College student needs advice

Home  \  Asian Imports  \  College student needs advice

OK so im 19 years old and in college, transferring to a school that is downtown next year so im gona be driving quite a few miles every week and I want to get a new car, and I have boiled my options down to 2, and they are quite different

My school will be 20 miles away, one way, plus work travel, and 5 days a week, I anticipate ~300 miles a week, and having a car that is reliable, comfortable, and affordable is a must.

Option 1. Honda Civic Si Sedan Fiji Blue-$21,290
Option 2. Honda Fit Sport 5-speed manual Vivid Blue Pearl-$15,190

I will have a downpayment of about 7000 dollars hopefully, so that should help with payments. The car will be financed so it will need full insurance coverage as well. I make decent money at work, and will be able to afford both, but the Si I will have little money left over, and thats my drawback with the Si, as well as the added fuel bills


http://www.2carpros.com/makes/images/civic_si_sedan_blue.jpg
Civic Si Sedan -
Pros: Look, performance, value, great aftermarket support for future.
Cons: Price, MPG, insurance costs


http://news.windingroad.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/honda-fit-india.jpg< br /> Honda Fit Sport-
Pros: Practical, MPG, price, roomy, I think it looks great, sport package comes with all features I need
Cons: 109 horsepower so I might get bored but I hear the car is fun

What would YOU do.

posted by  newyorker

Two very different cars I guess. What you call the 'Fit' is what we call the 'Jazz' and in my opinion it's more of either a first time driver's car, or a retired driver's car. The Civic will obviously cost more all round, but I think it'll suit you better in the long run given it's younger looks. It's also less bland than the Fit.

posted by  Cliffy

Both will be brand new. The jazz here is kinda aimed at new families and college students, etc.etc. Most of the people I see driving them are actually in their mind 20s to early 40s. Im still stuck in this debate, but the Civic Si will cost a LOT more

posted by  newyorker

I saw the pics at the last minute and edited my assumption about how old the cars would be, lol...If you can afford the Civic I still say go for that one. :thumbs:

posted by  Cliffy

Yea. we have 2 trims of the fit, the Fit and the Fit "sport" which includes 15" alloys, fog lights, underbody kit colormatched, rear spoiler, 350 watt upgraded stereo witht AUX input, security system, and cruise control.

Here are the 2 side by side, the Fit in the back, and Fit "sport" in the front...I use quotes because there inst much about it thats really sporty lol still the same 1.5 liter 109 horsepower motor but I hear its got decent torque and is geared well for zippy acceleration

http://www.motiontrends.com/2006/m01/honda/honda_fit_and_fit_sport.jpg
For you guys, the Jazz is like the non-"sport" fit, so I understand why you would think its bland, but the "sport" doesnt look bad actually, I quite like it.

I also think the interior is VERY nice for a car of it's price, ive been to the dealership and fiddled with the seats and storage compartments it was very impressive.
http://z.about.com/d/cars/1/7/b/T/ag_07fitbase_int.jpg
Its one of the things that makes the car very practical. It also has those touches that make it really nice like the acura style guage cluster, colormatched headlights, and it all around doesnt look like your typical econo-box. Quality seems very good for what it costs

posted by  newyorker

What's wrong with your current Civic? You're a student, why are you looking to buy a new car when your current one is fine? You're saying the Si is going to cost you a lot. Your current Civic must be somewhat fun, and probably quite reliable. Keep it, and use your money to have fun in your college years. You don't want to spend every free second you have working off a car that you REALLY DON'T NEED. When you're done with school you'll get a better paying job...then really go car shopping.

And between the two, I'd get the Si. I don't see why you'd get the Fit over your current car anyways. The Fit will cost you more money as apposed to just keeping your Civic, and it's going to be slow as balls. Even with 2X the power it would still be lacking, and doubling the power in that car is no easy task.

posted by  giant016

while ive thought of that option as well, my car isnt that reliable. Im replacing my transmission this week, at 116k miles, and they will keep on rolling up and up and up. there are just constant little annoyances I have with this car. rattles, reliability issues, comfort, etc.etc. that and my mpg isnt that great and is consistently dropping

EDIT: take for example if i have to replace my motor, in this car it wouldnt be worth it, and i wouldnt get shit with a blown motor, so id basically be left with a car that i could have gotten 4500-5000 for sitting in my driveway not worth anything and have to pay for the new car without the money that i would have put down from selling this one..its a tough decision

posted by  newyorker

Well when I wanted to sell the Z and get something else I realized, I may not exaclty love it now, but the way I'm modding and fixing or bettering this car all the time, eventually, It will be EXACLTY what I want and a one of a kind.

Kinda sucks I didnt figure it out sooner as I pretty much had to start over since I mostly returned it to stock and sold off the parts, but Im keeping it, cause I probably lose my ass on it if I sell it, and with a brand new build viperized tranny and a new forged motor going in in the extremely close future, then new paint following, it will be pretty much a new car but better:mrgreen:

posted by  Enthusiast

Well all of my major plans kinda died off for this car either becauyse they were too expensive or complex or both. I just wana get a car to drive thats good and step away from this whole tuning game for a while. With all of the shit going on, every other asshole street races now..I was on my way home from work last night at 3am and some dudes in a mustang every light we got to they revved at me and took off, then slowed down and did it at every single stoplight...it seems like you cant drive any kind of car with any kind of modification without getting assholes nag you

posted by  newyorker

Other people seem to really affect your car selection.

Why not a nice used LS1 GTO. Great Gas mileage (buddy gets 25-28 highway with the LS2), cheaper than a new SI, parts a cheap, good aftermarket, clean classy look (not boy racer), and very comfortable and roomy, I sit comfortably in the back and Im 6' 180lbs.
Plus itd be quick enough and nice enough to hold off modding while you just enjoy driving it, plus its still relativel new, and people usually dont notice it, so less gay mustangs trying to race.

posted by  Enthusiast

Sorry but american cars never caught my fancy, especially the "muscle cars". I also want something brand new, and I dont know how your buddy gets that much mpg either hes full of it or somethin with the car must be wrong. My friend has a 5.0 95 mustang gt an gets like 8 in the city 14 highway I realize its probbably not the same motor but whatever

posted by  newyorker

Easy its a Double overdrive tranny and a big torquey motor that lugs around right off redline.
Hell I get 28highway with 3.73s and a less efficient motor, and the same transmission. Its all in the tranny and gears, gotta love the T56.

Great Its not american its australian, what would it hurt to drive one, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised. Hell remeber when bronxie finally went and drove a vette?

posted by  Enthusiast

I uno man, i just dont want an american car or australian w.e lol. Everyone I know has some problems with them, more than mine anyway

posted by  newyorker

What would a test drive hurt then man, and so you know the drivetrain is pretty much bullet proof at stock power level in the car, and the rears are fine unless modded with some sticky tires.

posted by  Enthusiast

how many people do you know with Australian cars? Or are you assuming they're the same as American?

posted by  windsonian

Because nothing will convince me to get the car anyway. I just dont like them, they feel very cheap to me, especially the interior

posted by  newyorker

I will not buy a corvette, or a camaro, or a mustang, or a gto, etc. I just dont like them, end of story. Same as I dont like VW and audi and the likes because of their constant problems. I like jap cars.

posted by  newyorker

Normally I'd tell someone to go with the Civic, but I'll make a special exception this time.

posted by  jedimario

By saying that, you have obvoiusly never been in a GTO and are blinded by the ignorant generalizations of american cars.

posted by  Enthusiast

I just dont like them...everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Id rock a vette but its not practical for my situation, nor is it affordable now lets try to stick to topic

posted by  newyorker

Yes, you're entitled to your opinion, but you tried to back up your opinion with "evidence". The problem is not that you don't like them, it's your contradictory reasoning for not liking them.

And you'd be hard pressed to make me fork out that sort of coin for a new jazz. If it MUST be from those two, then civic. But only if affordable. If it's not, I'd be getting something else. Maybe slightly older.

posted by  windsonian

Buddy, after high school and through college I drove an '89 Pontiac Sunbird, an '88 Acura Integra and an '88 Mazda 323. "Constant little annoyances" sounds like princess talk to me. Just get over it and and don't drive your car like an asshole, which we all know you do. If you rev it to 7000 every shift, and ram into every gear of course you're going to wreck your transmission and blow your motor. Learn to drive properly, and your Honda Civic, an ultra reliable car, will last. You already boasted this week about your amazing parking ability, time to expand on that.

I'll vote for the third option when you put it in.

posted by  Mathew

You have a point there. I drove it to school today normally, and it drives great. I may just get this all fixed, while they are in there replace the clutch, and then get the shop to do my timing belt, water pump and tensioners, fix the alternator belt whine, and check the interior to secure those little rattles, as well as get a valve adjustment at the dealership (a buddy works there he wont **** my car up) and ride her out. I wouldnt want to spend ~1500 on maintenance and sell it for a loss, especially since I wont get much, the car has frame damage

posted by  newyorker

I'm getting high teens city (high of 18.7 or something) and almost 30 hwy with the LS1 and an auto, and my driving can be "spirited". I'm sick of people assuming they're inneficient dinosaurs, when their Hondas that weigh a lot less and have way less power aren't doing much better. I'm not talking about you NYer, just people in general.

If you don't like the cars that's your thing. I don't see why people are giving you crap for it. Different strokes and so on.

posted by  giant016

I would get the Fit given those two choices. Realistically between the two neither are cars your most likely going to want to keep into your thirtees or even mid-low 20's. The fit is cheaper so it is a better choice imho. That way you can save the money for something nicer than you could normally afford later down the line.

Personally I think those are both bad choices. Not because of make or anything like that. Simply because Mainly because I believe spending money on a new car is silly for a teenager/college student. Your paying dearly just to suck up a couple of years of depreciation. Seems like such a waste. Ontop of that, your talking about buying an econobox. To me (in my opinion) there is no difference between a new or a used economy car, they are both mediocre performers at best. Its the same thing. I wouldn't buy an economy car personally, but if I did, it would be used. Imho your much better off getting a used 300zx, MN12, Fox Stang, Porsche 944, etc. They are all ALOT cheaper, ALOT more upmarket, and have a ton more potential.

If your really die hard into japanese cars, get the 300zx, you won't be dissapointed. The NA version gets around quickly enough for most people and they are very elegant. They are a pain in the ass though and they aren't necessarily the most reliable of the bunch. Another choice is the 3rd gen supra, but they are very much outclassed by the Z32, same goes for the 3000GT.



Stop being a fan boy. Just say you don't like American cars and move on. Don't try to justify it with BS evidence. The Camaros were rated at 28mpg EPA highway or something similar. EPA lowers their ratings 22% also to better reflect reality. It is true that the Camaros get that kind of mileage. They have double over drive and cruise freeway speed at something like 1500rpm. That fact, not fiction so it really don't matter what you think it wrong, because it isn't. Just say you don't like them because your biased or whatever reason, just don't try and justify it with BS.

PS. Your friend needs to slow down or get his vehicle fixed. Its pretty damn difficult to pull anything below 15mpg average in a 5.0L Mustang unless your taking 1 mile trips all the time and flooring it everywhere. The 5.0L Mustangs were rated at 25mpg highway... seeing as my brother and I both have 5.0L Fords I can atest that it is indeed quite common to get in excess of 25mpg on the freeway in a maintained (not even well maintained) 5.0L.

posted by  rudypoochris

Just stick with your civic stop dropping the clutch. Replace the tranny. Hondas last a really really long time. I drove over 30 miles on a blow radiator so your honda should last a really long time. If your gonna replace the motor might as well throw in one of those other silly honda motors in.

posted by  Spanky2324

I understand that this is your opinion an all but the GTO's interior as very, very, very, very nice considering the price they are selling for used. Sport-luxury level, and in my opinion, better than a C-Class Mercedes.


Just for us, go test out a GTO. GTO's are like the super-bargain used car out right now. They sell cheap purely because it doesn't look like it's packing 350-400 hp. COMFORTABLE. FAST. LUXURIOUS. SPACIOUS. CHEAP. Reliable? From what I know, they've been reliable.


JUST F*CKING TRY IT!!!!!! It never hurts to KNOW something instead of taking a misguided guess. You f*cking idiot. You're such a child not ready to make decisions.


GTO Interior
http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/10/5/231/205/3030037127.231205595. IM1.07.565x421_A.562x421.jpg[/img]


http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/10/16/232/302/3112795019.232302889 .IM1.07.565x421_A.562x421.jpg[/img]
http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/10/16/232/302/3112795020.232302889 .IM1.08.565x421_A.562x421.jpg



A Dumbass Civic
http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/9/30/231/332/2992769346.231332208. IM1.05.565x421_A.562x421.jpg

http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/7/13/226/470/2458027149.226470486. IM1.10.565x421_A.562x421.jpg

YAWN.....here's a bitch....oh, umm.....FIT
http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/10/10/231/799/3068149162.231799299 .IM1.02.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/10/5/231/627/3030099409.231627797. IM1.12.565x421_A.562x421.jpg

http://images.autotrader.com/images/2007/10/10/231/799/3068149164.231799299 .IM1.04.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
Damn those back-rests look stiff and upright. I think I could squeeze one of my nuts back there. Super-soaker skeet skeet everywhere it's so small back here I WET IT ALL BITCH!!


GTO PERFORMANCE NUMBERS
HP: starts at 350...that's all you need to know.


Civic (Performance?) Numbers from the fastest of the slow...Si
HP: 197.00 HP
Torque: 139.00 Ft-Lbs
Moral Victory Stat: 98.5 BHP/Liter

Fit = dnf


To me, the Fit sucks. The Civic is a nice, decent car for the "safe" guy or a girl. The GTO is the bargain of the century. That's my opinion. Si insurance rates are sky-f*cking-high. But Geico, it's not that fast!! [I]Doesn't that read Si bitch!!! [I]ZOOM ZOOM OR WHATEVER YOUR SLOGAN IS!!! ZOOOOM ZOOOOOOM BITCH THEN GIMME THAT!! KIDS BUY IT TO RACE AND GET IT STOLEN!!! YOU MUTHAF*CKERS NEVER LOCK YOUR DOORS!!! YOU PARK IN BAD NEIGHBORHOODS TO PARTY AT 3a.m.!!! YOU ZOOOM ZOOOOOOM IN FRONT THE WROOOOOONNNNNNGGGGG MUTHAF*CKERS!!! SAY SIR!!!! CAN I GET SOME WATER FOR THAT!!!!

posted by  What

He's obviously never been in a GTO, he's just making generalizations. He used to drive a Pontiac 6000, what do you expect.

posted by  Mathew

Hey, What I have an idea. Go **** yourself and the GTO. I DONT LIKE THEM, i never did, never will!! By the way, id love to see a GTO stick a corner like the Si can. no ammount of pictures you post will change my mind, so congrats for wasting 20 minutes of your life in making that post

posted by  newyorker

First of all, you must be very specific and clear in what you want. That requires, of course, that you know what you want yourself. Do you want something economical, reliable, and affordable....or something that takes a quick corner?

I'm not sure which school you're transferring to, but there are a few things I can say on what it's like to work and go to school downtown in Philadelphia.

1) Traffic is a b*tch. There is simply no way I can stress this. I can get to Penn in 25 minutes without traffic but it can take me an hour 15 to drive there during rush hour. Therefore, I would STRONGLY advise you to make sure that a manual is what you want. Sure it feels sporty and powerful, but you want economy and reliability, right? You will be shifting every 5-10 seconds in traffic. This is not only not good for your trans, but is also EXTREMELY annoying. Perhaps getting a manual AFTER you graduate sounds better.

2) I don't really like either of the two cars you posted, but of them, I would go with the Fit. I don't think it's very good looking and the interior looks very boring, but it is considerably cheaper, more gas friendly, and cheaper to ensure. You will save a LOT of money, which is a priority in college. Since you like how it looks (to each his own) I don't see the negative of it for you. Speed won't be an issue as you will rarely find much room to use it. Only go with an Si if you care about it's mod potential.

posted by  Nissan_Altima

I think What said that like an asshole and is obviously quite immature or just down right uncouth, but I do agree with the majority of his points.

