who can drive stick [Archive] - Yellowworld Forums

wylin

12-24-2002, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by armycommando_turned_doctor@Dec 23 2002, 09:38 PM
The only way to drive a sports car--e.g., my cobra :D , Supra, RX-7, etc--- or a pseudo-sports car---riced-out honda Civic, integ,------------ is stick.........
exactly, though i dont consider mustangs sports cars. to me a sports car is a 2 seat 2 door vehicle with relatively good acceleration.

sports cars:

Acura Nsx

BMW M roadster and Coupe, Z8

Chevy Corvette

Mazda Miata and Rx-7

Nissan 350Z and 300zx Twin turbo

Lotus Esprit, Elise

Ferrari mid engine types (f40, 355, 260, f50, etc)

Toyota 2000gt, Mr2 turbo/ MR-S

etc.

2 seaters.

Hiroshi2

12-24-2002, 05:52 PM

Yeah I can drive a stick but don't do it every day. I like it though, sometimes with a slushbox i feel like I'm ready to fall asleep. A stick keeps me thinking.

BTW, the new Z-car is 2 + 2. So do you not consider it a sports car?

lethal

12-24-2002, 06:26 PM

I drive one daily...pain in the ass in stop-and-go traffic though.

karizma

12-24-2002, 09:12 PM

im scared to go up hills with one haha...which would probably keep me away from sf for a while 0_o...i cant imagine driving through windy mountain roads in an auto though =P

mrazntre

12-24-2002, 09:33 PM

HAHAHA you're still my bitch.

Craig

12-24-2002, 09:39 PM

Yes, male, resonablely skilled not every day though
Actually, 'reasonably'.

mrazntre

12-25-2002, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by Craig@Dec 25 2002, 05:39 AM
Actually, 'reasonably'.
Okay, edited.

we all know that spelling isn't one of wylin's stronger points.

Commando_turned_MD

12-25-2002, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by wylin@Dec 24 2002, 03:36 PM
exactly, though i dont consider mustangs sports cars.  to me a sports car is a 2 seat 2 door vehicle with relatively good acceleration.

sports cars:

Acura Nsx

BMW M roadster and Coupe, Z8

Chevy Corvette

Mazda Miata and Rx-7

Nissan 350Z and 300zx Twin turbo

Lotus Esprit, Elise

Ferrari mid engine types (f40, 355, 260, f50, etc)

Toyota 2000gt, Mr2 turbo/ MR-S

etc.  

2 seaters.
Yup........True sports car can ONLY have two seats and two two doors with an above average ~1/4mile time~.

Although I'm not too big into cars, the only reason why I purchase the Cobra is because it's fast stock....Why would anyone buy a slow car and make it semi--fast, when you can purchase a fast car and make it even faster---if one desire to do so?

wylin

12-25-2002, 03:14 PM

actually the cobra is kinda slow in my book, and its pretty short in the handling department too. Rx-7 run circles around it.

Commando_turned_MD

12-25-2002, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by wylin@Dec 25 2002, 03:14 PM
actually the cobra is kinda slow in my book, and its pretty short in the handling department too. Rx-7 run circles around it.
If I could do it again, I would have purchase a Saleen instead...When I got my Cobra in 97, I just wanted a new car, something faster than my old 92 Honda Civic..........Yes, I used to drive a Civic---- :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross:

But next car I want is a HUMMER H1....................or the Miltary Hummer---no AC and noisy as hell, but it's the KING of the Road.........10MPG..... :P

wylin

12-25-2002, 05:28 PM

Hmm, my next car purchase will be sumthing forced induction and i might be driving from the right side.!

mrazntre

12-25-2002, 08:37 PM

i consider a real sports car something that you could NOT drive on an everyday basis even if you wanted to do so.... basically, a race car.

ie.

saleen s7
mclaren f1
all ferrari's
all lambo's
all bugatti's

cars can be fast, and feel like sports cars, but c'mon.. if it was a real sports car, it would feel like shit to ride it everyday. i'm glad i don't have to drive my mr2 everyday anymore, the ride is way too harsh, the clutch is way too heavy and the exhaust is way too loud.

537

12-31-2002, 11:17 AM

Man, Sy.....I feel ya.

If I hit a bump in my car, I piss blood for a week.
Clutch effort is at least giving my left leg a workout.
Exhaust is pretty loud, but I drive like an old man nowadays so I can control it.
I remembered changing rotors every few months because my race pads were eating through them.
My camber and toe were setup for track use, and would eat up street tires.
Fuel computer was a bitch to tune depending on ambient temps/altitude/barometer readings.
Depending on the track, you either get all kinds of dirt in the car or bits of rubber and grease. It's a nightmare to clean.
Five point harness won't even let you grab a cig from the glove compartment.
No radio.

mrazntre

12-31-2002, 07:32 PM

*sigh*....

i'm gettin old...

oh, btw.. buy your tires at America's tires.. it's a lil bit more and shit, but if you buy their "certificate" if any damage happens to your tire.. say a nail going thru your sidewall on all 4 tires once they hit 40% tread........... they'll give you new tires. only catch is, you have to buy a new certificate per tire.

you figure it out. :)

man.. i couldn't even tune my car, so if the weather went foul, so did my idle. . . . =(

i never got the 5 point harness seats tho, since i didn't wanna drop for bride seats.

i hate that feeling when you hit a hard bump and you feel like your rim just cracked and it'll shatter the second you go past 60 mph... *shiver*

teaz0r

01-01-2003, 09:51 AM

i drove stick everyday whilst living in england.
now that i'm in bangkok i alternate between a stick and a triptronic auto.

thaite

01-01-2003, 11:32 AM

I can drive a stick skillfully, though my current vehicle (Toyota 4Runner) is automatic.

Watcha doin' in Bangkok, Pip?

teaz0r

01-01-2003, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by buoywonder@Jan 2 2003, 02:32 AM
I can drive a stick skillfully, though my current vehicle (Toyota 4Runner) is automatic.

Watcha doin' in Bangkok, Pip?
i was working as a travel writer.

now i'm teaching at princeton review and kaplan.
and i'm a ta at the engineering dept at the local university.
yeah. and i bum around. trying to figure out what i wanna do next.

i eat a lot in bangkok too. :P

Dhaval 4 U 2 NV

01-09-2003, 01:49 AM

...

well, thats pathetic... how can u define a "sports" car on the basis of seat number and acceleration alone?

my criteria is as follows:

- Muscle: it has to have power to show.... approx. 300 horsepower to begin with.
- Shape: it has to look sporty.... in the sense aerodymanic, low, wide, appealing.
- Upgradability: almost all sports cars have the ability to always boost the horsepower to double base. This gives one an idea on how good the car is able to take on. (tough, or a voos)
- Seats: i don't think this should matter, sports cars are different from racing mods.
- Wheels: should be able to take 18 inch rims, with phase 2 wide tires(these are about a foot wide).
- Then ofcourse the looks: get zenon projector head lights, clear altezza type tail, kit, spoiler, etc... bling bling.

Some cars i think fit this... that are reasonably priced... ofcourse if it costs over 70 k, u really have nthing to prove anyway: 1998 Toyota Supra, 2002 Nissan 300ZX, RUF GT2, Mustang 5.0, and then the exotics... lambhorghinis, porshes (they are OK), ferrari (especially the Modena), etc.

later
dhaval
...

BaiginLong

01-09-2003, 01:50 AM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 9 2003, 03:49 AM
...

well, thats pathetic... how can u define a "sports" car on the basis of seat number and acceleration alone?

my criteria is as follows:

- Muscle: it has to have power to show.... approx. 300 horsepower to begin with.
- Shape: it has to look sporty.... in the sense aerodymanic, low, wide, appealing.
- Upgradability: almost all sports cars have the ability to always boost the horsepower to double base. This gives one an idea on how good the car is able to take on. (tough, or a voos)
- Seats: i don't think this should matter, sports cars are different from racing mods.
- Wheels: should be able to take 18 inch rims, with phase 2 wide tires(these are about a foot wide).
- Then ofcourse the looks: get zenon projector head lights, clear altezza type tail, kit, spoiler, etc... bling bling.

Some cars i think fit this... that are reasonably priced... ofcourse if it costs over 70 k, u really have nthing to prove anyway: 1998 Toyota Supra, 2002 Nissan 300ZX, RUF GT2, Mustang 5.0, and then the exotics... lambhorghinis, porshes (they are OK), ferrari (especially the Modena), etc.

later
dhaval
...
yeah this boy right here
always driving like he's racing
and don't lie Dhaval cause I ride with you a lot

Dhaval 4 U 2 NV

01-09-2003, 02:02 AM

...

oh hehehe....

i forgot to mention wat i drive. 1993 Honda Civic EX Coupe, 5 speed manual, V-Tec. That year mdel for some reason had funky colors, i got it used so i had not choice... a shade between maroon and purple... shhhhiiit i don't know. But i plan on getting a bright thick yellow color color soon. 16-17 inch rims... with phase 1 tires. Terminator 2 spoiler, custom body kit, matrix tail light, zenon projector headlights, a stiff strut/suspension, ..... ahhh and then the engine... of course get the inside all reinforced with sports parts. Intake, supercharger, headers, stand alone cooling system, stand alone injection system, full 3 inch piping for exhaust from catalyst( and the of course a muffler with high air flow), and finally the last thing to to... an all wheel drive conversion. That will leave me with about 350HP at the wheels.

Hell... might as well get a nice sports bike .... it will beat a 700 HP Supra anyday. hehehe.... plus it is a hell of a lot cheaper !!!

later
dhaval
...

Arex

01-09-2003, 05:25 AM

Originally posted by armycommando_turned_doctor@Dec 25 2002, 03:48 PM
If I could do it again, I would have purchase a Saleen instead...When I got my Cobra in 97, I just wanted a new car, something faster than my old 92 Honda Civic..........Yes, I used to drive a Civic---- :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross: :gross:

But next car I want is a HUMMER H1....................or the Miltary Hummer---no AC and noisy as hell, but it's the KING of the Road.........10MPG..... :P
Gah! I'm assuming, since you've got a 'stang Cobra, that you enjoy spirited driving now and then and you might even consider yourself a driving enthusiast. That being the case, how could you jump ship into a Hummer/Humvee?! Granted, it's perhaps the baddest SUV out there ('cept maybe the Benz G-wagon), but talk about wallow wallow wallow and lack of performance... :gross: Maybe as a second vehicle 'cause I'd go crazy without a regular dose of zig and zoom...

Alex

wylin

01-09-2003, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 9 2003, 01:49 AM
...

well, thats pathetic... how can u define a "sports" car on the basis of seat number and acceleration alone?

my criteria is as follows:

- Muscle: it has to have power to show.... approx. 300 horsepower to begin with.
- Shape: it has to look sporty.... in the sense aerodymanic, low, wide, appealing.
- Upgradability: almost all sports cars have the ability to always boost the horsepower to double base. This gives one an idea on how good the car is able to take on. (tough, or a voos)
- Seats: i don't think this should matter, sports cars are different from racing mods.
- Wheels: should be able to take 18 inch rims, with phase 2 wide tires(these are about a foot wide).
- Then ofcourse the looks: get zenon projector head lights, clear altezza type tail, kit, spoiler, etc... bling bling.

Some cars i think fit this... that are reasonably priced... ofcourse if it costs over 70 k, u really have nthing to prove anyway: 1998 Toyota Supra, 2002 Nissan 300ZX, RUF GT2, Mustang 5.0, and then the exotics... lambhorghinis, porshes (they are OK), ferrari (especially the Modena), etc.

later
dhaval
...
:lol:

try taking sumthing that weights so much like a supra at 3600lb or a 4000lb 3000ft thru the autoX or salom then u realize my evalution of sports car is correct, because these large Gran Touring (GT) cars are too large to be truely manueverable. also i dont consider anything AWD or FWD a sports car because both are the incorrect driveline of a classic vehicle. For example i consider a miata a sports car over a more powerful sports coupe like an integra based on that the miata can slide and is rear wheel drive.

what the hell are phase 2 u mean plus 1 and plus 2 wheels. basically plus is u have a stock 195/65R14tire on 14x5.5 wheel then u add 10mm to width and 1 inch in wheel height and drop the sidewal by 10mm thus 205/55R15 on a 15x6.5 wheel will be plus 1, then do the same for plus 2 then u get 215/45R16 tires on a 16x7.5 wheel.

yuck big wings and body kits rice! i scream rice! do i see rice?

wylin

01-09-2003, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 9 2003, 02:02 AM
...

oh hehehe....

i forgot to mention wat i drive. 1993 Honda Civic EX Coupe, 5 speed manual, V-Tec. That year mdel for some reason had funky colors, i got it used so i had not choice... a shade between maroon and purple... shhhhiiit i don't know. But i plan on getting a bright thick yellow color color soon. 16-17 inch rims... with phase 1 tires. Terminator 2 spoiler, custom body kit, matrix tail light, zenon projector headlights, a stiff strut/suspension, ..... ahhh and then the engine... of course get the inside all reinforced with sports parts. Intake, supercharger, headers, stand alone cooling system, stand alone injection system, full 3 inch piping for exhaust from catalyst( and the of course a muffler with high air flow), and finally the last thing to to... an all wheel drive conversion. That will leave me with about 350HP at the wheels.

Hell... might as well get a nice sports bike .... it will beat a 700 HP Supra anyday. hehehe.... plus it is a hell of a lot cheaper !!!

later
dhaval
...
sounds like kinda u need sum schooling,

- jackson supercharger kit or vortech supercharger makes 200-230@wheel on B16 or B18 engines, on D16 less.
- the body mods i hope ur kidding....lol terminator 2 wing wat the heck is that.
- zenon = Xenon or High Intesity Discharge ie HID lighting
- stand alone cooling whats that a fridge in your trunk? u probably mean an EMS system
- AWD convesion how cut a floor board out and go flintstones style?

thank u jaime for the pix
http://www.gixxer.com/uploads/1040680362.jpg

Dhaval 4 U 2 NV

01-09-2003, 04:26 PM

....

hahaha....

There are different ways of saying the same thing. yurs being more prominent i think, aswell as the same mind set.

supras are manueverable... too light is not good... and no a car like a supra or nissan 300zx is not a GTV. talk about a acura tl or montecarlos if that is wat u mean.
Terminator 2 in a type of spoiler, two flang raised with 2 wings, one top of another, with the top one curved and the bottum straight.
it is easy to talk about superchargers... but to know which is right for the engine is wat gets you... and turbos are even harder to get a hold of for a 93 honda cvc... mostly it has to be custom. that is why i left it only as a supercharger. i wouldn't want my 1.5 dohc vtec forced over 350 total.... the last thing i want to worry about is being crazy. now if i had a 5.0 L.. then sure.. the big head makes it very upgradable. i don't want to be in the front page of a paper (that being the pic of my burned body, if they can find any parts of it.. if the car does blow on me).

one can nvr be too carful with mods. thas why i am thinking about getting a sprt bike... 1000cc... now that is power.... manuverability? don't even bother.

i have driven a miata.... it is not a car i would want to drive for sports.... ouch... i feel sorry for the person that is in one of those when he gets in an accident. besides .. the hood area is too small to do some serious mods. that is why u don't see too many changes being done on a miata. (so much for the enuendo... "family of sports cars") . Don't get me wrong, they are great cars... but not that great. Hell the skyline R34 IS BIG... but it can handle if u know wat u r doing.

later
dhaval
...

wylin

01-09-2003, 04:58 PM

miata u see them on circular track and SCCA events alot along w/ AW11 Mr2, AE86 Corolla, and CRX, they arent the typical ricer cars. ask Tre he has one of the miata's rivals car. I hope u know that the Fd3s 93-95 Rx-7 is based off the miata they share alot of the chassis parts and basic design is similar. The rx-7 can handle lotsa power....and i seen 200-300hp turbo miatas ask karizma her ex had one !

For civic i'd just motorswap the D15/ D16 is trash and just use a B16a2 or B18C engine and have variable valve timing and build it to handle well sum nice Tein HA or Flex coil over, sum 15x6.5 spoon RE388 wheel w/ sticky Falken Azenis or Yokohama AVS sports, stiffen up the chassis w/ sway and strut tower bars. and TAKE it to the track where it matters the Autocross or the track event like willow springs or laguna seca raceways.

forced induction is easily accesable for honda car, greddy and hks make turbo ktis, so do drag engineering. jackson racing and vortech make supercharger units. I denno forced induction doesnt scare me at all... Ren, me, Tre, and 537 all have turbo charged cars... ren has an mr2 and talon, tre a wrx and mr2, me a 240sx (turbo), and 537 an eclipse.

yah i denno bout body mods unless it comes outa japan or germany, if not i ignore them. If its like a real mugen or feel's piece for honda its impressive, ricer stuff isnt. Im not a big FWD fan nor a fan of ugly body kits. I believe in speed and handlling above astetics hence i tuned my car for those things.

Commando_turned_MD

01-09-2003, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by wylin@Jan 9 2003, 08:18 AM
Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 9 2003, 01:49 AM
...

well, thats pathetic... how can u define a "sports" car on the basis of seat number and acceleration alone?

my criteria is as follows:

- Muscle: it has to have power to show.... approx. 300 horsepower to begin with.
- Shape: it has to look sporty.... in the sense aerodymanic, low, wide, appealing.
- Upgradability: almost all sports cars have the ability to always boost the horsepower to double base. This gives one an idea on how good the car is able to take on. (tough, or a voos)
- Seats: i don't think this should matter, sports cars are different from racing mods.
- Wheels: should be able to take 18 inch rims, with phase 2 wide tires(these are about a foot wide).
- Then ofcourse the looks: get zenon projector head lights, clear altezza type tail, kit, spoiler, etc... bling bling.

