Oval Office Article Pretty Poor

I salute Mark Houlahan for his enthusiasm for Fords and for Mustangs, but his article in the July issue is way off track in his criticizm of Chevrolet's stick to it-ness.  I'm on my 6th Mustang (08 Bullitt) but, I'm also a great Corvette fan and think Mark's comment that the Corvette is "reborn"! is totally wrong!! Corvette has been produced steadily since 1954 with only 1982 being a carryover year....there was no 1983 Corvette.  Mark, what happened to the Thunderbird??????  and...if you really call the early 70s Mustang, Mustangs, you're way off track!!! Also, bone stock, the last Camaro will still put a firm whoopin on a new Mustang GT!  Why are so many people putting Chevy engines in 80s and 90s Mustangs at the drag strip????  I am very disappointed in my 08 Bullitt for it's lack of performance and total lack of new technology that almost all other car manufacturers include...like:  outside temperature indicator, dual heat/ac controls, automatic AC/heat temp controls, auto on/off control for headlites, telescoping steering wheel, adjustable foot controls, extremely poor materials in dash and other plastic areas...you can't even open the trunk without the key fob. A car costing $33,000 should have some of these!! I bought an 02 Corvette in 02 with 6k miles on it for less than I paid for my Mustang and bone stock it would have left my current Mustang behind by at least 8 car lengths in the quarter mile and would have thoroughly embarrassed it on a curvy road.  Geesh! The air conditioning controls on my Bullitt are exactly the same as on my 1990 Mustang GT! Oh, and by the way....my Bullitt is now worth about $20k and I've only lost $13k in depreciation.  I kept my Vette for 5 years and lost only $5k in depreciation!  I like my Mustang, but Mark really didn't give anyone the right picture of GMs performance cars!  Mark, print an apology!!!!  

Are you for real ?  You come on a mustang forum and trash talk. Not cool! I have nothing against Corvettes. GM has done a great job, but if you cant make power out of that Mod motor its you man. The mustang isnt a corvette, if you want something to compare it to, try the new shelby GT500,,,, it'll spank your vette in the quarter and more power is just a pulley away. The power levels coming out of the 4 valve engines are unreal and I dont think they need to apologize to anyone. The guy who puts a chevy small block in his mustang is a bonehead or just doesnt know how to make power out of a great engine. In 2, 3 or 4 valve iterations the power levels are on par or better then anything Chevy has. Read the latest test in Car and Driver,,,the mustang(yeah just a 315hp 4.6L) won in a test with Camaro and Dodge Challenger so I dont think its just Mark Houlahan who thinks the Mustang is better.  

To be honest with you, I never had to make excuses for my Vette or any Chevy I ever owned.  If you don't agree that something's wrong with a car that costs $33K and can't match standard equipment on a 4 cylinder Camry, you are really brainwashed.  I like my Mustang...it's a great looking car, but it ain't a performance car!  You apparently didn't read the article very well.  You see that the Mustang didn't come close to the performance of the Camaro in any tested area except in cornering Gs.  C'mon...what kind of magazine doesn't run a sporty car on a road course to determine which car handles better.  Read Motor Trend and Road and Track's comparison, clearly showed how the Camaro outperforms the Mustang!  The base Corvette with the Z51 suspension will beat a Shelby any day on a road course.  Why do I have to put thousands of dollars in my Mustang to get it to run 12s in the quarter.  I have added a Hurst shifter (because Ford is so dumb they mounted the front of the stock shifter to the transmission and the back to the car frame...under torque conditions, it hangs in 3rd), the Hurst shifter helps. I also added a larger throttlebody with no improvement.  I called all of the Computer program manufacturers and 3 of them said they could not improve the computer tune on a Mustang Bullitt (Ford has tweeked it to the Max).  If you simply look at your favorite magazine (car and driver) you'll see that they certainly did not list the Shelby GT 500 as one of their quickest for 2008, but there were two Chevys!! In Carroll Shelby's ZMax commercial, they show a clip of the "700 horspower" Shelby burning rubber on the grass!!  Wow!  Car and Driver tested the 2010 Shelby GT 500 and it turned 12.9 in the quarter and my 1/4 mile rtimes in my 2002 Vette were 12.3 seconds, so be careful if you want to challenge my Vette with a Shelby GT 500!  In the same issue of the car and driver you quote, they tested "A RENTAL, BASE CORVETTE" that turned the quarter in 12.6....beating your Shelby by 3/10s seconds(again C&D results). I can only presume you dream these things up instead of researching the argument. If you don't want to hear the truth about MUSTANGS from someone who loves American performance cars and Mustangs (I've had six)...I don't know what else to tell you!  Bring what you got to the drag strip and you'll find out real quick!  