The fact of the matter is that you like Hondas now. So your going to get one regardless, fine. I have a suspicion when your 22-25 your going to look back on the decision and be like "wtf". :screwy:

So as merely some recommendation, if it MUST be new, and it MUST be one of those two, just get the Fit, save the money for later, and "cut your losses" so to speak. You'll thank me later when you have an extra $5,000 in the bank which incidently can buy you a really nice, powerful, upmarket, late model car that has already gone through its depreciation. Eventually you will realize your making choices like "I could get this new 100hp FWD Econobox OR I could afford TWO 300hp Twin turbo Sports car, such as the 300zx" and once that sinks in, maybe you'll get it. I'll tell you now, in 3-4 years just one of the 300zx's will even be worth more than the Fit...

posted by  rudypoochris

Well it might not even boil down to that im gona have to drop like 500 for transmission repair next week so I may not even want to sell if I see the car is otherwise sound. I dont mind the manual, ive seen my share of traffic and trust me its not that bad, and i dont think its bad for the trans just wears the clutch a bit quicker, but its nothing that is noticable. I kinda have everything I NEED in my car, the new car would just satisfy the WANT portion of my life, but may also give me $$ problems and force me to take out student loans instead of paying for school as im working through the semester. I hate to say it but I dont know yet

posted by  newyorker

You just solved the riddle yourself dummy, KEEP YOUR CAR!

posted by  Mathew

go searching on youtube or wherever for the top gear episode with the gto :wink2:

posted by  windsonian

it doesnt exist

posted by  newyorker

GTO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJzRfQCt0GA


Lapped (in the wet) the Top Gear test track faster than a Ferrari 575.

posted by  What

I assure you the Monaro is not the same GTO we have it may be the same car but i guarantee there are differences. Besides a Ferrari is a ferrari, a GTO is just a pontiac. If you want to go fast and dont care about how you look, buy the GTO. Id rather look like I have taste and have a sophisticated car like a ferrari. I do not like american cars...just get over it

posted by  newyorker

So you would like to show you have taste by buying a Fit or an Si. Interesting... GTO vs. Fit or Si. Hmmmm tough one. Be real.

posted by  rudypoochris

I wasnt comparing the Si/Fit to the GTO. He compared it to the 575 ferrari...

posted by  newyorker

*never mind*

posted by  Nissan_Altima

Merely pointing out that you mention taste as an attribute you value. Which contradicts with your proposed selections. You could get something a few years old that is nice and elegant, or you could get a new Honda. Just found it ironic.

posted by  rudypoochris

First he didnt compare the cars, just the lap times, and the GTO Won, so EAT IT.

Second Your about as intelligent as a bushel of pubic hair.

The monaro and GTO are the same cars, minus the cabins being flipped and a new body. THEY ARE THEY SAME YOU TOOL.

Now go cry cause you look like a dumbass. Your just an ignorant little ricer, I hear the same ****in excuses everday" Well my honda isnt set up for drag racing but ill eat you in the corners." Dont forget your honda has its roots all tied up in an economy car.

Your retarded for not even wanting to consider a car that will outcorner, out accelerate, and be all around nicer, with more potential for power and less money than your gay SI.

You should just stop and say guys "Im ****ing retarded I make shit up about other cars so I feel better about my honda, sorry"

posted by  Enthusiast

:orglaugh:
what, because we cut bonnet scoops into it because that's what they thought the old school GTO crowd would like?

Differences:
minor cosmetic changes
you drive it from the wrong side......


....... got any others for me? And don't just say "yes, there are differences". You "assured" me, so you must know what at least some of them are.

[EDIT]: And they're obviously performance related, or you wouldn't make the distinction based on the video.... which showed an HSV GTO Coupe' anyway.

If it makes you feel more vindicated that these few cosmetic changes make it an American car ..... sure ... what the hell, go for it. Doesn't make you right though.

posted by  windsonian

Il take the new Si over the GTO thanks. I prefer a car that is not pieced together with just snapon plastics, and has primitive engineering. Now you can eat my nuts, cause maybe to you getting the most power for your dollar is important, but to some people not looking like someone with poor taste is important as well..thats why they buy imports, not rattly domestic cars (in this case australian). The only domestic cars I liked were the ones pre 1990s, new stuff is shitty with a few exceptions. Import cars have a quality feel, domestics feel like they are just slapped together with no concern for quality at all, the material choices arent there, etc.

posted by  newyorker

you're still making generalisations that don't make sense.

stop using the words domestic and import when you're talking about 2 imports.
And it's usually the Japanese type cars that are accused of being plastic, not larger V8's.... or so my experience runs.

posted by  windsonian

All cars have plastic interiors. Domestic guys say imports have plastic imports and we know this, but my friend's 95 mustang GT has the MOST plastic interior ive ever seen it just looks and feels SO cheap looking at it and touching it. My car has a plastic interior, so does my friend's golf, and my dads corolla, rav4, camry, golf, almost every car ive been in, but american cars just have such a crappy feel and look to them its what im used to

posted by  newyorker

I don't understand, you rocked a poo Neon and loved it, but you refuse to TESTDRIVE a GTO...which beats the Neon, Civic, and Fit in 90% of the categories a car is judged.



Let's all be naive and consider the GTO a domestic for ease of communication. NewYorker, we don't care or believe what you will do. You're the same guy who wanted to turbo his Civic but refused to buy the parts at a supreme discount from a reputable source (ME) because you don't like...ME? Do you know me? No, but I've seen you before. The liar.

Truth is, you're keeping your car and you aren't going to any college...you are lying to us. But the real problem isn't your current lies and current ignorance, it's your inability to learn...<<<

posted by  What

LOL im not going to college you are a funny kid. Nissan_Altima knows I do as well as MANY other people, but I dont need to prove anything to a lowlife like you...I might though, we will see maybe once you feel stupid (not for the first time) youll shut your mouth and go back where you belong. Yes I had my neon, and yes I loved it, but after getting my civic, I see the clear difference and I cant see myself going back to poorly made cars. If I were in the market for a sports car, id get an S2000, a car that was made for driving, and to get the most out of the experience, a car that is focused on performance, not a GTO...shit id take a miata over a GTO

posted by  newyorker

That's not the question...the real question is would you take YOU over ME? NEWYORKER over WHAT? Name any situation where the best positive results are expected and I bet most people, including you, would rather invest their faith in me.

Until you can choose yourself over me...you aren't ready...but even when you get to that point, you probably still won't be ready....because you're still making at least one bad decision...but at least you'll have the confidence and that is key.

posted by  What

Dude, your not too quick. You can't argue that you would choose a Honda Civic over a Pontiac GTO based on taste. The Civic is the epitome of economy car, which just so happens to be the opposite of taste. Yes, this time you flat out said it after making some poor excuse last time.

Yes, your friends 95 Mustang GT is a river of plastic. It was also priced extremely cheap for the amount of performance it delivered. If you want a nicer interior, buy a nicer car. Its not that hard. With the cost of a new Fit you could probably buy 3 95 Mustang GT's. That is hardly a fair comparison. Or you could buy a 2nd generation BMW M5.

Choose your next phrase:

A: "But I chose Civics over M5's because I want to show that I have taste!!!!!"

B. "But I chose Civics over C5 Corvettes because of their 'primitive technology'. I even heard Corvettes use leaf springs!!!" - Which just so happen to be lighter and lower than standard coils.

C. "But the Honda Fit gets 50mpg" - But you would have to drive the Fit 130,000 miles before you broke even on the 7-8k you would of saved buying a 300zx Twin Turbo.

posted by  rudypoochris

Well it started off being a car discussion, then somehow became about you so I will answer. I would take me over you because you are a worthless self centered piece of shit who cant see past his mustang, knife collection, and made up girlfriends. All you do is talk about how great you are...what are some great things you have done? Have you done any volunteer work? Given food to homeless on the street? Donated any money to charity? Given blood to the red cross? Have you ever helped someone do something they didnt have the skill or strength to do, and then refuse to take money because you did it as a good deed? Have you offered help to complete strangers such as an older woman loading her car in a parking lot because you felt you had a responsibility to help? I can say I have done each of these things on more than one occasion, so dont go thinking you are better than me. You talk, and seem to care only about yourself, and I hope to god if there is one that you spend the rest of your sorry days alone and reflect back on this moment when I told you it would happen, and realize what a scumbag you are. And you had better hope that when you are old and alone and weak, that in the parking lot of the grocery store someone like me comes and helps the sorry old man trying to do his shopping, that old man being you. Take a minute and think about how dumb you are, your future will thank me for it. That or il just get a smartass answer as you usually put out, and we will all keep standing in one spot.

posted by  newyorker

a. i would take an m5 over a civic, but not now. Its not the kind of car I need in this point in my life, I dont see why thats hard to understand
b. as much as I dont like the corvette and its "technology" the c6 z06 delivers great performance all around, once again, not what I am looking for in a car right now...that and later in life id rather have the stingray anyway over the new vette its just a matter of preference, its not something that can be dictated
c. once again not a practical car for this point in my life

I see where you are coming from with this argument, but realize that as a college student trying to have something practical and safe and efficient and reliable, there are only a few choices that I really have in my mind. If I was out of college and working making great salary based on my profession, I wouldnt look anywhere close to an Si or a Fit for my car, but at this point in my life, its something I can live with, and would actually prefer..keep in mind insurance rates for cars like the GTO, 300zxtt, and camaro for a 19 year old male, with a driving record that isnt clean to say the least. And about american cars, ive just never fancied them, i have many reasons for this, large and small, but ive listed a few...they might just be stereotypes but they are all based on experience, not madeup things. ive known people who have had LOTS of troubles with their domestics, but I havent met anyone, nor read anywhere about a honda having chronic issues..sure there will be a lemon but for the majority of the import market the probability is far less than what im used to seeing in domestics. Maybe my mind will change later, but for now, I have different needs in a car. My statements about american cars may be 100 times off 6000 times into tomorrow, but from the people I have known and things I have seen, iv gotten nothing but bad vibes about them. you can correct me all day long, and say how im wrong, but if I dont want a domestic car, and have NO intention of buying one becuase my mind is set based on fact or stereotype you wont convince me otherwise. now i hope we can move on and get back to the topic at hand...what do I do about my car situation...should I just fix my bearing and drive my car a few more years?

posted by  newyorker

if u get the fit, Broze Orange Metalic owns fiji Blue. BOM rsx's are my fav :thumbs:

posted by  V-Tec

haha.... gold.... and necessary, because it is a concept that he REALLY seems to be struggling with. Now he's not even saying "domestics", he's saying "American cars"... hmmm

posted by  windsonian

As much as I think newyorker is a misguided little brat, some of you are being morons. He's look for an economical new car, and you guys are recommending Camaros, GTOs, 300ZX's Corvettes, and M5's? You must be insane. All of those cars are not nearly as economical or reliable as a new Civic or Fit. Not to mention the fact that the cars you are recommending are USED and as such have little or no warranty and have MILEAGE. In other words, it will need parts sooner than a new honda!

Yes he is being stupid with his bias against domestics, but the bottom line is, those cars aren't in the right category anyway. So get off it already.

posted by  Mathew

but his "anti-domestic" bias was directed at an import.

[EDIT]: Also.... i think i gave my opinion awhile back.

posted by  windsonian

My point was merely that for a fraction of the cost you can get soooo much more. Take the 300zx for example. Twin turbo 300zx is around $7-8k right now. It gets about 24mpg. It IS economical because with the extra 8k you have left over from NOT buying the fits you would have to drive 130k miles to make the Fit price break even with the 300zx (assuming the fit gets 50mpg, which I doubt it does). Furthermore they ARE reliable. If you maintain them they really are. My roomate has a 300zx N/A with 190,000 miles on it he bought at 160k, no problems. I have a 191k Ford Explorer NO PROBLEMS. Warrenties didn't used to exist 20 years ago anywhere near the levels they do now, and it wasn't a big issue. Yes they probably will need parts sooner rather than later, no it isn't a big deal. Parts for 10 and 20 year old cars, especially domestics, are SOOOO much cheaper than the average new car part it isn't even funny.

Never mind the fact that ontop of all that the 300zx has already gone through pretty much ALL of its depreciation. It will most likely rise in value from where it is at. The Fit on the other hand is a new economy car and will depreciate like a stone. In 3-4 years most likely the used 300zx will resell for more than the Fit. So which is more economical and practical then? You save 8k and you have a higher resale. Also remember that this whole time he will have been driving a 300zx twin turbo which is a ton nicer than a civic. A fully loaded 300zxTT was something like 45k back in 96'. That is a NICE car. The fact of the matter is buying NEW is NOT what is the most economic or practical for a college student, period. It just isn't.

posted by  rudypoochris

Whatever you think of me personally, that doesn't stop me from getting results. And....AND....this doesn't have unity with my previous sentence but AND....I don't see how I can't "see past" those things you listed...like they dominate my life or something.

I haven't driven my Mustang in more than 2 weeks, I don't know where my knives are right now and it's not much of a collection...AND....AND...my girlfriend is real...you just want more pics of her.

Look how cute her little African-American toes are!!!
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/3434/img1943yt7.jpg[/IMG]




What great things have I done? PLENTY.

As for charity related things, I'm a nice guy. Very dependable, very giving. I'd help you. Oh, you ever heard of Hurricane Katrina? Guess who was there the first day at 6a.m. helping muthaf*ckers empty they refrigerator? Guess who? You seen those dirty people walking through water? I chauffeured some of them to there destroyed properties...I didn't know them!

Red Cross? Blood? Bitch, after the hurricane, Red Cross was LIVING IN MY APARTMENT. Not my momma's house, my shit. Red Cross people from out of state had no where to sleep because of over-booked housing, and I volunteered my apt on a sign-in sheet at the Red-Cross shelter, got a call, and for THREE WEEKS people lived at my place until a hotel was ready for them. I slept where? They didn't ask. Red Cross payed for my month's rent though...but that's not the point...who volunteers there living space? I do. They could have been f*ckin' and rollin' dice in my bed. Wait...wait...where'd that dude live when he came down for business because his bitch-ass didn't like his hotel? You know, the "soft-porn" king?


During the re-build period...f*ck it let's get to the point.


I have 2 statements for you.

1. Not you or anyone else you know is me, so don't compare you or anyone else you know...to me.
2. ...and if you ain't me then who the f*ck are you?*


*[I]quote from "What" 2007


----------------------------------------------------------


I'm not recommending he buy anything, I just want him to test drive a GTO to rid himself of his foolish mindset. I feel the best thing he can do is keep his car...which is what he will do...per post #32 of this thread.

posted by  What

I agree with you there, but this is what he wants...

posted by  Mathew

Well of course he does. Look how he drools over synthetic like hes never seen a woman half naked before. As some of your statements had been quite moronic but i agree with test driving the gto. It's like your asking him to do gay porn I mean I go out and test drive cars for the hell of it and it's sparked me today to go and test drive a gto tomorrow after i run some errands. This is kid is more about "handling" and "taste" and economy which is the only one he got right. The civic may be able to handle a few corners hear and there but ive seen civics try to keep up with me and it's no fun for them. I took an old high school friend out in the backroads who yet drove a civic and raced it back there. He was scared shitless of the lines i could take and handling i recieved so don't go bashing a american car just because it handles poorly because guess what the gsx may as well be an american car. Anyways you want something with taste buy a lexus or just buy whatever the hell you want.

Oh yeah btw whats quote is so going in the sig

posted by  Spanky2324

Still immature. Dont worry, keep being a loser and a scumbag, the karma train will hit you hard, and I hope in your case its a bullet to the head. By the way nice pic..its good to see that "I love what" has a pedicure done regularly

posted by  newyorker

Hes bitching about cheap interiors and he drives a used base model civic, and i talking about a FIT. DAMN

posted by  Enthusiast

Oh and so you know your SI will probably get shitty economy for what it is, It will cruise around at an insanely high rpm.

The fit is made solely for economy so it is a lil better

posted by  Enthusiast

Nothing has fallen off lol unlike a lot of cars i know...and there are no huge gaps between panels

posted by  newyorker

Dude what are you talking about. I have own and do own both imports and domestics. There isn't some magic American assembly line issue where panel gaps are added an extra 1/8" wider. Stop being such a tard man. Seriously. All of the comments I typically here about this stuff are so dumb.

