- Banned
- #61
By “stale” I mean barely even better (like, literally a couple tenths on a road course) and with a worse engine than a model that’s $20k cheaper. The GT350 was largely untouched for 5 years, and everything around it grew. That’s why it happens to be getting discontinued at the same time that the Mach 1 (what the PP2 should have been) is coming onto the scene... because it’s a car that will offer nearly identical performance and a better engine for $10k less.By “stale” you mean better than right? If you could afford a gt350 would you still bash it? It really comes down to a money thing for you, it has to and that’s ok. If the Mach 1 and gt350 cost the same, you’d pick the 350.
It’s ok to say the 350 is the better car, but when money is involved you’d take the less expensive one.
It’s not about money, as I’ve already said on the post. Newsflash; a $65k car isn’t that expensive. Hell, you could buy a used one for significantly less than I’m buying my Mach 1 for, and less than half as much as I’ve spent on cars in the last year. It has nothing to do with not affording it, it has everything to do with not WANTING it. Why? Because that special snake badge doesn’t hold much weight to me
And to answer your question, if the Mach 1 cost the same as a GT350, I’d get the Mach 1. But if the price really was the same, I would hope that the Mach 1 would be getting the GT350’s brakes and a bump in RPMs, because that’s the main advantage it holds
Sponsored
Last edited: