Help me settle this raging debate in my head about [cars]!

13

Posts

  • 1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    zilo wrote: »
    1ddqd wrote: »
    You'll notice that each car I've chosen has a solid builder's background (STI, R32, even the Bimmer). This car will, over time, be built. If you think it's about "penis size" then gtfo right now.

    If "be built" is modern parlance for "bolt a bunch of shit onto the engine", then you can discount the R32. It's already pushing the limit of what the transmission can handle.

    Also, lol if you try to drive the STi on a 4 hour road trip. You'll shake yourself to pieces. Really, man, you have to decide what kind of car you want and how much you're really willing to spend. You're all over the place here.

    Nope, be built is another way of saying "tuning" - be that adding or removing parts all over the car. Suspension, engine internals, whatever.

    The lower the price, the more likely this will happen. That's why the 135i is on the list; I'd like not to have to mod any new car I buy, but if I buy something high end, it will be near as possible to what I want anyways.

    1ddqd on
  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Why are you buying a new car to modify it? That is just going to void your warranty and you will never get any of the money you sink into it back out of it. A car's value never increases. "Tuning" your engine will only serve to decrease its value in fact. On the whole you could actually call automobiles divestments. And that isn't even a fucking word.

    Shogun on
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    I think I figured it out. OP wants a used Accord 4-banger for 20k and a late 70 / early 80s Porsche 911 for 15k.

    There you go. It's a comfortable daily driver and a tuner's dream car.

    zilo on
  • Popped CollarPopped Collar __BANNED USERS
    edited July 2008
    That actually makes a lot of sense.

    Popped Collar on
    El Roach0 wrote: »
    It was probably not until the next morning after you took a shower and ate your raisin bran that you decided you were a lesbian. And you've been living with that for.... 7 years?
  • 1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    zilo wrote: »
    I think I figured it out. OP wants a used Accord 4-banger for 20k and a late 70 / early 80s Porsche 911 for 15k.

    There you go. It's a comfortable daily driver and a tuner's dream car.

    Haha, that's not a bad idea.

    @ "Tuning" - yeah, if you buy a car as an investment (other than for a Concours D'Elegance) then you are certifiable. Warranty? I'll take whatever comes with it, but extended? No need.

    1ddqd on
  • DjeetDjeet Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    In addition to the R32 you might try the GTI 2.0T. You'll get out of the door under 25K and get most of the driving dynamics of the R32, except power. I don't quite get the objection to the Mini if you already have a beater for dog duty.

    ITT you want to spend closer t0 $30-35K, and there's nothing wrong with that, but you can get your hoonage on for less if you want.

    If you're playing in that territory you should test drive a Legacy GT or B spec. They are around $28-33K and compare favorably to the 3 series. Standard AWD, and nice ride, but less immediacy of power than a 330, and bimmers get free services during warranty period while subies do not.

    Also TD the WRX, it's gone through a pretty substantial redesign (much better looking I think) so if your only comparison is last gen's WRX you'll want to TD the new WRX.

    Djeet on
  • LaPuzzaLaPuzza Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    zilo wrote: »
    I'm not gonna lie and say I don't miss rowing the gears myself but I gotta make some compromise to save my left leg in rush hour ;-)

    So here's that C&D comparo, and the Top Gear video:

    Top Gear is awesome

    Zilo: Stop stealing my research!

    OP: The challenger is a bad choice IMHO, and I drive a RWD V8 sled. Its lacking in creature comforts and the mileage sucks. Worse yet, its not as fast as the SRT8. If you're buying a dream car, you'll constantly look at the 6.1 with envy.

    The 135i comes with nothing for standard equipment, so make sure you price it accordingly. Its not hard to get one up to $50K adding wheels, nav and leather. The universal indsutry review has been that you'll get a lot more car for nearly the same price if you get a 330i.

    I like the Mazda and the R32 both. I like the rabbit a little better because its 4WD drive system doesn't result in the hilarious understeer of its competitiors from Japan (I'm looking at you, Subi). I like the looks of the R32 a little better, too, althought I like the Mazda just fine. The R32 is equipped like an Audi, so you won't be hurting for creature comforts.

    My 2 cents, ask Zilo how he intimidated the dealer into letting him steal his R32.

    LaPuzza on
    If I didn't know LaPuzza wasn't a spambot I would think that was a spambot post.
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    It was so easy. 1) Find lowest price online. 2) Send emails to 5 nearest dealers asking them to beat that deal. 3) Profit.

    That was it. Sent emails on a Monday, picked up the car the following Saturday.

    Also LaPuzza, had to share the love. I was genuinely surprised (and pleased) to see that they liked the R32 better.

    zilo on
  • 1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Favorite Order:

    1) VW R32
    2) BMW 135i
    3) Mazdaspeed 3
    4) Subaru WRX

    Pending a new entry in competition, the most likely candidate for purchase will, in fact, be a new-ish R32 (if none are made next year, that is). While I'd love to have the BMW, I'm afraid you're all right: the price does not justify the car you get.

    1ddqd on
  • wmelonwmelon Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    So the S60R is out of the question? :)

    Tints004.jpg

    I mean, what's not to like about that? 300 hp/295 ftlbs, 6 speed manual, AWD, standard everything but Nav, still able to get 30 mpg on the highway, plus the added bonus of the growl of a meaty turbocharged I-5!

    wmelon on
  • firewaterwordfirewaterword Satchitananda Pais Vasco to San FranciscoRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    The S60R is a badass car. Were I buying a 4-door, that would be high on the list.

    firewaterword on
    Lokah Samastah Sukhino Bhavantu
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    hurry oh god the kids are late for soccer practice

    :P

    zilo on
  • wmelonwmelon Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    zilo wrote: »
    hurry oh god the kids are late for soccer practice

    :P

    yeah... stick a flux capacitor on it! They're REALLY late ;)

    wmelon on
  • FatsFats Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    When you refer to Suzukis 1340 cc "lump", is it a turbocharged engine? Because the renesis is not. Therefore your comparison is null and void. Show me a factory 1.3 litre engine (not motorcycle engines, besides the Hayabusa donk still only make about 165 hp compared to 237 hp for the rotary) that puts out half the power the renesis does and I'll be really shocked.

    Why not bike engines? They're the forefront of naturally aspirated engine development. 194 is what the 2009 'Busa brochure says, but that's probably at the crank with the typical manufacturer optimism. Still, Kawasaki's 1352cc engine does 174 at the rear wheel, and Ducati's 989cc Dual L-twin does 181. Not to mention the nutty shit they're doing with liter bikes these days.

    No doubt the rotary would look better if it had half the R&D money the 4-stroke piston engine gets, but overall I think the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Especially if we get into "clean" direct-injected 2-strokes. :winky:

    We don't get the S60R in the states, do we? It does look nice.

    Fats on
  • wmelonwmelon Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Fats wrote: »
    When you refer to Suzukis 1340 cc "lump", is it a turbocharged engine? Because the renesis is not. Therefore your comparison is null and void. Show me a factory 1.3 litre engine (not motorcycle engines, besides the Hayabusa donk still only make about 165 hp compared to 237 hp for the rotary) that puts out half the power the renesis does and I'll be really shocked.

    Why not bike engines? They're the forefront of naturally aspirated engine development. 194 is what the 2009 'Busa brochure says, but that's probably at the crank with the typical manufacturer optimism. Still, Kawasaki's 1352cc engine does 174 at the rear wheel, and Ducati's 989cc Dual L-twin does 181. Not to mention the nutty shit they're doing with liter bikes these days.

    No doubt the rotary would look better if it had half the R&D money the 4-stroke piston engine gets, but overall I think the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Especially if we get into "clean" direct-injected 2-strokes. :winky:

    We don't get the S60R in the states, do we? It does look nice.

    Supposedly the new 16X motor that mazda has developed will solve most of those problems. It's got Direct Injection and will supposedly make over 300 hp in naturally aspirated form.

    We did get the S60R in the states. Though they were only made from 2004-2007. It really is a fantastic car, they just didn't really market it properly.

    wmelon on
  • chrishallett83chrishallett83 A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Fats wrote: »
    When you refer to Suzukis 1340 cc "lump", is it a turbocharged engine? Because the renesis is not. Therefore your comparison is null and void. Show me a factory 1.3 litre engine (not motorcycle engines, besides the Hayabusa donk still only make about 165 hp compared to 237 hp for the rotary) that puts out half the power the renesis does and I'll be really shocked.