"Its reliable because it is Japanese"
"American interiors are all plastic"
"It makes alot of HP/liter"
"American cars fall apart at 100,000 miles"
"American panels have an extra 1/8" gap"

Come on. Both countries make fine cars of varying quality. The fact of the matter is that they are all made out of the same stuff by pretty much the same machines. Reliability comes down to ALOT more than just what the factory put in it. Panel gaps are just straight up myth. Be real.

You just don't have any real reason to justify why you hate American cars. Its fine that you do, just don't try to justify it with BS. I like both, each have their strong points and their weak, but I will never buy a Honda "because it is reliable", just like I won't buy a car with parts that are falling off... if they exist in this day and age.

posted by  rudypoochris

They do...we have had to reaffix countless panels in my friends 03 envoy (25k miles on this keep in mind) and the interior is horrid quality. The leather already has rips, brakes already had to be replaced 2 times, 10mpg, rides horrible the only thing i like is you dont have to slow for speed bumps, do I have to go on?? No I realize there isnt a magic behind making interiors, but some do it better than others

01 Cavalier

...ok so the pic wont upload...il take care of this all when i edit the post in teh afternoon
Steering wheel from an 80s buick, huge gaps at doors and dash, seats that look to have NO bolsters at all, a shifter surrounded by what looks like plastic wire brush, it just looks really cheap, almost like a kid made it

01 Civic

Il upload this when I get home from school its on my desktop and I have to leave for class now

posted by  newyorker

http://www.samarins.com/reviews/96_civic_interior.jpg

96 to 00' Civic interior. Its horrible too, get over it. Its a cheap car and looks like crap on the inside. Is that a surprise?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v407/RudypooChris/95cavalier_int.jpg

95' Cavalier interior. Wow, amazing another horrible interior!? Pick your choose, its the same stuff get over it. Plus, do you realize that often these vehicles are cheaper than their japanese equivalents which might just account for why they look a little cheaper? OMG really?!?! New Aveo 5 Door = 10,595 competitor, new Fit 13,950. Thats 32% more. You get eseentially the same horsepower and more weight.

As for your friends Envoy... Lemon law it if all that stuff was actually happening. Seriously. I don't know why you would buy an Envoy any way, but still. Lemon law it and get your money back. Don't pretend like this stuff only happens to American cars though. Toyota has recalled MILLIONS of cars in the past couple of years for steering failiures and other hazardous failiures that cause the driver to lose steering ability. Most recently they recalled the Tundra trucks with the 5.7L (I believe that was the engine) because the camshafts were BREAKING. Recalls and defects happen to everyone, wise up. :ohcrap:

posted by  rudypoochris

Id still take the fit for Hondas reputation. I drove aveos at work and even at 10k miles there were strange clunks coming from under the car...on every single one. Honda fit was great. About the Honda interior, its flush and has a nicer feel than the cavalier

posted by  newyorker

Hondas reputation is built on what? Theres no way any one person can know how reliable or unreliable an entire brands line up is compared to entire lineups of another make. Hondas reputation, as are all brands reputations, are based on what one person said to another, to another, to another. Alot of the time these people aren't necessarily the most reliable sources, like you. You can spin it any way you like. I can say every import I know of has had problems, just as you can say every domestic you know of has had problems. What does that achieve?

The Cavalier interior is flush too. And no, there isn't a nicer one of the two. They both are shitty and cheap, LOOK. Your spredding stuff about cars that just isn't true. This is how rumors and uneducated opinions, such as yours, get spread about cars that are just fine. I know you would still take the Honda for another 32%, thats fine for whatever reason it suits you, just don't say its because all domestic alternatives are pieces of shit, thats just ignorant. You can buy a Cobalt for the same price as the Fit and it is a whole market up, just to put things in perspective.

EDIT: Also it is hard to notice but in the pictures of the interior you can also tell the Civic is not setup to be a drivers car. Tach is on the wrong side.

posted by  rudypoochris

What does that have to do with anything?

posted by  jedimario

Yea that civic doesnt have a tach...at least it doesnt look like it. looks like a DX model or something

posted by  newyorker

Talking about interiors. He said the cavalier isn't smooth, I said the tach on the civic is on the wrong (left) side. Its not that big of a deal. The rest of the post was the actual point...

posted by  rudypoochris

I mean its just the little things. Look where the cig lighter is on the cavvy...not only is that a pain in the ass when smoking but when you plug up a phone charger it hangs all along the friggin dash, where as most normal cars have it by the cupholders. I dont understand the point of the plastic brush along the bottom of the shifter, and im sure the turn signal is like most other american cars of that era...you have to give it a lot more nudge to make it go up or down. the guages are very generic, I see them on everything from the cavalier to that generation tahoe (on the plus side I like how they iluminate...when they do we had an escalade come to work where one side of the thing was completely off), and when I put it in park, the shifter just fell out of its place, along with the door not closing properly and rips in the leather as well as many things being again very loose and to me, unrefined. The speaker holes in the door look like they were just poked, not like the civic where it is a designated bulge for them, so it doesnt look sloppy. Im not a fan of that civic either, one of the reasons I got the 01 with the slightly better interior..the little pocket next to the radio is good for well..nothing. Cant fit a cd in there, nor much anything else really MAYBE a pack of cigarettes. Im not a fan of either, but if I had to pick, I would take the civic..same would go for reliability. Im gona jump on my desktop and throw up a pic of my inside the first day I got it

EDIT: pic

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/2426/civicinteriorxq4.jpg
there is only one thing out of line which was due to a crooked spring nad is nowfixed which is to the bottom left of the steering wheel the little coin tray

EDIT: speaking of the Aveo, I think its retarded how you have to press down on the shifter to get it into reverse gear...I mean they could have just put a button on the shifter like all other normal cars, but they had to be "fancy" at work it took me a few minutes to figure out how to park the damn thing cause I couldnt get it into gear

posted by  newyorker

Im pretty sure thats a pretty common thing, Ive driven a ton of car like that epecially nice German cars, it works like a reverse lockout tard. Its so you dont slam R thinking its a 6 speed or doing other shit.

posted by  Enthusiast

Yes but this was an automatic...I know what you mean, the AP1 s2000 has the same thing, as do Jettas, golfs, audis, etc. Its pretty pointless to have on an automatic car especially when your shifter pattern isnt even in a straight line!

http://img385.imageshack.us/img385/2084/aveo37ko.jpg

You really would have to be a tard to put it in reverse gear with that pattern, you would almost have to try. I dont see a point for it, then again it might be designed for the kinds of people that drive those cars

posted by  newyorker

shit this turned into another argument quick

posted by  99integra

Okay.....I didn't even want to get into this shit, but I had to say something.

Newyorker, you're a ****ing moron. Blasting all "domestic" vehicles simply because they're domestic is beyond inane. Seriously. You claim that they have no reliability. I have personally seen SEVERAL domestics in the half-million mile mark, on ORIGINAL engines. Hell, we retired an 80's Dodge Ram Custom 150 on the farm a few years back that was over 600,000 on it's original engine AND tranny. My friend's uncle owns a mid 70's Ford with nearly 500,000 on the odometer, and it's damn near MINT. That's just TWO examples of reliability. So to try and say that every domestic is unreliable is just plain ****ing ignorant. You also claim that the interiors are "cheap and plastic". That's not always the case. Have you ever actually looked at some of the domestic vehicles interiors? Probably not, from the sounds of it.

Furthermore. I have several friends who have owned Civics, Accords, Tiburons, and the like. A few of them have run them problem free, but likewise, a couple have had nothing since headaches since day 1. One had his '05 Civic Reverb at the dealership almost weekly for one problem or another, finally Honda gave up and broke the lease without penalty for him. Hell, I even had a friend with a BMW X5 that was having problems out the ass. (Okay, sue me, I went to the 'rich' school, and it was his daddy's money that got him the BMW.)

