|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,085
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,085 |
Wait 'til you say you drive a 'Mystique' , I just tell everbody, "I drive a Ford Contour". I saves explaining....
2012 Lotus Evora
---------
95 Mystique MTX - GONE 395,000 Kms
--------- Both Zetecs
'97 Contour Mtx - stock - GONE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 536
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 536 |
Originally posted by FordRacingSVT:
Well we DO drive contours. They are jokable cars. That's why we onw them right? I can't speak for everyone but I drive a contour SVT because it's American, It's fast and it's a contour. Let people hate, then smoke em'. I love when punks with their civics and celicas hate on my car, that makes it more fun when I blow their doors off. Contours are cool. That's why we drive them. If you don't like them don't drive them. But I don't want to hear any excuses of how my Contour beat your Celica. Biotch
preach brotha preach. I have a friend with a sentra. He thinks it is the best thing on earth. After we raced, i asked him what a contour looks like pullin away. he dident think that was funny.
99' SVT #811 of 2760
Born on january, 12, 1999.
"This may have been his only shot at number one, but he just sucks on so many levels that I couldnā??t even let him win a contest of suckiness."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by CSVT1214:
Just because Ford came out with an SVT model of the Contour, that doesnt mean that other Contours are the ones that should be getting laughed at just because they arent SVTs. I would take a non-SVT Contour any day.
I wouldn't. no offense to any non-svt owners. i only bought mine BECAUSE it was an SVT. there is no way, personally, I would have bought an SE knowing there are SVTs out there. and if there were no SVTs to be had i would have gone on to a different car.
i have two possible scenarios i typically encounter with my car.
1. i have to explain what it is to the laymen and that the svt is the hi-po version
2. other REAL car guys see my car and are like "whoa, ive heard of those." (not that theyre overly impressed but there is some respect for them)
my buddy has a Typhoon and people, usually youngsters, say to him "those were fast back in the 90s" thinking they cant smoke today's cars.  he has taught a few NA porsches a lesson or two. 
Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,045
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,045 |
Originally posted by svt4stv:
i have two possible scenarios i typically encounter with my car.
1. i have to explain what it is to the laymen and that the svt is the hi-po version
2. other REAL car guys see my car and are like "whoa, ive heard of those."
same here
00 black/tan svt, #2052 of 2150, born 2/1/00
formerly known as my csvt
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." -Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,857
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,857 |
Originally posted by acrdklr:
Originally posted by svt4stv:
i have two possible scenarios i typically encounter with my car.
1. i have to explain what it is to the laymen and that the svt is the hi-po version
2. other REAL car guys see my car and are like "whoa, ive heard of those."
same here
that's how it seemed to be for me too when i had my svt...
but i also had some car guys that thought it had a turbo,or like 250+ hp stock
new,new ride!
'99 svt
black/mnb
'95 mustang gt sold!
'98 svt #800 sold!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,882
Highly Medicated Member
|
|
Highly Medicated Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,882 |
Quote:
Just tell them Ford spent $6 billion developing the car, and its more than Boeing spend developing the new 777.... 
Note Ford's current stock position...
Semper Fi
"They've got us surrounded. Poor bastards." -Chesty
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197 |
Quote:
Just tell them Ford spent $6 billion developing the car, and its more than Boeing spend developing the new 777....
No, Ford spent that much to bring out the cars for the entire global market. So everything is included in that. Developing, marketing, shipping etc on both sides of the pond.
-'96 SE MTX 3L
-'98 SVT 1,173 of 6,535
-'05 Mazda 6s, loaded, g/f's ride
-Need a 96-00 manual on CD? PM or email me
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867 |
Originally posted by svt4stv:
Originally posted by CSVT1214:
Just because Ford came out with an SVT model of the Contour, that doesnt mean that other Contours are the ones that should be getting laughed at just because they arent SVTs. I would take a non-SVT Contour any day.
I wouldn't. no offense to any non-svt owners. i only bought mine BECAUSE it was an SVT. there is no way, personally, I would have bought an SE knowing there are SVTs out there. and if there were no SVTs to be had i would have gone on to a different car.
I agree wholeheartedly that the SVT is a better car, but...
No SVT in 96, but the SE with MTX was the best performance/practicality value out there. The only other 4 door sedan that competed on price was the Chrysler Cirrus/Dodge Stratus, but it was 90's Chrysler quality, and only had drums in the rear. The Contour came out on top for somebody who cared about how the car drove.
I considered the Maxima, a car I had long admired, but by then they had already gotten fat and mushy, and were about $3k more, IIRC. Honda had already left the performance market. Anyway, I wanted a V-6, 4 doors, and handling as nimble as my deceased CRX. I got it.
I considered a SHO, but they were bigger, and about 4 or 5k more. I couldn't swing it.
If there'd been an SVT in 96, it would have been tough. I would have wanted it, but I don't know if I could afford it.
Anyway, I don't see any reason, today, to trade in my early SE on a later SVT. Yes, the cars got more power, but my car is lighter, and I'm tweaking the suspension, anyway, so the handling capability will be as good or better than a stock SVT. I sure would love 30 extra ponies, but otherwise, I like the content on my 96.
Function before fashion.
'96 Contour SE
"Toss the Contour into a corner, and it's as easy to catch as a softball thrown by a preschooler." -Edmunds, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by todras:
Quote:
Just tell them Ford spent $6 billion developing the car, and its more than Boeing spend developing the new 777....
No, Ford spent that much to bring out the cars for the entire global market. So everything is included in that. Developing, marketing, shipping etc on both sides of the pond.
recalls too? 
Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117 |
Originally posted by RogerB:
I sure would love 30 extra ponies, but otherwise, I like the content on my 96.
MSDS & an intake will get you close.
Must be that jumbly-wumbly thing happening again.
|
|
|
|
|
