Which new compact car would make the best pocket rocket?

that was my point...

The dust has settled. :) Please continue. The question is:

Which new compact car would make the best pocket rocket?

Let's keep it on-topic now. :D

I think a train would make the best compact car.

how is a train compact? or a car?



are you on crack?

Oh , sorry, wrong thread.

Originally posted by Sammy RSX
Oh , sorry, wrong thread.

http://www.users.qwest.net/~bkc3/+junk/cluepon.jpg :right:

What do you all think of the new mercedes C Coupe? It goes 0-60 in 7.5 which is kind of slow, but it is a benz. Do you guys think it matches up with the other cars in this comparison? I think it looks pretty good in the front and side views but it looks really bad in the rear view.

C Coupe is decent but loading it up can be expensive.

I don't think WRX is consider a compact car.

How did you get that cluepon?

much easier to mod the others..i think........








If you like the GTi, go w/ it. If you like the WRX, go w/ it. But you could do some pretty cool stuff to the RSX as well as buy it for the WRX price.

what is MSRP on the C coupe? Isn't it 30K or something like that? I wouldn't consider it compact, anyway.

Originally posted by hakka
what is MSRP on the C coupe? Isn't it 30K or something like that? I wouldn't consider it compact, anyway.

the MSRP is about 2-3k more than the RSX type-s
that's with like no options too, that the type-s comes standard with (like leather and heated seats, for those you gotta add on like another couple grand on the c-coupe)

rip off IMO

Originally posted by hakka
what is MSRP on the C coupe? Isn't it 30K or something like that? I wouldn't consider it compact, anyway.
I would consider it a compact.
According to Road & Track its goes 0-60 in 7.5 seconds which is okay but is the slowest in this comparison. I don't think mercedes could justify its price other then the fact that it is a mercedes. It has 195 horsepower from a supercharged 4 cylinder engine

its also really ugly from teh back view

I wouldn't even think about it.... RSX Type-S all the way

C coupe would be consider compact because of it's size. WRX sedan is not however.

RSX Type-R ALL THE WAY! If you watch the BEST MOTORING video, you will see that Honda handles better than the Subarus "on-track".... this maybe different when it comes to rally racing. (and i don't like the fugly front face of the WRX)

Originally posted by RiceRocket
RSX Type-R ALL THE WAY!

The RSX type-R doesn't come out for like another 2 years or so

I know. :mad: by that time, i'd be able to fully deck out my GSR and there'd probably be engine swaps for a Type-S engine to a Integra Body... that's one thing you gotta love about honda's too is their extensive aftermarket products.

The 1.8T GTi's are very tunable. A chip alone can add up to 45hp because the factory boost is set so low. A 6 speed is also available for 2002 which is great. The WRX's are also fabulous cars, but they are about $5000 more than the other compacts you have chosen. I test drove a white WRX sedan on Saturday, and it is a friggin' rocket. Too bad I can't afford one right now.

Originally posted by RiceRocket
I know. :mad: by that time, i'd be able to fully deck out my GSR and there'd probably be engine swaps for a Type-S engine to a Integra Body... that's one thing you gotta love about honda's too is their extensive aftermarket products.

You'll have fun driving backwards. The engine spins the other way around so you would end up having 6 reverse gear and 1 foward gear.

YES. F2OC is right. I found out the hard way. =/
Now there is a big hole between my garage and my house.

Ouch that sounds bad. How much was the damage to House/Garage? Car?

go with the subaru because of the all wheel drive. You can rev that sucker up and drop the clutch and the tires won't smoke unlike a front or rear wheel drive car. Also be origanal don't get something everybody wants unless your a groupie. Be the leading edge if you are a real tuner :devil:

Originally posted by Racer4life
go with the subaru because of the all wheel drive. You can rev that sucker up and drop the clutch and the tires won't smoke unlike a front or rear wheel drive car. Also be origanal don't get something everybody wants unless your a groupie. Be the leading edge if you are a real tuner :devil:

The tire on WRX is crappy and doesn't provide good grip. If you want a better launch you should spend the money on better tyres. Buying a WRX doesn't make a person original.

