|
ilkhan posted:Legally and feasibly, those stripped down gas guzzlers can no longer be sold. We've regulated and reviewed them out of existence. In real world conditions the DC2-R is very economical indeed (probably didn't translate too well to the test regime) PeterWeller posted:There were tons of "fast" FWD cars in America in the 90s and 00s. You could have gone with a Civic Si or a GTI or a Sentra SE-R or a Focus SVT. Instead, you picked the very best "fast" FWD car ever made. If you don't think those other cars are fast enough to be considered, then you concede the point because those are the FoST's predecessors, the cars that filled the market it now does. As much as I like the DC2-R the DC5 was quicker and no where near as stripped down.
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 08:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
ilkhan posted:Legally and feasibly, those stripped down gas guzzlers can no longer be sold. We've regulated and reviewed them out of existence. *Says this directly below a post about the 700hp Challenger  *I agree that there'll be most likely little demand for light, high strung cars when everyone is obsessed with turbos. Personally my issue with cars like the Miata or the BRZ isn't that they're N/A, it's just that there isn't that much power even at the top end. No such problem with the E92 M3, for example  .
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
So going back to cars that people actually buy, you can now get the big block 2.5l Mazda3 with a manual trans. http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/15/2015-mazda3-manual-larger-engine-official/
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
so if the 3 gets the engine the miata should have gotten, and the miata gets the engine the 2 should have gotten, what are they going to anchor the next 2 down with? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 09:32
|
|
|
fknlo posted:On the earlier hellcat discussion, And with the Charger Hellcat coming along, the only way they could make it more awesome is to resurrect their LX platform wagon. Magnum Hellcat 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 10:06
|
|
|
Powershift posted:so if the 3 gets the engine the miata should have gotten, and the miata gets the engine the 2 should have gotten, what are they going to anchor the next 2 down with? .7 liter rotary 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 11:36
|
|
|
Powershift posted:so if the 3 gets the engine the miata should have gotten, and the miata gets the engine the 2 should have gotten, what are they going to anchor the next 2 down with? renesis
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 11:56
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:And with the Charger Hellcat coming along, the only way they could make it more awesome is to resurrect their LX platform wagon. gently caress the LX bring back the original Magnum also the SRT-4 was a poo poo car that was so fast no one cared, the FoST won't be that in the least almost completely different cars in a way
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 12:08
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:gently caress the LX bring back the original Magnum Not a wagon, doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
I informally straw polled several(!) girls and the results are unanimous: Ranked by likelihood to agree to ride in said car with placeholders for scale: Maserati quattroporte Almost any Audi FoST FiST Hellcat A bicycle Neon Srt4 Buick grand national
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So going back to cars that people actually buy, you can now get the big block 2.5l Mazda3 with a manual trans. This is pretty awesome news. Especially the fact that you can get a stick with the Grand Touring trim. I thought for sure that if Mazda added the stick, they would only allow it in a configuration where you get 0 other options available.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So going back to cars that people actually buy, you can now get the big block 2.5l Mazda3 with a manual trans. Am I missing it or is this article not listing the specs for the 2.5 liter engine?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
dissss posted:As much as I like the DC2-R the DC5 was quicker and no where near as stripped down. Really? That must be a matter of tenths then. The best 1/4 mile I've seen for both is 14.6, and I think that was likely under the absolute best conditions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Coredump posted:Am I missing it or is this article not listing the specs for the 2.5 liter engine? It's about 185 hp 185 ft-lbs. You can get absolutely every option except the tech package with it, but that only adds things like adaptive cruise and whatnot. Nav is included in the higher trims.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Stealth Like posted:It's about 185 hp 185 ft-lbs. You can get absolutely every option except the tech package with it, but that only adds things like adaptive cruise and whatnot. Nav is included in the higher trims. Sweet Jesus, Mazda must have been really pissed that Subaru's 2.5L made 170. I guess that obscene Skyactiv-G compression ratio is good for something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Stealth Like posted:It's about 185 hp 185 ft-lbs. You can get absolutely every option except the tech package with it, but that only adds things like adaptive cruise and whatnot. Nav is included in the higher trims. Well that pretty much invalidates the Civic Si.