ImportCArs VS. Muscle CArs

[Fijian]

dont you just love this

hows that for a change? now if anyone wants to defend that civic, thats thier problem...

Edited January 16, 2006 by Fijian

[Nick]

I've seen that before and it is funny, but to be fair, that is an S2000 which are very good sports cars, and that specific one would more than likely give that camaro a run for it's money in the straight, and just waste it in handling.

[LosAngeles]

Shows how full of themselves the muscle car crowd really can be at times...and how little they actually know about cars...

[balthazar]

Much easier & cheaper to build a modified Camaro that can destroyed a modified s2000 in every catagory. Too much listed above is completely true (HP/L vs. HP/lb)

[Sixty8panther]

One thing is entirely INCORRECT!

A Honda S2000 WILL not ever get 40mpg. NOt happening. f@#king thing has tobe revved to 8500RPM ot get some power out... by that pint you might as well be burning fuel in 8 cylinders but only at 4000RPM and stil getting more power out at a better MPG.

What a HUGE Myth this is...

these retards think a $3000 Garret turbo bolted to thier 40mpg Civic will not effect the Civic's MPG. All of a sudden it's like 12MPG in the real world? But I riced a japanese car for the sake of cheap gas! Idiots.

I've overheard this scenario SO many times at N.E. Dragway. People justifying spending $4000 on a $20,0000 Civic to make it run as fast a a $3000 POS Mustang 5.0 or and IROC-Z TP350.

"it's more economical, I make my Civic run 14s and still get great fuel economy"

Sure you do and my STR4 get's 31 MPG too! (more like 13)

[Fijian]

ok panther, and all who replied before him...

its not reffering to the S2000...its reffering to ricers.....

and its not supposed to be entirely correct, just exagerism..(exagerized?)

[funkypunnk]

Shows how full of themselves the muscle car crowd really can be at times...and how little they actually know about cars...

While I am frequently full of myself, and am always part of the muscle car crowd, I am dying to know how little I actually know about cars.

I will tell you that when you start with a 115HP 1.5-2.0L 4 banger and rice it up to the point that it could be competitive with a 325HP 5.7L V8, even allowing for the lighter weight of an economy car, it is going to cost you big money. Horsepower gets progressively more expensive at inverse proportions to the horsepower level. When you start with 115, and need to get to at least 250, it will cost somuch that you have invested double the value of your entire car just into the engine mods. What really blows me away is how much the ricers actually spend on STICKERS!!! I know a guy who has 1500.00 in his stickers. That doesn't make the car any faster nor handle any better. Furthermore, I will line up any muscle car dollar for dollar against any ricer any day of the week. Modern muscle has every advantage and none of the disadvantages. Hell, I'll line up a V6 Firebird dollar for dollar against a 4 cylinder ricer any day.

My Credentials:

Master Certified Auto Mechanic-1986

Biomedical Electronics Technician-1995

Field Service Engineer-1999

Been working on cars including deep level engine work since 1982 (I was 14)

Never pay anyone to do my work, build my own engines, port my own heads, build my own trannys, design my own mods.

Finally, the proof is in the pudding. Ricers 99% of the time run Nitrous on their pieces of junk. Nitrous is the quintessential crutch of the ricer world. Only babies suck on bottles. I ran bottle free and lost only two races in three years, and most of the cars I ran against juiced. AND these were real cars like Mustangs and Camaros and Vettes, not ricer junk like Civics and Celicas.

[Flybrian]

Shows how full of themselves the muscle car crowd really can be at times...and how little they actually know about cars...

Knife cuts both ways.

[Nick]

And actually, a stock S2000 has a 2.0 with 240 hp stock. I know it is referring to ricers in general, but the picture of that S2000 clearly shows a professionally tuned S2000 which chances are would be making much more hp than that camaro say if that camaro is stock. Also the S2000 probably weighs between 700 and 1000 lbs less than that camaro.

And Balthazar, chances are even with significant suspension work to that camaro (sways, strut/shock tower braces, shocks/springs) A stock S2000 would probably still outhandle it by far. I love camaros as much as the next person, but lets face it, they were never made to handle. They were made to go fast in a straight line in stock form and they owned the roads in that respect.

Edited January 14, 2006 by Nick

[funkypunnk]

And actually, a stock S2000 has a 2.0 with 240 hp stock. I know it is referring to ricers in general, but the picture of that S2000 clearly shows a professionally tuned S2000 which chances are would be making much more hp than that camaro say if that camaro is stock. Also the S2000 probably weighs between 700 and 1000 lbs less than that camaro.

