no particular reasoning, i am just not fond of these few. in some cases it has more to do with the typical driver-type ive found has them and less to do with the car itself
1. neon
2. volkswagens (gti i guess specifically)
3. camaro
4. cavalier
5. scion xb

1. honda ridgeline
2. chevy avalanche
3. hummer h2
4. honda element
5. pretty much any ricer

1. Mustang
2.Camaro
3.celica
4.trans am
5.Any riced out civics

1. Honda Element
2. Cadilliac Escalade
3. Scion xB
4. Hummer H2-H3
5. Ford Focus

All ridiculous cars!

fantastic reasoning boys.
nice to see so many good arguments and educated opinions on such matters.
keep up the good work.

Nice contribution, yourself.

In no particular order:

- Scion (all of 'em)
- Hyundai (all of 'em...most notably the Tiburon)
- Honda Element
- Any Chevy (current gen) that isn't the Corvette or a real Truck (the SSR is lame...good idea, horrible execution)
- Any Hummer that isn't the original

Dis-honorable Mention: Any car with an unpainted body-kit on it.

I know I'm about to really piss some people off.

Viper (I think it's the most over-rated car ever, the only reason it's able to stay ahead of most of the competition is because it has two extra cylinders and a good 3-4 liter advantage)

Eclipse (I see these things acting all bad ass and all, trying to take on Corvettes and crap, take a hint)

SSR (Corvette wanna-be with an un-usable bed)

Harly Davidson F-150 (what's the point of paying extra for that little emblem and then thinking that little emblem means the same as having SVT, SRT, or SS on the side?)

EVO (I could only take so much from kids saying how it kicked the shit out of that Yenko)

Now here is one I really like. I use to think it was a cool car but then I hated it due to the fan base that seemed to follow it. I then decided "fuck them" and realized that's with any car so I don't feel that way about it anymore and hopefully might be able to get one someday. That car is the Supra.

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=489186


And again...

funny you people mention the mustang...

And again...

I know what you're saying Chris. Why not learn to love a good car for a good car? Well...I'm trying. I've come around on the Supra, Skyline, and STi. The Charger I no longer hate and I just have no opinion for it now. There are those few though I just can't find to like.

Chris, I understand what you're saying and for the most part agree, BUT....


There are just some cars that do thier intended purpose really badly, cars like:

The Nissan Skyline GTS: The car was supposed to be a cross between a luxury and a sports car, but came away with the comfort of a sports car and the performance of a luxury car. Poor weight distribution, no interior space and a weezy and pathetic standard engine, can't even shake off an SOHC Honda Accord.

The Nissan Serena- Unsafe, slow, unreliable, ugly, too narrow to be comfortable, unstable, the list of "uns" could go on

Lada Samara: Supposed to be a modern (For the 80's), reliable and economical car on the cheap, it missed the mark by miles, on all counts (Except cheap)

Mitsubishi Diamante: Supposed to be a spacious family car and to an extent it was, too bad they forgot that most Australians and New Zealanders (The market it was originally made for) also have boats (in the case of NZers) and caravans (in the case of Australians) and didn't give the car a transmission capable of towing without melting itself.

Suzuki Samuri: Oh come on, do I even need to explain?

1. Pontiac Grand Prix
2. Monte Carlo's with an "8" sticker
3. H2's (or any large SUV, really)
4. Buick Rendezvous
5. Rusty cars

Chris, I understand what you're saying and for the most part agree, BUT....


There are just some cars that do thier intended purpose really badly, cars like:

The Nissan Skyline GTS: The car was supposed to be a cross between a luxury and a sports car, but came away with the comfort of a sports car and the performance of a luxury car. Poor weight distribution, no interior space and a weezy and pathetic standard engine, can't even shake off an SOHC Honda Accord.

The Nissan Serena- Unsafe, slow, unreliable, ugly, too narrow to be comfortable, unstable, the list of "uns" could go on

Lada Samara: Supposed to be a modern (For the 80's), reliable and economical car on the cheap, it missed the mark by miles, on all counts (Except cheap)

Mitsubishi Diamante: Supposed to be a spacious family car and to an extent it was, too bad they forgot that most Australians and New Zealanders (The market it was originally made for) also have boats (in the case of NZers) and caravans (in the case of Australians) and didn't give the car a transmission capable of towing without melting itself.

Suzuki Samuri: Oh come on, do I even need to explain?

Compared to cars of the teens and 20s, none of those cars is worth hating. Compared to other communist block cars, even that particular lada is a polished jewel. And the Samurai has a lot of faithful followers, and actually is a good car for it's job: being a small, economical, rugged car for primitive conditions. I've seen them survive a LOT of stuff, and be much more economical to operate than Jeeps. And as such, is a good marketplace option for basic Jeeps.

Come on... There was a time when car companies came into business and went out within a year or less for building seriously utter piles of crap that make a trabant look like a Rolls. Cars like the Imp:

http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/1263490c.jpg

And you think the Diamante is worth hating?

Guys, hate an individual example of a car, one that is falling apart, strands you, or is otherwise a POS. But don't hate on generalizations, maes, models, etc, even of the sae type as the car that stranded you, as other examples will not be as bad, and will have loyal followers who never had problems with them. Hating on a brand or model is the same closed minded generalization that leads to racism (dislike of the other). You just think it's acceptable because it's aimed at a machine. It's unintelligent, and not a valuable goal. I can't believe anyone is defending being hateful as though it's something you should strive for.

Every Diamante owner I know ended up selling it and promising never to buy another Mitsubishi again, hence why the Mitsubishi 380 is selling so badly in the Antipodean Isles, hence why it's the end of the line for Mitsubishis Adelaide plant (Which is sad, that same plant pumped out many a Valiant :(). When a family car is unable to tow a boat without melting its' transmission, then it's a bad car. Hate is a strong word and I don't "hate" most of these cars, that's something for a more personal level, I just hold the justified opinion that it's a bad car and it'd be stupid to buy one where there are cars available that DO the intended job.

The Samara was the worst Eastern Bloc car, EVER. You see at the very least the old Lada 2014/Riva/God knows what other names it picked up on the way, were based on a tried and true platform (The Fiat 124), the Samara was just based on what Lada could find lying around, the build quality was so bad that when they first were launched in Australia, the Importer was forced to spend $2000 getting them up to the standard of the most non-discerning buyer, this is why they're a rarer sight than the Ladas of old.

I've seen too many Samuris/Holden Drovers tipped over to pretty much conclude that while they're tough, they are dangerous, I'd have much sooner bought a 10 year old 70 series Landcruiser if I were back in the 80's.

is it me or are you guys actually arguing over the mis-use of the word "hate" instead of the dislike for some cars?

BAN! I mean errrrr...... That's SORT of my point there and it SEEMED to be Chris' point.

so... really, the reality is, no one actually hates a car, they only say they do.
doesn't that then mean that this discussion is largely redundent because no one actually hates any car?

Yes, but you have to learn to translate what the average American 13-25 year old male says into terms that us of British Empire extraction can understand, e.g Hate = the world wouldn't exactly be worse off without them :p

1. Pontiac, Grand prix/am
2. Ford, Mustang
3. Chevy, Camaro
4. Honda, all of them
5. Saturn, all of them

so... really, the reality is, no one actually hates a car, they only say they do.
doesn't that then mean that this discussion is largely redundent because no one actually hates any car?

my point is, why is it so important to run around complaining about someone else's choice in cars, insulting those cars and by extention, the owner for choosing it? Why is it so importnat to defend acting that way, and why is it so importnat to actively act againsat trying to be more open minded and appreciative of all genres and types of cars?

Which is a better human trait, that should be lauded and supported?

Trom the standpoint of a person who likes some cars, it IS a pain to be diring one, enjoying your day, and have some idiot think he's being funny by insulting it and calling it crap because HE would rather own something else. This is supposed to be a hobby, something you do for enjoyment. Me owning or building what I like don't negatively impact you, but you deciding it's important to insult that which I like does negatively impact me, and makes the hobby less enjoyable.

It's about spreading a culture of tactlessness and intolerance vs promoting open mindedness and appreciation for the variety. This isn't about being PC, either. That's a separate subject.

so people aren't allowed to express their views of cars in a negative manner because it might indirectly offend you but you are allowed to directly call them ignorant and an idiot?

lets see!

1. ricer civic
2. ricer integra
3. ricer camry
4. ricer corrolla
5. Any other riced out car there is

1. http://www.evilzug.com/stuff/poopandfartjokes/pics/CivicRice.jpg
2. http://www.excessvelocity.com/rice/bigwing.jpg?176,160
3. http://www.moforacing.com/albums/rice/bustedeclipse2.jpg
4. http://www.dieselstation.com/wallpapers/Scion-Xb/Scion-Xb-036.jpg
5. http://www.excessvelocity.com/rice/vette.jpg

1. Hyundai (fake honda)
2. Ford all of them except the mustang
3. Dodge all of them
4. Scion
5. Saturn

1. Dodge/Plymouth Neon
2. Any Hummer that isn't an H1
3. Any Ford except the mustang
4. Mitsubishi Eclipse
5. Dodge/Plymouth Neon

WTF, just because someone hates something doesnt mean its an invalid point, hate is an emotion, not a primal form of fear and aggression. And ignorance is not a way to point out the fact that people as a whole are going to have emotions. Whether you have emotions of love hate fear or anger doesnt make you ingorant. If your statements are true then the fear of war is an opinion and not actual fear. Just because someones opinion isnt based on fact of your own account, or hasent been validated doesnt mean it makes them ignorant. Its the same reason peopla have the emotion of love, once again if your statements are true then love being an emotion not based on any fact makes someone who loves an ignorant person. Il agree with most of what you say as the fact that why cant anyone get the hate for man or machine out of there emotions, but emotions arent just emotions there also what makes someones personality. Your also basing your entire philosophy on the fact that car enthusiast dont hate or love cars of there own, just because a true car enthusiast doesnt like a mustang or a honda, doesnt mean that they dont appreciate the fact that these cars are what made the car industry what it is today. People will never get over basic human emotions.

Now that i got that out. I dont really hate to many cars, but there are ones that piss me off mainly due to the fact that these cars are the main platform for why everyone despises ricers. Granted most cars can be riced these same cars can be made into street legal sleepers. finishing with this not all cars are created equal.

eh, it was just to start some convo and find out a general opinion of some cars that are disliked by the general population here. i think the car itself might not be what affects my decision on what i picked but more the general drivers of the car, their attitude in my area, and maybe some drivers of a certain car in the past. i have found 95% of the volkswagen drivers in my area that are into the tuner scene believe that any car other than a german one is not worth 1/18th of the price paid. when the srt4 came out the 9 or 10 of them deemed themselves untouchable and would mock whatever challenger came their way and usually back out of a race anyway. the camaro i dont particularly 'hate' i have a few friends with them and i would particularly like the car if it wasnt for every one that comes across me in my mustang feels the need to try to make it seem like my car is inferior

my point is, why is it so important to run around complaining about someone else's choice in cars, insulting those cars and by extention, the owner for choosing it? Why is it so importnat to defend acting that way, and why is it so importnat to actively act againsat trying to be more open minded and appreciative of all genres and types of cars?

Which is a better human trait, that should be lauded and supported?

Trom the standpoint of a person who likes some cars, it IS a pain to be diring one, enjoying your day, and have some idiot think he's being funny by insulting it and calling it crap because HE would rather own something else. This is supposed to be a hobby, something you do for enjoyment. Me owning or building what I like don't negatively impact you, but you deciding it's important to insult that which I like does negatively impact me, and makes the hobby less enjoyable.

It's about spreading a culture of tactlessness and intolerance vs promoting open mindedness and appreciation for the variety. This isn't about being PC, either. That's a separate subject.

Oh shut up!


theres no particular order

- Ford Explorer...It really created the "soccer mom" mentality where fuel effecient minivans were not fashionable, and these massive gas guzzling, vheicles that were anything but practical became the fashionable product. It made Ford dependent on them so when oil concerns came about, and sales plummeted Ford really took a hit

- Toyota Camry...Only because the marketing campaign in Canada really touted (and still brag about) the performance, and sporty feel of the Camry....Its about as sporty as your oven, and feels just as much like an appliance

- Hummer H2 and H3... Very similar reasons as the explorer. with the added trait that people actually SHOULD take these off-road but they don't...Don't pretend your an off-roader, if you were you would have bought a TJ

- Honda Prelude... Their ugly, butt ugly and every kid in me neighbourhood has one customized

- BMW 318 (In north America)....I understanding having a 318 in Europe....but in North America you bought a bimmer to show off to everybody you have a bimmer. buy a 325 or a 330, and ACTUALLY own a bimmer

and 6_speed....YOU ARE MY HERO! You own the cars that I dream of having in about 5 years!

1. Hummer H2
2. Hummer H3
3. International CXT
4. Excursion
5. Civic w/ Battle Wing, Neon Paintjob, Beer Can Muffler, etc.

It's a wonder where all these Civic owners are, because hating their cars seems to be a common thread and they are usually very vocal in defending their "race mods".

Ricers

How can you hate a civic, there cheap, easy as shit to make fast, and while most the little ricers prefer these since the aftermarket is amazing for them. You cant base a whole car on the way some dumb ass kid smacked 50lbs of shit on it. And yeah i do hate them to an extent but you have to admit they can be fast as shit.

^ I never even said they were slow! Chill dude, i understand that they can be made fast, but I'm talkin about the old civics. I'm just tired of the looks. But the new civic is off the chain!

1. mustang
2. mustang
3. mustang
4. mustang
5. mustang

So, you like mustangs eh? lol

How can you hate a civic, there cheap, easy as shit to make fast, and while most the little ricers prefer these since the aftermarket is amazing for them. You cant base a whole car on the way some dumb ass kid smacked 50lbs of shit on it. And yeah i do hate them to an extent but you have to admit they can be fast as shit.

Anything can be made fast as shit, I could make a Geo Priszm fast with enought money. And no, you cant make a Civic fast as shit for real cheap. Its just cheap to take if from 130HP to 160, after that, you have to start spending real money, its the same as any other car. Civics are no different then any other car and for the most part, itd be cheaper to buy a different car then all the mods needed to make it fast.

So a 13.6 for an all motor civic coupe which has less than 2 grand into it isnt that fast. Granted yes you can make any car fast, with enough money. And yes while you would need close to 10-15k to make ANY beater car break into the low 10's. You can get civics to run 12's for (give or take) depending on how you can get your parts 5k. I already discussed this with polygon a while back, while slapping nitrous on a car would cost less than 500. TO make it reliable is a different story. Everyone of the dsm tuners syas its cheap to make a dsm fast, yes while it might be you forget that to get a nice running hardly abused 4g63 powered talon, eclipse whatever, you need to spend between 3500-12000 depending on year, mileage and which style. In the same aspect you can get a civic shell, or a decent modded civic. Once again depending on year, and so forth between 200-10000. Yes i have bought a civic shell for 200, Already had a rollcage, 17"wheels, and racing seats. Guy didnt want it anymore he was tired of working on project cars. Built that up for 1500 and had it running 13's.

I will agree with you jlad, you can make any car fast with enough money, but civics are so common that there cheaper than most other tuner cars. There like the FOX body mustang of the import world.

My latest project car is a 90 accord, im swapping in a h23a1, ive already started rebuilding it, and im going to put a turbo setup running 10 psi. One of my friends claims it should be a high 12 sec car. After i get the other parts i need IE another block im going to build it to handle 25psi, which should be enough for a mid 10sec street car. AS long as i can get traction. So far after car, engine, turbo, lsd trans, exhaust, and a few other parts ive spent about 2100, and it should be ready to go together within the next month or so.

civics shouldnt be defended because of the modabilty but because they are the perfect economy car. theres not a damn thing wrong with them, not because they can be fast but because the are so economical.

I am an automobile-enthusiast; I do not hate cars that do not appeal to my tastes.

i saw a red z06 c6 yesterday and the plate said "YU $$ WISH""
i dont hate the car, but i hate the driver and for his sake hope it gets keyed.

