R&T 12 Best Car Under $30k
#91
Pocket Mo
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We bring up an open diff because it is considered a norm for performance cars to come with them. Suspension is a completely different story. Some companies use a MacPherson front strut while others swear by multilink. You can get away with old suspension designs if it's set up correctly, but the lack of a limited slip is a HUGE performance downgrade on a track. You can't get away with the potential of one tire spinning at a largely different rate than the other.
#92
Evolved Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by andysoo8284
We bring up an open diff because it is considered a norm for performance cars to come with them. Suspension is a completely different story. Some companies use a MacPherson front strut while others swear by multilink. You can get away with old suspension designs if it's set up correctly, but the lack of a limited slip is a HUGE performance downgrade on a track. You can't get away with the potential of one tire spinning at a largely different rate than the other.
Take a look at the new Jeep Rubicon. It runs Dana 44 axles, both, live axles up front and in the rear. Why? Because it keeps the wheels planted with an even weight for traction over rough terrain. With an indepedent suspension, more weight would be on one wheel compared to the other wheel.
Go out and drive a car with an open diff, and then one with a limited slip diff, and you will immediately notice a difference upon acceleration and the first corner you dive into.
It's ridiculous that a $27,000 "sports car" would even have an "available" limited slip diff on the option list. Even a V6 F-body had a limited slip diff from the factory. On a $27,000 "sports car," a limited slip should be standard equipment, period.
#93
Evolved Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kings Fan
I've NEVER seen a base model Z for sale, and yes I've looked and searched inventories. There's 4 to 5 Nissan dealerships in my area. Then again Evo RS's are pretty rare themselves. But I've seen more RS's than base Z's. LOL @ open diff
#94
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In a van down by the river
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both are great cars but to not consider the 350Z base a sports car is just dumb imo. I think the test were fair and just handle the fact that the Z was picked as a better car than the Evo.
#95
Originally Posted by High_PSI
In terms of quality of materials and Fit-and-finish I would put Mitsu behind Toyota and Honda easilly. Nissan behind Toyota and Honda as well. Hell I would put Mitsu behind Mazda as well. Mitsu I would classify behind them in cheapness of materials for the interior easilly. Their leather is cheap too and cracks very early in it's life time. Mitsu does beat the **** outa Chevy/GM.
Lexus is #1 in terms of fit and finish IMHO.
Lexus is #1 in terms of fit and finish IMHO.
I stopped at a Subie store yesterday, and looked a new STI 's interior, there are maybe 2 small trim pieces that aren't obviously plastic, It's like taking about who's favorite color is better.
Everything that we've mentioned scrapes and punctures and warps with sun & age, just like the next one.
Everything that I've seen is just another texture or color of the same average interior. Some might look a little more space-age, like I mentioned, no real difference though.
I do agree with what the one person said about the VW's. There was one right beside the STI and it did look and feel nicer than the Nissan, Honda, and Toyota's, as well as Mitsubishi. Certainly not enough to make me look at one seriously though.
Honda's interior is WAY over rated. They just use big rounded moldings that remind me more of Little Tykes toys than a fine interior. Maybe a bit sturdier than other styles, but we are talking "so what" levels. We've had an Accord and a Civic, .... ehh .... A friends Pilot that I rode in was nice, but not any nicer than any of the other brands SUV's.
And again, unless you're looking at an upper trim level Camry, Maxima's, etc... it still ends up being my "plastic is nicer than your plastic".
And truthfully, I guess my heart isn't really in nice interiors, I mean, I wouldn't turn down leather, I might even pay more for it, ....but not for the plastic wood and poser bezel's that are still just plastic.
I'm not missing anything with the Evo's interior, but I'd be missing a lot of "car" with one of the "comparable" cars
(meaning I'm not including interiors in Audi's, Porsche's, BMW's, etc...)
#96
iTrader: (24)
Originally Posted by Sinister Subaru
Provided the C6 driver couldn't drive, it would definitely be possible. New C6s are running in the 12.50 range. An Evo with a TBE, tune, and wideband isn't going to be running that quickly. They'd be running closer to a 12.70 or 12.80.
On the top end, or off of a roll,an Evo with those mods wouldn't touch a C6. Top speed? Forget about it. Even if the Evo could travel faster, it would run out of gear long before it would run out of power.
On the top end, or off of a roll,an Evo with those mods wouldn't touch a C6. Top speed? Forget about it. Even if the Evo could travel faster, it would run out of gear long before it would run out of power.
Anyway, without VHT on a dragstrip, even a stock Evo or STi will give a C6 a seriously hard time until nearly triple digits.
Roll races are for ricers. Top speed runs are for people just begging to get locked up. Of course a C6 is a better track car with a better powerband than an Evo, but I don't have a hard time believing he beat a C6.