Originally posted by Racer4life
Also be origanal don't get something everybody wants unless your a groupie. Be the leading edge if you are a real tuner :devil: Um, everyone drives cars, so buy a scooter. That's original! :rolleyes: :right:

crappy tires w/ quality awd is still better than some nice tires on overpowered fwd...
think about it... and they arent that bad

The tires on RSX is not quality tire either. RSX is using GSR's tire in 16inch form. A big dropped in performance from ITR's.

true...
i guess that would be a valid arguement if the type s was a direct successor to the itr... but it is a gsr basically...

before anyone gets a crazy idea, i dint mean the type s is bad, like it isnt enough, but we need to remember that it cant be compared to the itr, b/c a. there is an rsx type r comin soon, and b. just b/c it has similar hp, it isnt a similar car per se, i.e. itr is a purpose built track car, type s is a really nice sporty mobile from a luxoline company (acura)...
and c. the type s is, in comparison w/ a teg, same/similar with a gsr. that is what i meant. i mean no disrespect to the rsx type s vs. itr debate, b/c the two are close, so that means the new type r rsx better be through the freakin roof compared to the itr... know what i mean?

omfg, why did you forget the nissan sentra se-R v-spec?! i think that would be the best choice becasue of the torque that it has compare the the acura, plus the interior looks alot nicer ;)

AHHHH. My head has been spinning over these same cars (except for the ford OF COURSE) and this is what I came up with during the comparo.

Celica: Whiney Bitch of a car that has to be revved tooo high. I loved it, then fell out of love. CHECK OUT THE HEAD LINER! It is card board. The interior plastic reminds me if a pontiac sunfire I owned:(

RSX: What the heck is going on with the weight? I think the curb weight is over 3K. Unacceptable! Also, you will hate me for this...but I like the front of the WRX better. The RSX lights look like saggy boobs.:bloated:

Ford: :finger:

WRX: Looks O.K., good rake and stance. AWD is awesome, turbo kicks hard, not too big for a 4 door. Shifter nice, handling superb.

Civic: Looks like a mini van but has some advantages of the GTI. Least torque of the group, and that's no good. Good all around compromise (when cost factored in) if that's what you are looking for.

GTI: Hatch back for convenience, 6 cylinder for good sound, german handling, smooth and most refined interior, 2002 comes with 6 speed, in dash changer. BUT, man it look plain.


The winner? 2003 Nissan 350Z!!!!:confused:

Originally posted by rpgonzalez

GTI: Hatch back for convenience, 6 cylinder for good sound, german handling, smooth and most refined interior, 2002 comes with 6 speed, in dash changer. BUT, man it look plain.


you think the interior is better than a RSX type-S?? i've never seen the interior on a GTi but i think the interior on the RSX is sweet

vw has a pretty nice interior. very easy to deal with. very nice seats. very well placed, and the materials are high qual for the price range..
and the veedubs have that cool indiglo color gauge cluster... cant really go wrong with that... and i like the steering wheel better than an rsx...
i cant get used to the weird gauges starting at the bottom, but i do like them...

Originally posted by rpgonzalez
AHHHH. My head has been spinning over these same cars (except for the ford OF COURSE) and this is what I came up with during the comparo.

Celica: Whiney Bitch of a car that has to be revved tooo high. I loved it, then fell out of love. CHECK OUT THE HEAD LINER! It is card board. The interior plastic reminds me if a pontiac sunfire I owned:(

RSX: What the heck is going on with the weight? I think the curb weight is over 3K. Unacceptable! Also, you will hate me for this...but I like the front of the WRX better. The RSX lights look like saggy boobs.:bloated:

Ford: :finger:

WRX: Looks O.K., good rake and stance. AWD is awesome, turbo kicks hard, not too big for a 4 door. Shifter nice, handling superb.

Civic: Looks like a mini van but has some advantages of the GTI. Least torque of the group, and that's no good. Good all around compromise (when cost factored in) if that's what you are looking for.

GTI: Hatch back for convenience, 6 cylinder for good sound, german handling, smooth and most refined interior, 2002 comes with 6 speed, in dash changer. BUT, man it look plain.


The winner? 2003 Nissan 350Z!!!!:confused:

Celica GT-S ~ Is a great handler as well.

Rsx-S ~ Curb weight is only 2767 lbs.

Focus SVT ~ Nice but the 2.0L turbocharged Focus in Europe is nicer.

Wrx ~ Cheap quality interior lousy shifter but great value.

Si ~ Not very interesting

Gti ~ 1.8T still better buy over VR6.

Speed is not everything but it is the only thing that concerns me about the vechicles mentioned in this post and the WRX is the king of this crop.

f20c...
i dint mean that ford dint build the cars, but they are svt cars, not ford... kinda like buying a saleen... there are a tonna ford parts, but the important ones have saleen stamped on em... know what i mean?
and i would also rather have some shit from europe... like, oh, a puma

i just love the way a focus rally car looks for some reason... i watched the san remo rally again yesterday, and they look so fucking good low on big rims swingin around corners... hmm...

i went for a rather spirited drive after that.... and the goodwood festival of speed...

Originally posted by bassik277
Damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My thread came a long way since I first posted it. Now there are over 240 posts and over 5000 views:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :) :) :D :D :D

Waw :silly: :silly: :rolleyes:

what happened to half the thread?

I currently have the same dilema as you which car to buy.

WRX = fast awd 227 hp 200 something torque how could you not want this car if you got the money go for it other wise
GTI= fast car can out run an rsx-s anyday the old VR6 was a just a little slower then the type R's 14.7 quarter mile time which is the same quarter mile time as the rsx-s and the new vr6's have 20 more hp. Also a reminder VW does hp at the wheels the old 1.8t claim 150 at crank was actually 142 at the wheels
Celica = girls car what can i say gt-s is pretty quick though
Civic si = lots of parts for it a bit slow and not enought torque
focus = just plain ugly i never seen such an ugly car well maybe the toyota echo

My choice would be the GTI 1.8T or VR6 both are good and 10k cheaper then the best choice subaru. with 10k you can get alot of performance mods

Originally posted by rpgonzalez
The winner? 2003 Nissan 350Z!!!!:confused:
350Z ew 300 Z was much better all i can say is turbo

The Focus RS is the choice.
But the WRX I think doesn´t belongs to this comparo.

Well, you can't beat a finely tuned AWD car:) , so the WRX is my first choice.
I have to give the Ford props for providing a kick ass Focus.

But I have to suggest the 91 and up Sentra SE-R as the winner:cool:
This car is the ultimate pocket rocket. Besides having a 15 second car off the showroom floor, you have a huge selection of aftermarket parts and Nissan OEM parts(SR20DET). I've heard of one person running 9's on a street turbo in a SE-R:) ..........not bad for less than 3 grand to aquire the car.

I voted the Impreza - here in Switzerland we call it 'a farmers Porsche':bandit:

Seems like I am alone here in recommending the Celica. I own a 2001 and really enjoy it. I don't know if this got cleared up already, (I couldnt read the WHOLE thread) but the RSX Type-S and Celica GT-S are both 4 bangers with extremely similar technology under the hood. If you notice, both cars put out 100hp per liter: GT-S | 1.8 lt 180hp, RSX | 2.0 lt 200hp. I read a thread that said the GT-S technology is OK while the RSX is better, this is not true.

