Jott

Forget I said anything, the 2011 GT sucks

YSUsteven

As long as its in the top 10 of the 100 or so new cars out there, I'm not gona worry if it is #10 or #1.

tvrbob

You need to read the article again.

1. True. I suspect that was just the best picture they had.
2. It was an allusion to the book, The Outsiders: "Stay Gold, Ponyboy."
3. It was referring to why the GT "grabs the [Top 10] trophy" over the V6 and GT500, not to why it grabs the Number 1 trophy over the other nine cars on the list.

Again, you need to read more carefully. They say nothing about the design of the back end. They like the sequential turn signals. And that's some horrible company to be in. 6 or 7 out of 10 of those, I'd put in the Worst Design Features category.

But yeah, it's great to see the Mustang continue to get some positive attention. It deserves it.

Jott

Wow, sounds like someone doesn't have an '11 of their own yet.

Adam

Does it really matter..

tvrbob

Not one bit. But claiming, based on borderline illiteracy, that C&D thinks it's The Best Car EVAR!!!!! is just plain dumb.

Jott

jesus if you're just going to sit here and **** on me and the 11 then close the **** thread

Overboost

Seems like you're reading way too far into that. Good to see that the GT made the list though. Notice no Camaro or Challenger in sight.

eric n

Wow, I don't remember verbatim the original post. Did it really think it say that Car and Driver thought it was the best car ever (spelled EVAR)?

Clearly it would seem, assuming it did say that, that someone got excited seeing their favorite car getting such preeminent placement in a photo featured in C&D's web site. Then this person likely posted before getting around to reading the article.

I would be likely to blame that excitement rather than illiteracy for two reasons. 1. It's likely the cause of the mistake. 2. Common courtesy for a fellow enthusiast not to mention human being would preclude me from accusing someone of borderline illiteracy unless they were being hurtful/hateful as a result of their less than fully informed posts.

Sure I might get banned for this, but ultimately I find it inappropriate that someone who is actually a representative of the site would be unnecessarily insulting and belittling of a site visitor. Ultimately it would seem that it is not in keeping with the goal of providing a place where enthusiast feel welcome to come and express themselves.

After all it is this feeling of welcome which creates excitement for the site which ultimately generates advertising revenues which keep the site functioning and hopefully profitable for it's owners.

tvrbob

This is getting silly.

Are you referring to me? If so, let's make one thing clear: I am not a representative of this site.

WhiteBird00

Odd... I made the same assumption based on the italicized user name (although the low post count made me wonder).

Perhaps someone can explain how moderators, vendors, and administrators are distinguished here.

BTW, I agree with Eric. It's one thing to correct somebody's information but bashing the poster is totally uncalled-for and rather childish.

eric n

I was apparently wrongfully so. I assumed, again apparently wrongfully so, that TEAM MUSTANG SOURCE and yes the italicized name was an indicator. Clearly I was incorrect in naming you as a representative of the site.

Boomer

And buh-bye thread ...