Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.













Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadVIDEO: Haven't you always wondered? ROUSH vs. SALEEN
(Page 1 of 1)
mk @ Feb 22nd 2008 5:10PM
UNDER 5 SECONDS???? Stock Mustang that isn't a GT500?
Not so much. Under 6 seconds perhaps, but neither of those cars are light enough for their power rating to be 4-second cars to 60 MPH.
Mustangs are not lightweights, and neither is the IS350, really, when considering other cars like Miata or Sky, or even lighter Lotus Elise, and others that are truly lightweight cars.
Mustangs that cost more than 40k are anathema to me, anyway, and 40k is my idea of a generous upper limit. It's a MUSTANG. they are nice, but they've always supposed to have been an average-joe affordable car, even in the upper ranges. There are cars much nicer than the Mustang at the prices these factory and aftermarket specials demand.
I am not positive, but I don't even think that Fox-bodied Saleen Mustangs, or the 93 SVT Cobra were as outlandishly priced as these, adjusted for time value of money. 60k is 50% higher than the average household annual income (gross, not net) in this country, of ~$40k
The only thing that allows a car like Mustang, even aftermarket versions, to push above $50k or $60k is easy consumer credit. We all know how that is starting to bite the economy back.