Both the RSX and GT-S have continuously variable valve phase timing, meaning the continuously change the starting times of the intake and exhaust valves. This improves torque (look at the Dyno's and you will see a fairly flat torque line each car when they are stock) and is the reason that these two cars have exceptional gas mileage for sport cars. The big thing that both engines have is what is called variable lift. Each car has two cam lobes for each valve, one low-mid speed cam and one high speed cam. At around 6000RPM the ECU sends a signal to the engine to engage the high speed cam, this results in increasing the valve duration and also allows the valves to open wider. This is where the cars differ from eachother. Each implements the high speed cam lobe in a different way, one with a hydraulic locking mechanism (Honda), the other with a pressurized pin (Toyota). Even though, the results are exactly the same. The effect is somewhat like a turbo kicking in because the HP jumps around +40hp or more in an instant, it is really quite impressive for an all-motor engine.

When compared side to side in a race it will be the better driver who will come out on top. The RSX has more horsepower, true, but it is also quite a bit heavier than a Celica. Mods for these cars are almost the same as well. Both have a turbo kit(s) in the works (some already installed on test vehicles) and super chargers are surely to be on the way. If you look at the popular mods out there today you can see that they both have Cool Air Intakes and enhanced exhaust systems. The Toyota has a little advantage in this arena because if you buy TRD enhancements your warrenty remains intack, which is a plus to those concerned about such things.

The best way to make your decision is to do as much research as possible and takes lots and lots of test drives, at different dealers if you have to. With either choice though, don't go skimpy on the options, you will kick yourself in the future if you do. The resale on vehicles with most options is also much higher than base models.

Good luck on your purchase and I hope you find the right car for yourself!

BTW: If you have any questions feel free to email me at [email protected] I will try to help you best I can.

BBTW: For a great understanding of variable valve timing technologies go to http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/lancia/58/technical_school/engine/vvt_1.htm

I almost bought a GT-S but then i looked at the RSX-S and said what am i an idoit?! The RSX is cheaper AND has more ponies, AND more features.....no contest. And on top of that im drivin' an Acura as opposed to a Toyota. Sounds stupid, yes i know, but every lil' bit helps with the ladies. Plus in my opinion the toyotas interior is pretty ugly.

I got my 2001 GT-S with every option minus the gold emblems and carbon fiber dash for $17,900. I personally have no problems buying used cars, especially when they are only one year old. I don't think you're an "idiot" to consider buying a Celica, they are much nicer looking cars in my opinion. As for the RSX having more ponies, yes it does, but it is also a bit heavier. Find two equally good drivers and sit one in an RSX and the other is a GT-S, they will post times very close to eachother, with no one car always being faster then the other on every race. Their engines are extremely similar to one another. You have a point on the interior though. It's not that I think the Celica interior is poor (in fact I really enjoy it, nice wrap-a-round feel to it), its just that the RSX looks more like a luxery automobile inside. One thing I will say, however, is that I feel the body style on the Celica is much more appealing then the look of the RSX. The RSX looks kinda Civic-ey with some different headlights, this I find waters down its sporty performance stigma.

Please don't take this as a RSX bashing, as you read (hopefully) I hold the RSX in high regard, almost to the same level as the Celica. I am just letting you know what made me choose the way I did in hopes that it will help you make a better decision.

One car I will semi-bash is the WRX though. I don't care how fast it is, it really is an ugly automobile, both inside and out.

I wasnt bashing your car at all, and i wasnt calling you an idoit by any means....thast what i was thinking. ANd i didnt know that you bought your car used....but if you compare the two cars new you will find that the RSX-S is cheaper then the GT-S about $2 or $3K CDN....and i agree with you on the WRX.....