Any of the new 2007 SUV's that I see on the road. I'm talking about the big ones:

-Chevy Suburban
-Ford Expediton
-GMC Yukon XL
-Caddiliac Escalade
-Hummer H2

Ok, I can understand the owners of older SUV's, gas wasn't $3.30 per gallon when they bought it, more like $1.80, so I do kinda feel sorry for them. But WHO, I ask, thinks of going out & buying a NEW gas guzzler when gas prices are only going to go UP?

This is one thing that I will never understand. The problem is that now I'm seeing more and more brand new SUV's on the roads, and this number is sure to go up soon.

Any of the new 2007 SUV's that I see on the road. I'm talking about the big ones:

-Chevy Suburban
-Ford Expediton
-GMC Yukon XL
-Caddiliac Escalade
-Hummer H2

Ok, I can understand the owners of older SUV's, gas wasn't $3.30 per gallon when they bought it, more like $1.80, so I do kinda feel sorry for them. But WHO, I ask, thinks of going out & buying a NEW gas guzzler when gas prices are only going to go UP?

This is one thing that I will never understand. The problem is that now I'm seeing more and more brand new SUV's on the roads, and this number is sure to go up soon.

I understand that most dont need these cars, but the Suburban and Expedition could be for people with families that may also need to to a trailor or boat or something.

The escalade, H2, and Yukon are just for show. However, i would love to take someone elses H2 off road.

True, if you do have a family of 8 and need to transport your boat or something, there is a 'practical' purpose for these vehicles. Espically out in rural areas where travel distances are a lot longer.

However, I live in the city, the most 'off roading' that these trucks see is when they hit the curb going around a turn; and are downright hilarious to see trying to park in crowded parking lots. The majority of these vehicles are driven by 1 person, or a family of 4 which could easily fit into a minivan let alone a 4 door. I'm not saying all people who bought these new SUV's are stupid, just the ones who use them against their intended purpose, which sadly, is a lot of people that I see.

However, i would love to take someone elses H2 off road.
Hmm...you take the H2, I'll take the H1!! Lets see who wins.

^ H1 baby!

what i dont get is at what point did it become cool to drive a big suv that is set up in such a way that it is no longer capable of doing anything offroad. used to be you saw a nice sports car and said hey, nice car. now kids see a big box with 24s and say hey, nice car. i mean i think nice off-road suvs/trucks are pretty cool. a friend of mine has a lifted izuzu amigo that he off-roads regularly and i think it is a cool car. but these newer suvs are more like minivans than anything you can take offroad. every time i see an suv with big rims, i just pray that maybe they will run over something and pop a tire or something lol.

I agree with poster above, new SUVs are very far from original concept of SUV. They are soft, full of plastic parts and are not capable of any off-roading. They are made for soccer moms and no longer have an image of tough workhorse than can help a man survive in the flood and than drive him home. I also hate POS buicks worth 100 bucks riding on 24 inch chrome wheels.

I also hate POS buicks worth 100 bucks riding on 24 inch chrome wheels.
Or any car for that matter. I hate that too.

im not a big fan of the civics...
like it has been said the vipers of ovverated and the only reason they work to well is because they have 2 extra cilienders for.. what i think would be extra intake for more power..

umm.. well, im not a big fan of the beattles eather.. rediculusly ugly shapped... to british looking for my taste..

o.o im not sure about others at the moment..

1. most civics
2. srt4s
3. hummer H2/H3s
4. anything made by kia, hyundai, daewoo, or geo
5. any car with HIDs that uses them during the day time

whats wrong with the srt-4 those cars are awesome for the money. my cousin took his to the strip just the other night and smoked a mustang gt.

Ford Granada
Citroen LeCar
Pontiac Fiero
Chrylser Cordoba
AMC Pacer

Ford Granada
Citroen LeCar
Pontiac Fiero
Chrylser Cordoba
AMC Pacer

Why Fiero ?
It is one of the best american cars IMO.

Dunno. Its one of the beauty in the eyes of the beholder thing. Besides, didn't they like spontaniously combust on a regular basis?

I don't like the SRT4 either, because I don't like neons. Just because its fast dosn't mean I have to like the car. If there was a 14.0 second XB scion....I would still hate it because it looks like hell.

honda civic
dodge neon
acura integra
any ricer


last and definitly least
ford mustang

and my favorite cars,
chevy s10 && blazer s10
monte carlos
fiero
camaros
and
corvettes

the reason that the fieros "combusted" was because the moron that planned it didnt think straight enough. the gas tank is WAY too close to the engine, i mean i love the car i hate to rag on it but seriously thats a stupid idea, even I wouldnt think of that
and im pretty stupid lol

the reason that the fieros "combusted" was because the moron that planned it didnt think straight enough. the gas tank is WAY too close to the engine, i mean i love the car i hate to rag on it but seriously thats a stupid idea, even I wouldnt think of that
and im pretty stupid lol

reminds me of the pintos

yah it really sucks cuz man i love the body style on the fiero, they are such nice compact little cars and shit if i souped one of them boys up and took it out one night shit, itd smash all them cheap inky dink imports! lol:banghead:

I don't like the SRT4 either, because I don't like neons. Just because its fast dosn't mean I have to like the car. If there was a 14.0 second XB scion....I would still hate it because it looks like hell.


i guess so, i think theyre pretty attractive for a 4-door, but its just personal taste. i will agree on the xb though, those things are gay period.

whats wrong with the srt-4 those cars are awesome for the money. my cousin took his to the strip just the other night and smoked a mustang gt.
1. Its a neon = we're already off to a bad start
2. Fugly = My opinion, yes they are horrid.
3. FWD = wheelhop and horrible weight balance and handling
4. Prone to breakage = I have yet to know of an SRT4 that hasn't had something wrong with it.
5. Drivers = they all think they're hot shit because they can go fast in a straight line...from a dig that is.

I think 5 reasons is enough to make my point. I dont like it, you do, others might or might not. That is all. :licka:

i dont like neons,
but...
realize that dude owns a mustang lmao
mustangs are just as bad as neons bud

i dont like neons,
but...
realize that dude owns a mustang lmao
mustangs are just as bad as neons bud

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I guess ignorance is bliss. I'm done here.

WTF@ Attributing bad handling to FWD. The only thing that can be attributed to bad handling is mediocre suspension ala the Ford Mustang (Or the lack of an LSD in some applications, but the SRT4 is equipped with one from 2005+).



Stop reading the descriptions on Gran Turismo and actually trash a few different types of cars around the track.

WTF@ Attributing bad handling to FWD. The only thing that can be attributed to bad handling is mediocre suspension ala the Ford Mustang (Or the lack of an LSD in some applications, but the SRT4 is equipped with one from 2005+).



Stop reading the descriptions on Gran Turismo and actually trash a few different types of cars around the track.
I stopped playing Gran Turismo a long time ago. I've ridden in SRT4s, watched them in autocross events, seen them drag race... and even raced a few. They handle like shit if you ask me.

And since when did this thread become, "bash the person's car who has a different opinion than you"? I said I didn't like SRT4s, I never said my Mustang was better, faster, or handled better; I just stated the fact that SRT4s suck IN MY OPINION.

1. Its a neon = we're already off to a bad start
2. Fugly = My opinion, yes they are horrid.
3. FWD = wheelhop and horrible weight balance and handling
4. Prone to breakage = I have yet to know of an SRT4 that hasn't had something wrong with it.
5. Drivers = they all think they're hot shit because they can go fast in a straight line...from a dig that is.

I think 5 reasons is enough to make my point. I dont like it, you do, others might or might not. That is all. :licka:

1. true, but neons have always just been cheap transport. they served their purpose.
2. opinions are opinions but i think it is a nice looking 4 door. i think it looks better than an evo/sti.
3. there handling is actually quite good.
4. cant argue here but hey you get what you pay for. price, performance, and reliability. you can only have 2/3 not all 3.
5. kinda reminds me of muscle car owners. they think they are badass with their 400hp v8s smoking everyone in a drag race, but would prolly get killed by a minivan on an autocross track. not that theres anything wrong with muslce cars, they fufil the role they were intended for(fast in straight line)

not to be a dick but, i guess if you hate the srt-4 you must really hate mustangs considering they are slower and handle worse. lol, im just messing with you, i actually like the new stangs alot.

1. true, but neons have always just been cheap transport. they served their purpose.
2. opinions are opinions but i think it is a nice looking 4 door. i think it looks better than an evo/sti.
3. there handling is actually quite good.
4. cant argue here but hey you get what you pay for. price, performance, and reliability. you can only have 2/3 not all 3.
5. kinda reminds me of muscle car owners. they think they are badass with their 400hp v8s smoking everyone in a drag race, but would prolly get killed by a minivan on an autocross track. not that theres anything wrong with muslce cars, they fufil the role they were intended for(fast in straight line)

not to be a dick but, i guess if you hate the srt-4 you must really hate mustangs considering they are slower and handle worse. lol, im just messing with you, i actually like the new stangs alot.

mustangs > srt4s at every autocross event I've ever been to. But let me guess, I'm sure those must have been bad drivers every single time. But then again, this is all useless because we're comparing two completely different cars.

Ford -- Dodge
RWD -- FWD
2dr -- 4dr
V6/V8 n/a -- I4 turbo

You're comparing a sports coupe to a family sedan with a turbo slapped on it. Lets just leave it at that. They're two totally different machines, so lets just agree to disagree! :banghead:

calling an srt-4 a family sedan is like calling an evo or sti a family sedan. its counterpart neon is indeed a family sedan, but the srt-4 has a completeley diffrent engine, suspension, exterior, wheels, and interior. they didnt just slap a turbo on a stock neon engine. but everyone has their own tastes i guess. id prolly take an 06 mustang gt over an srt-4 but not any other mustang.

not another STR-4 debate :shakehead

calling an srt-4 a family sedan is like calling an evo or sti a family sedan. its counterpart neon is indeed a family sedan, but the srt-4 has a completeley diffrent engine, suspension, exterior, wheels, and interior. they didnt just slap a turbo on a stock neon engine.

ummmmm no

its engine is basically the exact same engine as was in the dodge stratus(including using cast pistons). the suspension is the same setup as the stock neon. wheels dont make a car. it does have a nice interior though...

evo and STI are waaaaaaaaay different not a good comparo

i would rather own a evo/sti than a srt4 neon that's for sure. But i really hate...

1) chevy silverados- My dad had a 2005 silverado and that thing had no balls what so ever no passing power or merging power and that was with the a/c off.
2) Vw beetles
3)Chevy cobalt
4)Hummers (h2,h3)
5) Camaros/firechickens

calling an srt-4 a family sedan is like calling an evo or sti a family sedan. its counterpart neon is indeed a family sedan, but the srt-4 has a completeley diffrent engine, suspension, exterior, wheels, and interior. they didnt just slap a turbo on a stock neon engine. but everyone has their own tastes i guess. id prolly take an 06 mustang gt over an srt-4 but not any other mustang.

i always thought the srt-4 had the same engine as the stock neon, but that was just an assumption based on what i've heard. sti's/evo's are good comparisons because they both have slower versions of those same cars too. srt-4>neon, evo>lancer, and sti>non-sti wrx.

is an 03/04 cobra considered a mustang?

iis an 03/04 cobra considered a mustang?

Good point...TransAm gets a check in the W column for this conversation.

The sxt neons have the 2.0 I4 while the srt-4 has the turbocharged 2.4 I4 basicly the srt 4 shares the block and heads of the PT cruiser(turbo). I see more sxt versions than srt-4's around here

ummmmm no

its engine is basically the exact same engine as was in the dodge stratus(including using cast pistons). the suspension is the same setup as the stock neon. wheels dont make a car. it does have a nice interior though...

evo and STI are waaaaaaaaay different not a good comparo

no way the suspension is the same as a reg. neon. ive driven a regular neon and the suspension is sloppy in the turns and soakes up bumps, the srt4s is rough and handles pretty well.

im just saying that because its a 4 door dont mean its a family sedan. i know they are in a whole nother league though.

so lets just agree to disagree! :banghead:

Did anyone miss that?

i always thought the srt-4 had the same engine as the stock neon, but that was just an assumption based on what i've heard. sti's/evo's are good comparisons because they both have slower versions of those same cars too. srt-4>neon, evo>lancer, and sti>non-sti wrx.

is an 03/04 cobra considered a mustang?

yea i wasnt thinking about cobras, those would def. be nice to have.

i think that with the stage 2 mopar upgrade, some technical goodies, and an awd system the srt-4 would be a good match for the evo and sti.

1. Honda Civic (It's the most popular in a range of cars I hate that are underpowered, slow, and with poor handling. Everybody says they're bullet-proof, but they have common problems that people have learned to ignore because of what the magazines feed them about what build quality should be about.)
2. Cadillac Escalade (It's a big bling-mobile that people use to show off their money. There's no reason for a 6L motor because the rest of the car obviously wasn't designed for acceleration. It's just a waste to cover up for such weight.)
3. The new VW Beetle. It's just a FWD Golf, and it has nothing of the "folk's wagon" feel of a cheap, functional car. It's trying too hard to compete with more expensive models, losing its character in the process.
4. Mazda MPV. It has no power, and the front seats are the most uncomfortable pieces of furniture that I've ever used in my life. If you take the seats out and put anything in it (like back when I was moving into a dorm), you have to totally floor it to have any chance of highway merging.
5. Chevy Aveo. It was GM's sorry attempt to make a car as cheap as the Koreans do. GM has to realize that those engineers didn't come from the fast food culture of throwing out stuff after using it once.

5. Chevy Aveo. It was GM's sorry attempt to make a car as cheap as the Koreans do. GM has to realize that those engineers didn't come from the fast food culture of throwing out stuff after using it once.

Isn't the Aveo just a Daewoo, which would actually make it at Korean car? Correct me if I am wrong

And by that criticizm you should also not like the Honda Fit, or Toyota Yaris, which are both really popular right now...At least in Canada...we think smaller

1. Honda Civic (It's the most popular in a range of cars I hate that are underpowered, slow, and with poor handling. Everybody says they're bullet-proof, but they have common problems that people have learned to ignore because of what the magazines feed them about what build quality should be about.)
2. Cadillac Escalade (It's a big bling-mobile that people use to show off their money. There's no reason for a 6L motor because the rest of the car obviously wasn't designed for acceleration. It's just a waste to cover up for such weight.)
3. The new VW Beetle. It's just a FWD Golf, and it has nothing of the "folk's wagon" feel of a cheap, functional car. It's trying too hard to compete with more expensive models, losing its character in the process.
4. Mazda MPV. It has no power, and the front seats are the most uncomfortable pieces of furniture that I've ever used in my life. If you take the seats out and put anything in it (like back when I was moving into a dorm), you have to totally floor it to have any chance of highway merging.
5. Chevy Aveo. It was GM's sorry attempt to make a car as cheap as the Koreans do. GM has to realize that those engineers didn't come from the fast food culture of throwing out stuff after using it once.


i dont know on what planet the civic is unreliable, casuse here on earth it will outlast most cars on the road. not to mention the civic si is fairly quick and handles pretty good.

one of the civic's main strongpoints is its mpg. and they're a very reliable car (my gf has one) just not stellar when it comes to performance. throwing a wing and a WAI on it doesnt make it a race car like fast and the furious has lead so many ignorant ppl to believe.

yea, blame the people and the movie, not the car.

i dont know on what planet the civic is unreliable, casuse here on earth it will outlast most cars on the road. not to mention the civic si is fairly quick and handles pretty good.
I never said it was unreliable. I just said it has its own problems and that it's not the supercar of longevity that people make it out to be. One of my favorite common problems is that, over a relatively short amount of time, the shift lever really feels like it's not connected to anything (despite the fact that it still works). I also hate these cars because of the crowded engine bays (which is fairly common among front-wheel-drive econoboxes) and the tiny passenger compartment obviously not designed by a team of men 6 feet tall. Lastly, for what you get, they're overpriced when compared to the competition.