    Why not bike engines? They're the forefront of naturally aspirated engine development. 194 is what the 2009 'Busa brochure says, but that's probably at the crank with the typical manufacturer optimism. Still, Kawasaki's 1352cc engine does 174 at the rear wheel, and Ducati's 989cc Dual L-twin does 181. Not to mention the nutty shit they're doing with liter bikes these days.

    No doubt the rotary would look better if it had half the R&D money the 4-stroke piston engine gets, but overall I think the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Especially if we get into "clean" direct-injected 2-strokes. :winky:

    We don't get the S60R in the states, do we? It does look nice.

    Because we are talking about cars. Therefore bugger-all torque and a 14,000 rpm redline are out of the question. Imagine a Hayabusa engine trying to push 1500 kg down the road. And the fuel consumption would be unbelieveable. I'm also fairly sure I said factory stock engines, and I'm pretty sure that the D16rr engine is not road-legal, what with it being a factory team race engine and all.

    Also, most bike brochure power figures are measured with ram air induction effect included, and ancillaries like the alternator disconnected to minimize power losses. They use different measuring standards from ISO to SAE to DIN and all the others, whichever gives the highest readings.

    My bosses boss (at my old job) had an S60R wagon that he'd had 'worked', anyone for 4wd drive burnouts all over the delivery yard? He took it to the local drag strip, and ran a mid eleven second pass in full street trim. Didn't even take out the spare wheel and jack...

    To the O.P., why not see if one of your buddies will sell you their M3? At least then you know how it's been used and abused!

    chrishallett83 on
  • FatsFats Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    The D16RR is road legal, 1500 Desmosedici RRs were sold to people with more money than they know what to do with.

    As for MPG in a car, I wish the guy who wedged a 'Busa motor in a Smart Fortwo kept track of MPG, I suspect it wouldn't be too horrible. You're right, I wouldn't want to power anything larger with one. Small N/A car engines are boring in comparison because the manufacturer is looking to shave costs and not maximize output.

    Anyway I hope the OP found a car and isn't too annoyed by this tangent. :P

    Fats on
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    Fats wrote: »
    wedged a 'Busa motor in a Smart Fortwo

    D:

    :D

    ...

    D:

    zilo on
  • ApexMirageApexMirage Registered User
    edited July 2008
    KMFurDM wrote: »
    really hard about which one you want to be in on a daily basis or when stuck in traffic. A friend of mine that bought an Evo didn't. He has a special hatred for Miami traffic.


    Mind Elaborating?

    ApexMirage on
    I'd love to be the one disappoint you when I don't fall down
  • SushisourceSushisource Registered User
    edited July 2008
    So I'm guessing the Evo was a nono?

    Even the six-speed auto variety?

    Sushisource on
    Some drugee on Kavinsky's 1986
    kavinskysig.gif
  • KMFurDMKMFurDM Registered User, ClubPA
    edited July 2008
    ApexMirage wrote: »
    KMFurDM wrote: »
    really hard about which one you want to be in on a daily basis or when stuck in traffic. A friend of mine that bought an Evo didn't. He has a special hatred for Miami traffic.


    Mind Elaborating?

    He lives in Miami which doesn't have the most interesting roads. Up where I live I can see it being more fun, down there though the closest thing to a corner is a highway on ramp. But anyway, he has an Evo IX, the seats are thin, the glass is thin, the ride is very firm, the AC is not very powerful, and the interior is less than pleasant. It's great fun to drive, but when you are barely moving, the sun is beating down on you, and every expansion joint feels like a kick in the ass, there are other places I'd rather be.

    As with the new STi, the new Evo is supposed to be a bit less hardcore. Haven't driven one so I couldn't say for sure.

    KMFurDM on
  • 1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Very heavily leaning on the R32 now!

    1ddqd on
  • KMFurDMKMFurDM Registered User, ClubPA
    edited July 2008
    As you should. ;)

    KMFurDM on
  • Durandal InfinityDurandal Infinity Registered User
    edited July 2008
    ich.. I can't do a car like that =/ Honda Fit is also a winner if you like the hatchback croud.

    Durandal Infinity on
  • KMFurDMKMFurDM Registered User, ClubPA
    edited July 2008
    ich.. I can't do a car like that =/ Honda Fit is also a winner if you like the hatchback croud.

