That irs was heavy and breaky and didn’t really produce better objective handling. Mach 1 looks better too.

With the extra room under the hood you can route better intake and exhaust paths, and it doesn’t heat soak as much, so the crown vic actually dynos slightly higher than the GT.

Wasn’t the super cobra jet a 335hp 428, and the 375hp 429 a boss? And the mach 1 was also available with a non super cobra jet and a 351w, in 69, I think.

spot on about the tranny. I had a 94 with e cam and gt40 heads and stockers wouldnt hold up. I had one built by Gforce, which did. it was cheaper/lighter/easier than the tko and had a taller 1st and 5th, so the 4.10s worked better

Im brutal on my stuff, but Ive had the best luck with hondas, and the 90s civics etc are sooooo simple and inviting to work on.

As a collary to my “everything breaks” thing, I agree its much nicer to own cars that arent terrible to work on.

Looked into it, you are right. No torque converter. No clutch either though.

I dont think operating those counts as “knowing how to handle a stick”.  

Sounds like you scored a good deal on the weestrom. I had a SV1000. Ive noticed a curious phenomena where the 650s are worth at least as much as the thousands.

Id love to do a dual sport tour from baja up the dalton hiway (did you go all the way up?). I think Id rather trade hiway comfort for offroad chops (DR650) but…

I guess its a matter of taste? Im thinking (here in central Tx?) I wouldnt hardly detect the awd. The stick I would, I guess. But Im imagining a 125hp thing to be frustratingly underpowered. Maybe thats not fair, i had a 240 for awhile and it was pleasent enough.
But Id sure feel that V6. I had a 2012 for awhile, and…

I think cars from that turn of the century era will be coveted because they were modern enough to have decent power/build quality/interiors, and they are past janky port fi, drum brakes etc, but compared to things that followed they are light/analouge/simple.

With BMWs for me the E30 (and 2002) is with the volvo 240…

A DR650 is quicker through the 1/4 mile than a ninja 250, with the sameish ~100mph top speed. I agree neither are ideal for the hiway. But if one is good enough for a recommendation, so is the other. And around town the DR is kinda better with tourque, and curb jumping. Its about as economical as the ninja 250. With…

It takes some time for me to warm up to them too.

In Canada?

“If you say...”

Ya, my train of thought was to compare it to newer mercedes. You think an old Bentley is more apt? An e34 M5 or 750i? Lotus Carralton? I guess through that lense it seems more competitive.

Call me crazy, but Id want a 1995 XJ12

I had a 2012 2GR Camry. In 2016, with 108k miles the transmission failed. At the time it was made it was marketed as lifetime transfluid, but theyve changed that now I think. I realize you qualified your statement with Japanese “tend” to make 150k, but Im just saying everything breaks.

Idk what the market on these is, but at 30k you are walking past a whole heap of turbo V12 and normally aspirated 63s

I have a 2004 mustang with 72k miles advertised as low mileage. Am I an offender?

The Z was great but it started in 1990 at 28 and the turbo at 34. MR2 was like 15 to start with and 19 for the turbo. This progressed to about 25 by the end of the run. Look at the 1990 and 1994 Motor Trend Bang for the Buck (MR2 won the 1990)

I agree, the Z3 (and sw20, and boxster and other 2800lbs stuff) certainly feel a “size up”, in the same way a vette feels a size up over the z3.

Maybe not at launch but there are auto ones.

Its just not that light. You have google, Im not going to argue a point of fact, just putting this here so no innocents are led astray.