No problem man, I didn't take any offense. I was just addressing some of the points you brought up.

tuning potential of WRX is almost infinite. plus awd is a bonus

cheers
jay

;) ;) i would pick the WRX on ur list but since i cant afford it the SE-R Spec-V is my pick, Both 4 door and can burn all the other cars on the track anytime anyday!!!!!:D :D :silly2: :silly2: :p :silly2: :silly2:

I see some of you are really butt-heads, you ONLY consider performance, what´s the diference between 0.5 or 2 seconds from 0 to 60 mph, damn are you really thinking you´re gonna hit the top speed any day? What about looks, confort, etc? You can barely hit 90mph in the fastest USA highways and you would have to be prepared and responsable to easily hit 170kph in Europe like we do! :p

hey euro, you shouldve stopped with the argument against .2 and .5 0-60 differences. You killed it bringing out the top speed argument. The US is a big place and there are lots of lil corners where people hit their top speeds. deserted roads, empty highways, hit up any major city on late on a friday night, youll see some peeps leavin a gas station and goin to a deserted road. Happens all the time.

See, comfort is an issue, so is style. So you shouldve stopped it before then

Originally posted by Euro19
You can barely hit 90mph in the fastest USA highways and you would have to be prepared and responsable to easily hit 170kph in Europe like we do! :p

uh, wrong

In the USofA most people drive at around 80mph on average on the freeways, so 90 isn't VERY special and you don't BARELY hit it

you can easily hit 130mph on american freeways, if you want to (breaking the law ofcourse)

and also 170kph is only about 105mph, which you can do if you feel like it here

I usually drive with the flow of traffic which on average is around 140kph, this is on a normal everyday. So going over 90 isn't really a difficult task, i've done it by accident before

All of you punks bashing the ford focus are blatantly biased. How dare you give the Civic SI any credibility. Its one of the most blatant rip-offs in the history of the auto industry. Honda got scared because the Focus was biting into sales and copied it. Just look at the headlights. If the hondas are great. Why aren't they in the WRC? The focus won straight rallies last season against the WRX and The Evo. Honda can't make an engine with any torque. Or do you ricers know what torque is? Does Colin Mcrae not know anything about cars? He left Subaru for Ford. From now on I will stick to the experts and stay away from the biased 'Fast and Furious' punks. :flipa:

Yea but Burns won last year in the Subbie soo i dotn see what u want.. A lot of ppl keep changing teams.. Makinen is now on subbie and burns in on Puegeut.. so whatever.. Anyway i would either go for the WRX or the RSX type-S.. THe type S is gonna get a sick selection in the aftermarket world adn soo is the wrx... I mean turbotechnics.. or somethign have a TT on an RSX in SEMA.. GReddy coming out wit a turbo, HKS is, etc. And the SEMA even proves the market for the RSX is gonna be vast considering that like every company showed up wit a tricked out RSX... so RSX or WRX

Oh yea and Makinnen is considered like the best rallier now or something.. And he is in a EVO for a long time and is now in a Subbie both JPN cars.. hmmmm...

Hey, i like the focus, i think its a hot looking car. Especially the SVT.....its just back in the day Ford sucked balls at making engines. Sure, theyre making tons of improvements, and the Focus rally car rules, but after watching Fords do nothing but break down all my life its kinda hard to trust em. I think that goes the same with a lot of people here too. As for the Civic SI, i agree so whole-heartedly you would not believe.

Import freak - You like import cars then fine. You chose them in the same people decide what football team they like. You are biased against the Focus. It is in the same league with all those other cars and I can back up what I say. Writers for car magazines will tell you the same thing. Did you see Automobile magazine two months ago? They compared a lot of these cars and the focus did just as well or better. Do you know more than writers who review cars for their job? Obviously not, they can spell and you can't. Ford is competitive in many forms of racing in many countries around the world. So I don't buy that the SVT Focus should not be considered when looking at those cars. The truth is that it is in the same class. I can back it up. Just because you don't like Fords doesn't mean a lot to me. Would you try to tell me next that Hyundia or Kia is better because it is an import? How do you tell what is import anyway. The Focus is British designed and the ones built there differ only slightly from the North American ones. Believe what you want --
The truth is that the SVT Focus is just as good.