210 HP but only 143 Torque??? - Page 3

crazy_canuck · #31 08-02-2005, 10:08 PM

I don't think the problem is with Acura being associated with ricers (look at the TL and TSX) but its just not the right styling for most people and lacks a V8. They also know how much more reliable Acura is comapred to Volkslemon/OWdi.

mason_RsX · #32 08-03-2005, 08:36 PM

not starting a flame war, but I dunt agree

the corp execs are driving around and they see a bunch of Honda's with Acura labels on them, and integras and RSX's flying by with fart can mufflers....then they look at the RL and say "I wanna associate myself with that?"

The V6 and styling play a role I mentioned that already, but I think the brand image plays a role as well

paulkramer · #33 08-04-2005, 03:15 PM

Well I'm sure there's some truth to what you're saying.......maybe that's why I'm not an exec!

I don't want to associate myself with fat Lexus (Japanese copy of M-B) or snotty VW/Audi (especially now with their new hideous styling).
Infiniti has always struck me as a real oddball, though that image may be no longer valid. It's an old association from when their designs were worse than anything Hyundai ever styled.

Vip09 · #34 08-10-2005, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pik_d

and toyota... what do they have to offer as sports cars... a celica? mr2? nothing that even breaks 200hp... unless you count the solara, but honestly... i dont consider toyota much of anything so far as sports cars.

That's a pretty ignorant statement. The GT-S may not have 200hp, but it is just as fast or faster than other cars in its class.

pik_d · #35 08-10-2005, 01:24 PM

difference between sports car, and sporty coupe.

i mean a proper sports car... like the toyota supra was. you cant put the celica in the same class as the supra, can you? just like i dont really consider the RSX a sports car...

dont take it as ignorance... just a distinction between car classes.

Vip09 · #36 08-10-2005, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pik_d

difference between sports car, and sporty coupe.

i mean a proper sports car... like the toyota supra was. you cant put the celica in the same class as the supra, can you? just like i dont really consider the RSX a sports car...

dont take it as ignorance... just a distinction between car classes.

I see what you mean.. the rsx, celica, etc are only sport compacts.. definitely not a sports car by any means.

JekylandHyde · #37 08-12-2005, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pik_d

and toyota... what do they have to offer as sports cars... a celica? mr2? ... i dont consider toyota much of anything so far as sports cars.

pik_d · #38 08-13-2005, 05:14 AM

yea... i'm so glad you read my explanation that even someone with one of the cars i named accepted.

maybe reading the whole thread has hit the road?

EDIT: i see you've got a couple of '91 MR2's. no disrespect to them... but just the same, i'm not calling my dodge neon a proper sports car just because it says "R/T" and "Magnum 2.0" on it.

point is, you own two sporty coupes, not two full blown sports cars. that is... unless you modified them, in which case they're not proper examples in this argument.

JekylandHyde · #39 08-13-2005, 08:54 AM

I read your explanation (and the whole thread) and my comments stand.

You apparently do not understand the term "sports car." I own four MR2s, an '85, '88 and two 91s and they are all sports cars ~ as is the 2000+ MR2 Spyders. "Big horsepower" is not part of the equation of a sports car. Miatas, MGs, Elises, TVRs ... they are all sports cars and none of them are very powerful.

The Celica is not a sports car. I would agree to the term "sport comapct" for that vehicle as I would for the RSX, Integras, Neons, Civics, etc ...

All "coupe" means is a car with 2 doors.

pik_d · #40 08-13-2005, 10:26 AM

in that case what seperates the celica from the mr2? other then one being FWD and one being RWD?

and, the mr2 is more of a roadster, as is the miata, and maybe even the elise.

mg and tvr are brands... and look at the tvr speed12, got enough power and torque there.

RSX-S777 · #41 08-13-2005, 02:25 PM

Why bother with the excruciating and irrelevant task of labeling and classification anymore? If you can modify lightly and kill a Mustang or other traditionally dubbed sports car, what's the point? If you want to attempt to classify cars stock for stock, you can- but in today's market where cars can be easily tuned/modified with any number of readily available parts- where RSXs and Celicas have been heavily modified to pump out ridiculous horsepower with a stock block, it seems like a waste of time. I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't consider the RSX or the Celica a sports car, but then again, they probably have no idea of each car's potential- and probably haven't done any research concerning the beasts that have been put together lately.

JekylandHyde · #42 08-13-2005, 06:43 PM

Celica is not a 2-seater and it's not set up to be a curve huggin performance car.

The cars I listed are purpose built sports car. There primary function, by design, is driving.

The Supra I would classify as a high-performance vehicle. They are heavy, big cars ... not exactly tossable.

mason_RsX · #43 08-13-2005, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pik_d

yea... i'm so glad you read my explanation that even someone with one of the cars i named accepted.

maybe reading the whole thread has hit the road?

EDIT: i see you've got a couple of '91 MR2's. no disrespect to them... but just the same, i'm not calling my dodge neon a proper sports car just because it says "R/T" and "Magnum 2.0" on it.

point is, you own two sporty coupes, not two full blown sports cars. that is... unless you modified them, in which case they're not proper examples in this argument.

You can see from his sig that hes got a pretty fast Mr2...were talking about it in the non-specific racing forum

and S777 where have you been? no RSX stories or nothin?? or did you get your dream car mustang??

and welcome to my neck of the woods Hyde

it is very tough to properly define a sports car... and theres alot of cars that are borderline sports cars...for example, a Bentley Continental flying spur is considered a luxury car, but it gets to 60 in 5s and can his 200mph, a definate sports car credential

JekylandHyde · #44 08-14-2005, 06:43 AM

mason_RsX, thanks for the welcome

I'm not familiar with the Bentley you are talking about, but the numbers you gave to represent it sound more like a high performance car than a sports car. Sports cars, by definition, are cars designed for corner carving and curve hugging

It doesn't matter if it's top speed is 90 or 210

The numbers is my siggy are not accurate, they are higher now ... I am just waiting to update my siggy because we are making biggersnumbers this week *crosses fingers*

pik_d · #45 08-14-2005, 11:47 PM

well yea, i wouldn'd deny that HIS MR2 is a proper sports car, but thats quite different from what toyota has to offer the general public.

and my original statement was "what does toyota have to offer?". certainly not something like in his sig.

but RSX-S777, point taken, each car is what the owner makes of it... and i suppose on forums like these, thats a bit more then what the general public will make of any given car.

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD