Stupidru Posted September 30, 2003 Share Posted September 30, 2003 http://www.pbase.com/image/21193195 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweet82 Posted September 30, 2003 Share Posted September 30, 2003 Actually your REALLY not "MILES FOX!" Your using some "LAMERANDOMNANE" too! Wow! The two of you have more in common than you thought...? Can't we all just get along?:argue: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ringe Posted September 30, 2003 Share Posted September 30, 2003 Whatever the advantages of unlost boost between shifts, an automatic tranny is harder to launch than a MT (just take a look at how they launch AWD cars in these car mags) and the increased drivetrain loss from the torque converter and the lack of a ratio thoroughly negate any advantages. Slushies still suck, even with a turbo charged engine in front of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LameRandomName Posted October 1, 2003 Author Share Posted October 1, 2003 Miles - My Forester is for transportation. The only mod IT gets is an aftermarket oil filtration system. I have a real car for my hotrod antics. :-p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reoff Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 All this anger over a test drive??? Come now children. I have my own opinions on this based on experience, but I'm going to keep that to myself. No need to flare any tempers. But seriously, all that is being discussed here is theory of boost vs. theory of transmission. Can we at least argue about reality? Let's just agree to disagree and put this behind us. This post has been all over the place. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ABAJA Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Cheers Jay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilesFox Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 its all sH!ts ang giggles from here on. so what's this REAL car? my car is real too. i can touch it, smell it, and taste it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reoff Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 From what I've seen/heard, I'm very impressed with your car Miles. Sorry I missed you when you were out this way. I just was getting frustrated with the arguments about theory and based upon "all things being equal." Nothing personal to anyone. It's just that this thread started with a comment about a testdrive where an observation was made, then went into philosophy of transmissions and turbos. Before you know it we are down to "which is better," then "which is better in the snow." Then it just turned into a d!ck measuring contest. I have the deepest respect for all of you, but the answers to all of these questions are debatable, and really come down to the individual. There is no "right" answer. No need to get so excited about it and drag it on so long. In different ways I agree with all of you (except about the operation of the turbo part). Feel free to tell me what an @$$ you think I am, but please just send me an e-mail rather than dragging this out even further. I would rather see an open discussion here than an argument. They are rerely productive. Rich reoff(at)gmx.co.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilesFox Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 dude called me out. I have to keep true to my character, you know! but anyway, i see where you come from, but dude kept responding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foresterturbomiatacamry Posted October 3, 2003 Share Posted October 3, 2003 That's funny I took a test drive the other day (5 speed) as well and I was all smiles:D Whats not to like about this car umm oh SUV mmmm...car? ACCELERATION (Seconds) Zero to 30 mph: 1.3 40 mph: 2.6 50 mph: 3.6 60 mph: 5.3 70 mph: 6.9 80 mph: 9.2 90 mph: 11.8 100 mph: 15.0 110 mph: 19.5 120 mph: 26.7 Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.3 Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 8.4 50-70 mph: 8.1 Standing 1/4-mile: 13.8 sec @ 97 mph Top speed (governor limited): 129 mph Car and Driver Aug 2003 That's fast enough to blow the doors off of most cars out there even the 350Z and G35. Oh and yet it is comfortable enough for weekend trips with my family. I can't wait to blow the doors off any and all Mustangs. Firebird's, Z car, G35, all huge a** SUV's and Dodge Caravans......EVEN IN SNOW and yes even my beloved Miata. _____________________________ 2004 Subaru Forester Turbo 2000 Miata Miata SE 1995 Toyota Camry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebz Posted October 3, 2003 Share Posted October 3, 2003 LameRandomName Said.. TANSTAAFL You must read the some of the same books I do.. I love that acronym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy Posted October 3, 2003 Share Posted October 3, 2003 Originally posted by foresterturbomiatacamry I can't wait to blow the doors off any and all Mustangs. Firebird's, Z car, G35, all huge a** SUV's and Dodge Caravans......EVEN IN SNOW and yes even my beloved Miata. _____________________________ 2004 Subaru Forester Turbo 2000 Miata Miata SE 1995 Toyota Camry Miatas are not drag racers. Their strength is not having to slow down for the corners. I on a regular basis, blow the doors off Mustangs and Firebird's on an autocross course. 2004 Subaru Forester Turbo 1993 Mariner Blue Miata E-Stock SCCA Solo2 1994 Laguna Blue Miata Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie Posted October 3, 2003 Share Posted October 3, 2003 They would beat the muscle cars I had in the 60s in the quarter for sure, and I think would also take my BMW M in the quarter. I think the best my M can do stock is high 13s on a good day. Probably in every day use more like low 14s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LameRandomName Posted October 4, 2003 Author Share Posted October 4, 2003 Originally posted by cookie They would beat the muscle cars I had in the 60s in the quarter for sure 13.8 is fast (if it'll really do that), but don't get carried away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ringe Posted October 4, 2003 Share Posted October 4, 2003 Originally posted by LameRandomName 13.8 is fast (if it'll really do that), but don't get carried away. I don't understand why you are so skeptical of the 5MT Forester XTs test times when you haven't driven one, except with the slushy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilesFox Posted October 4, 2003 Share Posted October 4, 2003 so where did thsi dude come form, anyway?:-\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie Posted October 4, 2003 Share Posted October 4, 2003 In the 60s the mags used to get specilly doctored cars for test. Hand assembled and set up perfectly. The funniest had to be one test, and I forget the mag, but almost