lm not an engineer, but what they said were actually logical, while the talk about ecu and extra gas made no senseboganbusman wrote:Jopuma, I suggest you just forget about cars altogether because you have no idea.
Jon, drewb and Hercubus have already OWN3D you enough, but just to add my own little bit and inform others:
That thing on the top of the engine is not just a 'big air intake'. It's a f@#%ing supercharger.
Just engage your brain before you say something ffs.
Muscle Cars
- Pinecone
- Drift King
- Posts: 641
- Joined: 12 Jun 2005, 00:21
- Location: United States Usergroup: SR3 Tester
- Contact:
- boganbusman
- Unbeatable
- Posts: 5142
- Joined: 03 Sep 2004, 12:09
- Location: Mute City
- Contact:
I'll tell you what it means:Jopuma wrote:What's that supposed to mean. Cars are the only thing in life that I truly had a liking for and still do. Cars is the career I'm getting into and I even bought a $100 book for auto engineering.boganbusman wrote:Jopuma, I suggest you just forget about cars altogether because you have no idea.
If you were REALLY into cars, then you would know what you're talking about. I think your old enough for that. And also, there's no point buying a book on auto engineering if you can't understand anything that's in it.
I myself am going to do auto engineering when I leave school. So that means that after my last year of school, I'm going to an institution to study maths methods, basic welding and auto mechanics. Then I'll go to University for four years, and HOPEFULLY I can then land a job as an auto engineer.
It takes a lot more effort then buying a book and talking crap on a forum
btw, If you're going to take the same path as me, then I hope you're good at maths because half of the four years at Uni is just that.
Math and science are my favorite subjects. Math is said to be the "language of the angels". And the type of auto engineer I'm becoming is this.
RX-8 sketch
RX-8 sketch
.... ive read that article 5 times and i remember them saying the skyline ( for example) goes from 0-60mph in 7.something seconds(and yes, it had engine mods).... now you can read my post again.... i said the cars didnt have an easy life....Focer wrote:If you don't believe me, then go HEREbaadmw wrote:hmmmm all cars in fnf2 had engine mods but not the evo and eclipse.... the reason why the cars performance sucked, was bcs they had been, like i would say in finnish, "rääkättyjä"= they haven't had an easy life... meaning the owners broke their cars....
ok sry, i know this hasnt got anything to do with muscles.... i really love the looks of the challanger and the vette master m posted
btw i saw a corvette stingray yesterday, it was awesome (especially the engine sounds)
speaking of muscles here is an INCREDIBLE modded shelby GT500!
http://www.jbaheaders.com/video/Ford100_runningcar1.mpg
http://www.jbaheaders.com/video/Ford100_runningcar1.mpg
Sweet-16 wrote:speaking of muscles here is an INCREDIBLE modded shelby GT500!
http://www.jbaheaders.com/video/Ford100_runningcar1.mpg
Aaah... so that's why the link says "Ford100", and the car doesn't look like an Shelby gt500 at all...?
That's not a Shelby GT500. It's a normal "Ford Mustang"Pigbenis wrote:Sweet-16 wrote:speaking of muscles here is an INCREDIBLE modded shelby GT500!
http://www.jbaheaders.com/video/Ford100_runningcar1.mpg
Aaah... so that's why the link says "Ford100", and the car doesn't look like an Shelby gt500 at all...?
Next time search for it to be sure
-
- Ricer
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 02 Jun 2006, 23:48
- Location: Finland
the guy who owns it says it's a shelby. so maybe it's a GT350 and not GT500.master m wrote:That's not a Shelby GT500. It's a normal "Ford Mustang"Pigbenis wrote:Sweet-16 wrote:speaking of muscles here is an INCREDIBLE modded shelby GT500!
http://www.jbaheaders.com/video/Ford100_runningcar1.mpg
Aaah... so that's why the link says "Ford100", and the car doesn't look like an Shelby gt500 at all...?
Next time search for it to be sure
the GT350 looked a lot more like your common '66 Mustang
and just for reference, not all shelby's were fast backs either before anyone says anything about that.
No, the Mustang in that video wasn't a Shelby.
http://www.jbaheaders.com/articles/MF0406.pdf
That article is about the car in the video, and not once does it make reference to the car being a Shelby (more importantly, from '67 onwards, Shelby Mustangs used the taillights from Cougars, not regular Mustangs). Maybe it's just that the same guy also owns a GT500.
As for the fact that not all Shelby Mustangs were fastbacks, that is true, since there were convertibles made. But I don't think that they ever used the hardtop.
http://www.jbaheaders.com/articles/MF0406.pdf
That article is about the car in the video, and not once does it make reference to the car being a Shelby (more importantly, from '67 onwards, Shelby Mustangs used the taillights from Cougars, not regular Mustangs). Maybe it's just that the same guy also owns a GT500.
As for the fact that not all Shelby Mustangs were fastbacks, that is true, since there were convertibles made. But I don't think that they ever used the hardtop.
- boganbusman
- Unbeatable
- Posts: 5142
- Joined: 03 Sep 2004, 12:09
- Location: Mute City
- Contact: