I'm calling out HandoEX

[50stang]

LankorDie wrote:
Is 10 miles a gallon awsome?

Or how about the great power to weight ratio?

No wait, instead of your 5.0 put a .50 to your head.

The torque is awesome. Stock 5.0 with 2.73's was rated at 20 mpg in town and 28 mpg on the highway I believe... I would have to look at my window sticker again and it is at home right now. It was either 27 or 28 on the highway though. Even with 3.73's it is not that much worse.

[Bryce]

50stang wrote:
The torque is awesome. Stock 5.0 with 2.73's was rated at 20 mpg in town and 28 mpg on the highway I believe... I would have to look at my window sticker again and it is at home right now. It was either 27 or 28 on the highway though. Even with 3.73's it is not that much worse.
That is a 5.0 brand new, now figure in 100k or more + if CMK drives as fast as his mouth moves, I don´t think he gets 28 mpg..

[50stang]

LankorDie wrote:
That is a 5.0 brand new, now figure in 100k or more + if CMK drives as fast as his mouth moves, I don´t think he gets 28 mpg..

Any car... no matter what it is... if you can't keep your foot off the gas pedal the majority of the time the mpg won't be pretty.

[Erik]

dubbsy wrote:
...and teh leader makes an appearance..

this is lame..

And using the oh-so-fresh misspelling of "teh" officially promotes you above me as commander-in-chief of Gaytoria. Time to organize your troops.

[MisterCMK]

For the record, I do get 27mpg on the highway with my 2.73s.

stir stir stir

Mustang > all

[HandoEX]

LankorDie wrote:
That is a 5.0 brand new, now figure in 100k or more + if CMK drives as fast as his mouth moves, I don´t think he gets 28 mpg..
He's pretty lucky that peice of shit even moves:icon_puke_r: :icon_puke_l:

[50stang]

MisterCMK wrote:
For the record, I do get 27mpg on the highway with my 2.73s.

stir stir stir

Mustang > all

Your timeslip is still fake... I'd have to be there to see a stock 5.0 with 2.73's run a really low 14 to believe it. I still call BS on that slip.

[Erik]

mustang > taurus

[MisterCMK]

50stang wrote:
Your timeslip is still fake... I'd have to be there to see a stock 5.0 with 2.73's run a really low 14 to believe it. I still call BS on that slip.

I call BS on everything here. I have a scan of it if you want. Hell, I'll even bring it to b-dubs tomorrow night. I believe that Brian and Tristan both saw it too. :icon_rr:

[HandoEX]

50stang wrote:
Your timeslip is still fake... I'd have to be there to see a stock 5.0 with 2.73's run a really low 14 to believe it. I still call BS on that slip.
It's cuz he's a liar and a fake. Boo to MisterCMK.

[MisterCMK]

Its the v-t@k-y0

[2slo50h]

KidSupreme wrote:
mustang > taurus

By a very small margin.:icon_blackeye:

Might as well be the same car as far as shitty quality goes.

[Guest]

fat chicks > mustangs

[MisterCMK]

TacoSupreme loves fat chicks!

[sitn2lo]

nothign wrong with fat chicks

[Guest]

All you gotta do is slap the thigh and ride the wave in.

[sitn2lo]

^^^^^^
yes sir! lol

[MisterCMK]

Wow, looks like we have a bunch of chubby chasers in here.

[btleier]

this is a great thread...

[youngin2nr]

Ok, Nothing against Mustangs at all, but, what do you have to brag about? My brother used to own a 92 5.0 and it was decently fast stock. But,(very big but) what mods do you have done to your car? Exhaust<HOLY SHIT my car has exhaust. Intake<Holy shit my car has intake. Maybe some headers<WOW! Anyway your car is NOT FAST! So STFU. And you might come back with, "Oh and your car is?" But no my car is not fast. Never said it was.

Im pretty much following Carlos Mencia here.....
And to you creating this thread. RETARDED
You calling out HandoEx. RETARDED
Making a fake time slip. RETARDED
Actually arguing in this Dumb ass thread. RETARDED
Add all those up and throw your POS Mustang in there. DEDEDE!!!

EDIT: This thread should definitley be deleted along with you being banned for awhile to teach you a lesson on how to not be so damn stupid.