Search results

What you wrote about EPA testing has no basis in fact. You need to do a lot of research in that area...:lol:

I'd be more inclined to dump the factory dampers and go with Koni Sports all around when they become available. :shocked:

I'd just have no use for it. The last 8 or so vehicles I've owned had standard cruise control, and I never once bother with it. I just view it as something else that can break. To each his/her own, I guess.

I wouldn't want that option if Ford paid me $250 in cash, on top of throwing the option in for nothing. :thumbdown:

While most people don't know it, that award it limited solely to vehicles that are "all new" for any particular model year. That seriously limits the competition. Their past list includes such classics as this 1996 Dodge Caravan...

Be sure to use a proper plastic paint, like Krylon Fusion. And use it as directed. Otherwise the paint will fall off and look lousy. Stain black would be the best choice. http://www.krylon.com/products/fusion-for-plastic/ I personally don't understand why anyone would give a sh*t. Just...

And the EB's numbers can also be better than the EPAs. On average, the EB is notably more fuel efficient - per the EPA. The V6 could be a lot more engine in terms of performance and fuel economy if Ford didn't have to sandbag it to make Ecoboost (more profitable and "green") look good.

The televised Barrett Jackson auctions have become so commercialized and filled with senseless "fluff" that they've become unwatchable. On average, actual auction coverage (cars being auctioned on stage) now runs about 12 minutes an hour. The rest is the nonsense (e.g. "April Rose") and...

How do you know what his future income stream will allow him to buy? And how do you know when non-hybrid V8s will stop being produced? Answer: YOU DON'T. It is all SPECULATIVE All kinds of automotive "experts" have been predicting the demise of the V8 since the first oil embargo in 1973...

:crazy:

Follow the owner's manual. Is your suggestion better than the owner's manual? Nope. :headbonk:

And that one was REALLY bad.:paddle:

Do whatever the owner's manual suggests...

Two of the three engines are "pending certification." The 5.0 has already been OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED to both levels 1 and 2, and is listed as such: http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/data/ Big companies begin to prepare statements weeks before their official release dates. The engine was...

I'm using Firefox and it works fine.

I don't know what you're taking about. The 2015 Mustang 5.0 makes 435 peak SAE net HP, and has been third party certified as such to both levels 1 and 2. That's THE GOLD STANDARD for power and torque ratings. Any claims to the contrary are baseless. I have read the entire SAE standard. You...

Nope, it has to be within 1% of the observed peak (+/- 1%). There is no room for conjecture when it comes to SAE CERTIFIED ratings. There will always be very tiny variations from engine to engine, based on the realities of machining variations. But those variations are now extremely small due...

The regular production 2015 Mustang GT's 5.0 has been OFFICIALLY SAE CERTIFIED at 435 Net HP. There's nothing "preliminary" about it because it already appears in the SAE's certified HP table: http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/data/ Note that 98 octane RON = 93 octane R*M/2, and 91 octane RON...

Not 800 pounds... More like 500 pounds. Check your figures. The Mustang will still hold a very tiny advantage in terms of pounds per horsepower, though.

The difference is so small that it's essentially irrelevant. A skilled amateur behind the wheel of a '14 GT is going to be quicker than the typical guy behind the wheel of the '15. The ability to properly calculate and hit the ideal RPM shift point in each gear (it varies and isn't always...