|
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
1993 W-41: (vin A) 185hp 160ft lbs torque.
1991 and 92 W-41: (vin A) 190hp 160 ft lbs torque. 1989-92 H.O.: (vin A) 180hp and 160ft lbs torque. the rsx type s can barely touch those numbers in 2006 http://www.geocities.com/calais_man442/Rearof442.jpg http://www.geocities.com/calais_man442/442_1.jpg http://www.geocities.com/calais_man442/Newmotor-1.JPG |
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
the difference between me and you other than being black and from Jamiaca. and married to a white woman. is that the fact that I gives props where props is deserved. I dont just hate a car because of where it was made, I hate it because of what it is, and what it can do.
|
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
Originally Posted by rudebwoy
I hate it because of what it is, and what it can do.
|
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
still a big car and how does that thing handle im asuming it goes in a strait line fairly well but can it handle worth a damm? thay looks alot like a pontiac grand am motor how manny of those things were produced like 500 only in brown and green?
|
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
Originally Posted by random-strike
so you hate cars that are better platforms than yours because of what they can do not because where they come from. make sense.... :l
|
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
Ever work on a quad4? It sucks big fat donkey dick. Just had to throw that in. lol.
I like a car for what it is, how it looks, and just personal preference. I dont see hating a car or manufacturer just becuase of its country of origin. I just recently got into Hondas, I was hard core domestic for the longest time, but I couldnt feed my Ram with gas anymore so in came the cheapo 4 banger. It happened to be a Honda, and I decided Ill do a search and see what can be done to it. In comes HMT. Dont get me wrong, my dream car that one day I will own is a 340 Duster w/ a pistol grip 4 speed. I have friends & co-workers that drive fox body mustangs, C5 vette, lt1 camaro, ls1 trans am, and one even has a 325ci. They all have their flaws and advantages, but then again NONE of the above cars are stock anymore. They are all fun to drive, just some put more money and time/effort into their cars than others. I dont see disrespecting someone elses hobby or past time because of their perefernce of manufacturer. I see both of your points, but I dont see why people that have domestics accept the fact that there is more to life than the big 3? On that same note, the Import guys (jap and german) have to respect that fact that the US uses a different aproach to making power, but make power nonetheless. What erks me the most is that I catch ---- from domestic car drivers all the time about me showing up at the track and running a piss poor time (15.7 no turbo yet). Talking ---- like "shoulda kept your sewing machine powered car at home" and ----. Its so tiring listening to that ----. Its just as bad as the ------- ricer faggots that talk ---- like "my fart canned civic will hang with that vette..." Come on, really, cant someone just go to the track and have fun and run what I run and dont worry about what im doing, and just mind your own ----? WTF! :7 /vent For the comment on going 120 in a ls1 f-body...I rode in my buddys trans am at a little over 100 w/ the front sway bar disconnected to help him launch at the track, that was ------- SCARY! Its fine when the bars connected, but that thing was all over the road with it off. BTW, he runs low 11s with 150 shot & some internals with an auto and 2.89 (I think) desert gears in the back. I liked his car ;D Its blown for now, I guess 200 off the line was too much for one pass, he was trying to hit high 10s |
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
i agree
ive owned two hondas, one being turbocharged. i ran 9.2 in the 1/8 and 14.2@102mph 10psi in my turbo integra with about $1000 invested in the turbo setup, $845 for engine. blew up 3 sets of cast pistons. street/dyno tuned with conservtivie timing i ran 8.3 in the 1/8 with a 2.7 60 foot spinning 245r16s through 2nd at 8psi in my turbo mustang with about $400 invested in turbo setup, stock engine from 1988, using only FMU no tuning at all. that speaks volumes to me. i liked both cars |
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
Originally Posted by random-strike
1993 W-41: (vin A) 185hp 160ft lbs torque.
1991 and 92 W-41: (vin A) 190hp 160 ft lbs torque. 1989-92 H.O.: (vin A) 180hp and 160ft lbs torque. the rsx type s can barely touch those numbers in 2006 http://www.geocities.com/calais_man442/Rearof442.jpg http://www.geocities.com/calais_man442/442_1.jpg http://www.geocities.com/calais_man442/Newmotor-1.JPG Cars are dirt cheap :y For me: LSx RX7; light and motor has a helluva potential |
Re: i did feel bad , like a real noob :-(
Originally Posted by random-strike
i agree
ive owned two hondas, one being turbocharged. i ran 9.2 in the 1/8 and 14.2@102mph 10psi in my turbo integra with about $1000 invested in the turbo setup, $845 for engine. blew up 3 sets of cast pistons. street/dyno tuned with conservtivie timing i ran 8.3 in the 1/8 with a 2.7 60 foot spinning 245r16s through 2nd at 8psi in my turbo mustang with about $400 invested in turbo setup, stock engine from 1988, using only FMU no tuning at all. that speaks volumes to me. i liked both cars |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands