The MW Automotive Thread

[myk]

My Charger was originally white, with a red interior, however in the early 90's the previous owner changed both inside and outside colors to do the Dukes of Hazzard thing.

That E body is far too extreme of course, but I've always enjoyed the idea of wedding today's cutting edge performance with yesterday's abolutely beautiful bodies...

[Phyrox]

My Charger was originally white, with a red interior, however in the early 90's the previous owner changed both inside and outside colors to do the Dukes of Hazzard thing.

Guess that wasn't you I saw then. I actually saw the guy twice, so figured it would be a hell of a coincidence...

[David Hingtgen]

Just a side note, my dad had a '69 Charger, it's in my parent's wedding photos. Metallic blue paint, blue interior, black top, black bumblebee stripes, and mag wheels of course.

Edited March 13, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Lightning]

nice!

I have the issue of PHR that did the engine buildup, the car turned out...........ok, paint choice is nice, but not how low the car is or how big those F-ing wheels are.

[JKeats]

Ugh, why did they have to lower it like that?

[myk]

Yeah, it's ugly-low, but I'm sure it's completely functional and the car handles like a dream...

[emajnthis]

The new Supra is going to have the same problem as the old Supra: no one is going to pay 50,000 for a Toyota (if you didn't know that's the same MSRP as the old Twin Turbo Supra), the Supra's weren't as great a seller's as people believed them to be. Also it's kind of silly paying 40,000 for a V6 model when you can get a 350Z for 10,000 less and soon the 450Z for almost the same price. As cool as it is that the Supra is coming back, I still find it ridiculous paying such an atrocious amount for what seems (from this moment) a mediocre car, doesn't a V6 convertible Supra just wreak of Solara?

As far as i remember, Toyota had some great successes, but never were they actually top of their class in performance (WRX's and EVO's were always faster than the GTfour Celica's and the GT-R was always faster than the Supra, the MR2 was really the only thing that pulled away but then they gave it a rag top and a NA motor). I am anticipating their Lexus super car and hopefully they can start making all of their cars with a little bit of edge to them as opposed to the econo crap they've bit spitting lately.

[yellowlightman]

As cool as it is that the Supra is coming back, I still find it ridiculous paying such an atrocious amount for what seems (from this moment) a mediocre car, doesn't a V6 convertible Supra just wreak of Solara?

A 500HP stock Toyota is mediocre? Uh...

[Seven]

Also it's kind of silly paying 40,000 for a V6 model when you can get a 350Z for 10,000 less and soon the 450Z for almost the same price.

380164[/snapback]

What's the 450Z? A 350z with a V8?

[Stamen0083]

New, 4.5L Z, I guess.

PS: The displacement figures are starting to get ridiculous. What's going to happen in the future, a 12L Z?

Edited March 15, 2006 by Stamen0083

[yellowlightman]

Z's are lame and getting lamer by the year. The 350Z was cool because it was the only car like it available from a Japanese manufacturer. Now with the RX8, the STi, the Evo. Not mention cars like the new GTO. There's just no decent reason to buy one.

Not to mention every Z since the original body style was pretty much crap.

[Seven]

Z's are lame and getting lamer by the year. The 350Z was cool because it was the only car like it available from a Japanese manufacturer. Now with the RX8, the STi, the Evo. Not mention cars like the new GTO. There's just no decent reason to buy one.

Not to mention every Z since the original body style was pretty much crap.

380505[/snapback]

All the cars you mention are sufficiently different from each other to be aimed at a different part of the market. I would think that not many people that are considering buying a 350Z are going to cross shop a substantially lower powered 4 door car like the RX8. And the two others are AWD turbo 4 door sedans. The GTO is going away and there are people that simply won't buy domestic. Everyone is looking for something different and the 350Z still fills a unique place in the market for imports.

[emajnthis]

HP is completely irrelevant when it comes to what really pulls your car off the line: torque, something that Toyota has always been bad at (Supra being the exception). The MkIV Supra and the second Gen MR2 were the only great sports cars to ever come out of Toyota, and if it wasn't for a little movie called Fast and the Furious, the Supra wouldn't even be a recognized name.

Not to mention their motors as of late claim all this HP but where's the torque? At least Nissan motors have the torque to support their HP (hence the great numbers on road tests). Not to mention some poor guy is going to pay 40,000 dollars for a hyped up Solara.

And the biggest point that always hurts Toyota is weight, my Supra was a friggin Porker that couldn't take a corner and it used an Inline 6, i can only imagine how much worse it will be with a V8.

Personally, if you're going to blow 50,000 on a Toyota you may as well just buy the better performing ZO6 Vette, or save 10grand and buy a 450Z (VK45 V8 that is used in the the M class and the FX, and if you're sick of displacement names then you should go yell at BMW, Mercedes, and Ferrari 'cause God forsake them to ever use displacement on their badges ever again).

I'm not saying that the Supra will be a failure, but given Toyota's sports car credibility as of late (no Celica, no MR2, and salesman have to try and sham people with the Solara as their "sports" car), i'm definitely not holding my breath (also keep in mind that i used to manage sales for Toyota and found them to be highly overrated, i used to wonder why people would just bend over whiel i charged them a premium for utter non sense).

And just a little bit off the topic at hand, but did anyone else realize that the new GTI weighs in at 3300lbs!? that's the same as an EVO/STI/350Z!

Edited March 15, 2006 by emajnthis

[Lightning]

yeah, the new GTI is definatly a porker. That's almost as heavy as my car.

[yellowlightman]

All the cars you mention are sufficiently different from each other to be aimed at a different part of the market.  I would think that not many people that are considering buying a 350Z are going to cross shop a substantially lower powered 4 door car like the RX8.  And the two others are AWD turbo 4 door sedans.  The GTO is going away and there are people that simply won't buy domestic.  Everyone is looking for something different and the 350Z still fills a unique place in the market for imports.

380599[/snapback]

Considering the RX8 will go around a track just as fast as the 350z, it's easier to drive and costs LESS, I think it's a fair comparison. If you're gonna be whining about the RX8 not being a true coupe because of those little doors, you should probably just shut up. Same goes the the STi and Evo, who the hell cares if it has 4 doors? An Evo is still a hell of a lot cooler than the yuppie poser mobile that is the 350z.

The GTO isn't domestic, it's Austrailian. Furthermore, the difference between imports and domestics is getting smaller, as Detroit has been putting out some really interesting cars.

[emajnthis]

but the point Seven is making is valid, the 350Z is for people who want a true bred RWD sports coupe. I don't know what track you're running but the 350Z will totally burn an RX-8 around a track, the RX-8 doesn't have sufficient torque to pull out of the Apex's (I'll admit that it's suspension is more than sufficient thus is typical of Mazda: slow motors, great suspensions; i loved how you could red line it all day but even at redline the torque is completely vacant). I'll also admit its easier to drive (handles like a dream actually), but since it doesn't use a conventional motor, you run the risk of someone seriously screwing up your car even with simple maintenance. The STI/EVO are rally inspired turbo sedan AWD cars that are really in a completely different class.

[yellowlightman]

The track comment was based on an episode of Top Gear comparing the two. But hey, the Toyota X-Runner will beat a 350z around a track, so whatever.

[realdeal]

but the point Seven is making is valid, the 350Z is for people who want a true bred RWD sports coupe.  I don't know what track you're running but the 350Z will totally burn an RX-8 around a track, the RX-8 doesn't have sufficient torque to pull out of the Apex's (I'll admit that it's suspension is more than sufficient thus is typical of Mazda: slow motors, great suspensions; i loved how you could red line it all day but even at redline the torque is completely vacant).  I'll also admit its easier to drive (handles like a dream actually), but since it doesn't use a conventional motor, you run the risk of someone seriously screwing up your car even with simple maintenance.  The STI/EVO are rally inspired turbo sedan AWD cars that are really in a completely different class.

380785[/snapback]

Here are some of the track times from the Top Gear website. RX-8 did pretty well.

Torque and hp are great on a straightline race, but around the track things are even.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/powerlaps/page_2.shtml

Honda NSX Type R - 1.31.6

BMW M3 - 1.31.8

Nissan 350Z - 1.31.8

Mazda RX8 - 1.31.8

BMW 535d - 1.31.8

BMW 130 - 1.31.9 - NEW

Ford Focus RS - 1.32.2

[Beltane70]

An Evo is still a hell of a lot cooler than the yuppie poser mobile that is the 350z

The Evo would be cool if it didn't have the risk of falling apart long before the 350Z would. I wouldn't trust any Mitsubishi car any further than I can throw it.