Some cars i think fit this... that are reasonably priced... ofcourse if it costs over 70 k, u really have nthing to prove anyway: 1998 Toyota Supra, 2002 Nissan 300ZX, RUF GT2, Mustang 5.0, and then the exotics... lambhorghinis, porshes (they are OK), ferrari (especially the Modena), etc.

later
dhaval
...
:lol:

try taking sumthing that weights so much like a supra at 3600lb or a 4000lb 3000ft thru the autoX or salom then u realize my evalution of sports car is correct, because these large Gran Touring (GT) cars are too large to be truely manueverable. also i dont consider anything AWD or FWD a sports car because both are the incorrect driveline of a classic vehicle. For example i consider a miata a sports car over a more powerful sports coupe like an integra based on that the miata can slide and is rear wheel drive.

what the hell are phase 2 u mean plus 1 and plus 2 wheels. basically plus is u have a stock 195/65R14tire on 14x5.5 wheel then u add 10mm to width and 1 inch in wheel height and drop the sidewal by 10mm thus 205/55R15 on a 15x6.5 wheel will be plus 1, then do the same for plus 2 then u get 215/45R16 tires on a 16x7.5 wheel.

yuck big wings and body kits rice! i scream rice! do i see rice?
RICER :P

zooommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

PREPARE FOR TAKE OFF...........

BeTheReds

01-10-2003, 12:29 AM

I learned stick cuz stick is cheaper when you wanna buy a car.

My stock civic is still being unused in my back yard...
I never had the chance (translation MONEY) to rice it out. Don't really know if I want to.

A girl taught me to drive stick.

mrazntre

01-10-2003, 05:26 PM

a sitting car can lead to a lot of engine and component failure.

mrazntre

01-10-2003, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 10 2003, 12:26 AM
....

hahaha....

There are different ways of saying the same thing. yurs being more prominent i think, aswell as the same mind set.

supras are manueverable... too light is not good... and no a car like a supra or nissan 300zx is not a GTV. talk about a acura tl or montecarlos if that is wat u mean.
Terminator 2 in a type of spoiler, two flang raised with 2 wings, one top of another, with the top one curved and the bottum straight.
it is easy to talk about superchargers... but to know which is right for the engine is wat gets you... and turbos are even harder to get a hold of for a 93 honda cvc... mostly it has to be custom. that is why i left it only as a supercharger. i wouldn't want my 1.5 dohc vtec forced over 350 total.... the last thing i want to worry about is being crazy. now if i had a 5.0 L.. then sure.. the big head makes it very upgradable. i don't want to be in the front page of a paper (that being the pic of my burned body, if they can find any parts of it.. if the car does blow on me).

one can nvr be too carful with mods. thas why i am thinking about getting a sprt bike... 1000cc... now that is power.... manuverability? don't even bother.

i have driven a miata.... it is not a car i would want to drive for sports.... ouch... i feel sorry for the person that is in one of those when he gets in an accident. besides .. the hood area is too small to do some serious mods. that is why u don't see too many changes being done on a miata. (so much for the enuendo... "family of sports cars") . Don't get me wrong, they are great cars... but not that great. Hell the skyline R34 IS BIG... but it can handle if u know wat u r doing.

later
dhaval
...
huh?

1000cc is power? uhmm... no.

sport bikes are fast because they don't have a 2500lbs chassis that comes along with the motor. it's hp to weight ratio. not power.

why would you even bother with a 1.5l civic motor?

miata's are not usually "souupped" up because of SCCA rules and regulations. it's basically broken down by stock and stock + performance mods. this is the reason why most miatas are stock. also, miata's are a maintsream sport car, which means a lot of normal people drive it. many who are uninterested in doing anything to their cars other than drive it.

<<exactly how do you compare an r34 with awd and a 2 seater miata with rwd?>>

JR makes an SC kit for the miata.
13b can also be swapped in.

princess

01-10-2003, 05:41 PM

i can drive, but i cant drive it well. i dont have a stick shift car to practice on, thats why. i use my friends. we trade cars around sometimes.

Dhaval 4 U 2 NV

01-12-2003, 01:16 AM

....

maybe we should definately tell each other a more precise definition of a sports car bc wat started this was not enough and unforunately wat i said was too much

later
dhaval
....

mrazntre

01-12-2003, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 12 2003, 09:16 AM
....

maybe we should definately tell each other a more precise definition of a sports car bc wat started this was not enough and unforunately wat i said was too much

later
dhaval
....
nah..

we define our own definitions of what a sports car is and try to infringe on everyone else's ideas of what they think a sports car is.

Dhaval 4 U 2 NV

01-12-2003, 07:38 PM

...

hey

let not get too overly peripheral here.

here is is wat i think is a criteria i find very discriptive of a sports car.

1. Aerodynamics
2. Functionability
3. Handling
4. Performance

all i am trying to proof here (for the record) is that sports cars are not based on being two door, and having a good acceleration. That is only part of the answer.

1. aerodynamics... well the word is pretty self explanitory... wide, low center of gravity, smooth looks.
2. functionability... wat is its purpose? and how well does it fit everyday usage... but of course one doesn't drive a lambhorghini everyday and put milage on it... but u get wat i mean
3. handling... if it is a sports car it better have a nice way of gettiing around curves, sharp turns, and tricks... a very nice suspension is a must.... and nice tires.
4. performance.... this is where we have been bogged down the past few posts.... well in general a low power to weight ratio is wat we all should look for.

by the way ... u defeated your own arguement about car power when u said bikes have a very good power to weight ratio... so maybe power is not always everything

later
dhaval
...

mrazntre

01-12-2003, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 13 2003, 03:38 AM
...

hey

let not get too overly peripheral here.

here is is wat i think is a criteria i find very discriptive of a sports car.

1. Aerodynamics
2. Functionability
3. Handling
4. Performance

all i am trying to proof here (for the record) is that sports cars are not based on being two door, and having a good acceleration. That is only part of the answer.

1. aerodynamics... well the word is pretty self explanitory... wide, low center of gravity, smooth looks.
2. functionability... wat is its purpose? and how well does it fit everyday usage... but of course one doesn't drive a lambhorghini everyday and put milage on it... but u get wat i mean
3. handling... if it is a sports car it better have a nice way of gettiing around curves, sharp turns, and tricks... a very nice suspension is a must.... and nice tires.
4. performance.... this is where we have been bogged down the past few posts.... well in general a low power to weight ratio is wat we all should look for.

by the way ... u defeated your own arguement about car power when u said bikes have a very good power to weight ratio... so maybe power is not always everything

later
dhaval
...
i do not see how my argument is contradictory. i did say power to weight ratio, yes. however you seem to have taken it out of context. power to weight ratio means, hp:weight. POWER in the sense of horsepower is deemed relative to weight in this case. You on the other hand were talking about bikes having real power as opposed to cars. I inferred from your comment that bikes have real power is actually something not in terms of power, rather it is ACCELERATION. Although power is relative in these two cases, ultimate power is measured in terms of horsepower output, that is, a motorcycle motor makes roughly 125 hp, as opposed to a 2jz-gte that makes 280 hp. Acceleration wise, the bike will smoke a Supra TT even though it has less horsepower.

So am I contradicting myself ? (again?)

mrazntre

01-12-2003, 09:06 PM

Originally posted by princess@Jan 11 2003, 01:41 AM
i can drive, but i cant drive it well. . . . .
FINALLY !!!!! a woman who can tell the TRUTH!!!!!

d00d.. wassup ? *wink, wink*

Dhaval 4 U 2 NV

01-13-2003, 01:51 PM

...

how did i ever take it out of context?

i was talking about bikes on a side note... but now that u mention it... i stilll didn't take it out of context... bikes are for true sports.

but since u seem to think we have been saying the same thing in a different way.... although i don't see u mentioning all the 4 points anywhere... i will drop the arguement.... frankly i think it was a very nice discussion. :P

but miatas... are nice.... and when did regulations ever stop sports enthusiasts from ever souping up their car. i am sure there are plenty miatas with secrets under the hood.

by the way their is nothing wrong with souping up a honda.... why pay 100G for a car when almost 30 % is actually a mark up??? i would rather get a nice looking prelude... or something... and spend 12 more grand moding it... and still be able to beat the odds. After all... thats the whole point right... spend the least to get the most.

later
dhaval
...

wylin

01-13-2003, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 13 2003, 01:51 PM

but miatas... are nice.... and when did regulations ever stop sports enthusiasts from ever souping up their car. i am sure there are plenty miatas with secrets under the hood.

by the way their is nothing wrong with souping up a honda.... why pay 100G for a car when almost 30 % is actually a mark up??? i would rather get a nice looking prelude... or something... and spend 12 more grand moding it... and still be able to beat the odds. After all... thats the whole point right... spend the least to get the most.

later
dhaval
...
Sports Car Club of America autocross class rules disallow you to modify a car beyond a certain point if u want to race in a certain bracket amongst similar performing stock cars. So do NHRA drag racing rules (used by IDRC and Battle of the imports) that pertain to safety and fairness are also limitations to what you can do to your car. Typically sanctioning bodies perscribe a limit to modifications in both amatuer and professional racing. Hence why WRC cars are typically mass produced compact cars (u need to make over 3000 units to qualify), have a lmit of 2000cc for engine size, have limits and regulation to what and which combonation of safety components can be put on each WRC car. Alot of formal sanctioned racing has limits.

What are u talkin bout 30% mark up? ur honda has quite a bit of mark up too its called invoice price + dealer holdback = actual price dealer has paid then its marked up typically a couple grand to the MSRP (manufactuer suggested retail price). Random hypothetical example a Acura RSX type S invoices at 21,000 the dealer pays 21k for it, sells it to u for 24,000, and after showing the manufactuer that he has sold the car, he recieves 1000$ dealer hold back as a reward for moving the car off the lot. thus he has made 4000$ bux off you after selling to u for msrp and getting his dealer hold back 4000/24000 = 1/6 or bout 16.7% profit he marked you up and that doesnt count if sold it over msrp, then the dealer made more and raped you.

Spend the least to get the most then just buy an american hot rod or muscle car used, V8 and spend a few hundred bux making it fast and it'll rape 90% of all japanese car cept supra, rx-7, skyline, and 3000gt. Basically just drop 10k buy a used 1994 Camaro Z28 u got 280 hp and add sum basic boltons and u'll be having more then 300hp and can rape maxed out turbo honda's.

Front wheeel drive is the wrong drivetran for racing.

537

01-13-2003, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by wylin@Jan 13 2003, 02:36 PM
Front wheeel drive is the wrong drivetran for racing.

I am a firm believer that front wheel drive is in fact the wrong drivetrain for a true enthusiast. But it is most definitely not the wrong drivetrain for racing. Front wheel drive is merely a vehicle design. Meaning, FWD vehicles should only race with other FWD vehicles. FWD layouts require different (not less, not more, not worse, not better, just...different) driver inputs to move fast around a racetrack than a RWD vehicle requires. It is agreed that FWD layouts truly are at a major disadvantage when it comes to moving around the track, as the front wheels bear the full burden of turning, braking, and accelerating. More has to be done to the vehicle itself to achieve neutral handling characteristics, and even more so to attain an even front/rear weight balance. But a couple (2) Apex'I RX-7's and a 500-hp Supra (even an R33 GTR, but that's based solely on lap times) can attest to the fact that a FWD vehicle ran circles around them on the track.

Honestly, it doesn't matter what layout the drivetrain boasts. The only thing that matters is how neutral the thing handles.

SO, my conclusion is:

The true definition of a Sports Car:

- 50/50 F/R Weight ratio on a Front Engine or Mid Engine Vehicle (FWD OR RWD), 40/60 F/R Weight Ratio on a Rear Engine Vehicle OR Completely neutral handling!!!
- Drag Coefficient of 0.29 or lower
- 0-60mph Acceleration times in the sub-5 sec range, top gear supports speeds in excess of 170mph
- Ability to support 1.0g lateral grip with the right tires
- Driver's pedals allow for easy Heel-Toe shifts

-L

mrazntre

01-13-2003, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by 537@Jan 13 2003, 11:04 PM

I am a firm believer that front wheel drive is in fact the wrong drivetrain for a true enthusiast.  But it is most definitely not the wrong drivetrain for racing.  Front wheel drive is merely a vehicle design.  Meaning, FWD vehicles should only race with other FWD vehicles.  FWD layouts require different (not less, not more, not worse, not better, just...different) driver inputs to move fast around a racetrack than a RWD vehicle requires.  It is agreed that FWD layouts truly are at a major disadvantage when it comes to moving around the track, as the front wheels bear the full burden of turning, braking, and accelerating.  More has to be done to the vehicle itself to achieve neutral handling characteristics, and even more so to attain an even front/rear weight balance.  But a couple (2) Apex'I RX-7's and a 500-hp Supra (even an R33 GTR, but that's based solely on lap times) can attest to the fact that a FWD vehicle ran circles around them on the track.

Honestly, it doesn't matter what layout the drivetrain boasts.  The only thing that matters is how neutral the thing handles.  

SO, my conclusion is:

The true definition of a Sports Car:

- 50/50 F/R Weight ratio on a Front Engine or Mid Engine Vehicle (FWD OR RWD), 40/60 F/R Weight Ratio on a Rear Engine Vehicle  OR Completely neutral handling!!!  
- Drag Coefficient of 0.29 or lower
- 0-60mph Acceleration times in the sub-5 sec range, top gear supports speeds in excess of 170mph
- Ability to support 1.0g lateral grip with the right tires
- Driver's pedals allow for easy Heel-Toe shifts

-L
|--- (drives a FWD) . . . . .----^

mrazntre

01-13-2003, 05:33 PM

by the way ... u defeated your own arguement about car power when u said bikes have a very good power to weight ratio... so maybe power is not always everything

power to weight ratio is just that a RATIO. when i said you took "power" out of context i explained it in my above post. in short, i was speaking of absolute horsepower output, NOT relative to power to weight ratio. you were mixing up those two concepts in trying to prove me wrong.

wylin

01-13-2003, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by mrazntre@Jan 13 2003, 05:33 PM

power to weight ratio is just that a RATIO. when i said you took "power" out of context i explained it in my above post. in short, i was speaking of absolute horsepower output, NOT relative to power to weight ratio. you were mixing up those two concepts in trying to prove me wrong.
you got "JACKED" by tre cuz hez right and u been OWNED!

Dhaval 4 U 2 NV

01-15-2003, 01:19 PM

...

raaaight....

welll... all that time when i was talking about power... I WAS talking about HP.... i don't know wat u were talking about.... so how did i take it out of context... just bc CCs have a different meaning... doesn't mean u can't figure out the HP equalant (and that is IF i was trying to compare a vette to a ducati (or WATEVER) in a power sense). I was talking about it in a speed sense.... acceleration..... so that is why i brought up the power to weight ratio... But watever... i don't have time to argue right now... or make a bibliography or site technical references.

later
dhaval
...

wylin

01-15-2003, 04:50 PM

stop trying to prove urself, u got jacked by tre! shutup sit down and bow b4 him.... U got jacked!

loserbutt

01-15-2003, 04:54 PM

hmm, I haven't driven stick since my freshman year of college. though I used to drive every day

mrazntre

01-15-2003, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by Dhaval 4 U 2 NV@Jan 15 2003, 09:19 PM
...

raaaight....

welll... all that time when i was talking about power... I WAS talking about HP.... i don't know wat u were talking about.... so how did i take it out of context... just bc CCs have a different meaning... doesn't mean u can't figure out the HP equalant (and that is IF i was trying to compare a vette to a ducati (or WATEVER) in a power sense). I was talking about it in a speed sense.... acceleration..... so that is why i brought up the power to weight ratio... But watever... i don't have time to argue right now... or make a bibliography or site technical references.

later
dhaval
...
no, actually i brought up the concept of acceleration and implied that THAT was what you were trying to say.

Filiprish

05-30-2004, 11:15 AM

DragonKnight

05-30-2004, 11:44 AM

I'm an autophile. All true autophiles drive stick. The two cars I've owned so far, Ford Escort GT and Acura Integra SE coupe, are stick. Despite the latter, I'm thinking about selling out and getting an automatic. I guess I'm getting older. I really want a four-door. So, maybe I'll get the four-door and keep the manual transmission. http://www.forums.yellowworld.org/images/smilies/wink.gif*YOU'RE* getting older?! Lol, no need for ya to sell-out. You're only 24. :wink:

Hehe, I do feel the need for getting a four-door. Hmm, those WRX station wagons are pretty sweet. AWD, turbo, and enough space to haul shit...on the roof. :biggrin:

missmeow

05-30-2004, 12:07 PM

I drive stick. I just bought a new car, a stick of course. The people looked at me crazy when I bought it because I came in for another model which they did not have a stick in the color I wanted. They tried to sell me an automatic, "it's better, blah, blah." Then they looked at me crazy because I was like, no it has to be stick. You might be able to talk me into silver, but not an automatic. I do not like automatics.

I don't mind bumper traffic with a stick either. You just do it automatically, so it's not really any kind of work.

hooligan

05-30-2004, 12:10 PM

how do you all suggest to learn stick? i wanted to learn, i heard the best way was through a beater car, but i know no one with such vehicle. : (

missmeow

05-30-2004, 12:19 PM

I learned on a four speed, so it was really easy. I think it only took an hour to be "street capable." Of course, it takes a little longer to feel 100% confident in your stick abilities, especially when stopped on a hill :)

Maybe you could rent a car for a day?

hooligan

05-30-2004, 12:20 PM

missmeow

05-30-2004, 12:59 PM

You can't ruin a car learning stick.

At least, I don't think so.

Filiprish

05-31-2004, 02:17 PM

*YOU'RE* getting older?! Lol, no need for ya to sell-out. You're only 24. :wink:

Hehe, I do feel the need for getting a four-door. Hmm, those WRX station wagons are pretty sweet. AWD, turbo, and enough space to haul shit...on the roof. :biggrin: Sorry, man. Didn't mean to make you feel old. http://www.forums.yellowworld.org/images/smilies/wink.gif

Yeah, I need the extra room to haul shit, as well, and friends around.

and ruin it during the weekend? yes! : D My friend did that. He rented a stick and now owns a one and drives it like a pro. Btw, it's pretty difficult to ruin a stick learning, especially if it has a hydraulic clutch.

I learned on a four speed, so it was really easy. I think it only took an hour to be "street capable." Of course, it takes a little longer to feel 100% confident in your stick abilities, especially when stopped on a hill :) I don't know why, but I was always fascinating with stick shifts growing up. I was determined to get one when I got old enough to drive. I basically learned by watching others drive stick. So when I got my first car (a stick), I taught my self how to drive it. Hills...I remember those days. http://www.forums.yellowworld.org/images/smilies/wink.gif