    What do you not like about it? The Fit and the R32 aren't really comparable, but I'm curious.

    KMFurDM on
  • Durandal InfinityDurandal Infinity Registered User
    edited July 2008
    Personally I am not a fan of german cars nor hatchbacks. Make me feel like a suburban mom. I'm jaded though Im a tall bodybuilder and dont fit well into it =/ It may be perfect for you. I also highly remember my dad's old Diesel rabbit and the issues VW used to have. BUT if the car works and you like how it drives and more importantly how the R32 Steers go for it.

    Durandal Infinity on
  • Durandal InfinityDurandal Infinity Registered User
    edited July 2008
    Personally id also look at an Audi A3 or A4. I find their build quality alot better then Volks

    Durandal Infinity on
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    Personally id also look at an Audi A3 or A4. I find their build quality alot better then Volks

    Having had four (yes really) A4s over the past 10 years, and now an R32, I'd say VW and Audi essentially identical in build quality. Makes sense considering they're the same company.

    for those interested, the A4s in chronological order: Red '98 1.8t, red 2000 2.8, black 2001 2.8, silver '98 2.8 (beater, 170k miles for parking on the street in Chicago).

    zilo on
  • 1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I've been in each; R32 and A3/A4 had nearly interior quality; this is a good thing. In a recent review, the GTI was deemed a better interior than the A3 and A1, but I can't remember if it was Top Gear or Automobile that said that.

    R32 for $32000 or GTI (configured) at $28000...AutomobileMag can help!

    Summary - GTI chipped makes it to 130mph 7 seconds faster than the R32!

    1ddqd on
  • Durandal InfinityDurandal Infinity Registered User
    edited July 2008
    I will concede to one thing I may not like VW but the GTI has always caught my eye and its one car I've never heard a complaint about.

    i'm still saying go balls out and buy a Suburban and a pair of whale skin hubcaps and big baby seal eyed headlights. If you're gonna hurt the planet, make a god damn dent =].

    Durandal Infinity on
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    1ddqd wrote: »
    I've been in each; R32 and A3/A4 had nearly interior quality; this is a good thing. In a recent review, the GTI was deemed a better interior than the A3 and A1, but I can't remember if it was Top Gear or Automobile that said that.

    R32 for $32000 or GTI (configured) at $28000...AutomobileMag can help!

    Summary - GTI chipped makes it to 130mph 7 seconds faster than the R32!

    Christ almighty, not this "zomg chipping" garbage again.

    Also, you won't be paying 32k for an R32 unless you fail completely at negotiation.

    zilo on
  • KMFurDMKMFurDM Registered User, ClubPA
    edited July 2008
    zilo wrote: »
    1ddqd wrote: »
    I've been in each; R32 and A3/A4 had nearly interior quality; this is a good thing. In a recent review, the GTI was deemed a better interior than the A3 and A1, but I can't remember if it was Top Gear or Automobile that said that.

    R32 for $32000 or GTI (configured) at $28000...AutomobileMag can help!

    Summary - GTI chipped makes it to 130mph 7 seconds faster than the R32!

    Christ almighty, not this "zomg chipping" garbage again.

    Also, you won't be paying 32k for an R32 unless you fail completely at negotiation.

    Chipping the 2.0T does bring huge gains though. As much power as the R32 and a lot more torque. I've been tempted to chip my 1.8T, but I don't see the point when a 330hp car is on the horizon. I've also read of plenty of people's cars being no worse for wear after a chip. An R32 is still a special car though and I wouldn't want to deploy 250bhp and 300lb/ft without a slippy diff in a GTi...so...extra $$$.

    KMFurDM on
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    You know what, the OP should just quit dicking around with foreign cars and get a Mustang if he wants a tuner platform. Honestly, if you're looking to dump money into the aftermarket, you couldn't do much worse than an R32. The transmission just won't handle any more power.

    A buddy of mine as a new 'Stang ragtop and it's pretty nice. Way nicer on the inside than I expected. Plus you can get one with all the gizmos you'd want (except independent rear suspension, har har) for under 30 grand.

    zilo on
  • chrishallett83chrishallett83 A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I love Mustangs, but they don't go around corners for shit. The R32 lacking headroom is a fallacy, my g/f has a Golf GT Sport 2.0TDi, I'm 6'1", and with the height-adjustable seat cranked all the way up, my head just touches the roof. All the way down and I can wear my dirtbike helmet and still fit three hands between the roof and my helmet.

    chrishallett83 on
  • Durandal InfinityDurandal Infinity Registered User
    edited July 2008
    I sit 6'3" and my head doesnt his the roof but any change in suspension makes my head hit

    Durandal Infinity on
  • SkylineCollapseSkylineCollapse Registered User
    edited July 2008
    saw this kinda late but i'd thought i throw my two cents into this. i actually, have an 05 STi and i love the thing to death. the new ones are growing on me but i will say this about them--if you have not already, you need to drive one. this is an absolute must. the seats in the old STis were notoriously uncomfortable and the from what i hear the new ones are too. also, the ride is stiff, prob not so much in the new ones, so rattles may not be as big of a deal as the old ones.

    to address this issue of tuning, if you don't care about your warranty then it doesn't matter. best thing to do is ask the dealer, as it varies. some dealers actually sell engine management, so it's warrantied as long as they install it. there isn't anything harmful with putting a "chip" in your car or reflashing the tuning map. this is actually the reason you see horsepower increases from model year to model year--simple ECU adjustments on the existing components.

    as the old saying goes, speed costs money, how fast do you want to go? you do seem all over the place here, though. zilo is right, if you want a tuner car then something like the STi or R32 is going to be the last demographic of car out there. anything above is going to be one of those diminishing returns sort of things. very expensive to net worthwhile HP out of if you can find manufacturers of parts. i've pretty much done all i will to my STi. my next car will likely be an Audi S4 or S5 for daily driver while building my Chevelle :winky:

    SkylineCollapse on
    princess peach is a cockteasing bitch
  • zilozilo Registered User
    edited July 2008
    Personally I'm more of a 70s Porsche kind of guy but man, Chevelle's a hell of a great car.

    I was sad I had to sell my '75 914 right after I'd located a donor car for a 6-cyl engine swap :(

    zilo on
  • SkylineCollapseSkylineCollapse Registered User
    edited July 2008
    oh man, my friend's dad gave me a ride in his porsche and that thing was amazing. it was a classic one also but i'll be damned if i would be able to pace it on the track.

    SkylineCollapse on
    princess peach is a cockteasing bitch
  • EvylEvyl Registered User
    edited July 2008
    saw this kinda late but i'd thought i throw my two cents into this. i actually, have an 05 STi and i love the thing to death. the new ones are growing on me but i will say this about them--if you have not already, you need to drive one. this is an absolute must. the seats in the old STis were notoriously uncomfortable and the from what i hear the new ones are too. also, the ride is stiff, prob not so much in the new ones, so rattles may not be as big of a deal as the old ones.

    to address this issue of tuning, if you don't care about your warranty then it doesn't matter. best thing to do is ask the dealer, as it varies. some dealers actually sell engine management, so it's warrantied as long as they install it. there isn't anything harmful with putting a "chip" in your car or reflashing the tuning map. this is actually the reason you see horsepower increases from model year to model year--simple ECU adjustments on the existing components.

    as the old saying goes, speed costs money, how fast do you want to go? you do seem all over the place here, though. zilo is right, if you want a tuner car then something like the STi or R32 is going to be the last demographic of car out there. anything above is going to be one of those diminishing returns sort of things. very expensive to net worthwhile HP out of if you can find manufacturers of parts. i've pretty much done all i will to my STi. my next car will likely be an Audi S4 or S5 for daily driver while building my Chevelle :winky:

    That didn't really address the core issue of tuning. If you get your car chipped, or remap an existing ECU, you need to get it custom tuned by a pro - unless you want to do the datalogging/map tweaking yourself (and you know what you're doing). Anything else is asking to have your engine blow up when you go WOT.

    Evyl on
  • Durandal InfinityDurandal Infinity Registered User
    edited July 2008
    I'll sell you my 5.7L 2002 Pontiac Firebird Trans-AM WS6

    I'm going to need 2 cars in the future 1 cheap POS to drive into work (cop's cars get gouged and slashed far too often in the city) and One truck frame for hauling stuff.

    Durandal Infinity on
Sign In or Register to comment.