I think the Civic is overpriced. Let's compare the MSRPs for base models. Wouldn't you agree that these are comparable models? It's not like I'm throwing the Kia Rio, the Chevy Aveo, or the Hyundai Accent into the mix.

Honda Civic - $14 760
Toyota Corolla - $14 105
Hyundai Elantra - $13 865
Chevrolet Cobalt - $13 590
Kia Spectra - $13 475
Saturn ION - $12 490

The Saturn might be the lowest here due to "no haggle" pricing.

Isn't the Aveo just a Daewoo, which would actually make it at Korean car? Correct me if I am wrong

And by that criticizm you should also not like the Honda Fit, or Toyota Yaris, which are both really popular right now...At least in Canada...we think smaller
GM owns Daewoo, so that makes perfect sense. It's actually sold in South Korea as a Daewoo Kalos. More information can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Daewoo
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Aveo

I've driven it, and I still say the car sucks. It would have been 10 times more fun to drive with a slightly lower center of gravity and a little less weight up front (or more weight in the back).

If you do notice that out of the cars you listed the most reliable are the most expensive. Seriously because a common prolem you consider is the shifter doesnt feel like its attached to anything. WTF, ive seen bigger problems with other cars, that are more common and work out to be a bigger problem. No matter what you say the point is the civic/corolla are 2 of the most reliable cars ever made, in fact if i can find the video of the civic that being run with water in the crankcase that seriously wont die. I highly doubt you could do that with a kia, or a hyundai.

ANd saturns have had there nice list of problems in the past and now. And a side note you do knoe that gm uses a honda motor in one of there smaller suvs and i believe saturn uses it to. And when your talking reliability ALL cars have there problems, and civic seem to more of a function problem than mechanical. And mechanical problems are what more people look at. So in agreeing with you no car is perfect, not even a $600k ferrari, lambo is free from defects.

I think the Civic is overpriced. Let's compare the MSRPs for base models. Wouldn't you agree that these are comparable models? It's not like I'm throwing the Kia Rio, the Chevy Aveo, or the Hyundai Accent into the mix.

Honda Civic - $14 760
Toyota Corolla - $14 105
Hyundai Elantra - $13 865
Chevrolet Cobalt - $13 590
Kia Spectra - $13 475
Saturn ION - $12 490

The Saturn might be the lowest here due to "no haggle" pricing.

just because theyre in the same class dont mean you are getting the same quality. that 2000 extra bucks will pay off when your saturn is falling apart and the civic is still going strong. you see the price cutting in crappy interiors and being more problematic. the cars are cheaper for a reason.

Shoot i once had a 93 civic ex that thing got the best mpg and was pretty reliable until it overheated and there went the reliability, but it had over 200K and not once messed up the yrs i drove it. Although it could have used more Hp it was slooowwwwww but hey i was getting 30+ mpg so i wasnt complaining at all Heck i wish i had another one.

ANd saturns have had there nice list of problems in the past and now. And a side note you do knoe that gm uses a honda motor in one of there smaller suvs and i believe saturn uses it to.

The ION is mostly Opel from what I hear. The ECOTEC is anything but Honda. As far as the transmissions go, the 03-04 automatics were Aisin, and the 03+ manuals are Getrag.

When you stop to think that the sticker price of two or three cars can add up to a single engineer's salary, you realize that with the vast quantity of cars these companies are making, "engineering expertise" costs rather little. I know nobody will agree with me when I say this, but I'll say it anyway: It's obvious to me that the Civic is sold with higher profit margins than these other cars. Look at GM's Saturn ION: The company is going to hell, and the Spring Hill, TN plant where the cars are made drastically cut its production. I think the ION is being killed in favor of a rebadged Astra.

eh?
you think that GM equivilant cars not costing as much as a honda civic is the reason why they are going to hell?
has it ever occured to you that the civic is simply worth the extra money and the equivilant GM cars aren't?
i also guess you don't like the new mini then.
or the golf.
or bmw 1 series.
or audi a3.
£18,000 for a focus st?
£16,000 for a renault clio?

if the honda civic is overpriced, then those cars must be absolute rip-offs.

i said SUV, and i said i BELIEVE that it might have been crammed into a saturn. You really think gm would want to put that an engine from a japanese competitor is powering one of there cars.

But here you go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_L66_engine

have fun with that.

I think the Civic is overpriced. Let's compare the MSRPs for base models. Wouldn't you agree that these are comparable models? It's not like I'm throwing the Kia Rio, the Chevy Aveo, or the Hyundai Accent into the mix.

Honda Civic - $14 760
Toyota Corolla - $14 105
Hyundai Elantra - $13 865
Chevrolet Cobalt - $13 590
Kia Spectra - $13 475
Saturn ION - $12 490

The Saturn might be the lowest here due to "no haggle" pricing.


All those cars except for the Corolla are far inferior cars, the GM's for thier inferior quality and the Elantra and Spectra, for just being far short of the mark set by the Civic.

Ans even then the Civic can claim to be better equipped and more sporting than the Corolla, thus justifying the $700 (NB: That's based on the European perspective, not sure of equipment levels in the USA)

eh?
you think that GM equivilant cars not costing as much as a honda civic is the reason why they are going to hell?
has it ever occured to you that the civic is simply worth the extra money and the equivilant GM cars aren't?
i also guess you don't like the new mini then.
or the golf.
or bmw 1 series.
or audi a3.
£18,000 for a focus st?
£16,000 for a renault clio?

if the honda civic is overpriced, then those cars must be absolute rip-offs. Have you seen the suspension geometry of the BMW 1 series? The roll axis inclination is flat, which is very rare for a road car. I've never driven one, but I'd imagine, for several reasons, that the handling would put it in an ENTIRELY different class than the Civic. And yes, I believe $33600 (USD) for a Focus ST isn't exactly a steal, even with its independent suspension and five cylinders and all. It's a modified grocery-getter; you might as well get a Dodge SRT-4 which is a much better deal. If I had that kind of money to spend on a car right now (and was going to buy something new) I'd go with a Mazda RX8 or something else rear wheel drive.

You have to look at it proportionally.

£18,000 wouldn't get you anywhere near a Mazda RX8, it would probably get a nicely equipped 4 Cylinder 407 or Vectra, but the RX8 is closer to £25,000

The Civic Type R was £15,000 when it was back in its' old EP3 form.

....but then again, that z axle at the back of the 1 series renders it next to useless when compared to things like the civic and focus as a family hatchback car.
In terms of usefullness and hence value for money, the BMW 1 would rank quite low in this respect.
Does a family hatchback need that level of handling capability?
Does that rear drive and z axle make the 1 series better than the new focus and civic?

what i don't get here is that you are going along with the fact that the BMW 1 series costs more because it has more vested technology, engineering and quality in it but you can't seem to see that the same is true of the Civic when compared to the other cars in that list of yours.

As was pointed out, the EP3 Civic Typre-R was list at £15,000 (ish...)

That's not far off from the average selling price of a Mini Cooper S.
Which one is overpriced here then?

And a side note you do knoe that gm uses a honda motor in one of there smaller suvs and i believe saturn uses it to.

Thats the Saturn ION Redline...and no other GM Car. I don't know why GM would put so much effort in getting a Honda engine, then stuff it in a car that's gonna sell 1000 units a year. I think they should have put it in the G6.

and when you consider price I think the Cobalt is very comparable to the Civic...It might not be as stylish, but it is fuel effecient, has a decent interior, is roomy for a econobox...and I would take Cobalt SS over a Civic Si

and yeah...I do own an RSX Type S and I am suggesting a Cobalt SS....What of it?

Hey i dont have any problems with that.

Yeah i couldnt remember which vehicle it was in. I like the cobalt, the only reason i would take a new civic si over the cobalt ss is the k series engine. Other than that i dont like the new civic, YET. Man this is a down hill battle.

i thought the ion red line used the ecotec just like the cobalt. i like the cobalt ss as well though. for a new car under 25k id get one.

I like them better than a sartie even if thay are alower and still have little aftermarket support. I give it about another year and it should have the support that the sarties have now.