And Balthazar, chances are even with significant suspension work to that camaro (sways, strut/shock tower braces, shocks/springs) A stock S2000 would probably still outhandle it by far. I love camaros as much as the next person, but lets face it, they were never made to handle. They were made to go fast in a straight line in stock form and they owned the roads in that respect.

The 4th gen Camaros and Firebirds actually were designed to handle very well. The S2000 which is a hairy (8300 RPM sweetspot) wound out dedicated sports car offering little or no real world utility is being compared to an everyday commuter car. The S2000 also sold for 33,000 in 02. That would have bought you a WS6 Ram Air TransAm Convt. in 02. The Trans Am had two extra seats, a glass back window, power top, bigger tires to compensate for the higher weight(Which is MAX of 800 Lbs. for the convt., only 500 Lbs. for the coupe), and much more.

The TA was 1 second faster to 60mph, within .03G on the skidpad, and a full second quicker in the quarter mile. Sounds like the TA handles pretty close while smoking the Honda in acceleration. All this and you can bring the kids along. When will you ricers give it up.

If you counter that this modified S2000 will smoke a stock Camaro, then I'll counter that if the same money was spent modifying the Camaro, it would win by even larger margins. Plus, most Camaro owners wouldn't wast all that money on stupidass stickers versus actual performance mods.

In the end I have only one thing to say:

LINE EM UP!!!!!!!

S2000

Exterior

Length: 162.2 in. Width: 68.9 in.

Height: 50.6 in. Wheel Base: 94.5 in.

Ground Clearance: 4.2 in. Curb Weight: 2809 lbs.

Interior

Front Head Room: 34.6 in. Front Hip Room: 50.2 in.

Front Shoulder Room: 49.8 in. Front Leg Room: 44.3 in.

Luggage Capacity: 5 cu. ft. Maximum Seating: 2

Performance

Acceleration (0-60 mph): 6.1 sec. Braking Distance (60-0 mph): 121 ft.

Base Number of Cylinders: 4 Base Engine Size: 2 liters

Base Engine Type: Inline 4 Horsepower: 240 hp

Max Horsepower: 8300 rpm Torque: 153 ft-lbs.

Max Torque: 7500 rpm Drive Type: RWD

200 ft skidpad : 0.91 g

Turning Circle: 35.4 ft.

TRANS AM convertible:

Exterior

Length: 193.8 in. Width: 74.5 in.

Height: 52.7 in. Wheel Base: 101.1 in.

Curb Weight: 3623 lbs.

Interior

Front Head Room: 38.7 in. Front Hip Room: 52.8 in.

Front Shoulder Room: 57.4 in. Rear Head Room: 39.4 in.

Rear Shoulder Room: 43.5 in. Rear Hip Room: 44.4 in.

Front Leg Room: 42.9 in. Rear Leg Room: 28.9 in.

Luggage Capacity: 12.9 cu. ft. Maximum Seating: 4

Performance

Top speed : 165 mph(estimated)

0-60 mph : 5.2 sec.(manual), 6.0 sec.(auto)

0-¼ mile : 13.4 sec @ 106.2 mph(manual)

60-0 braking distance : 120 ft

200 ft skidpad : 0.88 g

Base Number of Cylinders: 8 Base Engine Size: 5.7 liters

Base Engine Type: V8 Horsepower: 325 hp

Max Horsepower: 5200 rpm Torque: 340 ft-lbs.

Max Torque: 4000 rpm Drive Type: RWD

[Fijian]

oh my god you guys are freaks...i'll make sure to keep all exageration away from you guys next time

[Cory Wolfe]

If that wasn't an S2000, a modded one at that...

[balthazar]

And Balthazar, chances are even with significant suspension work to that camaro (sways, strut/shock tower braces, shocks/springs) A stock S2000 would probably still outhandle it by far. I love camaros as much as the next person, but lets face it, they were never made to handle.

Whaa- of course they were. Right from the beginning the Camaro was marketed as "the Hugger" (and no: that was not a reference to hybrid tech and/or trees). I have an article in my files on a '65 GTO turning 1.03 Gs. A stock s2000 outhandling a modified Camaro "by far"? I completely doubt it- the aftermarket for the A- and F-Bodies is tremendous and continually growing, and the basic handling hardware on the Camaro/Firebird is completely competent as a baseline.

Fijan-- sorry buddy; sometimes the winter doldrums prompts us UV-deficiant car nuts to jump snarling at even the hint of a good argument. I completely understood the generality of the jpg above.

