2003 Cobra vs 2003 S2K *link*

[TerminalVelocity]

CLICK!

[cybercrx00]

next up will be the viper-corolla shootout?

[TerminalVelocity]

I keep hearing people with s2k's talk of beating cobras, and they are in the same class people keep saying. So sure, when they make a 13 sec corrola i'll do that. :bandit:

[Prelewd]

:hehehe: HAHAHAHAHAHA that was some good shit cybercrx... I thought about that too and I can't stop laughing... damn.. I love the satire.

[Self]

Originally posted by TerminalVelocity
I keep hearing people with s2k's talk of beating cobras, and they are in the same class people keep saying. So sure, when they make a 13 sec corrola i'll do that. :bandit:

You keep hearing talk of people beating pre-03 Cobra's...And that's completely possible and believable. Mag stock times on both are close...14.1 for the s2k, and 13.7 for a new Cobra...Not much of a difference, so an s2k with a profecient driver and a Cobra with a below average driver would do it. Also, just a bad launch fron the Cobra and a good launch from the s2k would also do the trick...No one has compared an S2k to an '03 Cobra I don't think...It's minnows vs. great whites...

[Prelewd]

No one has compared an S2k to an '03 Cobra I don't think...It's minnows vs. great whites...

took one last week on my huffy... the goldfish always wins..

[94svt5.0]

Originally posted by Self

14.1 for the s2k, and 13.7 for a new Cobra

The 2003 cobras run mid 12s.

[Self]

Originally posted by 94svt5.0





The 2003 cobras run mid 12s.

Yes yes, I know...I meant newER...New as in before the '03. I was too lazy to go back and edit it and also hought it was clear givin the rest of my argument...No harm done, get to tack one more onto my post count

[AE101]

I wonder what handles better, has a higher build quality and is just a pure blast to redline at 9000 and toss around corners? Yeah, your right. The S2000.

[Self]

Originally posted by AE101
I wonder what handles better, has a higher build quality and is just a pure blast to redline at 9000 and toss around corners? Yeah, your right. The S2000.

Better build quality?? Doubtful. How do you come to that conclusion? You make unintelligent assumptions about a vehicle you know nothing about. You've never seen one in person most likely, you haven't heard anything about the vehicle other than the specs most likely, so you decide to bash its build quality...That's great...Secondly, the S2k better damn well out handle the heavier, larger, more powerful Cobra. And in my opinion the Cobra has the S2k beat in the fun-factor department.

[cybercrx00]

big, heavy, and powerful don't make a fun car, but then again, that is a very subjective aspect of a vehicle. I personally feel a fun car to drive is one that is decently quick, yet has the ability to be throw around like a go-cart. I've said it a thousand times, my SH prelude is much funner to drive than my modded TTZ was. I could just imagine some stiffer springs, sway bars, and some sticky tires.


As fo build quality, a mustang is a mustang, I sincerly doubt they use completely different materials and procedures for making the chassis/ body/ interior on the new cobra then they do on any other 99+ mustang. That being said, their interiors are very poor quality compared to honda's. maybe the cobra has a better built engine, since there have been some problems with the s2k engine, but overall, I think the honda is probably built quite a bit better.

[Prelewd]

It was rumored that mustangs (of the later 90's model year) were built cheaper than civics of the same years. Cheaper being quality of materials, design, ect... It could be all hearsay, but if someone could back this up with some facts, or prove it wrong with some facts, I would think it to be an interesting part of this battle.

[1SlowAccord]

I'm pretty sure that would have to be a rumor. First off, who in their right mind would go through each component of both cars just to find out if one was made with a higher/lesser quality then the other. Especially between two cars like the mustang and civic. I could possibly see a in-depth comparison between say a mustang and a camaro. But even then, you'd had to take EVERYTHING on each car and find out how it compares to the same thing on the other car. I.E, the quality of the screws used to hold the door panels in place, or maybe the door handle. Just my 2cents

[TerminalVelocity]

I completly agree

Honda normally has better designs on interior and quality of styling etc, but is usually slower. As I see it

[Self]

Originally posted by cybercrx00
big, heavy, and powerful don't make a fun car, but then again, that is a very subjective aspect of a vehicle. I personally feel a fun car to drive is one that is decently quick, yet has the ability to be throw around like a go-cart. I've said it a thousand times, my SH prelude is much funner to drive than my modded TTZ was. I could just imagine some stiffer springs, sway bars, and some sticky tires.


As fo build quality, a mustang is a mustang, I sincerly doubt they use completely different materials and procedures for making the chassis/ body/ interior on the new cobra then they do on any other 99+ mustang. That being said, their interiors are very poor quality compared to honda's. maybe the cobra has a better built engine, since there have been some problems with the s2k engine, but overall, I think the honda is probably built quite a bit better.

I suppose so...Fun to me has always been slamming the pedal to the floor in second and going sideways into third...That's a feeling you have to experience to understand...Being able to chirp the gears into third...Lifting the wheels off of the ground on a hard launch...Difting around corners effortlessly...Being able to set a $20 bill on the dash and telling your friend riding shotgun if they can grab it, they can keep it(and being able to keep your $20 ) but to each his own...