Also: For those of you nutswinging off the 350Z, let me restate what I said on P3:
The 350Z is a lot less than it could be, because Carlos Ghosn turned Nissan into a platform sharing profiteer, complete with inferior paint finishes that are full of orange peel, and the gutless also-ran VQ engine is hard to make power with NA (Here's to hope that the new HR engine is a lot better!). At least it drives the proper wheels.
Anyway, I would NEVER own a 350Z as they are now. Different people like different things, and I think the 350Z blows goats.
Last edited by Noize; Nov 12, 2006 at 04:50 PM.
#97
Evolved Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Noize
12.5 is a little optimistic for a C6, IMO. Car & Driver got a 12.8.
Anyway, without VHT on a dragstrip, even a stock Evo or STi will give a C6 a seriously hard time until nearly triple digits.
Roll races are for ricers. Top speed runs are for people just begging to get locked up. Of course a C6 is a better track car with a better powerband than an Evo, but I don't have a hard time believing he beat a C6.
Also: For those of you nutswinging off the 350Z, let me restate what I said on P3:
The 350Z is a lot less than it could be, because Carlos Ghosn turned Nissan into a platform sharing profiteer, complete with inferior paint finishes that are full of orange peel, and the gutless also-ran VQ engine is hard to make power with NA (Here's to hope that the new HR engine is a lot better!). At least it drives the proper wheels.
Anyway, I would NEVER own a 350Z as they are now. Different people like different things, and I think the 350Z blows goats.
Anyway, without VHT on a dragstrip, even a stock Evo or STi will give a C6 a seriously hard time until nearly triple digits.
Roll races are for ricers. Top speed runs are for people just begging to get locked up. Of course a C6 is a better track car with a better powerband than an Evo, but I don't have a hard time believing he beat a C6.
Also: For those of you nutswinging off the 350Z, let me restate what I said on P3:
The 350Z is a lot less than it could be, because Carlos Ghosn turned Nissan into a platform sharing profiteer, complete with inferior paint finishes that are full of orange peel, and the gutless also-ran VQ engine is hard to make power with NA (Here's to hope that the new HR engine is a lot better!). At least it drives the proper wheels.
Anyway, I would NEVER own a 350Z as they are now. Different people like different things, and I think the 350Z blows goats.
12s for any car are respectable times, but a car that weighs 3100-3200 lbs and has 400 hp is surely capable of quicker times than a 12.80. I know numerous people that own LT1, LS1, and 4.6L Mustangs that are making in the 400 hp range and they are consistently running in the mid 12s. Keep in mind that these cars also weigh nearly 200-300 lbs more than a C6 Vette, and compared with the C6, they have the aerodynamics of a brick.
As for the 350Z "blowing goats," I think that's a bit extreme, but you're right about the "platform sharing." Doesn't the 350Z have the same engine from the Maxima?
#98
Evolved Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Robert_K
Both are great cars but to not consider the 350Z base a sports car is just dumb imo. I think the test were fair and just handle the fact that the Z was picked as a better car than the Evo.
I won't even begin to mention why it shouldn't have won. Besides, despite the Evo being the best performer of the bunch, I wouldn't have voted for the Evo either. It may be the best performer of the bunch, but it surely isn't the most well-rounded car for under $30,000.
#99
iTrader: (24)
Originally Posted by Sinister Subaru
C&D are a bunch of crackhead retards. They couldn't drive a car to its full potential if they tried. They're no different than R&T.
12s for any car are respectable times, but a car that weighs 3100-3200 lbs and has 400 hp is surely capable of quicker times than a 12.80. I know numerous people that own LT1, LS1, and 4.6L Mustangs that are making in the 400 hp range and they are consistently running in the mid 12s. Keep in mind that these cars also weigh nearly 200-300 lbs more than a C6 Vette, and compared with the C6, they have the aerodynamics of a brick.
12s for any car are respectable times, but a car that weighs 3100-3200 lbs and has 400 hp is surely capable of quicker times than a 12.80. I know numerous people that own LT1, LS1, and 4.6L Mustangs that are making in the 400 hp range and they are consistently running in the mid 12s. Keep in mind that these cars also weigh nearly 200-300 lbs more than a C6 Vette, and compared with the C6, they have the aerodynamics of a brick.
Power was never in question! Ellis (LSx) has area under the curve that guys with cars like ours can only dream about. The only problem with the Vette is traction. Get a good holeshot with VHT like a proer dragstrip has, blow an ECU + flash Evo VIII away.
Street race like a big dummy from a red light, and the Vette just doesn't have the traction to catch up for awhile.
#100
Evolved Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Noize
Power was never in question! Ellis (LSx) has area under the curve that guys with cars like ours can only dream about. The only problem with the Vette is traction. Get a good holeshot with VHT like a proer dragstrip has, blow an ECU + flash Evo VIII away.
Street race like a big dummy from a red light, and the Vette just doesn't have the traction to catch up for awhile.
Street race like a big dummy from a red light, and the Vette just doesn't have the traction to catch up for awhile.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post