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Legally and feasibly, those stripped down gas guzzlers can no longer be sold. We've regulated and reviewed them out of existence. Also the kind of young people who used to buy those cars no longer have money and jobs, and the target market has gotten older and moved upscale. This means you have to make the car cushier or else more practical, plus reduced volume from lower sales plus the decline in popularity and sponsorship of things like club racing means it's more expensive per unit to make performance parts like short ratio gearsets.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:And with the Charger Hellcat coming along, the only way they could make it more awesome is to resurrect their LX platform wagon. They couldn't take my money fast enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Well that pretty much invalidates the Civic Si. I'm not so sure. You'd give up 20 HP, the LSD, the best shifter in a FWD car, and the gigantic K-series aftermarket.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
In truck news, GM Adding 3rd sSift to Colorado/Canyon Plantquote:DETROIT -- General Motors will add a third production shift at its Wentzville, Mo., assembly plant, where its new midsize pickups and commercial vans are made. I still think that as long as you can walk out of the door with one for at least a couple grand less than a comparably equipped full-size that they'll sell just fine. I'll definitely take a look once they hit lots and then possibly wait on the diesel if I like it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:I'm not so sure. You'd give up 20 HP, the LSD, the best shifter in a FWD car, and the gigantic K-series aftermarket. The Si does also tend to cost more though, especially in terms of otd prices
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:There were tons of "fast" FWD cars in America in the 90s and 00s. You could have gone with a Civic Si or a GTI or a Sentra SE-R or a Focus SVT. This entire thing is entirely off the original point I was trying to make anyways (which had nothing to do with FWD hot hatches anyways), which is that ten years on, competitors to the 3-series haven't appreciably improved upon the older cars. The current C-class and A4 are about the same or slower than they were 10 years ago. The only reason I mentioned the Focus is that I was looking at them in consideration of buying one in a few years, and was disappointed that they were slower than what I have now. That started me looking at a bunch of other modern 'sporty' cars and sports sedans and was kinda disappointed that so many of them performed worse than what I drive now. Whatever I buy next, I want it to be at least as peppy as what is currently in my garage (which isn't particularly fast itself); I'm not going to downgrade to something slower. I'd be willing to live with the sin of FWD if the FiST or FoST or MS3 (if Mazda even comes out with another MS3) were at least a little quicker than what I have now, but I'm not going to give up the beauty of RWD for something that's also slower. The thing that makes the lack of improved performance at the $20-35k range is all the more shocking when you see what the mid-high end performance cars are doing; they've gotten faster at a seemingly exponential rate; something like a modern GT-R or C7 Z06 or Camaro Z28 is last decade's hypercar, and modern hypercars like the P1 or 918 Spyder are infringing on straight up LMP1 cars in raw performance. The high end of fast cars now is at a level utterly inconceivable just a decade or two ago. And yet the lower end is practically stagnant. p.s. it's worth noting that while Ford was dribbling out the SVT for the US, Europe got the much more powerful RS, and similarly we didn't get the Civic Type-R or Si-R, instead getting the tepid Si. That is what I meant by the US not getting a lot of the hot (actually hot, not just warm) hatches during that era. Militant Lesbian fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Sep 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:And with the Charger Hellcat coming along, the only way they could make it more awesome is to resurrect their LX platform wagon. I would not be surprised to see one within 3 years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:That started me looking at a bunch of other modern 'sporty' cars and sports sedans and was kinda disappointed that so many of them performed worse than what I drive now. You're entirely ignoring the pony cars, which are exponentially better than they have been before. The V6, V8, and upcoming 4 cylinder Mustangs are all massively faster than the best 90s and 2000s performance cars, and handle well to boot. They also have the "beauty of RWD", as you put it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:You're entirely ignoring the pony cars, which are exponentially better than they have been before. The V6, V8, and upcoming 4 cylinder Mustangs are all massively faster than the best 90s and 2000s performance cars, and handle well to boot. They also have the "beauty of RWD", as you put it. Pony cars are also why Ford is reluctant to put out a $30k Focus, because who would buy it. And that's not even starting on whatever weird selective definition of "performance" is being used here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Pony cars are also why Ford is reluctant to put out a $30k Focus, because who would buy it. People buy $30k+ Golf's all the time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:This entire thing is entirely off the original point I was trying to make anyways (which had nothing to do with FWD hot hatches anyways), which is that ten years on, competitors to the 3-series haven't appreciably improved upon the older cars. The current C-class and A4 are about the same or slower than they were 10 years ago. You should be comparing your car to the Audi S4 and BMW 235/335, they are all quick cars and the natural successors to an E46 330.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:This entire thing is entirely off the original point I was trying to make anyways (which had nothing to do with FWD hot hatches anyways), which is that ten years on, competitors to the 3-series haven't appreciably improved upon the older cars. The current C-class and A4 are about the same or slower than they were 10 years ago. The only reason I mentioned the Focus is that I was looking at them in consideration of buying one in a few years, and was disappointed that they were slower than what I have now. That started me looking at a bunch of other modern 'sporty' cars and sports sedans and was kinda disappointed that so many of them performed worse than what I drive now. I see where you're coming from, and I understand your argument but consider the following points. You state competitors to the 3-series haven't appreciably improved upon the older cars. The current C-class and A4 are about the same or slower than they were 10 years ago. That depends on how you want to quantify the improvement. The average car buyer doesn't need a super fast vehicle. It needs to be peppy enough to be enjoyable to drive, but I would guess 85 out of 100 car buyers care more about the looks and features of the car rather than just speed and handling. Cars have improved quite a lot in the last 10 to 15 years. We see nice strides in fuel economy numbers, while maintaining similar performance numbers. A 2002 MB C320 was rated at 17/23, while a 2014 C350 gets 20/29. The 2002 BMW 325i was rated at 17/24, the new 328i gets 23/35. Safety is way up as well. Almost all newer vehicles are safer than the older models. Reliability is at an all time high as well. New vehicle purchasers can expect with factory recommended maintenance that their vehicle last to 200,000 miles and beyond. The 20 to 35K range you point out isn't for high performance buyers. It's for Sally Q. Public to buy a new Camry or Fusion. They don't need those cars to have high performance. Cars are getting better. They're getting a lot better. They're just not getting better how you want them to get better. Unfortunately you, and most automotive enthusiast are not the target market. Although as a counterpoint the new 2015 Ford Mustang is a hell of a car for the money. 32K gets you a really nice powerful car. To address your comparison of the US Domestic Market with Europe or Japan, small expensive cars can sell over there. They will not sell in the USDM. The 2009 Focus RS was a beautiful car, but no one is going to pay Forty Thousand US Dollars to buy one over here. The 2002 Civic Type R stickered at the USD equivalent of 35,000 dollars. Adjusted for 2014 dollars, that car would cost 46,300 dollars. Do you see anyone lining up to spend 46 grand on a Honda Civic? Didn't think so. The US market is different than the rest of the world. I would do terrible things to get some of Ford Austrailia's FPV vehicles here in the US. I love the GT-P, but it costs 82,000 AUD, and a US version would probably be 6 figures. It's not feasible for them to bring those kinds of cars to the US.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
I always felt that anything under 6 seconds 0-60 and equivalent other stats is "fast" to most people. I feel like modern cars can get into that range with fewer trade offs with economy/safety/comfort and its an improvement. I like cars that are engaging at legal speeds like the STs, abarths and minis of the world. From personal experience I can't really tell the difference, seat of my pants between a 5.5 second 0-60 and a 3.5 second 0-60 but one car was a sedan you can drive for 5 hours and the other was a gutted homogenization special that gives people migraines after an hour.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
fknlo posted:People buy $30k+ Golf's all the time. code:
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Also the kind of young people who used to buy those cars no longer have money and jobs, and the target market has gotten older and moved upscale. This means you have to make the car cushier or else more practical, plus reduced volume from lower sales plus the decline in popularity and sponsorship of things like club racing means it's more expensive per unit to make performance parts like short ratio gearsets. Cream_Filling posted:Pony cars are also why Ford is reluctant to put out a $30k Focus, because who would buy it. The ideal garage is like a Mustang GT + F150. Specialized vehicles for DD/performance and utility/hauling. I see a Focus ST as the compromise vehicle. 4 doors, 4 seats, decent cargo space, decent performance, cheap at $25k. But at $35k I'd want one of the real choices.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:They also aren't getting replaced. The youth market that used to buy them are moving up as you say, and the replacement youths don't care about performance. I don't think it's this, I think that it's that the replacement youth are broke as hell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:"All the time" I'm not just talking about the Golf R. The GTI is a Golf that regularly sells for $30k+. I'd say at least half of them that I see are autobahn package equipped.