|
American cars, or imports?? (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| Ok, I think the problem is I'm talking about the regular sport cars you can buy in a store and you're talking about uniquely built cars for the WRC or the drag races. In that case the best car is that british one with two Rolls Royce jet engines which have 80000kg thrust each and that is able to travel at near the speed of sound. Damn, I guess brits make the best cars then. Off I go to buy myself a Rover then. |
|
|
| GelatinPufF |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
The top companies are still the top companies, and we have been entering the age of affordable super car. Look at the Dodge Srt-4 18 grand with something like a 13.5 quarter and 5.5 0 -60. So cheap, badass car, nice ass parts. Euro cars are running more efficiently and have been making HUGE steps these days.
The reason you got the award is because youre ass backwards on every statement you made, and it was ridiculous. |
Well you do know that the Srt-4 incorporates japanese technology by using the mitsubishi TD04 turbocharger :rolleyes:
I find it quiet amusing that it took over 10 years for american manufactures to implement *cough*STEAL*cough* such widely standard technology from japan.
And with that in mind http://www.allpar.com/neon/neon-srt-4.html
| quote: | | Brooke McClelland wrote: According to their chassis dyno, this Neon puts out 223 HP and 250 lb-ft of torque at the wheels! ... In comparison, their test of a 2002 Nissan Sentra SE-R, which is rated at 175 HP, put out just 141 HP at the wheels. |
And then I find it equally amusing that they comapared the 2.4 turbo of the Srt-10 to the NON-TURBO of the Nissan Sentra SE-R (in morons :rolleyes: )
Now i dont want to sound like im braggin about my car, but it's 96.....and it's a ONLY a 2.0L (with the stock turbo), and brand new, it also ran 0-60mph in 5.8 and a flat 14 seconds over the quarter...
Now with the Srt-4 having 7 extra years to be deveoloped and refined to beat my 200sx, and with it having an extra .4L of engine capacity (it's a 2.4L turbo), which do you think is the better car? :rolleyes: |
|
|
| MrSquirrel |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Ok, I think the problem is I'm talking about the regular sport cars you can buy in a store and you're talking about uniquely built cars for the WRC or the drag races. In that case the best car is that british one with two Rolls Royce jet engines which have 80000kg thrust each and that is able to travel at near the speed of sound. Damn, I guess brits make the best cars then. Off I go to buy myself a Rover then. |
You would be speaking of ThrustSSC
736.035 mph...well over the speed of sound.
MrS |
|
|
| Orbax |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Ok, I think the problem is I'm talking about the regular sport cars you can buy in a store and you're talking about uniquely built cars for the WRC or the drag races. In that case the best car is that british one with two Rolls Royce jet engines which have 80000kg thrust each and that is able to travel at near the speed of sound. Damn, I guess brits make the best cars then. Off I go to buy myself a Rover then. |
and not really. because that rocket isnt the result of numerous modifications to a car. it was built from the ground up as a rocket. and even if I took an engine out of a car and placed jet thrusters in it would totally fall out of the scope of what a car is defined as. WRC are cars that you and I can purchase and mod to meet those specifications. There are SCCA rallies that normal average americans take stock WRXs and rally out so it is very capable off the line as a fully functional rally car.
WRC does incorporate a lot of crazy jap . The suzuki is probably the most feared car ever in rallying with its "killer" B rating and pushing 1200 HP i believe. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| quote: | Originally posted by GelatinPufF
Well you do know that the Srt-4 incorporates japanese technology by using the mitsubishi TD04 turbocharger :rolleyes: |
lol, and you do know that japs incorporate the american idea of a ing car dont you :rolleyes:
| quote: | | I find it quiet amusing that it took over 10 years for american manufactures to implement *cough*STEAL*cough* such widely standard technology from japan. |
we usually dont need turbos, the 2.0 is just becoming popular in America and thats why the new implementations. People are no longer interested in pure 0-60 so American companies are smart enough to shift to smaller compact cars that can corner and are all around more versatile. It actually makes perfect sense.
| quote: | | And then I find it equally amusing that they comapared the 2.4 turbo of the Srt-10 to the NON-TURBO of the Nissan Sentra SE-R (in morons :rolleyes: ) |
who gives a ? there are lots of cars with turbos that i would never even remotely put into the classes of naturally aspirated engines. Porsche comes to mind pretty quick and im not talking about their turbo carrying models obviously.
| quote: | Now i dont want to sound like im braggin about my car, but it's 96.....and it's a ONLY a 2.0L (with the stock turbo), and brand new, it also ran 0-60mph in 5.8 and a flat 14 seconds over the quarter...
Now with the Srt-4 having 7 extra years to be deveoloped and refined to beat my 200sx, and with it having an extra .4L of engine capacity (it's a 2.4L turbo), which do you think is the better car? :rolleyes: |
the srt 4. hands down. number one, america put a man on the moon 30 years ago. this isnt something we have been trying to figure out. Like i said earlier the "7 years" of development were Americans gradually shifting to a compact frame of mind. Also, with recent films such as fast and furious, the demand for these cars has reached a peak. They are merely following the trend. This car is incredibly affordable, and has very very high quality parts in it. The shere durability of the car is going to be fantastic, and the modding potential is still there to drop times even further. Add that to having a Dodge warranty and cool lookin car, i think its one of the best packages out there. |
|
|
| SuperFarStucker |
chah.. to step aside from the thread hijacking I personally don't care one way or the other about cars ATM... (no money).
