TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,170 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Thunderbird buyers must seek out the new "Sport Option" suspension package, which includes 225/60TR16 Goodyear Eagle GT2D4s mounted on 16x7.0-inch aluminum wheels, stiffer anti-roll bars front and rear, shocks, and springs. A bargain at $210, this package tightens the Thunderbird's otherwise Continental-like ride to just shy of BMW 7-Series precision-ground standards. Even at a tire-howling pace, the Bird was impressively balanced and easy to drive, with a reassuring though minimal amount of understeer.


Maybe I will get the sport shocks :)

The article is a comparison between a chevy (puke) monte carlo and a tbird.


http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/112_9609_1996_chevy_monte_carlo_vs_1996_ford_thunderbird/power_rating.html

Pretty sad that ford couldn't capitalize on stuff like this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
I was rather surprised they thought it was so close, after all, which one is still popular today?
Define "which one". Do you mean older Montes vs. older Thunderbirds?
Or new Montes vs. old Thunderbirds?
Or new Montes vs. new Thunderbirds?
Or Thunderbirds vs. BMWs?

Not trying to be a smartass or anything, I'm asking honestly.

I'd have to rank old 'Birds over old Montes, but below new Montes and BMWs for sure. Not that it's my preference or it's what I think is better/best, but just in terms of popularity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
Define "which one". Do you mean older Montes vs. older Thunderbirds?
Or new Montes vs. old Thunderbirds?
Or new Montes vs. new Thunderbirds?
Or Thunderbirds vs. BMWs?

Not trying to be a smartass or anything, I'm asking honestly.

I'd have to rank old 'Birds over old Montes, but below new Montes and BMWs for sure. Not that it's my preference or it's what I think is better/best, but just in terms of popularity.
I was referring to the two cars tested in the article.

I know older monte's have a good following, but not as well as the older T-birds (well, depending on the actual year) I guess I've never really looked into the BMW's, though they often impress people who don't know about cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,747 Posts
Ive been looking for this article, good find!

On a side note,
Chevy has done it again with the V-6's The new camaro V-6 will be more powerful than the mustang GT's V-8.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,112 Posts
I think the recent Monte Carlo is all right, but:

1. Is and always has been a little "mullety"
2. Is a W-body, which means it has a number of cheap parts that will repeatedly fail
3. Is FWD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Weren't they comparing the Z34 and the LX in that article though? I see way more LS Monte's on the road than Z34's. In fact, I've only run into maybe 2 or 3 Z-34 Monte Carlo's all the years that I've been driving T-Birds. It really wasn't until the Bird got canned that Monte Carlo's got some pep in their base models. The 3.4 took over duty for the base while the high end Monte's got equipped with the 3.8 and in some years the 3.8SC. Of course, all a 4.6 T-Bird needs in order to compete with the higher performance Monte's of later years is a nice PI swap. The Birds really just have the over all edge in that competition.

The only Monte's I'd see a basically stock T-Bird (PI Swap no other goodies) getting a beating from is the V8 package Monte's they produced in the last year or two of production. And even those were somewhat disappointing, mostly due to FWD and Torque not getting along to well.

I owned a 1996 Chevy Monte Carlo LS for a year or so. Very cheap construction, clunky, wheel hop like mad, floaty, just not that great of a car. Ditched it for a base model Mustang, which oddly enough was a way better car haha.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top