True the cost is higher than inflation but I believe vehicles as a whole are above inflation. I could be wrong though.
I used the general CPI so you may be right, but I don't think it's that big of a difference. Either way, I wholly agree with you that you definitely get a lot of car for the new models and a stock 430+HP back in the 80's would've been in a supercar category.
Even though there's a sticky post warning against inter-model bashing, we get "5.0-brahs" here and there that pop up thinking that 5.0's are god's gift to the mankind. There's no rule against bashing 5.0-brahs so I consider them a fair game, especially since they are types who lack the funds, tools, knowledge, and/or desire to work on their own cars beyond superficial mods. Fortunately, almost all 5.0 folks on this forum are cool and 5.0-brahs get squashed pretty quickly.
Never understood that nonsense. There're nothing wrong with any of the engine choices in the Mustang. The only wrong one was the NA 2.3L back in the Fox body days (I was an owner of one so I know of what I speak.). I ultimately went with the GT because it's a weekend/fun car and MPG was not that much of a concern. I drove the EB and it was a fine machine and a great choice for a DD if MPG is a concern. It still had tons of performance as well.
As somebody who has owned a lot of Mustang's including the low grunt 5.0's of yore (new 85 through 2006 until this new one) I'll take the 7,800rpm Drag Mode scream into possibly 11's stock over my old 5.0 any day of the week.
Performance package does not effect the engine....only suspension and tire bits.
