Ford Mustang

This is gonna be a rant, a rant I’ve been working on for weeks on an issue that refuses to die. And I’M going to put it to rest, for good.

“That’s not a muscle car!”

It IS a muscle car, sod off.
It IS a muscle car, sod off.

I am absolutely SICK AND TIRED of hearing this bullsh*t everywhere. People are under the assumption that the newer muscle cars, the Camaro and Mustang, aren’t muscle cars, mostly due to their nimble aspects. Alternatively, people belive that f!cking European cars like the Mercedes Benz C63 AMG (great car though, my favorite German car, actually) are muscle cars.
Really?

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

First off, the Mustang a Camaro, whether you like them or not, ARE muscle cars. All muscle cars share the same general description:

-2 doors (except the Charger)

-4 seats

-V8 (except the GNX)

-RWD

-American-manufacturer (or Australian, in some cases).

What, you think that’s just my opinion? Read these:

Merriam-Webster states that a muscle car is “any of a group of American-made 2-door sports coupes with powerful engines designed for high-performance driving”. Although a broad definition, it still stands.

The American Muscle Car Club says “A muscle car, by the strictest definition, is an intermediate sized, performance oriented model, powered by a large V8 engine, at an affordable price. Most of these models were based on “regular” production vehicles. These vehicles are generally not considered muscle cars, even when equipped with large V8s. If there was a high performance version available, it gets the credit, and not the vehicle that it was based on” and “In addition to fullsize and intermediate muscle cars, a number of smaller vehicles started appearing on the automotive performance scene. These new ‘pony cars’ and compact cars are generally considered muscle cars only if they have the top of the line performance engines and options.”

The Mustang and Camaro fit in these descriptions perfectly.

“Hurr durr, handling.”

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

Here’s a fun fact for you: You know the original Camaro Z28, the Camaro which everyone calls a muscle car, or has at some point? It had a revised suspension system and disc brakes STRICTLY for the purpose of handling. Not unlike the newer Z28 and ZL1, which everyone tends to call “non-muscle cars”.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

Similarly, the original GT350s and GT500s came with bigger brakes, power steering, and upgraded suspension systems.

Fact is that muscle cars are meant to have a ton of performance at a decent price. And what does performance include? HANDLING. This means that the ones that can handle live up to the name perfectly, even if there wasn’t a set definition.

Need another example? Sure.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

Another example? Sure.

Let’s say you run track, as with everyone in your family. You can take the straights pretty well, but you can’t go around the turns as quick as you’d like to. Your entire family is renowned for it, except for your brother, who is slightly better at it. You eventually have a son, who is a BOSS at taking the turns. Is he not your son because of the fact that he can around bends nicely? Hell no. This applies to muscle cars as well.

However, the “non-muscle car” term isn’t too wrong, I’ll admit.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

Remember, muscle cars are still sports cars, because a sports car, as defined by good ol’ Wikipedia, is “A sports car is a small, usually two seater, two door automobile designed for spirited performance and nimble handling”. And modern muscle cars are what? That’s right; designed for spirited performance and nimble handling.

Too long, didn’t read? I’ll sum this up.

A muscle car is not a car that is only meant to drive straight really fast. A muscle car is not a really powerful non-turning vehicle. A muscle car is any car that is American (or Australian), V8, RWD, 2 doors, and 4 seats, meant for performance. Compared to other performance cars, a muscle car is comparatively cheaper. Handling does not factor in.

What, you thought I was done, here? Nope.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

This doesn’t just apply to muscle cars.

Many, MANY cars throughout modern times have constantly been misclassified simply because they are lacking or winning in one area. Take, for instance, the MX-5.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

Older.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

Older.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

OLDER.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

That’s the one. The MX-5 NA, which people rag on about it having “not enough power”, therefore making them say it isn’t a sports car.

Lemme repeat what has already been said.

“A sports car is a small, usually two seater, two door automobile designed for spirited performance and nimble handling.”

No one mentioned power, here. Power has nothing to do with it. Besides, there have been many cars preceding the MX-5, and what do people call those vehicles?

SPORTS CARS.

Plus, people always say that the BRZ/GT86/FR-S are sports cars, yet only have a little extra power! Really? That is absolutely ridiculous.

“It’s a rally car, bro!”

No it isn’t, you uncultured, unlearned, and unobservant swine.
No it isn’t, you uncultured, unlearned, and unobservant swine.

Another one which pisses me off to the millionth power is when people call WRX STis, Evos, and cars like them “Rally cars”, especially when people lower and stance them.
The amount of sense this makes is literally non-existent.

First, the definition of rallying breaks this logic.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

According to Wikipedia, “Rallying is a form of motorsport that takes place on public or private roads with modified production or specially built road-legal cars.” The key words here are “specially built road-legal cars”. From the factory, STis and Evos are NOT able to compete in rally, because they are bone stock, and not specially built. There are regulations and requirements needed to compete in rally, and the latter cars wouldn’t be allowed to compete.

Even if they were allowed to compete in their stock states, they would not be able to keep up with the actual rally cars. The suspension systems on these cars are much too low, and would not be suitable for bumpy tracks. They’re meant for tarmac roads, not dirt roads.

Second, they’re not safe.

I got the least-scarring picture on Google available, to save your eyes.
I got the least-scarring picture on Google available, to save your eyes.

Your car has to have a safety/roll cage installed. If you were to roll over after a jump (due to your illegal suspension, probably), you’d smash your head.

Third, they can’t compete.

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

They’re much too heavy to keep up with the lightweight rally cars, and the gears are too long, as well. The acceleration would be abysmal in comparison. Plus, like I said before, their suspension systems are too short.

Simply put, they aren’t rally cars, so stancing them is fine (in some cases, dumb, but fine).

Incorrectly-Labeled - Properly Categorizing Cars #blogpost - Blog

Before you enter the comment section and make some long-winded comment about how I’m wrong (like I probably would, not gonna deny it), just know that you shouldn’t go throwing around random terms of cars without knowing the full definition behind them. STis are not rally cars, Miatas are sports cars, and ZL1s/GT350rs + the like are muscle cars. I guess you also now know the full logic behind my comments.

I guess that’ll wrap things up, here. Tis’ been Flux of CarThrottle. Peace. 😀

P.S. THE ZL1 IS A MUSCLE CAR