[ComicKaze]

but the point Seven is making is valid, the 350Z is for people who want a true bred RWD sports coupe.  I don't know what track you're running but the 350Z will totally burn an RX-8 around a track, the RX-8 doesn't have sufficient torque to pull out of the Apex's (I'll admit that it's suspension is more than sufficient thus is typical of Mazda: slow motors, great suspensions; i loved how you could red line it all day but even at redline the torque is completely vacant).  I'll also admit its easier to drive (handles like a dream actually), but since it doesn't use a conventional motor, you run the risk of someone seriously screwing up your car even with simple maintenance.  The STI/EVO are rally inspired turbo sedan AWD cars that are really in a completely different class.

380785[/snapback]

The view head to head vids I've seen of 350Z vs. RX-8 have shown them virtually equal.

[emajnthis]

Must have missed that episode, good facts. I have driven both though (RX8 350Z) and they are two completely different driving experiences, so i can't imagine people who want an RX8 would put the 350Z in the same category as they fulfill different driving senses.

The EVO is probably the only car from Mitsubishi i would purchase as my friend who is a master mechanic at a Nissan dealership (formerly Nissan/Mitsubishi dealership) tells me that the EVO's are the only cars that Mitsubishi seems to give a spit about as they're built pretty well. But i would definitely take a WRX (not the STI) over an EVO any day.

At least one thing makes me happy about those lap times, and that's the NSX only pulling .2 seconds faster than everything else (that matters) on the board but costing anywhere between two to three times what all of those vehicles cost. That further proves to me the total crapiness of the NSX, now if only everyone else would remove the scales from their eyes and see that.

EDIT:

I just took a look at the track their racing these cars on and I would hardly consider that a "real" track. If you look at the top standings they start to get funny, like a CLS55AMG beating a Viper SRT10 and other such oddities.

Edited March 16, 2006 by emajnthis

[yellowlightman]

At least one thing makes me happy about those lap times, and that's the NSX only pulling .2 seconds faster than everything else (that matters) on the board but costing anywhere between two to three times what all of those vehicles cost.  That further proves to me the total crapiness of the NSX, now if only everyone else would remove the scales from their eyes and see that.

380948[/snapback]

Back before you joined there was a thread (or it might have been this thread) where I brought up the argument that the performance of an equivalent year 3rd gen RX7 made the NSX something of an unwise purchase. That didn't go over to well. On the other hand, you can now buy NSX's in the low $20k range, and that's not a bad value for a cool daily driver.

Edited March 16, 2006 by yellowlightman

[emajnthis]

you're not the only one who's brought up those similar arguements; just about every car rag has done one, though my favorite was the S2000 vs the NSX (same 0-60 and 1/4 mile is only .2 seconds slower). That is one good/bad thing about the NSX is that it hasn't changed since it was conceived (by change i mean performance) so you can buy a first year 90's NSX and still perform the same as a brand new one (maybe even better since the new ones have the Targa top) so whoever buys a new one is a fool.

EDIT: Alfa Romeo is going to come out with an AWD coupe, i think its using the V6 but i'd have to go back and read the article on it.

Edited March 16, 2006 by emajnthis

[yellowlightman]

EDIT:  Alfa Romeo is going to come out with an AWD coupe, i think its using the V6 but i'd have to go back and read the article on it.

381029[/snapback]

Yeah, they're releasing a hopped up AWD Maserati-motor version of the Brera. It's going to be stupid expensive though.

[VF-18S Hornet]

here are some auto show pics with me in it, standing next to two of Chrysler Corp. newest vehicles. Chrysler Aspen and a new version of the Grand Cherokee still working on uploading the other photos I have taken at the 2006 Philadelphia Auto Show.

[emajnthis]

I went to test drive a few Jeep's with my brother and they are so nice inside and have a very commanding presence but are Stupid friggin expensive. Chrysler's are great, but I can buy a comporably equipped Ford or GM classed vehicle and still walk away with 5-6 grand.

I Love Chrysler's Hemi, but they're charging top dollar for any car equipped with it, and the rest of their vehicles use gas hogging Mercedes motors.

[areaseven]

Coming to theatres on June 16: The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift

Edited March 17, 2006 by areaseven

[Stamen0083]

At least one thing makes me happy about those lap times, and that's the NSX only pulling .2 seconds faster than everything else (that matters) on the board but costing anywhere between two to three times what all of those vehicles cost.  That further proves to me the total crapiness of the NSX, now if only everyone else would remove the scales from their eyes and see that.