[capriceman]

Are you guys on crack really????

A camaro can corner very well. especialy if it rides on airbag suspension. I seen a stock SS camaro wiht the airbags make a turn on a road track at around 98 with out skidding the tires or braking while an older s2000 with obvious turbo skidding tires in the turn and spun into the grass. there probably was so beter drivng skills in play but a Camaro has by far awesome handling.

I consider the camaro 4th gen to be a sports coupe. since handling is very good. but a 1st gen goes like hell stops like shift and turns like $h!.

[deanh8]

I will tell you that when you start with a 115HP 1.5-2.0L 4 banger and rice it up to the point that it could be competitive with a 325HP 5.7L V8, even allowing for the lighter weight of an economy car, it is going to cost you big money.

Im going to try to not even get into this subject. Unless you have money to burn fixing up a single cam d-series is a waste of money IMO. Its like getting a V6 camaro and trying to make it fast when you can start out with a V8.

90% of the time 200hp is good for 12's in a gutted civic. The new RSX's come stock with ~200hp. Stick that motor in a civic and your most likely doing 12's right off the bat. Then mod from there. Fastest/cheapest way to make a civic fast is a swap. Fixing up the stock motors will cost a lot of money

Hell, I'll line up a V6 Firebird dollar for dollar against a 4 cylinder ricer any day.

Where do you live? I might have to take you up on that if your local. Edited January 15, 2006 by deanh8

[Cory Wolfe]

Furthermore, I will line up any muscle car dollar for dollar against any ricer any day of the week. Modern muscle has every advantage and none of the disadvantages. Hell, I'll line up a V6 Firebird dollar for dollar against a 4 cylinder ricer any day.

Hypothetically speaking... let's say I have 1999 Nissan Silvia Spec R, specially imported from Japan. It's a 4cyl. It has about 240hp naturally aspirated and fully stock. It's more practical than a Firebird, is lighter, handles much better, has more hp, and... has a 4cyl. You said any 4cyl ricer. Would you race for pink slips since you are so confident that your V6 Firebird could take on any 4cyl ricer? ...Yeah, that's what I thought.

[LosAngeles]

Oh God, got the Camaro fanboys started....I'm listening out for the argument that a stock IROC-Z would kill a brand new Murcielago in a road race and then cure AIDS.

[Bizz]

One thing is entirely INCORRECT!

A Honda S2000 WILL not ever get 40mpg. NOt happening. f@#king thing has tobe revved to 8500RPM ot get some power out... by that pint you might as well be burning fuel in 8 cylinders but only at 4000RPM and stil getting more power out at a better MPG.

What a HUGE Myth this is...

these retards think a $3000 Garret turbo bolted to thier 40mpg Civic will not effect the Civic's MPG. All of a sudden it's like 12MPG in the real world? But I riced a japanese car for the sake of cheap gas! Idiots.

I've overheard this scenario SO many times at N.E. Dragway. People justifying spending $4000 on a $20,0000 Civic to make it run as fast a a $3000 POS Mustang 5.0 or and IROC-Z TP350.

"it's more economical, I make my Civic run 14s and still get great fuel economy"

Sure you do and my STR4 get's 31 MPG too! (more like 13)

my cars MPG suffered very little before i did gears and converter. it would still get over 30mpg (all highway, mind you, like on a trip) when it was running 13-flats. im not saying your above example isnt true, just that more HP doesnt necessarily equal big MPG drop.

[Fijian]

ok guys...that should be enough..i started this i will end it

its too late now 1:37am, but tommorrow i'll update the thing with a civic and we can all be happy

[balthazar]

Hypothetically speaking... let's say I have 1999 Nissan Silvia Spec R, specially imported from Japan. It's a 4cyl. It has about 240hp naturally aspirated and fully stock. It's more practical than a Firebird, is lighter, handles much better, has more hp, and... has a 4cyl. You said any 4cyl ricer. Would you race for pink slips since you are so confident that your V6 Firebird could take on any 4cyl ricer? ...Yeah, that's what I thought.

You didn't think about this V6 Firebird:

Yeah, that's what I thought.

More practical, handles much better, much faster, worth much more, U.S.-legal. Oh... how sad.

[Sixty8panther]

BV:

Balthazar just said CHeck Mate! That V6 Firebird will eat most Corvettes for Lunch, nevermind a Silvia. (spec R or not)

Comparing cars that are not sold here is ridiculous. Back in the late 1990s the USA got a 240 horsepower BMW M3 but in Europe they got a 300+ horsepower version. US emissions make quaite a differance.

