Is Fender trying to put Jackson out of business?

[Rich#6]

I agree with this. I hate the shit out of buying used stuff. I bought a used car, and I felt like the car was used (Maybe because it was?). I'll never buy another used car unless it's like an old classic.

The same thing goes for my guitars. I bought a used guitar, and it was just that, a used guitar. It had the dings, the scratches, etc. I've only purchased one used guitar.

For me, I like to be the sole owner of my shit. I always buy new. The same goes for a home. I refuse to buy an existing home. I want my home built from the ground up. I want to see it being rectified, and "born." I don't want something that someone else has lived in. My wife and I have purchased two homes, and each of them were brand new.

Was your wife a virgin?

[guitarzan_josh]

Was your wife a virgin?

OUCH!!! ....but good point!

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Was your wife a virgin?

Nah, we were both used merchandise, but she may as well have been until she met me.

[KingVee]

I agree with this. I hate the shit out of buying used stuff. I bought a used car, and I felt like the car was used (Maybe because it was?). I'll never buy another used car unless it's like an old classic.

The same thing goes for my guitars. I bought a used guitar, and it was just that, a used guitar. It had the dings, the scratches, etc. I've only purchased one used guitar.

For me, I like to be the sole owner of my shit. I always buy new. The same goes for a home. I refuse to buy an existing home. I want my home built from the ground up. I want to see it being rectified, and "born." I don't want something that someone else has lived in. My wife and I have purchased two homes, and each of them were brand new.

Sounds like you need to change your tampon, it's very well used.

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Sounds like you need to change your tampon, it's very well used.

Uh...rrrrrright... :think:

[Sukkoi19]

Generally I prefer used guitars and cars. If something is perfect or near perfect my OCD kicks in and I fanatically avoid bruising it in any way shape or form. I find that this limits the fun I have with the car or guitar and hampers my technique. I actually will not touch the finish for fear of fingerprints. That is why I love my SL1 so much. I got it used and while it was not abused at all it already has a few personality marks that seriously eases my stupidity. I still compulsively wipe it down then blow the dust off with compressed air after every play session but I don't mind getting it dirty while I am playing.

Cars are the same way. Considering I am already plotting a cam change and headswap followed by a blower when contemplating the purchase, why buy new? That and new 5.0s are so much more expensive than old ones.
'

[VitaminG]

right. And don't you love that new car depreciation? The way the value drops by half as soon as you drive it off the lot?

What I love is that I can buy a car under a year old for $10,000 less than retail.

I also love that I was able to pickup my RM100 with 3 modules for $1200. That's 3 grand worth of amp over here. No way I could have justified a purchase like that new.

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Generally I prefer used guitars and cars. If something is perfect or near perfect my OCD kicks in and I fanatically avoid bruising it in any way shape or form. I find that this limits the fun I have with the car or guitar and hampers my technique. I actually will not touch the finish for fear of fingerprints. That is why I love my SL1 so much. I got it used and while it was not abused at all it already has a few personality marks that seriously eases my stupidity. I still compulsively wipe it down then blow the dust off with compressed air after every play session but I don't mind getting it dirty while I am playing.

Cars are the same way. Considering I am already plotting a cam change and headswap followed by a blower when contemplating the purchase, why buy new? That and new 5.0s are so much more expensive than old ones.
'

Personally, I'd rather put the "beauty marks" on my guitar myself. As for planning cam changes and all of that, I wouldn't buy a new car that needed a cam swap in order to run strong.

Sure, the 80s/early 90s 5.0L Mustang can be had for reasonably cheap these days, but what's it going to cost to bump that 215 hp motor up to 412 hp like the current 5.0L? In the end, you have yourself an old car with no warranty. With a new one, sure, you may spend more, but you also have peace of mind. Not to mention, your high-horse application is covered under a factory warranty.

right. And don't you love that new car depreciation? The way the value drops by half as soon as you drive it off the lot?

What I love is that I can buy a car under a year old for $10,000 less than retail.

I also love that I was able to pickup my RM100 with 3 modules for $1200. That's 3 grand worth of amp over here. No way I could have justified a purchase like that new.

The only car that would lose that much depreciation within a year is some pos like a Hyundai, Chevy Aveo, or Kia, because the only people who buy them are the people who have to. I have over 105,000 miles on my 2005 WRX STi, and I could still get $13,000 for it...nearly the price of a new Kia.

IMO, buying used is a risk. You risk buying someone else's problem. Sure, there are DEFINITELY good deals out there. Back in 2003/2004 my brother and I came across a 2002 Grand Prix GT with 6000 miles on the clock. We "stole" that car for $16995. It stickered for $25000 brand new. We got the car at the end of a month, and just as new models were hitting the showroom. This lady owned this car for 6 months, then decided she liked the new body-style better, and traded it in. What a fucking idiot she was...

I would consider buying a family car used, but no fucking way would I buy a used sports car or 4x4.

