|
laserred02 -> RE: Why does our V6 seem....like a POS (7/15/2007 9:37:59 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: raz54 I think the real problem is most of you are jaded by the 3.8 V6. They have a lot more power and get better mpg than most of the 6 cyl that was used in the 60's / 70's & 80's. Most of those had less than 150 hp and only got low 20's (mpg). So before you bitch and moan to much about what a turd you have find a 65 -66 Mustang or Falcon with a 170 6 cyl and then you'll really be glad you have a 3.8. you are 100% correct. my first car had a 200ci Inline 6 cyl, it was a 1966 mustang. That thing was slow as ****, maybe 100hp in todays terms. the 3.8L V6 ford makes is a ohv pushrod design, it is cheap and easy to produce, with little advanced technology. When I bought my 2002 brand new I got it for $15,500 before tax, title and all that jazz. You tell me who makes a 15,500 car with 190hp and 225 ft/lbs of torque. You should compare the 3.8L V6 to ford's new 3.5L DOHC V6 that makes 265 hp and is designed to go plus or minus 20 hp on that depending upon the configuration. However you will not find the 3.5L in anything less than a 22k+ car, just as you wouldn't see an import manufacturer put a high technology DOHC V6 pumping out 265 hp in a base model. Please compare base model to base model, and premium model to premium model as others have stated. I do not believe there was much better value for my money than when I bought my Mustang for $15,500, seriously you get a lot of power for that price range. As far as the 3.8L camaro they made 200 hp which is 10 more than the mustang, that is not a significant amount, there biggest strength over the base model was a superior transmission.
|
|
|
|