Perhaps we should tweek NOS's Camaro, port & polish the heads and remove the cats while installing 4:11 gears and we'll see what a V6 F-body can really do.

Fijian:

I got the joke, and understand it was not targeting the S2000 specifically.... but since the annalogies were already flying I joined in.

FOr the record if that WAS a Proffesionaly tunned S2000 that car would have already had like $60,000 invester in it while the Camaro looks like it's got like $34,000.

For $60,000 like a lot of people spend on a car like the S2000 for drifting or SCCA you could have a C5 Z06 and bitch slap a whole S2000 car clus's woth of Hondas. Rice mods are expensive!

[Newbiewar]

I've seen that before and it is funny, but to be fair, that is an S2000 which are very good sports cars, and that specific one would more than likely give that camaro a run for it's money in the straight, and just waste it in handling.

lol i dont know what you're talking about... those S2000 dont give much of a run for its money even on a straight away i've been in a few races and its no competition...

my 94 formula blew a brand new one away...

haha one got really embarrased when he tried to race my friends 70 chevelle SS 454

but really those things only have 220 hp... and i dont think very much torque...

[Sixty8panther]

240 HP... but the torgue was like 115 or something ridiculous back in the first gen car. I've driven one several times.. it's got about as much torgue as a Geo Metto 3-cyl.

Plenty of horsepower once you rev it past 8000rpm! I think it's an annoying little buzz saw... not my style.

[capriceman]

240 HP... but the torgue was like 115 or something ridiculous back in the first gen car. I've driven one several times.. it's got about as much torgue as a Geo Metto 3-cyl.

HEY NOW!!! dont go rippin on the metro's!!

with a stick and like 400lb fat person in the back i could do some like 25ft burn outs.

In real that thing was a pocket rocket! I could get it up in the 5000 RPM range dump the clucth and do some burnouts. one thing dont be afraid to redline. I beat Civis like mad.in country corners just throw it in 2nd and reline it all the way through.

[ShadowDog]

Interesting... but the car in the image is a Civic hatchback, not an S2000.

As for which is better... somehow this matters?

[Nick]

lol i dont know what you're talking about... those S2000 dont give much of a run for its money even on a straight away i've been in a few races and its no competition...

my 94 formula blew a brand new one away...

haha one got really embarrased when he tried to race my friends 70 chevelle SS 454 

but really those things only have 220 hp... and i dont think very much torque...

That's why I was referring to that specific one...not S2000's in general. :AH-HA_wink:

I know S2000's have no torque and while they are "quick" little cars they are useless without being in the high end of the range as far as straight line racing goes, and it would take a lot of work to put it in range of a camaro as far as from a standing start. Even with all that work chances are it would get spanked in any type of highway roll-on situation.

And for those of you who really do believe a camaro handles better, has the potential to handle better, or can even hang with an S2000's in the twisties, well, I'm at a loss for words. I prefer to make judgments based on real world first hand driving situations rather than reading what some article, magazine, or website said. I've driven my fair share of 4th gens. My grandma drives a Z/28 and a guy I know has a modded SS. To say the 4th gen was made to handle is a joke. It was possibly one of the worst handling cars I have driven. When I drove my buddy's, he has some suspension work done to it, upgraded shocks/springs, and sways, and while it handled significantly better than my grandma's stocker it still didn't handle all that well, and it didn't hold a candle to my car as far as handling goes and my car isn't one of the best handling cars around either. Even he agreed after taking my car for a spin. (Btw, my car's skidpad stock is in the .84 range, I'm just giving these numbers for comparison, but skidpad numbers are like 0-60 numbers...they are pretty worthless and shouldn't be used to judge how a car truly performs).

Now, on to the S2000. I have had the chance to drive one of those as well (I've had the privilege to drive many different cars in the years I've been driving). My friend's sister has one and we got the chance to take it out for a spin one day. We took it ripping through the canyons (Mulholland/decker) to PCH. (btw, when I took the camaro for a test drive, we ended up in the canyons to test its capabilities as well). As far as skidpad goes for the S2000, I've seen ratings from .88 to .94. For the most part it was in the .9-range. When I took it out, this surely confirmed it. I'd actually compare the handling more towards that of an e36 M3. It was a very tossable car that took very well to the curves. Without a doubt handled worlds better than the camaro. I don't see where the argument is in here. I mean, the S2000, while not having all the power on tap that the camaro does, has a very rigid chassis and is significantly lighter than the camaro with a suspension tuned to handle the twisties.

