s the Teddy Roosevelt of cars. Imagine a Grand Wagoneer showing up to the automotive congress. Thing’s would get done.
This question did a great job of sussing out the people who didn’t read the post.
If you actually read the question you would know this does not on ANY level. Not American and not made 35 years ago. It is a car though, so good for you.....
The Corvmarostang. It’s a perfect politician: tries to please everyone, fails on all fronts.