Drop-Dead Gorgeous MC4
I think the people at Ford have their act together with the Mercury MC4 (June '97). A practical, sporty car with styling moves that would make pedestrians do a double-take is something I want parked in my garage.
The MC4 should be produced here and now. Ford doesn't have much to brag about in the performance coupe arena these days. For the price of a well-equipped Mustang GT, you could get 90 more horsepower with a similarly outfitted Pontiac Firebird Formula. To match the power of a 305-horse Firebird, you'd have to get a Mustang SVT Cobra, but at that price, you could almost get something better, like a Toyota Supra. And the T-Bird has been retired. Ford fans need the MC4!
Michael PalsChesterton, Ind.via Motor Trend Online
"Drop-Dead Gorgeous" is certainly correct. It's just a cryin' shame that she had to share cover space with that metallic hamster.
William O. Treanor, IIINashville, Tenn.via the Internet
The MC4 car is a dream. As a car enthusiast, I long to see this automobile one day; as a technician, I dread it. Engineers make cars look so glamorous on the outside but compress everything to fit inside, particularly in the engine compartment. What's with these guys? Do they think technicians have go-go gadget arms or something? I love seeing the future cars, though. If it's one thing the engineers do have, it's imagination.
Scott BurrGrove City, Ohiovia Motor Trend Online
I like the car. It's a believable future model that Mercury knew how to bring down to earth. Most concept cars are way too trendy to be well received by the general public. If available, the MC4 would be a car I'd buy, as I did the new Taurus.
The jewel-like interior design is awesome; I love the way all that polished aluminum looks. I just wonder what would happen if the MC4 was parked in the sun-wouldn't all the accessories be too hot to touch?Juan MoncadaKingsport, Tenn.via the Internet
Concerning the cover of the June issue, the "drop-dead" part is right because I think Ford will kill the MC4 before it makes the production line. Ford engineers have too much time on their hands if they can design such an ugly vehicle. Instead, Ford should be working on updating the ugly cars they already have in production.
Jeff Young Jenera, Ohiovia the Internet
'98 Camaro
After seeing the 1998 Camaro in your May issue, I was shocked. First off, I loved how the new front end made this great car look. The only lacking element of current Camaros was their front end, which looked like a lame attempt to stretch and round out the third generation's fascia.
Although I liked all of the changes, Chevy ripped off the front of the 1998 Chrysler Concorde. Another thing that surprised me about the new Camaro was the increased power, or rather how Ford is so far behind, as far as power goes, in the pony car race. Let's face it, an LS1 Z28 would eat a Mustang GT alive any day of the week, no matter if my grandmother was going against Mario Andretti!
Nick SuizzoPark Ridge, Ill.via the Internet
Please tell me this is not the new Z28. I've owned three Camaros ('81, '86, and '95), and I was planning on a fourth, but after seeing the picture of the '98, Chevrolet just lost a customer. I was really excited about the new performance specs and know that no Camaro has ever run, or probably handled, better. But it is flat ugly. All of the past Camaros had eye-catching style, but this new one looks like a Ford Taurus with a big mouth up front. I hope that the Firebird does not follow suit, except for the LS1 engine. Good-bye Chevy, and hello Pontiac.
Alvie TaylorIngram, Texas
I like the new front end of the Camaro. Definite attitude: it almost looks mad, with the wide mouth and elongated eyes. You might say it's the cowl with a scowl.
Paul HippakaSan Diego, Calif.via the Internet
...
next page >>