View Single Post
  #13  
Old July 29th 08, 04:56 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Spike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 413
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:28:51 -0400, "dwight" >
wrote:

>"WindsorFox<SS>" > wrote in message
...
>> dwight wrote:
>>> "Spike" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Don't take this as a negative directed at you, but how old are you?
>>>>
>>>> The following is not to say how it was so good back in the day, but as
>>>> an illustration of how similar it was. And cars of that era were
>>>> rusting out, had lower mileage, less safety features, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Being over 30+ (x2 :0) When I graduated high school in 1966, you could
>>>> buy a brand new Mustang for under $3,000. At that time, incomes were a
>>>> lot lower. As a Ranch Hand in Merced, CA, I made $76.10 per week
>>>> working 5.5 days from sun up to sun down. As a Manager Trainee in a
>>>> grocery store in 1966, I made $500 per month no matter how many hours
>>>> I worked.
>>>
>>>> snip gold standard era history lesson<
>>>
>>> Preach on, Spike. I remember when the new VW Beetles jumped from $1,595
>>> to $1,795. When we married, my wife and I bought a brand new 1978 Mustang
>>> II (a nice little six-cylinder hatchback model), and stretched for it -
>>> an incredible $5,000. The monthly payments were $108, and there were many
>>> months when we couldn't manage to pay on time.
>>>
>>> Somewhere around here, I still have a 1972 Ford price sheet for the new
>>> Mustangs, with a Chinese menu of available options. $3,000 would have
>>> bought a nicely-equipped model, but who could afford $3,000 in 1972?
>>>
>>> dwight
>>> (damn, we're old)
>>>
>>>

>>
>> Heh, here ya go gramps, take a look at this...
>>
>> http://www.shamikaserver.com/ssforum...2033#post82033
>>
>> or
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/5weq5o

>
>Hah! Not just 25-cent milk shakes, but wonderful, real, full-of-ice-cream
>milk shakes. And comic books, 3-for-a-quarter.
>
>In other words, the numbers may have changed, but the relativity hasn't.
>
>dwight
>

Dang! I think you have finally found proof of Eisensteen's Theory of
Relativity. All this time and I still though the proof was in how many
unknown relatives showed up for the reading of the will.
Ads