Needless to say, you are an uneducated ignorant ****tard, to put it kindly. Clearly you lack the ability to have a cogent argument, probably due to a lack of actively firing synapses in that mush you believe is a brain.

posted by  dodgerforlife

No argument that GM made great cars before the early-mid 90s, but im looking for a new car, so domestics fall out. Sue me, but thats my opinion, and im entitled to it. Let me put it this way, and Nissan_Altima knows this guy as well so dont even call BS. Me and him know a kid named Stan, and Stan's dad works at the local ford dealership. He himself told my parents "these cars are not selling, and are trash. We sell a few mustangs, but other than that, its very slow and the cars are very poor quality". Il leave american cars to be driven by the people they were designed for. Overpatriotic americans, cause quite frankly thats all I see now...every single american cars has a "god bless america" sticker like it came from the factory, everyone with half a brain (intelligent people) have left american cars to the morons. I love older american cars, anything pre 1990, and I think some of the classics are still the most beautiful cars out there, but try to put me in one of these newer ones, I wouldnt be caught dead in it. My idea of a good car is a high power import. someone elses idea of a good car might be a high power domestic..the difference is domestic cars do not handle at all with the exeption of the corvette and a few others..shit I was talking to a muscle car guy last night he even said "american cars are only good for straight line" import cars are good for everything

S2000
remarkable handling
2 liter
240 horsepower
9000rpm
amazing reliability
convertible
13.8-14.2 in the 1/4 stock

go ahead id love to see americrap pull something like that, or if not that, just making a fun car, that doesnt cost 70k like the vette.

posted by  newyorker

Pontiac Solstice
Saturn Sky

posted by  What

So what you're saying is that all domestic cars handle poorly except the ones that don't. The same could be said about the imports.


Alright:

LS1 F-body
.9 on the skidpad
5.7 liter (but who gives a f*ck)
340 hp
5500RPM (I think, but once again, who gives a f*ck)
You've got me on reliability (stock)
Convertable, hardtop, or t-top
12.9-mid 13's in the 1/4 stock
Do I think the F-Body is a better car? Nope. But they are in the same ballpark to me.

I was with you earlier in the thread, when you were just speaking you're opinion. I don't care if you hate a car for no reason, your loss. However, to come on here spewing you're generic ignorant BS is, well...BS. Yes, many GM interiors are cheapish. But it seems odd that somebody says that they know that the GTO has a shitty interior even though they refuse to even sit in one.

posted by  giant016

9000 RPM?

Not that it matters, but it's one of the things he said.

posted by  jedimario

drove both at work, nothing remotely fun about them. I like the look of but would never drive one

posted by  newyorker

59 horsepower per liter is just bad. Yes it has a LOT of torque on it, and yes in a line its faster than an s2k hands down but its nowhere near as fun. Try chucking a little RWD honda into a turn going 80, and try the same thing with the f-body. You will have more weight pushing you out, more body roll. The s2000 was made to be driven, the f-body i see grandpas drivin em. However, we had a meet close to here il post pictures of some of the muscle cars that were there they were really nice. It was mostly trans-am though.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b261/vwcorradokid/LS1Tech%20Meet/LS1TechM eet-5Signed.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b261/vwcorradokid/LS1Tech%20Meet/LS1TechM eet-4Signed.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b261/vwcorradokid/LS1Tech%20Meet/LS1TechM eet-23Signed.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b261/vwcorradokid/LS1Tech%20Meet/LS1TechM eet-11Signed.jpg

posted by  newyorker

Dude your a dick. I have a Ford Explorer 1992 and it is god darn reliable, it yanks, and it slides predictably. Its a fun car and it has 191k on the original engine. Most likely still has the factory cross hatching in the bores and I beat on it. I drop the clutch, I down shift to redline, etc. Your straight up ignorant if you are going to go off what a couple people say rather than looking for yourself, feeling it, driving it etc. Same goes for the Ford service technician. Why doesn't he go work somewhere else if he feels the vehicles he is servicing are so terrible? Better yet, why doesn't he fix them so they aren't? There isn't some magical spice put into domestic cars that makes them unreliable.

The S2000 is a joke of a car by the way. 240hp and 3000lbs is not a good ratio for a sports car, never mind that, it gets 0-60 in what 5.8? It is outclassed in almost EVERY catagory by other cars like the 350z. It doesn't have a 9,000 rpm redline, Honda was having relibaility witht he 2.0L due to high revs so they switched to the 2.2 to lower the redline and try and add more torque. The handling is good, but it isn't all that.

Ya, America doesn't have very many sports car offerings right now besides the Corvette, Solstice, and Sky. But those 3 cars are all great cars, so I don't see where you can find fault with that. The fact of the matter is, you drive a civic and your now talkin trash and dishin out about the performance of vehicles you know NOTHING about. It isn't a matter of patriotism for SOOOO many people. It is the fact that you can build a 500hp daily driveable reliable engine for under $3,000 REAL EASY. You can stick that in a US chassis between 3000 and 3500lbs and your already infinately better than an S2000. What can you do to an S2000? Swap a 700lb Supra motor in?

posted by  rudypoochris

Hes a salesman, not a service tech. Congrats on your explorer, like I said the cars up to the early-mid 90s were good, then it turned to shit. I think that spice is called poor engineering

**** the Z. The S is not 3000lbs, its 2770 IIRC, im talking about an AP1...or AP2 doesnt matter ive driven both and they are both spectacular, unlike all of these domestics people keep naming. Its an amazing car, you just want to join the bandwagon and talk shit. Go ahead, you will never win with me. The AP1 is 2770 AP2 is 2855. 3000lbs blow me

Ever heard of Turbochargers? Superchargers? Im talking here about stock performance, because thats what shows which car maker knows how to make and which doesnt. Honda motors are amazingly engineered, as well as the rest of the cars. I cant say the same about american cars, nor will I until they actually make something good.

posted by  newyorker

Shut the f*ck up. How many f*cking pistion engine cars have a 9000 rpm redline? NAME ONE FERRARI.

SHUT THE F*CK UP.


No one can match that.

posted by  What

Here is a little something for the rest of you guys from wikipedia.

The Honda S2000 F20C engine produces the highest horsepower per liter for any naturally aspirated piston engine currently sold on the market that is less than $100,000 , at 120 horsepower (89 kW) per liter. It is followed by the B16B engine found in the 1996-2000 Honda Civic Type R (Japan only) producing 115.625 horsepower per liter (185 hp through 1.6 liters), followed by the 2007 Honda Civic Type-R K20A developing 111 horsepower (83 kW) per liter (222 hp through 2.0 liters) which is followed by both the 2ZZ powered Celica Sports-M (UK only) developing 110 horsepower (82 kW) per liter (200 hp through 1.8 liters) and the B18C5+ found in the Honda Integra Type R that also developed 110 horsepower (82 kW) per liter(~200 hp through 1.8 liters).

Id love to see a domestic pull that off. And why is it that everyone who is driving a big SUV with a ford or chevy badge on the back seems to be driving like its their first day behind the wheel?? To show my disliking for domestics, id take a super unreliable VW over any domestic...at least it would be more fun to drive while it works

posted by  newyorker

What does horsepower per liter have to do with anything? A much better thing to consider would be like pounds (weight) per horsepower or dollar (price) per horsepower

posted by  chris_knows

This is where american cars take the cake, but with high power and low price comes low quality. Horsepower per liter is what I use to see how well engineered a motor is. 59 horses per liter is not hard to do like the f-body, shit my civic gets 67 per liter. Make me a list of naturally aspirated engines with over 100, and arrange from lowest price to highest...imports will be first, then european exotics simply because of their cost. Im doing valet for the people who work at Breitling today, apparently there are rumors of ferrari, lambo, porsche, and cars of the likes so il try to snag some pix

posted by  newyorker

Okay, more ignorant blather. HP per Litre means shit obviously. So what if a Honda can crank out a 102hp/litre ratio? Does that make it any better then a v8 cranking out 340hp? Hell no! And you do realize that those tiny little tin can engines need to run those ridiculously high RPM's to attain that kind of power, and that they don't really get into their power band until they're way up in the RPM's? A V8 can create low-rpm torque and horsepower, and a hell of a lot more of it then your little engines. It's really quite funny that an engine that's twice the size of your little engine, with lower hp/litre ratios, will still walk all over you.

As for stock performance, just because domestic manufacturer's had the insight to install FACTORY Turbo's, technically making them stock. You contradict yourself. First you say "Stock Performance", then you go on to say you're talking about "Naturally Aspirated". You chump. If you want "Stock Performance", include FACTORY-TUNED cars. Hell, back in the early 90's, dodge was using a 2.2 DOHC turbo that created 224hp - that's right, 102hp/litre STOCK. Don't give me shit about being N/A. It also didn't need to spool to 9000RPM to see those numbers either. Those numbers were being cranked at 6000RPM. How about we come a little more modern? Seems there was a 2.4L SRT-4 engine, which put down 245hp, which is again 102hp/L. Hell, the '08 Caliber SRT-4 will be throwing 285hp from the 2.4L world engine. That's almost 120hp/L.