380948[/snapback]

Pheh. You're comparing 1989 technology to 2004 technology. You're right, buying a new NSX doesn't make sense, but that doesn't make the NSX any less incredible.

Wait for the 2008 NSX replacement, then make a judgment.

[emajnthis]

For the first time in a F&F movie they're going to use cars that are fast in real life. The Veilside RX-7 (yes that orange/black car is an RX-7) is heavy but has some insane HP number under the hood unlike their last RX-7 used in the first movie. And i can't recall what company makes that 350Z, but other recognizable companies like Signal Auto's and C-West's S15's and a few Skyline's are definitely from Japanese based Motorsports companies and not from some rich guys garage or singular franchise.

It already loses points for putting Bowow in it, so the cars and the track racing better make up for the letdown in compitent acting.

Edited March 17, 2006 by emajnthis

[emajnthis]

At least one thing makes me happy about those lap times, and that's the NSX only pulling .2 seconds faster than everything else (that matters) on the board but costing anywhere between two to three times what all of those vehicles cost.  That further proves to me the total crapiness of the NSX, now if only everyone else would remove the scales from their eyes and see that.

380948[/snapback]

Pheh. You're comparing 1989 technology to 2004 technology. You're right, buying a new NSX doesn't make sense, but that doesn't make the NSX any less incredible.

Wait for the 2008 NSX replacement, then make a judgment.

381384[/snapback]

Actually it's 1990 technology vs. 1999 technology (if you're counting it by the Japanese release) as the NSX was released in the US in 91 and the S2000 was released in 2000, but even so the technology in the NSX is still more advanced than what was put into the S2000. It has nothing to do with technology, it has everything to do with formula, the NSX's V6 (and any Honda V6 for that matter) sucks, and it took them almost two decades to realize that. If technology was the issue then people wouldn't be comparing brand new exotics against the McLaren F1 for good measure (also built in 91).

[Lightning]

well, to offshoot the current topic a bit, I may have a chance to race my car afterall!

see here---->Grassroots Motorsports $2006 Challenge

[emajnthis]

I can't believe someone else reads that magazine, my brother and I find that magazine to be a humble releif from the "spend your life savings on your car" magazines. I don't have a subscription yet but i believe the last person who won the last challenge they held (i think it was $2000 budget race car) was a guy who jammed a Vette motor in his CRX and still had change (got the motor from a junk yard, and paid under 1000 for the car).

[Lightning]

I can't believe someone else reads that magazine, my brother and I find that magazine to be a humble releif from the "spend your life savings on your car" magazines.  I don't have a subscription yet but i believe the last person who won the last challenge they held (i think it was $2000 budget race car) was a guy who jammed a Vette motor in his CRX and still had change (got the motor from a junk yard, and paid under 1000 for the car).

381399[/snapback]

yeah, I just got a susubscription as an X-mas gift, been buying it since summer last year.

Last year's Challenge winner was a 302-powered RX-7. and they still had $200 left over

[emajnthis]

Awesome magazine, it's just so comfoting knowing that people aren't blowing small (and large) fortunes to make a ride that kicks nuts. It is possible to get supercar performance on a carpenter's budget.

[areaseven]

For the first time in a F&F movie they're going to use cars that are fast in real life.  The Veilside RX-7 (yes that orange/black car is an RX-7) is heavy but has some insane HP number under the hood unlike their last RX-7 used in the first movie.  And i can't recall what company makes that 350Z, but other recognizable companies like Signal Auto's and C-West's S15's and a few Skyline's are definitely from Japanese based Motorsports companies and not from some rich guys garage or singular franchise.

It already loses points for putting Bowow in it, so the cars and the track racing better make up for the letdown in competent acting.

381389[/snapback]

Yeah, for some reason, the F&F franchise always has to have a rapper attached to it (F&F had Ja Rule, while 2F2F had Ludacris). Hopefully, the races won't be CG like in 2F2F.

BTW, as reported a few months ago, a 1967 Mustang fastback with a Nissan (the RB26DETT, IIRC) motor appears in the movie. I guess an American muscle car has to be attached to each movie, but putting a Japanese motor in a Mustang is just wrong in many ways.