Thats the Saturn ION Redline...and no other GM Car. I don't know why GM would put so much effort in getting a Honda engine, then stuff it in a car that's gonna sell 1000 units a year. I think they should have put it in the G6.

and when you consider price I think the Cobalt is very comparable to the Civic...It might not be as stylish, but it is fuel effecient, has a decent interior, is roomy for a econobox...and I would take Cobalt SS over a Civic Si

and yeah...I do own an RSX Type S and I am suggesting a Cobalt SS....What of it?

Are you sure about that? I don't think the LSJ is from Honda. I believe it has more Opel pedigree than anything.

idk if ive posted my 5 picks in this thread but

1. h2/escalade/insert other "blingmobile".
2. dodge caliper
3. chevy hhr
4. scion xb
5. dodge charger/300c.

Id agree with everything on that list except the HHR. I kind of like it im not sure why everyone i know says it looks like a pt cruiser. And as for the charger yes i know it the market but that would have been like making the new mustang a 4 door or a 4 door celica or something of that matter. And the caliber is just plain ugly.

i thought the ion red line used the ecotec just like the cobalt. i like the cobalt ss as well though. for a new car under 25k id get one.
That's true, but the 2.2L L61 is destroked to 2.0 for the LSJ, and it has an Eaton roots-type supercharger as well as many minor differences throughout the motor. The L61 has inferior connecting rods and valve train that partially limit its ability to make high horsepower in a modified configuration. I think that the LSJ's crank is rated to higher power, but I'm not sure; that could just be from the reduced bending stresses of a shorter stroke. The LSJ was definitely designed to be tuned more than the L61, and GM will gladly admit that in order to get you to buy the Chevrolet Cobalt SS and the Saturn ION Redline, which are almost identical mechanically (Delta architecture). The LSJ is/will be also available in the Saturn SKY Redline and the up-level Pontiac Solstice, which again are pretty much identical mechanically (Kappa architecture).

Id agree with everything on that list except the HHR. I kind of like it im not sure why everyone i know says it looks like a pt cruiser. And as for the charger yes i know it the market but that would have been like making the new mustang a 4 door or a 4 door celica or something of that matter. And the caliber is just plain ugly.

have you heard about the hhr ss theyre planning? it has more power than the cobalt ss, wtf. i think the cobalt ss is in need of a small power boost, being that it is a way cooler and sportier car than that brick on 4 wheels. i hate it when they put good engines into gay cars(hhr, caliber, magnum)

have you heard about the hhr ss theyre planning? it has more power than the cobalt ss, wtf. i think the cobalt ss is in need of a small power boost, being that it is a way cooler and sportier car than that brick on 4 wheels. i hate it when they put good engines into gay cars(hhr, caliber, magnum)

The GM Sport Compact Build Book can show you how to build up the ECOTEC, in various stages, from stock up to a 1400hp drag racing motor. The Ariel Atom now uses the ECOTEC, and the highest hp available is 300hp, street legal in the US (which is why I believe they switched from the Civic Type R motor, which wasn't IIRC). The book is available online as a free download somewhere... I can find it for you if you really, really want me to.

I was gonna say it says right on the site that it uses the CTR s/c engine, but then i looked up the us site and it does use the ecotec. Id still rather have the Honda engine.

And id love to see a gm i-4 factory block handle above 800hp. Im not saying they cant because ive been surprised before.

blackscorpion that would be a bad ass suv, i like the one they made for the salt flats for the top speed run i thought it looked awsome lowered and chopped. But thats just me.

I was gonna say it says right on the site that it uses the CTR s/c engine, but then i looked up the us site and it does use the ecotec. Id still rather have the Honda engine.

And id love to see a gm i-4 factory block handle above 800hp. Im not saying they cant because ive been surprised before.

blackscorpion that would be a bad ass suv, i like the one they made for the salt flats for the top speed run i thought it looked awsome lowered and chopped. But thats just me.

Find me a foreign block that can handle 800hp without severe modification (such as filling in the liner gaps and using shrink-fit sleeves and stuff like that). Any four-cylinder with that kind of power will typically break rather quickly, so it's almost a moot point to be talking about this for road cars. Sure, I've seen Toyota 3SGTE's handle that kind of power, but these aren't exactly daily drivers. It's often not even a quarter mile competition... it's to see who has the biggest dyno numbers. After 600 hp in the ECOTEC, for example, the stock lost-foam cast isn't good.

Here's that build book, just because I'm bored
http://www.gm.com/company/gmtunersource/html/race_shop_build_book.htm

Sure, it's full of expensive GM parts, but if you have the dough here's how to convert it to ET.

actually there is a drag car with a 1000hp ecotec in it.
the 3sgte can also get some insane numbers. the pikes peak rally celica has an 800hp 3sgte in it. mitsus 4g63 is also capable of around 800hp. as far as 4 cyls go, id put the ecotec, 3sgte, and 4g63 on the top of the heap.

i thought the ion red line used the ecotec just like the cobalt. i like the cobalt ss as well though. for a new car under 25k id get one.

ION Redline? I must have been smoking some really bad pot the day I said that...

Sorry guys..I meant the Saturn VUE Redline...That's the car with the Honda V6 engine

I had the VUE in my head when I was posting, but some some reason I called it the ION. Probably because when I was reading about the Honda V6 I heard it was to be in the VUE Redline (its also in the Vue basic V6)...

Ma bad

actually there is a drag car with a 1000hp ecotec in it.
the 3sgte can also get some insane numbers. the pikes peak rally celica has an 800hp 3sgte in it. mitsus 4g63 is also capable of around 800hp. as far as 4 cyls go, id put the ecotec, 3sgte, and 4g63 on the top of the heap.
The ECOTEC tops out around 1400 hp, but after all the modifications, is it really an ECOTEC by that point? I would argue "no." At that point, you're looking at a severely modified and prepped race block with almost no stock internals. One of the few things such a race engine has in common with the LSJ is the displacement.

i saw a red z06 c6 yesterday and the plate said "YU $$ WISH""
i dont hate the car, but i hate the driver and for his sake hope it gets keyed.

What are you some sort of a$$ H0!e.

No do you have to be an ass hole to realize that someone has an ego problem. Its more or less the guy with the vette is the asshole. I want one that reads in big letters "FUCKOFF". And in MD i think its possible to get it done.

No do you have to be an ass hole to realize that someone has an ego problem. Its more or less the guy with the vette is the asshole. I want one that reads in big letters "FUCKOFF". And in MD i think its possible to get it done.

It doesn't matter if someone has an ego problem or not. It is someone elses property.

So if I think you are an A$$ for having an ego about your car, you wouldn't have a problem with me keying your car.

Nobody should key any car, you do not have the right to damage someone elses property.

No do you have to be an ass hole to realize that someone has an ego problem. Its more or less the guy with the vette is the asshole. I want one that reads in big letters "FUCKOFF". And in MD i think its possible to get it done.

Also you better hope that no one it the Merchantville MD, zip code area 20659 gets keyed and if it says F'off you may have some explaining to do to the police.

No do you have to be an ass hole to realize that someone has an ego problem. Its more or less the guy with the vette is the asshole. I want one that reads in big letters "FUCKOFF". And in MD i think its possible to get it done.

People who flaunt their money are assholes, but the very worst kind are those who buy the car to show off the wealth. Personally, I'd take a Lotus Elise over a Corvette any day, and it's cheaper. Sure, the Z06 is a sweet car, but it's not my thing, really.

It doesn't matter if someone has an ego problem or not. It is someone elses property.

So if I think you are an A$$ for having an ego about your car, you wouldn't have a problem with me keying your car.

Nobody should key any car, you do not have the right to damage someone elses property.

It's one thing to think it, and it's another thing to actually do it. There's no harm in having a big smile on your face when some guy does your dirty work for you, right?

as far as 4 cyls go, id put the ecotec, 3sgte, and 4g63 on the top of the heap.

sr20det/ve?

