>>13186 If they are, Dodge will monopolize it unless GM brings back Pontiac to make a new GTO or Firebird. Pony cars have become entirely track focused, and the Chevy SS flopped. Maybe Ford will do a new Super Snake.

>>13186 Tuning a car from factory for one thing is stupid. If it can't corner for shit, what is it good for? Yeah you could be the red traffic light hero, but fuck everyone who does that.

While it seemed like they made a resurgence their future looked bleak. But with Trump cutting some of the fuel economy red tape bullshit they've got another 8 years left now. But honestly while there's some pony cars on offer by the big 3, that produce some massive power, they're not muscle cars. Muscle cars are sedans, maybe coupe form, with plenty of power on the cheap. The closest is the Camaro and if you want the V8 it starts out at $38,000. Any goodies outside of paint push it over $40,000. Dodge is really the only one offering a true Muscle cars and those start at $40,000 for the V8 as well. >>13190 >But hurt Euro who can't even afford a bit of Americana detected

>>13192 I always hated the distinction between muscle cars and pony cars, as I always felt they were the same aside from a few technicalities. But if you're going to follow through, the Camaro/Mustang/Challenger are ALL pony cars and the "true" muscle cars are the Charger and maybe the Corvette, although since the C4 it's been more of a low-end grand tourer than a muscle car. Ford used to have the Thunderbird and Falcon way back when, but the former became a sports luxury sedan in the early 70s and the latter went down south for the rest of its long lifespan.

>>13193 I always though the distinction was that pony cars were distinct coupe (more like cheap sports cars) models while Muscle cars were just sedans or wagons with as much motor could fit in the front. It's why the GTO is a Muscle Car while the Firebird is a Pony car.

>>13193 >>13194 I always understood a "pony car" to be a car (exclusively American) that was just a sports car on a purpose-built performance platform, as opposed to an upgraded version of a shared chassis. Mustang vs Focus RS. Wiki gives a different definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony_car

>>13195 I've always thought the term "pony car" literally meant "a car which is like the mustang".

>>13195 >purpose-built performance platform, as opposed to an upgraded version of a shared chassis But the first gen Mustang is famous for mostly being Falcon bits underneath. But it's far more stylish, and bit more sporting credential. >>13199 Well that's not WRONG, they're not called pony cars for nothing. But it's more the small cheap sports car aspects being described.

Back just in time to be ruined by disgusting high belt lines and have all the HP soaked up by feature bloat. I wonder how long before the Mustang, Camaro, and Charger/Challenger are reduced to a shit choice between FWD and "AWD" consisting of a rear drive tacked onto the FWD model. And how long before the Camaro's windshield/windows disappear entirely into the body.

>>13208 >the first gen Mustang is famous for mostly being Falcon bits underneath I didn't know that, kek

Just bought a 1983 Camaro Z28, previous owner swapped out the stock 305 V8 with a 350 SBC bored out 0.020. With an Edelbrock Performer intake, Holley DP 750 CFM carb, and short pipe headers coupled with an Eaton 3.73 posi in the rear end, she goes. I think the third gen cars are really underrated as far as cheap platforms go for "pony cars". Looking at the new Dodge Challenger, Chevy Camaro, and Ford Mustang, its hard to imagine how much HP they're able to put out nowadays from factory cars.