Furthermore, you complained about the reliability. However, you must realize that there is right now, a 3:1 ratio of american vehicles on the road as compared to imports. Granted, the trend is changing, but american vehicles are still the most popular here. That OBVIOUSLY means there is going to be more complaints about them! There's no way you're going to get around that.

posted by  dodgerforlife

N/A or turbo I dont care, im talking about stock for stock. With the srt4 putting down that power there is MAJOR torquesteer through gears 1 and 2, and i expect the same from the caliber...but hey we are american we only want to brag about how powerful our cars are, we will never really utilize any of that power but just trot along on the highway doing 55 so everyone passing us can see how nice a car we have. **** that philosophy. on the other hand i drove the 2.2 liter turbo shadow you speak of an I thought it was a great car. The fact of the matter is, there are very few manufacturers out there now that can match the quality of import cars, thats why as you said the trend of american cars is slowly changing, and GM workers are losing their jobs because the big guys cant compete.

and back to what you first said, yes an f-body will walk an s2k, simply because it has more cylinders. when i say engineering, i mean the ability to make power from such a small displacement. yes it takes tuning to make a turbo engine last and perform, but its a LOT easier to make power from a factory turbo car than N/A. Take for example. Bugeye WRX 2.2 liter H4 turbo 227 horsepower (or 222 not sure), s2000 2 liter N/A 240 horsepower. Both are great cars, but simply comparing engineering ability, the s2k is my vote, especially since the bugeye WRX has a glass transmission and very fragile drivetrain in general.

posted by  newyorker

Listen New York weve had the HP per liter discussion and it ricer math nand pretty much ****ing useless. It doesnt get you shit and doesnt win races. All you can use it for is your ****ing ricer excuses.

And s2000s arent that bad ass. Actually go drive one HARD and quit being a nut swinger. They are underpowered and I think they handle sloppily, like most stock cars.

And S2000s are very unreliable.

posted by  Enthusiast

Didnt you **** up your honda tranny with just 115 hp. There is reliablity for you, haha.

Stock F-body T56s can handle upwards of 600hp if taken care of.

posted by  Enthusiast

Thats because I was chirping from 1st to 2nd on a routine basis and doing rough shifts

posted by  newyorker

No horsepower per liter is a good way to see who engineers their cars better...its a lot harder to crank out 120 than 59

I HAVE driven one hard. My brother has an AP2 red and its an amazing car. Nothing underpowered or sloppy about it from what I recall, and I drove the thing for about 6 hours, HARD

LOL ok dude the one thing I dont like is they need valve adjustments every 30k miles IIRC...everything else is stellar

posted by  newyorker

First of all they are doing 107hp/liter currently, 120hp/liter WAS NOT RELIABLE WHICH CAUSED THE SHIFT TO THE F22C.

Secondly, there are stock OHV engines popping out 70+hp/liter... and? They are doing it with OHV... Think about the huge limitation that places on the maximum potential breathability. It is done so that the engine can remain light, have a low CG, and be small amongst other things. Hence why a Ford 302 can turn out plenty of power in a tiny, very light package.

No, it really isn't. You can get a 60's Ford small block to over 100hp/liter easily. No one really does it though since it is pointless. You kill your low end torque, lower engine life, drivability, and hurt performance compared to simply adding displacement. BMW was turning out 1200hp out of 1.4L turbo motors. They said it was like an on/off switch and was pointless except it was the only way to compete based off of the old racing regulations (I believe it was some form of F1).

Think about this one... its the year 2007, Honda has an S2000, a sports car with 237hp!

Now this one... its the year 1987, Ford has a Mustang, a sports 2+2 with 225hp!

20 years of engineering, and? And nothing. The Fox weighs within 100lbs of the S2000 and it has two extra seats.



You have FWD wheel slip and 115hp??? And you broke a trans? What a joke. That is hardly shock loading. How about my roomates 300zx, 200ftlbs, slams the gear EVERYTIME we go out, slams the launch. What about my 4250lb Explorer with 225ftlbs slamming? And your trans bit it off 115hp and probably less torque? Be real, you think anything that engine is going to put through FWD compares to the kind of beating a RWD, heavy, powerful car will do? They manage to do just fine...


Lastly, and this is the important bit. If you compare a dyno of a high displacement low HP/liter engine vs. a low displacement high HP/liter engine you will be surprised. Turns out the high displacement motor being less strung up has a wider powerband... more area under the curve. Much more. A measured 14% more comparing a Ford 302 to an S2000 motor from 3000-5000 on the 302 and 5280-8800 for the F20C. Thats not even including the normal street powerband, that is merely all out performance driving. The S2000 will suffer considerably more the rest of the powerband. Also notice that the S2000 makes only 198hp on the chassis dyno but the 302 pulls 202hp despite the fact that the S2000 was rated for 240hp, and the 302 for a mere 225hp. Drivetrain loss figures in as well, drag increases with the square of speed. Thus high RPM motors suffer from much more power loss than a low RPM motor. Which is why the S2000 gets poor times for its power to weight ratio compared to other competitors.

posted by  rudypoochris

Alright, please answer me this: What benefit does a 2.X liter engine making 240hp have over a 5.7 liter engine making 340hp? I don't see any, seeing has the 5.7 engine weighs almost the same. So why would they waste money to engineer it? They are different car companies that make things differently, HP/Liter doesn't make a car better engineered unless perhaps Honda came out with a 5.7 liter that still had the 120hp/liter and still was able to keep the costs low and reliability high.

The S2000 pulls about the same (sometimes less depending on the sources) on the skidpad as the F-body. Let me spell that out for you: your tiny import roadster DOESN'T outhandle the 3500+lb V8 American musclecar that even has a backseat. I think that shows some shitty engineering, perhaps they shouldn't have been so worried about hp/liter.

posted by  giant016

I wonder WHY there's torquesteer......Oh yeah! It ACTUALLY produces torque! A hell of a lot more torque then the s2000, to be exact. So of course when your sitting on about 250ft-lbs of torque, you can expect it. And for shits and giggles, imagine driving a bobtailing semi, with over 1400ft-lb torque. Now that is some serious torque to hold down.




Isn't that the same bullshit you're pulling right now? "OMGWTFROFLOLCOPTER my import does 102hp/L, your American car doesn't!" And it also sounds like you're advocating driving like a retard. If the speed limit is 55, drive 55. You need to be driving several hours to make speeding worthwhile, anything an hour and under doesn't make it worth it. I'm sorry if most people understand that, and the concept seems a little to difficult for you to grasp.




Like I said previously, there's a 3:1 ratio of Domestics to Imports on the road in North America, so that means if the quality is the same, you'll still have 3x as many complaints, and unfortunately the media only concetrates on the number of complaints, not on the number of vehicles on the road. I'll even give a nod to Ford on this one, look at the F-series pickup trucks, they've been around since 1948. How the hell is that not longevity?! Oh, and don't forget, the F-Series has been the top-selling vehicle in the USA for over two decades. In 2006, THREE GMC vehicles were on the top 10 sales list, GMC is cutting so many jobs is because of several reasons. Firstly, the plants don't need as many people to run them anymore, with so much robotic manufacturing done. Secondly, the union is keeping wages way up there, and that's a huge money pit for any manufacturer. Thirdly, they lost a pissload of money in R&D over the last couple of years. Give them a few more years to finish reshaping things, and they'll be rock-solid again.




