The fact that you're comparing the handling of the f-body to the Mustang just goes to show how low the bar is for the car. When you compare the car to an Integra, Prelude or MR2, it feels like a bloated pig.

I always thought the WS6 handled really poorly, even compared to the cars of the 90s. If you get out of an Integra of a similar vintage, then step into an F-body, you'll realize that you're driving a car that was originally designed in the 60 and never meant to corner.

The problem is that "muscle car" is a worthless word to describe a car because nobody agrees on a definition. Some people will insist that it must be, old, a two-door, V8, and American while another will say that it can be a new, four-door, Japanese I4.

The only indication that the 2011+ had a SRA was the ride quality, especially when going over things like railroad tracks. There was none of the shimmy or floatiness during corners that was prevalent in F-bodies or older 'Stangs.

Anything will "handle well" — in other words, put down nice skidpad numbers — with good enough tires. An SUV like the X6 M, with its 275/315 staggered setup will put down great numbers, but I wouldn't say that it handles "well."

The batteries are almost entirely recyclable and they are much, much more efficient at converting energy into work than an ICE. They are also much more simple to produce. They are more environmentally sound in every possible way.

But how many thousands of dollars will it cost?

This should start to make up for the large amount of perfectly good used cars removed from the market by cash-for-clunkers and give more people better transportation options as the cars coming off of leases are better than the cars they have now (or the no cars they have now).

Well, that wasn't a Ford engine. Ford sued Navistar over the issue and subsequently brought the design and manufacture of their diesel engines in-house. They've had no issues since they began designing their own turbo diesels.

By that logic, a V8 will never be as reliable as a I4 because it has more parts.

Turbos are watercooled in almost every modern application. Also, if you look at the oil lines for turbos, they don't hold onto much oil after the engine shuts off, gravity will cause the oil to flow out of the turbo almost immediately.

Dude, turbos are dead reliable. Even the turbochargers in the most beat on cars will outlast the rest of the vehicle. There are tons of WRX guys with undersized turbos pushing them well outside of their designed limits, yet they hold up. When the seals do eventually go after 200k miles, they can be rebuilt cheaply.

A crossover is a vehicle that replicates the features of an SUV, but is built on a car platform. The GLA meets that very definition — it's a jacked up station wagon.

Mazda Proteges are fucking tanks. You can easily get a 2002-2003 — which is the last year before the 3 was introduced. They have all of the reliability and fun of a 90s Honda, but without the rust, theft, and high prices. You can even get a stickshift wagon too!

I think buying new is a great idea in two cases: when you drive the wheels off of a car and used car prices are strong.

Oh, I caught your sarcasm. I was apologizing to the people who are honestly too aloof to realize that SUVs don't make them look younger.

Out of the four turbo cars that I've owned (two were VAG products), zero of them needed any abnormal maintenance in the first 100k miles. Turbo motors are usually overbuilt as hell. Even VAG products.

> SUVs and crossovers are for people that go on "adventures" and fill their car up with "antiques."

He was all like, "woof."

I'm 140, so it's not girth that makes them uncomfortable, my elbows hit the bolsters when I shift. This is more of a height issue , a 6 ft person can move their seat back a few more inches so that this is not an issue.