[joking] You might as well be comparing an Elise to a Suburban [/joking]

Edited January 15, 2006 by Nick

[Nick]

Interesting... but the car in the image is a Civic hatchback, not an S2000.

As for which is better... somehow this matters?

The cars changed...ok...it's decided...no contest

[Cory Wolfe]

Hypothetically speaking... let's say I have 1999 Nissan Silvia Spec R, specially imported from Japan. It's a 4cyl. It has about 240hp naturally aspirated and fully stock. It's more practical than a Firebird, is lighter, handles much better, has more hp, and... has a 4cyl. You said any 4cyl ricer. Would you race for pink slips since you are so confident that your V6 Firebird could take on any 4cyl ricer? ...Yeah, that's what I thought.

You didn't think about this V6 Firebird:

Yeah, that's what I thought.

More practical, handles much better, much faster, worth much more, U.S.-legal. Oh... how sad.

Balthazar... you silly guy... He said HIS V6 Firebird (the one in his sig) could take on any 4cyl car. Of course the Turbo Trans Am is faster than it. I mean, I'm a Pontiac fanatic... did you forget that? Seriously? Asking me that is like asking you about 50s/60s Buicks.

Anyways, of what you listed, only the last three are correct if you even count the last one. Silvias are much more practical and handle much better. They actually have a *gasp* usuable back seat and *gasp* still gets better gas mileage. And if you seriously think it handles better... Wow, I'm speechless, like Nick. You need open your mind a bit and don't write off everything that's not domestic as worthless crap. You're no better than the ricers and import humpers that write off everything domestic as crap. Get over it, already...

Also, I accidentally said the Silvia is n/a. Don't know why I did, but it's not. It's turbo. It is stock, though. Must have had a brain fart... I guess that's why you don't post that late at night.

[balthazar]

Yeah, but he might've snuck a 3.8T between the fenders when you weren't looking.

>>"You're no better than the ricers and import humpers that write off everything domestic as crap."<<

The popular perception is so horrifically one-sided than indeed I am better for attempting to balance it, because it does not reflect reality.

[mute]

most cars come stock with 130 - 180 hp not just muscle

[Cory Wolfe]

Yeah, but he might've snuck a 3.8T between the fenders when you weren't looking.

>>"You're no better than the ricers and import humpers that write off everything domestic as crap."<<

The popular perception is so horrifically one-sided than indeed I am better for attempting to balance it, because it does not reflect reality.

But he hasn't.

Anyways, I just don't believe being one-sided either way balances anything. It shouldn't matter, anyways. We should all be in the middle and open to things other than our ideal. We shouldn't shut out certain things and ignore the facts because it doesn't fit your ideal. Period. Close-minded-ness < open-minded-ness. That's my philosophy.

Edited January 16, 2006 by blackviper8891

[ocnblu]

I stopped by the local VW/Porsche/Audi dealership tonight to see if any new GTIs had shown up. Nope... but I did see a gorgeous new Cayman S, all black. Man oh man, if I ever win the lottery...

[NOS2006]

Perhaps we should tweek NOS's Camaro, port & polish the heads and remove the cats while installing 4:11 gears and we'll see what a V6 F-body can really do.

Soon enough it'll be better than even that.. I'm getting 3.73s put in ASAP (they're in my room already, just waiting for the dude to get 'em in) and after I get a few more hunded dollars, I'm dropping a turbo. THIS turbo.

[ocnblu]

Please be careful driving, Nos. It would suck big time if you spend all this money, then lose it all in a flash of violence.

[NOS2006]

Thanks, oblu. I'm typically a safe driver though. I try not to speed and don't drive carelessly unless someone pisses me off (cuts me off, etc) or someone's tailgating me and I have to lose 'em (had that happen last night).

[mute]

Thanks, oblu. I'm typically a safe driver though. I try not to speed and don't drive carelessly unless someone pisses me off (cuts me off, etc) or someone's tailgating me and I have to lose 'em (had that happen last night).

i only drive fast when the cars running i just cant bring myself over 2mph when its off unless theres a hill

[ocnblu]

HA!

[Cory Wolfe]

Thanks, oblu. I'm typically a safe driver though. I try not to speed and don't drive carelessly unless someone pisses me off (cuts me off, etc) or someone's tailgating me and I have to lose 'em (had that happen last night).

Well... just remember what happened when I tried to lose someone who was tailgating me.

Good one, Mute.

