![]() |
Quote:
<iframe width="917" height="688" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/16u6w0cjjrU" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe> I second Matt's concerns. For San Diego, the roof needs to be an option:D |
Quote:
|
I have a '66 hardtop, it was my first car. It is a good cruiser, perfectly fits that roll.
|
Quote:
Mustang. But even knowing that, which would you rather own? That said, there's a '65 ragtop on BAT right now...but it would be a project to bring it up to snuff. |
Yeah I agree, they can still be fun. Just a TOTALLY different flavor of fun as compared to where this thread started. And definitely not as well suited for use as a normal car.
|
Quote:
|
Mustang Sally is a song - from the '60s
|
I would not EVER recommend a GM f-body car to anyone who values their sanity. I owned two in my youth (a Camaro and a Firebird). They both looked cool but were heavy, woefully underpowered (yea they CAN be made fast for $$$) and handled poorly. They had rust, rust and more rust. I think they came from the factory pre-rusted. Panels, frame sections, structural pieces, tie rods, you-name-it. They all rusted. Badly. I wouldn’t waste my time. Build quality is “iffy”.
A 951 can be made fast for relatively short money but they’re finicky. Check the fuel lines and don’t use gas with ethanol in it. It likes to disintegrate the fuel lines from the inside out (ask me how I know). I do have an affinity for the cars. If I was in the market for a “fun car” I’d consider an S2 cabriolet or a 968. Both very cool looking and timeless - and more reliable than a 951, albeit not as fast (rare-as-hens-teeth 968 turbos excepted). |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:20 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website