I dont know what your reading parisdude but it wasnt car and driver. The 315 hp mustang against the 426 hp camaro and the 376 hp Dodge and the Ford WON as in best and numero uno. A car is more then straight line acceleration but even there the camaro beat the Ford by only a tenth to 60, the Ford beat the Dodge by 2 tenths and the Ford killed both of them in top gear roll ons from 30 and 60. It outhandled out braked and on top of that got better mileage then both the other two. It was just a better car ,,,period. Your vette came in LAST in the comparo with a Audi(oh gawd) a BMW Z4 and a Porsche boxster. I guess you went right to the acceleration figures and lost everything else huh because the chev was dead last as in loooser!!!
Your figures for the GT500 are wrong also, Mustangs and Fast Fords ran a test and because of hazing the tires thru the first three gears with a 25 mph headwind only ran a 12.6 quarter and they felt it was an easy 12.10 and maybe in the 11's with a little better shoe. More power is just a pulley away so bring on your vette because there is no stock 2002 corvette running 12.3. Your just full of what cows leave in the field. You stop your tuning at a chip and a throttle body do you ,,,, there's your problem frenchie, you dont have the knowledge to go fast so leave it to the real mechanics and dont keep buying Mustangs if you dont like them.

If your still starved for fast Fords read this article about the 2003/4 terminators(essentially the same engine in the GT500 today) that make it into the 11's for cheap dollars. He ran 11.86 for $1199 and that wont buy a aftercat system for your vette. Maybe you will quit making excuses frenchie.
http://www.mustangmonthly.com/shop4parts/mump_0307_2003_ford_mustang_svt_cobra/upr_venom_kit.html  

Ahhhhh, spoken like a true brainwashed Ford lover.  At least I have an open mind about these things...I have owned 6 Mustangs and three Corvettes to compare them and I know from experience what I'm talking about.  You don't even say in your profile what kind of ride you have.  Again, if I have to pay $33,000 for a performance car and another 10 to get it to beat a much better (and cheaper) Corvette, let me think...which should I buy!  So you think putting another pully on the GT 500 will let it beat my 2002 Corvette?  It was only a couple tenths from beating your terminator and the Vette was basically stock.  I wish I still had it, I'd put some money on my Vette against your car and I'm not a gambler.  The pulley was exactly what Roush did with his GT 500s and they don't run that much better than stock...face it, a stock GT 500 is an embarassment to Ford lovers.  Google it, you'll find plenty of tests!  Did you see what the same magazine said about the GT 500KR...."What fool would pay that much money for this car ($80,000?"  'nuff said! I will keep my Bullitt since it's weak engine is well known and if I don't race Camaros or Dodge challengers, I don't have to make excuses...it does win car shows so, as a garage queen, it's a great car!  Look at my profile.  

Corvettes have won every award they were ever considered for.  They set the record for a lap at Nurburgring, they won the 24 hours at Lemans so many times, they're tired of winning and have won the manufacturer's championship what...six years in a row.  Germany awarded the Corvette small block engine the world's best in 2008!!!  Check the NHRA drag strip records and see how many Chevy's own the records compared to Fords.  Again, there must be sooooo many reasons why Ford owners put Chevy engines in their cars for the drags......duh....they want to win once in a while!  Don't you watch speed channel's Pass Time?  You'll see plenty of Fords with Chevy engines in them.  Oh, and how many 32 "Deuce" coupes have small block Chevys in them??  Face it, Dude...even Ford owners concede that Chevy makes a better engine!!!  The 4 year old chassis Corvette lost to the other cars in the test you mentioned, but Fords were so far behind, they didn't even test them, and they compared a thrashed 24,000 mile Vette from Enterprise rental and the car was a base model...no performance options!!!  Did any of those cars in the test out perform the Vette...not even close and they all cost considerably more!  That was the same biased magazine that said the Mustang was a better car because it got better gas mileage...and the Camaro was less expensive!!!  Let's take any new stock Mustang you want on a road trip with any C5/C6 Corvette and see which gets better gas mileage!!

You still didn't get it, did you.  Had they run the Camaro and the Mustang on a road course as on real streets, the Camaro would have beaten the Mustang.  Thats what Road and Track and Motor Trend did to determine which was better.  The Mustang did not stop better than the Camaro...your problem is you can't read!  What is your ride...by the way.  You must have the fastest Mustang around and  plenty of money if you have made your Mustang run faster than mine!  Right?  

Personally,,,I am really not interested in 1/4 mile time. Its a very small aspect of what makes a car enjoyable(which is why the Corvette lost). But I have nothing against your corvettes, the chevy small block was a fine engine no doubt about it. I am an engineer, I worked as an engine engineer for Ford many years ago so I know Fords. I have three vintage mustangs and none of them are built for speed. They run well and I cant drive them without people stopping and getting out of their cars to come look at them, they draw a crowd wherever they are. I could care less how fast they are or how fast a camaro is,,,,my cars are cool. I love the hobby of vintage cars. Your love of the chevy smallblock is outdated to me. In the 60's chevy's were faster, the only decent valve sizes Ford had were in the Cleveland motors, but now that aftermarket heads are available for everything it really doesnt matter. An engine is an engine and it responds to certain things whether its a Chevy or a Ford or a Mercedes. Fords mod motor is a fine engine that responds exceedingly well to hot rodding. You can get whatever HP your after just get yourself the book by Sean Hyland and he will show you how to make any iteration of the motor make 400hp or more depending on what you want to spend and what you want to live with. You can talk trash but its superficial. Ford has won its share of races and beat corvettes when they wanted to so I see no need to apologize anywhere. That mythical corvette of yours probably died anyway(the trap times always get faster as you tell the stories years later). Its a shame you dont have the time or the knowledge to make your car as fast as you seem to want it to be, so why arent you driving a new corvette then ?