Anyways, I'm a safer driver than my mom, but that's not saying much... That's another reason why a 240SX is better for me over a Fiero. I'd probably kill myself with a Fiero since I strive for that adrenaline rush from driving horrendously fast on terribly rough and complicated back roads. B)

[NOS2006]

Well... just remember what happened when I tried to lose someone who was tailgating me.

I guess I missed that thread?

[Cory Wolfe]

No, I don't think you did... My engine troubles, remember? I had it at higher rpms than that poor 121,000 mi. Quad4 could handle, appearantly, as it spun a rod bearing. Now do you remember?

[balthazar]

We shouldn't shut out certain things and ignore the facts because it doesn't fit your ideal. Period.

Right.... exc-eeeeept that far too many people confuse "opinion" with "fact" then claim others are ignoring what is in actuality... their opinion.

'...were never built to handle' is something I've seen attributed to vintage A-Body GMs numerous times, and it has merit.

Yet here in the revisionist New Millenium, we now have those who have seldom or never driven these vehicles claiming '...F-bodies were never built to handle' like it's so blatant & inarguable. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

[NOS2006]

Yeah, F-Bodies (well, at least the 4th gens) can handle, brake, and accelerate. Sports cars for sure (the V6 models, I'd still hand the V8s the Muscle Car description).

BV, I didn't know that was when you were trying to get away from someone, lol.

Edited January 16, 2006 by NOS2006

[Cory Wolfe]

We shouldn't shut out certain things and ignore the facts because it doesn't fit your ideal. Period.

Right.... exc-eeeeept that far too many people confuse "opinion" with "fact" then claim others are ignoring what is in actuality... their opinion.

'...were never built to handle' is something I've seen attributed to vintage A-Body GMs numerous times, and it has merit.

Yet here in the revisionist New Millenium, we now have those who have seldom or never driven these vehicles claiming '...F-bodies were never built to handle' like it's so blatant & inarguable. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I'm not saying they weren't built to handle...That wasn't me. I'm just saying that the specific Silvia in stock form I mentioned handles better than a stock F-body. I'm not saying F-bodies handle like crap, just that the S15 Silvia handles better.

[Cory Wolfe]

BV, I didn't know that was when you were trying to get away from someone, lol.

Sad, isn't it? That damn Durango/Dakota...

[NOS2006]

LMAO! I sure hope it wasn't a 4.7.. those things are dogs!

The 5.9 Dakota can haul though. The dude tied me when I raced him (well, with someone else in the car and some sandbags in the back of the Camaro).

[Cory Wolfe]

LMAO! I sure hope it wasn't a 4.7.. those things are dogs!

The 5.9 Dakota can haul though. The dude tied me when I raced him (well, with someone else in the car and some sandbags in the back of the Camaro).

Well... whichever it was, I didn't appreciate it so I left him. On a long, steep hill, too! Which is why I had to downshift to third. Ended up hitting about 75 mph. I guess 121,000mi Quad4s that tick, has possible leaking headgasket, and some other minor problems shouldn't be driven like that.

[Nick]

I'm the one saying they weren't built to handle. They are muscle cars, predominantly made for straight line acceleration. Like I said, I have driven 4th gens before, and if they were made to handle, then either someone f*cked up or I just need to drive some worse handling cars for comparison.

Edited January 16, 2006 by Nick

[NOS2006]

Nick, don't forget they're not M3s lol

Edited January 16, 2006 by NOS2006

[Cory Wolfe]

I'm the one saying they weren't built to handle. They are muscle cars, predominantly made for straight line acceleration. Like I said, I have driven 4th gens before, and if they were made to handle, then either someone f*cked up or I just need to drive some worse handling cars for comparison.

I think one ride in our Chevy Blazer would have you making out to an F-body's fender.

[Nick]

Nick, don't forget they're not M3s lol

They aren't?! Then I must have been dreaming when I saw that ///M badge on the side of that iroc the other day...

I don't mean to come off the wrong way with you camaro lovers. I mean, I love camaros too, but I dont know. I mean, they seem to handle like I would expect from the type of car that they are. I've just never felt them to handle all that well...I mean, maybe I have to refresh my memroy as it has been a while since I have driven one. Though I drove an 05 GTO and that thing handled pretty decently, a lot better than the camaros I have driven anyways.

And BV, well, SUV's are one thing...As far as handling goes I tend to hold cars at a higher standard than SUV's...depending on the SUV that is...I'd rather not go up against a cayenne turbo in the twisties anytime soon

Edited January 16, 2006 by Nick