Again, that's ignorance speaking. Just because it can produce those numbers, at very high RPM's, does not make it any more 'advanced' in regards to engineering. I bet you if other manufacturers were building engines to spool up to that RPM, you'd be seeing just as high, if not higher numbers. And how about you compare the SRT-4 to the S2K? The SRT-4 definitely has a drivetrain built to withstand the power, and abuse that some drivers put them through. Hell, guys running 550+whp on the SRT-4 are still using stock transmissions and they still hold up.

posted by  dodgerforlife

The s2000 is a better piece of engineering than the mustang nad a better car overall than the new mustang as well. it uses better technology, and corners better than a 3000+ pound american piece of crap with no new technological development whatsoever except the guage cluster having 100+ backlight colors. **** the mustang, and all american cars for that matter with the exception of the vette, viper, and...well thats it. I dread driving them, and at work I already know what car is going to have what problem becase its all too common between them all.

posted by  newyorker

What makes them technologically superior? VTEC is in use on domestics, just under a different acronym. DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder have been in use since the '30s. And isn't it funny how your Honda engine doesn't even grace the Ward's Top 10 Engines list...yet 4 domestic engines are on it.

Even funnier, Honda hasn't really come up with anything new...ever. 9/10 new developments in vehicles are either European, or Domestic.

Just give it up. Ignorance really must be bliss.

posted by  dodgerforlife

VTEC is all honda, all I see now are copies used by different manufacturers. Lets not forget what cars last, and which ones dont. Sure older domestics were indestructable, hell my pontiac went 152k before I crashed it and im sure it would still be running strong today with 200k+, but the new stuff they make is just blah. I like a few domestic cars, but thats all. I would take a range rover sport over an escalade, a passat 2.0t over an accord, and a fod gt over most any ferrari just for the price difference, and the car wouldnt see enough miles to actually get to the point where it breaks, but for sheer engineering, american cars do nothing for me

posted by  newyorker

How is it better?

The Mustang is faster, cheaper, has more seating...

What technological developement is so great in the S2000 compared to the Mustang?

Sorry you dread driving them, do you think someone who drives a Mustang GT wouldn't dread driving a Honda Civic? Same goes for drivers or Supras, 300zx's, Camaros, etc. Not even that guy from the fast and the furious probably enjoys driving a Civic, LOL. :screwy: We already know your logic is off, no point in telling us you dread driving american cars, we get that, we're all just trying to find out why.

Is it because you can FEEL it has less hp/liter and that makes you upset?
Is it because you can FEEL the torque as you rocket through the ENTIRE powerband?
Is it because you have a Honda and feel that should allow you to be stuck up and to smell your own farts?
Is it because you are just disagreeable and don't want to face the facts?

or Is is because you are just plain intolerable of a different way of achieving similar or better performance? Must really bother you how much better a performer for less money cars like the 350z are, yet it only makes 85hp/liter with DOHC. Is it Honda or die?

posted by  rudypoochris

Variable valve timing has about a thousand abbreviations. Click here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_valve_timing#VVT_Implementations) to see most/all of them.

posted by  chris_knows

No its because to me, american cars have a lower (much) quality feel than their import and european rivals, thats all. If im going to go out and spend 60k on a brand new SUV, Il pay the 60k for a range rover that has every feature to match the escalade and then some, still does 0-60 in 7 and 15.4 in the 1/4, still luxurious, but doenst feel like a plastic wedge when you are driving it. To me its worth the price difference to have a quality car, not just any ol SUV. Same goes for cars. Would I take a passat or a malibu? Any day of the week, for the same exact reasons. Thats just my take. If im going to be spending money on a new car (and this isnt what i call pocket change), I want to get something that I will enjoy, and something that will serve me well, rather than something I dont like.

posted by  newyorker

Haha you ignorant piece of shit, I do believe buick was the first to use variable valve timing. I think it was in 53 and it was for economy.

posted by  Enthusiast

well obviously honda made it work, cause i dont see that on buicks...in fact i dont see buicks at all anymore

posted by  newyorker

You ignorant retarded wannabe. VTEC was introduced in the 80's. ****ing FIAT of all manufacturer's had VVT in the late 60's. How in the SHIT can you claim that VVT is a Honda invention? They were copying something already in place, you asstard.

posted by  dodgerforlife

I guess that because Honda have made such a big thing if it in recent years, he just took it that they were the first manufacturer to use it.....It was an ignorant statement I suppose, but I can see his side of it (I think, lol....)

posted by  Cliffy

Just because people buy it doesn't mean Honda made it work. I guess Honda must have superior engineering in the badge department as well, seeing as Type R badges sell better than Cobra or SS badges.

Buicks are considered to be some of the highest quality cars being built right now in their price range.

And you never answered my question as to why domestic companies would want to steer away from making 300+hp V8s and spend the extra time and money into engineering a less powerful (yet just as heavy and expensive) 4 cylinder that makes more power/liter.

My car makes more power per cupholder. This makes GMs better somehow, Honda is using old cupholder engineering technology.

posted by  giant016

Now you are just acting like an idiot. Maybe buicks are some of the highest quality cars in their price range right now, but I still dont see any. Shit ive been doing valet for a month, and with over 1000 cars that we have had come through, I havent seen a single newer buick, only one older one that looked like a ~1992 century. And I never said they should. Why would they put a less powerful motor into a heavy car like the mustang. If they could make 240 horses from even a 2.2 N/A motor for the Focus, that would be impressive.

posted by  newyorker

Can I just ask a question? Why is it that you Yanks (rash generalisation that just seems to hold more true for Americans than other nationalities) always seem to preface your arguments with a personal attack like that above, or "you're a dumbass" or something similar?

By doing this, you will always put the other person off-side immediately and any valid argument you have from that point on will always be disregarded and you will never manage to make the other person see your point of view properly, no matter how right you may be...

posted by  windsonian

Not all of us are like that Windy. It's the new generation. They're bombarded with that sort of crap everyday. It's in our movies, commercials, porn, hell even our congressmen do it. Complete breakdown of civilization. (sigh)

Newyorker:

I put 4 kids through college.

Two listened to father and bought nice used cars for cash.
Two bought new cars with big payments.
Two went to all the parties, ball games, concerts, other fun stuff.
Two stayed home every weekend, because they were broke from those big car payments.
Two of them loved college.
Two of them hated college.

Guess which two?

Putting yourself in debt at 19 is a very stupid thing to do. No hill for you of course.

Keep your old car.

Rethink your thought processes, Every time you start one of these, you get your ass handed to you. Why do you continue to think your the only one who is right? You should learn from making the same mistakes over and over and over . . . and over . . . and over . . .

PS:

The S2000 is one of the most sorry pieces of crap, I ever owned.
there, I said it, and I stand by it.

posted by  jcutsh

I did much the same thing. Went and bought a new car at 19, although not in college. Sick of paying bills all the time. It totally blows.

posted by  dodgerforlife

Not all of us are like that Windy. It's the new generation. They're bombarded with that sort of crap everyday. It's in our movies, commercials, porn, hell even our congressmen do it. Complete breakdown of civilization. (sigh)

Newyorker:

I put 4 kids through college.

Two listened to father and bought nice used cars for cash.
Two bought new cars with big payments.
Two went to all the parties, ball games, concerts, other fun stuff.
Two stayed home every weekend, because they were broke from those big car payments.
Two of them loved college.
Two of them hated college.

Guess which two?

Putting yourself in debt at 19 is a very stupid thing to do. No hill for you of course.

Keep your old car.

Rethink your thought processes, Every time you start one of these, you get your ass handed to you. Why do you continue to think your the only one who is right? You should learn from making the same mistakes over and over and over . . . and over . . . and over . . .

PS:

The S2000 is one of the most sorry pieces of crap, I ever owned.
there, I said it, and I stand by it.

posted by  jcutsh

Much better then I could ever say jcutsh

posted by  rudypoochris

Already told him that 100 posts ago but as if he's going to listen to me....

Hopefully he'll listen to you....

posted by  Mathew

Well the car goes in for the input shaft bearing on wednesday, as well as clutch kit, so after spending 520 dollars on it, I dont think il want to sell it right away. I fixed all of the rattles, and the car actually isnt bad now, still drives great for the miles it has, and looks the part as well. My neighbor thought it was brand new when I brought it home on the first day. We will see how it goes, but unless I hit the lottery, Im not sure a new car will be coming anytime soon. If I can drive it till end of college, and get established with a nice job after finish, I will be able to get something brand new then, and it wont be an economy car, rather a large luxury sedan, or a sports car

posted by  newyorker

Congratulations, you just wasted EIGHT PAGES OF THE INTERNET.

posted by  Mathew

forget the fit... get si...si looks MUCH nicer

posted by  a_gopowyk

Your Message