Hard to say -- but I do hate them. I don't hate the poor misguided people that own them -- I hate the manufacturers for giving us these lumps. And I hate looking at them

1. 57 chev -- I hated it in 57, and I still do
2. Early Toyotas -- lumpy and unbalanced
3. Almost any Citroen
4. Most early 60's mopars -- liked the Valiants
5. Pontiac Aztec -- maybe it should be no1 -- it's hard to rank these

For those who disliked the Mustangs -- I can't see it, but it's your
choice. I will say that in the last few years, FoMoCo has recreated and updated the original concept better than any others I've seen -- the mopar and Camaro efforts seem lame by comparison. They look like Mustangs - not
like some retro patches applied to what passes for styling these days.
So -- if you hated them earlier -- they're back

ford2go

57 chevy is a classic, and IMO its one of the few sexy cars from the time era. As for mustangs i dont think its the cars its more or less the driver. And another side note the camaro and mustang have never even looked close to the same. But every one has there own opinion.

Hard to say -- but I do hate them. I don't hate the poor misguided people that own them -- I hate the manufacturers for giving us these lumps. And I hate looking at them

1. 57 chev -- I hated it in 57, and I still do
2. Early Toyotas -- lumpy and unbalanced
3. Almost any Citroen
4. Most early 60's mopars -- liked the Valiants
5. Pontiac Aztec -- maybe it should be no1 -- it's hard to rank these

For those who disliked the Mustangs -- I can't see it, but it's your
choice. I will say that in the last few years, FoMoCo has recreated and updated the original concept better than any others I've seen -- the mopar and Camaro efforts seem lame by comparison. They look like Mustangs - not
like some retro patches applied to what passes for styling these days.
So -- if you hated them earlier -- they're back

ford2go


dude, early toyotas are sweet, the 2000gt and 1st generation celica are awesome classics.

i dont dislike mustangs, i actually find them growing on me. most stang drivers suck though, they think their mustang is the greatest car on the road. especially v6 mustang owners, hell i could smoke them in my lowley 130hp celica, and thats in a drag race, not to mention how bad they would get murdered on some kind of circuit.

WTF is wrong with Citroens? If it weren't for Citroens, we'd be driving out dated junk, there'd be no FWD, no radial tyres, no hydraulic suspension, no swivelling headlights, shapes would be hellishly boring, disc brakes would still be only fitted to top of the heap sports cars.... See where I'm heading? They deserve respect for making sure revolution took place, rather than evolution.

WTF is wrong with Citroens? If it weren't for Citroens, we'd be driving out dated junk, there'd be no FWD, no radial tyres, no hydraulic suspension, no swivelling headlights, shapes would be hellishly boring, disc brakes would still be only fitted to top of the heap sports cars.... See where I'm heading? They deserve respect for making sure revolution took place, rather than evolution.

Ok, radial tires, hydraulic suspension, interesting shapes, and disc brakes are good things, but I'm not so sure I like the idea that everything these days is FWD. While FWD is good in poor traction situations, the whole concept has ruined the modern idea of a performance automobile. Companies are finding out that the general public doesn't know a high performance car from a whole in the ground, and they can get away with badging cheaper FWD cars as sports cars. While some are fun (and quick), a well-designed RWD car will kill them when the roads aren't wet. (Remember when you could get a Nova and drop a naturally aspirated small block in it and, with enough tuning, rule the streets? It takes a lot more money to do the same thing with today's cars.) It seems the average buyer has no concept of weight transfer and balancing and everything else that really matters. Instead, they follow brand loyalities and the boasting of their affluent peers.

I wish idiots would stop saying it cost double the money to make a fwd car as fast as rwd one. Budget drag imports can be done and have been done. Im sure the dsm group can bring light to this. You dont need 10k to make an 11 sec fwd honda. My friend has one he just rebuilt it has a 1.6l, open diff trans, turbo and he ran an 11.7 in the 1/4. Keep in mind he has only spent 3500 for car, turbo setup, and a gsr engine, which now has b-16 internalls. He was running 13.6 NA, and that was with 2000 in the car. Any person who follows the import scene will tell you its not true anymore when you can get a used car for less than 1k, engine swaps for between 500-2500, and turbo setups for 300-to no end. Hell do it cheaper prove them wrong once and use nitrous, you dont need a heavy low revving V8 anymore to run below 12's for under 5k.

Kia
Deawoo
Suzuki (but I like their motorcycles)
Mercedes C230 Kompressor "Sport Coupe"
Ricers that look like s#!t

Ok, radial tires, hydraulic suspension, interesting shapes, and disc brakes are good things, but I'm not so sure I like the idea that everything these days is FWD. While FWD is good in poor traction situations, the whole concept has ruined the modern idea of a performance automobile. Companies are finding out that the general public doesn't know a high performance car from a whole in the ground, and they can get away with badging cheaper FWD cars as sports cars. While some are fun (and quick), a well-designed RWD car will kill them when the roads aren't wet. (Remember when you could get a Nova and drop a naturally aspirated small block in it and, with enough tuning, rule the streets? It takes a lot more money to do the same thing with today's cars.) It seems the average buyer has no concept of weight transfer and balancing and everything else that really matters. Instead, they follow brand loyalities and the boasting of their affluent peers.


See, the thing is, in the world outside America, what matters is making your car go around a corner. This is doable with both FWD and RWD, but it's easier and cheaper for the maker to do an FWD one, then tighten it up, set up the chassis for good handling etc (Case in point, VW Golf GTi, Honda Integra Type R, Peugeots GTi/RC/S16 cars).

I wish idiots would stop saying it cost double the money to make a fwd car as fast as rwd one. Budget drag imports can be done and have been done. Im sure the dsm group can bring light to this. You dont need 10k to make an 11 sec fwd honda. My friend has one he just rebuilt it has a 1.6l, open diff trans, turbo and he ran an 11.7 in the 1/4. Keep in mind he has only spent 3500 for car, turbo setup, and a gsr engine, which now has b-16 internalls. He was running 13.6 NA, and that was with 2000 in the car. Any person who follows the import scene will tell you its not true anymore when you can get a used car for less than 1k, engine swaps for between 500-2500, and turbo setups for 300-to no end. Hell do it cheaper prove them wrong once and use nitrous, you dont need a heavy low revving V8 anymore to run below 12's for under 5k.

I love imports like anyone else, but I have a serious problem with FWD. From the very physics of it all, you can't put the power to the ground in a drag race because of rearward weight transfer. 11's are nice, but there's a HUGE difference between running 11's and running 9's. Even with 1400hp, GM's ECOTEC dragsters usually only run 8's. The only thing holding them back (from 7's and 6's) is that they can't hook up like a purpose-built RWD drag car can.

FWD?? Not for me.The Toyota MR2 is one of my favorite cars simply because it has a reliable motor in cheap car, and the setup is almost perfect: light weight, mid-engined, rear wheel drive. It's the best of everything as far as affordable used imports go. The only thing that would have made the car better (and in the supercar handling category with mods) would be if the motor sat lower to the ground with a longitudinal setup like an F1 car. This would provide a lower center of gravity (to get the tranny out from underneath the motor and put it behind it) and a lower polar moment of inertia (with a longer wheelbase to counter it).

My questions about such 11-second Civics, though....

1. How long do such setups last? You have to admit... 800hp out of a four-banger, no matter who makes it, is putting a lot more stress than 800hp on an eight cylinder.

2. Can these cars turn? You can do all you want to the suspension, but you'll never make up for the fact that those cars are front-heavy. Sure, you might be able to outcorner the stock Civic like it's standing still, but there's a good reason why race cars are RWD. (Believe it or not, most aren't required to be.)

If I had to buy a car now with a front engine, I'd get a Miata or an RX7/RX8. I don't even care if your FWD car is faster in a drag... mine will be a LOT more fun to drive, stock-to-stock.

I recently developed an anger issue with Suburban/Tahoe like SUVs. They take up 2 parking space and impossible to see around on the freeway. And most of the time they are driven by distracted bimbos/soccer moms.

Ok, radial tires, hydraulic suspension, interesting shapes, and disc brakes are good things, but I'm not so sure I like the idea that everything these days is FWD. While FWD is good in poor traction situations, the whole concept has ruined the modern idea of a performance automobile. Companies are finding out that the general public doesn't know a high performance car from a whole in the ground, and they can get away with badging cheaper FWD cars as sports cars. While some are fun (and quick), a well-designed RWD car will kill them when the roads aren't wet. (Remember when you could get a Nova and drop a naturally aspirated small block in it and, with enough tuning, rule the streets? It takes a lot more money to do the same thing with today's cars.) It seems the average buyer has no concept of weight transfer and balancing and everything else that really matters. Instead, they follow brand loyalities and the boasting of their affluent peers.


too bad an old nova would lose to a fwd minivan on a road course.

Ford SUVS/Minivans
Yukon/Delani
Trailblazer's
Hummer's
Ram's

Umm..damn...hate cars?
1. Scions
2. Miata(sorry, i just don't get it)
3. Barabus(F*** that piece of...*stops and calms down*)
4. 4cyl Vans or trucks
3. Cobalt (IT KILLED THE F-BODY!!)

Umm..damn...hate cars?

3. Cobalt (IT KILLED THE F-BODY!!)


yea, on the autocross course. :D hahaha.

yea, on the autocross course. :D hahaha.

remember that commercial where the cobalt acts like the corvette's little brother? That wasn't right, it was like they forgot the camaro ever existed.

on another note, there are two 3's.

remember that commercial where the cobalt acts like the corvette's little brother? That wasn't right, it was like they forgot the camaro ever existed.

on another note, there are two 3's.


wasnt the camaro discontinued by then? they cant advertise for a car no longer in production. plus the cobalt ss was the next sportiest thing to the vette in chevys lineup at the time. lol i thought that was a pretty cool commercial. made me want a cobalt ss.

That was the day that GM took a step back in the performance world.

I recently developed an anger issue with Suburban/Tahoe like SUVs. They take up 2 parking space and impossible to see around on the freeway. And most of the time they are driven by distracted bimbos/soccer moms.

amen to that.

That was the day that GM took a step back in the performance world.

2002 marked the end of the f-body dynasty :(

geez i completely forgot about this thread i changed the subject so it doesn't read "hate" anymore for all you guys who complained about that. it was just a general discussion thread to see what types of cars are disliked and by what owners.

on a side note 98blacktransam - just wondering if you've come down off of your pedistol yet and have come to find the trans am is not touched by the hand of god. i used to read your posts in the mustang forum where you attacked anyone and anything even if it pertained to you in no way. i see its stopped so either youve found another group you pick on or youve come to terms.

ahhh, the mustang/fbody rivalry. so funny.

It really is funny, I mean how can you love one but hate the other. I can see how you can favor one over the other.... but to be so one sided on them is really amazing. I am more of a mustang guy myself, but I still like camaros a lot.

yea, unless you count cobras, im gonna have to go f body on this one. if you count cobras then its mustang for me.

1. Latest gen Civic. Because Its so god damn tasteless.
2. Hummer H2 and H3. Read above.
3. Cadillac Escalade Read above
4. Chevrolet Nubira, Lacetti Because they're a disgrace to the Chevy name.
5. All new Ferraris. Because they don't have neither the "Italian Passion" nor the performance to compete with other supercars these days.

WTF is wrong with Citroens? If it weren't for Citroens, we'd be driving out dated junk, there'd be no FWD, no radial tyres, no hydraulic suspension, no swivelling headlights, shapes would be hellishly boring, disc brakes would still be only fitted to top of the heap sports cars.... See where I'm heading? They deserve respect for making sure revolution took place, rather than evolution.

I'd say Saab was pretty independent on the FWD market. Though Citroen, like the other big French brands (Renault, Peugeot) don't make much exciting cars nor engines, and thats why people hate them (They are also a tab bit snowed in ignorant Americans who never would let a vehicle with Wrong Wheel Drive and small engines outmatch their oversized tanks.

Sorry.

No, nothing wrong with Citroens, though the newer ones are abit boring. But thats because I'm too young for it i guess :wink:

yea, unless you count cobras, im gonna have to go f body on this one. if you count cobras then its mustang for me.


Of course I count cobras haha, why wouldn't I count them?

Of course I count cobras haha, why wouldn't I count them?


idk, cobras are harder to find and more expensive than the z28/trans am. but i guess they would be more comparable to the ss/ram air. ive always considered the cobra on a whole nother level than the gt/base mustang. and really it is.

Actually they are (in comparable years) about the same as an SS or WS6 price wise. Its just that the 03 and 04 cobras are newer than any trans am or camaro so they sell for a little more. If you shop around for 02 SS/WS6 I think you would be surprised what you will have to pay. The cobra is made by ford, its not an aftermarket mustang sold at a dealer lot.

ok, yea i have really been swaying back towards the mustang lateley. and to think i used to hate the car with a passion. if only they werent so abundant, a bunch of people cruising around in a v6 mustang thinking they are hot stuff. but i wouldnt mind having a 93-99 model gt, new gt, or cobra of any year. i never liked the foxbody or the previous generation though.

im not into that whole rivalry thing, i was referring to him coming into the mustang forum and attacking everything that posted

i used to own a 01 ws6 lowered with 18" chrome c5 rims, lid, bellows, pro5.0 lots of bmr tubular stuff

i sold it for a mystic cobra then sold that for the saleen

im not into that whole rivalry thing, i was referring to him coming into the mustang forum and attacking everything that posted

i used to own a 01 ws6 lowered with 18" chrome c5 rims, lid, bellows, pro5.0 lots of bmr tubular stuff

i sold it for a mystic cobra then sold that for the saleen

aight, you're referring to one thread, which I was an ass i'll admit. it was basically targeted at the cunt that created the thread though, krebecca, not at mustang owners which it probably came off as. she came into my thread and said some pointless, useless shit just for the sake of talking shit,, so i figured I'd return the favor. it then got waay out of hand as i'm sure you remember and the thread just got retarded. it was basically me vs. 20 closed-minded mustang owners and was a losing flame war over the internet..i'm definately not a mustang fan but i can respect the 03/04 cobras which are probly a little faster than my car right now. that's gonna change this christmas when I get a 3400 stall tho :evillol:..anyways yeah, you really need to get a life man and stop digging old pointless threads out of the grave,,,, what exactly was your purpose for bringing that up anyway, just curious as to what relevance that possibly had.

um, no i just found this old thread saw your name and remembered how many times you came into the mustang forum trying to start a fight, so i brought it up...that means i need a new life? get real.

im sure the stall will help but why didnt you choose a manual? when i had my ws6 all i had done was a lid, but the fact that it was a m6 vs. my friends a4 z28 i would walk away from him pretty quickly even though he had full slp exhaust, lid, bellows, slp hood, ls1 edit, 4.10 moser rear, sticky tires, and full slp suspension

I'd say Saab was pretty independent on the FWD market. Though Citroen, like the other big French brands (Renault, Peugeot) don't make much exciting cars nor engines, and thats why people hate them (They are also a tab bit snowed in ignorant Americans who never would let a vehicle with Wrong Wheel Drive and small engines outmatch their oversized tanks.

Sorry.

No, nothing wrong with Citroens, though the newer ones are abit boring. But thats because I'm too young for it i guess :wink:

That's it, I'm totally convinced now, anyone who likes FWD more than other drivetrains is living in a dream world. First you attack rear wheel drive racing, which is really pointless, because a lot of people have come to terms with 'more expensive rear wheel drive racecars are better' and you haven't. Now you attack (for the Fiftieth time) another country's vehicles because they're bigger than yours? :screwy:

hes not saying fwd is better, he is just saying that it can compete. and in the racing world bigger is not better, contrary to popular american beleifs.

1. Pontiac Aztec because they are ugly as a crackhead leprochaun
2. Mercury Topaz
3. Late 80's Ford Bronco because you could tip it with a pecker smack
4. Ford Festiva for having like...what? 27 hamster power with a CAI?
5. Dodge Neons that aren't SRT... they all end up with the same crap box sound and leak more than Julius and Ethel Rosenburg combined.

This thread is amazing. Its like 20 bad threads rolled into one.