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:You're entirely ignoring the pony cars, which are exponentially better than they have been before. The V6, V8, and upcoming 4 cylinder Mustangs are all massively faster than the best 90s and 2000s performance cars, and handle well to boot. They also have the "beauty of RWD", as you put it. No, not ignoring them, an EB Mustang is highly likely to end up in my garage within a few years. The mustang is the rare exception as far as bang for buck goes currently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Reliability is at an all time high as well. New vehicle purchasers can expect with factory recommended maintenance that their vehicle last to 200,000 miles and beyond. So they're just now catching up to where Volvo was at forty years ago? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:I don't think it's this, I think that it's that the replacement youth are broke as hell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:This entire thing is entirely off the original point I was trying to make anyways (which had nothing to do with FWD hot hatches anyways), which is that ten years on, competitors to the 3-series haven't appreciably improved upon the older cars. The current C-class and A4 are about the same or slower than they were 10 years ago. The only reason I mentioned the Focus is that I was looking at them in consideration of buying one in a few years, and was disappointed that they were slower than what I have now. That started me looking at a bunch of other modern 'sporty' cars and sports sedans and was kinda disappointed that so many of them performed worse than what I drive now. Here's the part you keep ignoring: the FoST is faster than your car in every situation but a clutch melting drag launch. It will feel much faster than your car in everyday driving. Again, it posts poor standing acceleration times because it has trouble putting all that power down because it is a turbocharged FWD car with an open diff. Otherwise, it's fast as gently caress. E: In truth, many of the cars you think are slower than yours because you compared 0-60 times are probably faster than your car in all the ways people usually use cars. Standing acceleration times only tell a little bit about a car. And you don't need to tell me what the US did and didn't get. We might not have got the CTR, but we got the equally fast RSX-S (and the 07+ Si is better than the equivalent CTR). We got the previously mentioned SRT4 and the cheap WRX. We got all the good VWs. We didn't get all the good stuff, but we got a lot of it. PeterWeller fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Sep 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:They also aren't getting replaced. The youth market that used to buy them are moving up as you say, and the replacement youths don't care about performance. If we're talking fantasy cars that don't exist, the Mustang shooting brake is clearly superior to a RWD Focus Hatch. Or a modern US Ford Falcon wagon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Here's the part you keep ignoring: the FoST is faster than your car in every situation but a clutch melting drag launch. It will feel much faster than your car in everyday driving. Again, it posts poor standing acceleration times because it has trouble putting all that power down because it is a turbocharged FWD car with an open diff. Otherwise, it's fast as gently caress. I still plan on test driving both the FiST and FoST, as well as the ND Miata (and MS3 if they make another one), as they may still be entertaining enough to drive to justify the purchase (and I kinda would like a hatchback if I can find one I like, it'd make trips to Ikea or Lowes a lot easier...), but I'm betting for the money the EB Mustang with perf pack will be the sweet spot - not much more expensive than the Focus, but a lot more fun to throw around a corner (sideways). Either way, I've been really pleased with Ford's current/upcoming lineup. If you'd told me in the 90's or early 2000's that Ford (or any domestic automaker, really) would be the company making some of the most exciting cars and had more cars that appeal to me than anyone else, I'd have told you that you were full of poo poo. I'm really loving Global Ford. Also, not exactly a new car, but new news about car dealers: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/09/tesla-wins-right-to-sell-directly-to-consumers-in-massachusetts/ One more blow struck against lovely entrenched dealer franchises that treat their customers like rubes to scam. I'm secretly hopeful this may lead to one day encouraging the Japanese brands to experiment with opening manufacturer-owned dealerships in the US like they have in Japan - they're more like going to an Apple store than an American dealership and they really treat the customers well and aren't full of lovely hucksters. I'd be ecstatic to see that model have more success here, and Tesla's fighting a good fight in trying to force their way in using only manufacturer-owned stores. If they become more widespread, independent dealers will really have to clean up their act or lose their businesses; if there was a better alternative nobody would waste time with most of these shitheels selling cars now. Militant Lesbian fucked around with this message at 07:18 on Sep 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:if there was a better alternative nobody would waste time with most of these shitheels selling cars now. Which is precisely why dealerships will successfully lobby against any better alternative. Look at how difficult it has been for Tesla, an entirely new manufacturer, to be able to sell direct to customer. Now imagine Ford or GM trying that, with their massive existing dealership network.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 08:50
|
|