everything came on a trailer. You had Olds engineers there with the 442, Chevy guys with the SS, Buick guys , and of course the hot young Chrysler corp dudes. But Ford had Holman Moody guys there with a theoretically stock 390 Fairlane that turned about 7,000 RPM on hydraulic lifters, beat everything and blew up before the end of the test. After that things have calmed down a bit on the testing front, but the only guys whose numbers I really trust is consumer Reports. If I was an ad guy for a manufacturer you can bet the car mags got to test from me would be as hot as we could tune it and be called stock. These cars are often pre production prototypes they test. Consumer reports buys the car blind from a dealer. No chnace to see that it is anything but production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LameRandomName Posted October 4, 2003 Author Share Posted October 4, 2003 Originally posted by ringe I don't understand why you are so skeptical of the 5MT Forester XTs test times when you haven't driven one, except with the slushy. BECAUSE I drove one. I've been VERY clear that I am willing to believe that the particular car I drove had issues and that I'm willing to reserve final judgement. However, if the auto version really is running mid 16's then there is NO WAY the car will run high 13's just because you put in a stick. You can jump up and down and scream about that all you want, but it isn't going to change anything. Wishful thinking doesn't have ANY impact on the laws of physics. And excuses, like "it had a slushy" don't have any impact on me. The car either has the stones to run high 13's or it doesn't. PERIOD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LameRandomName Posted October 4, 2003 Author Share Posted October 4, 2003 Cookie - What you say is absolutely true. One difference between then and now was that back then cars came off the floor with a tremendous amount of unrealized potential. I remember one case in particular that illustrates that. The 1969 Z-28 camaro came off the showroom floor running 14's and spinning it's bias ply tires all the way down the track. We scrapped the exhaust manifolds and bolted on headers. Changed the rear gears out for something stiffer. IIRC it was 4.11 from the factory and we used either 4.56 or 4.88's Other than that, the distributer was re-curved and the carb was re-jetted. The car then proceeded to run low 11's on 9" slicks. You can't get that kind of improvement on todays cars without going into major money, because todays cars are already so optimized. For instance, on the 69Z we put on headers. But today's cars don't have the restrictive exhaust manifolds of the old timers and their tubular exhaust manifolds flow almost as well as headers. Years ago with we would take the old fashioned ditributors and change the weights inside to alter the advance curve. Today, the computer controlled electronic ignitions in modern cars outperform anything you could do with a distributor, essentially allowing the advance curve to change "on the fly" Changing jets in the carb? Not anymore. Computer controlled electronic fuel injection takes over and meters more precisely than a carb is capable of doing. Tires are another thing that's completely different. In the old days you might come out to your car in the morning and find your bias ply tires flat spotted from sitting overnight, and you'd have to drive with the tires making thumping noises until they warmed up and became round again. Traction? Fuhgedaboudit! The end result of all this is that you can't really compare new cars with the old muscle car because they are such different animals. For "off-the-showroom-floor" performance, todays cars win hands down. But if you want to hotrod your car, the old muscle cars have an advantage that new cars just can't compete with. Cubic inches. To put this in perspective, I've got a long term project going on for my Caprice. The engine that I am planning for it is a Gen IV big block chevy. Nothing exotic... I'll be buying an off-the-shelf 502 short block, bolting on "as-cast" AFR 305 heads and, admittedly for looks, a low rise dual quad manifold with vacuum operated carbs. This motor will have a mild cam, 8.5:1 compression, will run on 87 octane gas and idle down to 600rpm. it will also make over 600hp, based on results from other real world motors. AND the entire motor, start to finish, will only cost about $7,500. Sounds like a lot but anyone who has ever built an engine can tell you that $12.50/hp is dirt cheap. And you know what? I had actually backed off my original plans, which were to run a single 4 barrel carb with a Vortech blow-through supercharger running about 7-8lbs of boost. (keep in mind that with a centrifugal supercharger max boost is at max rpm and at normal driving speeds it would make 3-4lbs) You know why backed off? Because that simple setup, which would have run right about $10,000, would have made over 1,000hp and frankly, I would have to spend about 30,000 on the rest of the car to beef it up enough to let it live under that kind of abuse. And, not to put too fine a point on it, that's $10.00/hp, which is even cheaper than my current plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie Posted October 4, 2003 Share Posted October 4, 2003 hp you can buy. And you are right about the cubes that were available in the 60s and 70s. But I have to say that I am amazed by the performance of these little cars. I drove a WRX in New Zealand and it was a pure blast. I am still not sure if the American version has the same power as this was a Japanese home model. The thing did not need to be optimised for the quarter with gears that gave you 5,000 RPM at freeway speeds, and it still got reasonable gas mileage and you could commute with it. Frankly I love the comparitively little trouble these modern engines give. The Fuel injection and electronics means no weekly tuning SU carbs and no points to worry about. I used to love to work on cars and it sounds like you still do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LameRandomName Posted October 5, 2003 Author Share Posted October 5, 2003 Nahhh... I'm too old and decrepit to work on cars anymore. Now I pay people to work on them for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie Posted October 5, 2003 Share Posted October 5, 2003 that I think may be easy or fun. I work six days a week and have very little time to do things like this. This is why I just sold my Jeep. Now I only have two cars to wash, service, and do the occasional little upgrade. It seems like the cars or the house always demand something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LameRandomName Posted October 5, 2003 Author Share Posted October 5, 2003 Such is life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now