[Sinistas]

some pos like a Hyundai

Not really the case at this point.

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Generally I prefer used guitars and cars. If something is perfect or near perfect my OCD kicks in and I fanatically avoid bruising it in any way shape or form. I find that this limits the fun I have with the car or guitar and hampers my technique. I actually will not touch the finish for fear of fingerprints. That is why I love my SL1 so much. I got it used and while it was not abused at all it already has a few personality marks that seriously eases my stupidity. I still compulsively wipe it down then blow the dust off with compressed air after every play session but I don't mind getting it dirty while I am playing.

Cars are the same way. Considering I am already plotting a cam change and headswap followed by a blower when contemplating the purchase, why buy new? That and new 5.0s are so much more expensive than old ones.
'

right. And don't you love that new car depreciation? The way the value drops by half as soon as you drive it off the lot?

What I love is that I can buy a car under a year old for $10,000 less than retail.

I also love that I was able to pickup my RM100 with 3 modules for $1200. That's 3 grand worth of amp over here. No way I could have justified a purchase like that new.

Not really the case at this point.

I'd buy a used "Hyundai" of guitars...like a Squier Bullet, or something, but only for the sake of modifying the Hell out of it...

[RacerX]

, but what's it going to cost to bump that 215 hp motor

225

Get your facts straight, you dick!

[Torment Leaves Scars]

225

Get your facts straight, you dick!

A 1993 5.0L was downgraded from 225 hp to 205 hp due to the new implementation of hypereutectic pistons from the forged pistons of previous years. Ford also lowered the hp claim using the excuse that 205 hp was more realistic of road conditions. Hp was bumped up to 215 for the final years of the classic 5.0L, which were 1994 and 1995. After 1995, the 4.6L came into play. My facts are spot on.

Thanks for playing, come again.

[Sukkoi19]

Personally, I'd rather put the "beauty marks" on my guitar myself. As for planning cam changes and all of that, I wouldn't buy a new car that needed a cam swap in order to run strong.

Sure, the 80s/early 90s 5.0L Mustang can be had for reasonably cheap these days, but what's it going to cost to bump that 215 hp motor up to 412 hp like the current 5.0L? In the end, you have yourself an old car with no warranty. With a new one, sure, you may spend more, but you also have peace of mind. Not to mention, your high-horse application is covered under a factory warranty.

A $1200 used S-Trim. Warranties are overrated. They look for every excuse to void it with a performance car anyway. "Whats this rubber in the wheel well? We're not covering you shelled tranny." I mentioned my own peculiarities not as a guide for how everyone else should live rather as my own personal outlook in an effort to participate in the thread and contribute to the discussion.

[Sukkoi19]

A 1993 5.0L was downgraded from 225 hp to 205 hp due to the new implementation of hypereutectic pistons from the forged pistons of previous years. Ford also lowered the hp claim using the excuse that 205 hp was more realistic of road conditions. Hp was bumped up to 215 for the final years of the classic 5.0L, which were 1994 and 1995. After 1995, the 4.6L came into play. My facts are spot on.

Thanks for playing, come again.

Stock 87-93 5-speed will generally dyno 185-195 rwhp. Fords ratings are a bit dubious in my opinion. Just like the current flywheel rating of the new 5.0L or GMs rating of the LS1. My 02 Z/28 was rated at 310 flywheel horsepower and put down 327 rwhp and trapped 110 mph so I take all manufacturer claims with a grain of salt until proven at the track. I have done a 100 mph traps with stock Windsor 5.0Ls so I think they are bit underrated from Ford.

[RacerX]

My facts are spot on.

Thanks for playing, come again.

Au contraire, mon frere. Not to get all lerxstcat on you, but you said:

Sure, the 80s/early 90s 5.0L Mustang can be had for reasonably cheap these days, but what's it going to cost to bump that 215 hp motor up to

"80s/early 90s 5.0L"

I had an '86, that was 225hp. Here's an '89 article that states 225: http://www.cars.com/ford/mustang/1989/reviews/
1990: 225hp: http://www.cars.com/ford/mustang/1990/reviews/
1991: 225hp: http://www.cars.com/ford/mustang/1991/reviews/
1993: yes, Ford changed the rating: From http://mustangforums.com/forum/5-0l-...00-torque.html RE: 5.0 - 205 or 225 HP/275 or 300 torque?? actually they changed the numbers in 1993.

1992 rated 225 hp 300 tq forged aluminum pistons
1993 rated 205 hp 275 tq hypereutectic pistons

Here is some good reading on it... Mustang Specs go to the left of the page and click "infor by year" in the small blue letters. Then pick the 1992 and 1993 years and see the difference. They say it changed because of some mechanical changes. I know this is a specific GT mustang site but the engines were all the same! http://www.mustanggt.org/main.htm

So, for the most of the years in your range, the # was 225. Not 215. And I was just kidding about the dick part. I hope