Harry P.

That's why God invented the snap-on lid...

I'd go with McD coffee for the drive to work, the office machine once I get there. I've tried Starbucks coffee, and maybe it's just me, but it was awful! I'm not talking about the fancy-schmancy drinks they sell that have all sorts of stuff in them to disguise the taste of the coffee... I'm talking about plain old cream-and-sugar coffee (the only coffee I drink). Yuck! It tasted so bitter and bad! Never again for me.

Four cylinder turbo-305 HP, 300 lb/ft torque. V6- "more than" 300 HP (not sure how much more), 270 lb/ft torque V8- 420 HP, 390 lb/ft torque.

You got that right.

Please don't tell me you are one of those people who willingly pays five bucks for a cup of coffee...

Well, seeing as how there's either a gas station or a 7-11 on every corner, I think you'd be safe to venture out into the scary Arizona desert and be able to revive yourself pretty much any time. But hey... you're perfectly welcome to your heated/cooled cupholders. I have no problem with them... as long as they're optional!

Doesn't the styrofoam cup do a pretty good job keeping the coffee warm and the Big Gulp cold? And besides... when did we start to be incapable of driving somewhere without some sort of drink available?

Jeez, Rob... based on reading a lot of your posts over the years, you are such a slave to technology. Do you fire up the GPS when you walk to the mailbox? I get it... you work in the tech field. You have different expectations than most everyone else. But seriously... we need heated/cooled cupholders? Come on!

Look around. The price of everything has skyrocketed.

Rob, the proof is in the pudding. I gotta test drive one and compare it to my current V8 GT. Plus, the '15 finally gets IRS. Not just the high end models, but all of them. About time, if you ask me. And a 6-speed, which I wish I had now. I can't tell you how many times I wished I had one more gear...

I last owned a car with a four-cylinder turbo many years ago (1984 Dodge Daytona Turbo Z). I still remember that "kick in the pants" feeling when the turbo came on... pretty cool. That was back when "turbo lag" was the way things were, so when the turbo did kick in, man, you felt it! Assuming that today's turbo technology has advanced from where it was 30 years ago (and obviously it has), I can't wait to test drive a new eco-boost Mustang.

I also loved the retro Mustang. Heck, that's why I bought mine! Based purely on looks. I think it looks fantastic, but I'm liking the 2015. Not quite as retro, but still recognizable as a Mustang. I think the design team at Ford has handled the Mustang really well since the "new" retro look came along in '05. They've managed to freshen it up for '15 while still keeping the inherent "Mustangness." Great job on their part, IMO. I was reading about the 2015 Mustang eco-boost performance. Pretty impressive numbers. And again... ten grand less than the GT that makes its power the old-fashioned way...

It all depends on whose top ten list you want to believe. There are dozens of them. Some are a lot more legit than others. Some are downright useless.

No matter how you spin the facts, 24 different recalls involving 35 different models and 14 million cars within a six month period is NOT GOOD. In fact, it's unprecedented.

We've all been there!

I've been on the Ford website pricing out various models. I'm kind of interested in the eco-boost turbo model. I know, a four-banger "muscle car?" But it's very interesting. My current GT has the traditional V8, but the real truth is, 90% of the time I don't need what the car has, performance-wise. Yeah, it sounds cool, and when you want to go fast, you can, but the everyday cost is lousy fuel economy. And with gas back over $4 again, that eco-boost model is looking pretty good right now. Plus, the eco-boost model is ten grand less than the GT. http://bp3.ford.com/2015-Ford-Mustang#/Models/Style%5BBodyStyle:BS-BJ%5D

The important thing is to be able to discern between a news report and a talk/opinion show. The "talking heads" on TV are all speaking editorially about the news stories. You don't see the editorializing on a straight newscast. They may only cover certain stories and ignore others, but the stories they do cover are reported more or less factually. The CBS (or ABC or NBC) nightly news... straight news reporting (more or less). O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, Anderson Cooper, etc... talk and opinion about the current stories in the news. Shows like that may "report" breaking news, but they almost always follow with commentary on the story. That distinction–what is a "news report" and what is a "talk show"–is what a lot of Americans simply don't get. A lot of people think that Jon Stewart's show is an actual news show. Again... gather your news from more than one source. And know what you're watching.

Sometimes even more so!

That might be the case in one or two isolated incidents by one particular reporter. But major national media outlets as a whole (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc.) don't just make up stuff out of thin air.

Well, technically, it wasn't so much high taxes, but "taxation without representation" that irked the colonists. They were being taxed and ruled by a government in which they had no say. That's what PO'd the colonists more than the actual tax rates. Civics (not politics) lesson for the day...

I don't think any major media outlet literally makes up stuff. They all have their viewpoints and biases... every media outlet does... they all put their "spin" on things, but they don't just make up false stories. You can't just blindly follow any one news source and assume it's the gospel truth. You have to have enough sense to "shop around" and get the story from more than one source. That way you'll at least hear more than one side of any given story and you can make up your own mind as to what you want to believe. And you have to remember that there's a difference between a news show and an opinion/talk show. The worst thing is seeing people interviewed about their views, and they'll be asked, "what do you think of so-and-so as a news source?" And they'll say "oh, I can't stand them, they're all such (fill in the blank). "Have you ever watched that program?" "Of course not, I hate them."

Where??? The cheapest I've found is $15.95, but they charge me an extra three bucks because the Mustang takes six quarts instead of the usual five.

The thing that people are wondering about is the fact that he stated the kit has such a "major flaw" that, as I understand it, was apparently so bad that he decided to stop building the kit and he's trying to trade it away. Yet he won't tell anyone what that "major flaw" is. I have this new kit that everyone's talking about, and I found a problem with it so huge that I've given up on trying to build it... but I'm not going to tell you what that problem is... Kind of odd behavior, no?

Probably another GT coupe.

Published author, yes. 84 grand? More than I'm willing to spend on a car.