However, my friend is picking up a '94 3000gt vr-4 (3.0 v6 TT) tuesday this week on a trade in deal with his '00 eclipse GT (205 ponies @ crank) + cash, which is incredibly sweet. It's got 23k miles on it (hard to believe but true!) and they come with approx ~320 (at crank). AWD AWS, the car gets CRAZY launch times (no/minimal traction loss dropping the clutch @ 3k... turbo's spool at ~2.5k). All in all its one hell of a sweet ride and for 13 grand your never going to find a faster car (or mod one to be faster for that matter). Too bad the engines only last to about ~120k miles in the cars ...
Talk about a rice-killer.... |
|
|
| SuperFarStucker |
as for the land speed record I'm afraid a manned vehicle will never beat this. http://www.af.mil/stories/123004755.shtml ... It has set the land world speed record which was unchanged for 20 years (ironically the previous one was set at the same launch site aswell). It's actually part of a missile defense system program.
0 - mach 8.5 (6416 MPH) in less than 6 seconds = 31 football fields per second. However it's just a solid state 4 stage rocket on a railguide, hardly a vehicle, even if it was I suspect it would instantly kill all its passengers as the initial force from that kind of speed would shatter/liquefy ones body (not to mention the sustained force would also be unbearable/bone crushing by several orders of magnitude). Still would be insane to see that |
|
|
| DJ Juno |
| quote: | Originally posted by SuperFarStucker
chah.. to step aside from the thread hijacking I personally don't care one way or the other about cars ATM... (no money).
However, my friend is picking up a '94 3000gt vr-4 (3.0 v6 TT) tuesday this week on a trade in deal with his '00 eclipse GT (205 ponies @ crank) + cash, which is incredibly sweet. It's got 23k miles on it (hard to believe but true!) and they come with approx ~320 (at crank). AWD AWS, the car gets CRAZY launch times (no/minimal traction loss dropping the clutch @ 3k... turbo's spool at ~2.5k). All in all its one hell of a sweet ride and for 13 grand your never going to find a faster car (or mod one to be faster for that matter). Too bad the engines only last to about ~120k miles in the cars ...
Talk about a rice-killer.... |
3000gt vr4, isa nice car. fast as from the line. but as soon as they get to about 100-115 mph, they really arent a threat. as they weigh alot. so top speed on them is nothing to brag of. but all and all, a nice car |
|
|
| Ukrainianstud |
ONE WORD
:eyes:SUBARU:eyes:
:D NO ONE CAN BEAT IT :D |
|
|
| Orbax |
| cept Markko in WRC Finland with Focus RS :tongue2 |
|
|
| GelatinPufF |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
lol, and you do know that japs incorporate the american idea of a ing car dont you :rolleyes: |
:rolleyes:
| quote: |
the srt 4. hands down. number one, america put a man on the moon 30 years ago. this isnt something we have been trying to figure out. Like i said earlier the "7 years" of development were Americans gradually shifting to a compact frame of mind. Also, with recent films such as fast and furious, the demand for these cars has reached a peak. They are merely following the trend. This car is incredibly affordable, and has very very high quality parts in it. The shere durability of the car is going to be fantastic, and the modding potential is still there to drop times even further. Add that to having a Dodge warranty and cool lookin car, i think its one of the best packages out there. |
Okay, now lets make a little comparison, where I'll point out just how ty the Srt-4 is compared to modern japanese technology.
The case in point, the nissan S15 Silvia Spec - R
Now the Srt-4 has a 2.4 litre turbo 4 putting out 215 hp, while the Spec - R with its 2.0 litre turbo 4 absoloutly s over it by putting out 247hp. (gotta love the SR20DET  ) So, you have an extra .4 of a litre, and are down by 35hp....what's with that ? :conf:
The Srt-4 uses a cheap 5 speed transmission, while the Spec-R uses a 6 speed
Not only that, the Spec-R is both faster from 0-60 and the quarter mile then the Srt-4....
now ill just hand things over to someone i found summed the car up pretty well :rolleyes:
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/automotive/59188
| quote: | | Wow! That is a lot to take in… rear wheel drive, 247hp, a 6-speed manual, big brakes, lightweight, and a multi-link suspension. However, those are not the car’s biggest selling points. The car’s $22,000 price tag is. Yes, at the current exchange rate, a Japanese Silvia would only cost $22,000 to an American consumer. As soon as that dirt-cheap price sinks in, you will realize that there is no other car currently sold in the US in this price range that could compete with it. But what about real-world performance? The Silvia doesn’t fail to please, with a 0 to 60mph time of under six seconds, a skid-pad score which exceeds .90g, and a 60 to 0mph braking distance of under 120 ft. Overall, it is an amazing package which sticks to the formula that made the original Japanese sports cars so popular |
| quote: |
the srt 4. hands down. number one, |
-in a girly american teeny bopper accent...-
"I dont think so"
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| nate735 |
Nothing like a BMW.
 |
|
|
|
|
