Sigh, looks like I might be heading towards FWD for the next car :(

[midlifebear]

not really a big station wagon fan but if I was forced to get one... that's a damn fine car.

There are no real station wagons these days. I'm till lurking about hoping to find a 1975 13-passenger Buick Estate Wagon some mormon family in southern Ewetaw has driven only to church and the local AG Foodtown and has 90,000 original miles on it. Take a whiff, you can smell the stale Cheerios and sun-cracked vinyl upholstery if you try -- not to mention the old 455 cubic inch GM engine sucking up between 7 to 9 miles to the gallon. Maybe, if I'm lucky, it will be in the original shit/mustard yellow with a chrome luggage rack and the optional Vista Cruiser tinted back seat overhead windows stolen from the last Oldsmobile Cutlas wagons. They were true Dinoglide Zoomerados. Punch the lead while going 75 mph and you got whip lash as the automatic transmission kicked into passing gear. Ahhh, the golden age of automotive engineering! And if you hit or got hit by anyone, they were dead!:biggrin1:

The following is a 1977, but you get the idea: YouTube - Exhaust sound of my 77 Buick

 

[snoozan]

There are no real station wagons these days. I'm till lurking about hoping to find a 1975 13-passenger Buick Estate Wagon some mormon family in southern Ewetaw has driven only to church and the local AG Foodtown and has 90,000 original miles on it. Take a whiff, you can smell the stale Cheerios and sun-cracked vinyl upholstery if you try -- not to mention the old 455 cubic inch GM engine sucking up between 7 to 9 miles to the gallon. Maybe, if I'm lucky, it will be in the original shit/mustard yellow with a chrome luggage rack and the optional Vista Cruiser tinted back seat overhead windows stolen from the last Oldsmobile Cutlas wagons. They were true Dinoglide Zoomerados. Punch the lead while going 75 mph and you got whip lash as the automatic transmission kicked into passing gear. Ahhh, the golden age of automotive engineering! And if you hit or got hit by anyone, they were dead!:biggrin1:

The following is a 1977, but you get the idea: YouTube - Exhaust sound of my 77 Buick

best. post. evar.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

shit mustard is the best kind of mustard


also, and I shit you not, this was my high school girlfriend's car:

1979 Volvo station wagon

 

[snoozan]

shit mustard is the best kind of mustard

the kind with the little black dots or without? i hear the dots are a sign of an ulcer.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Grey Poopon

 

[transformer_99]

Take a stock RX-7 and race it against a stock Viper, any generation, and the RX-7 will be absolutely DESTROYED.

That link I provided was simply a twin turbo 13B production engine. Now why compare one off the showroom floor for each. The Gen 2 was years ahead of the Viper. Besides, how fair is it to compare a 1.3L to an 8 or 8+L engine. The 13B needs twin turbos, which really in that link levels the playing field (you'd think), but rather it then becomes unfair to the Viper (as you point out) as it simply would mop the floor with the Viper. But guess what, we're talking $ 65-80+K for the Viper and $ 30-40K tops for an RX7. Hey, Dodge put 35-50+K of goodies into the Viper, why shouldn't the RX7 get a couple of turbochargers, chip limit top speed restrictions lifted and a port job ? Let's level the playing field based upon dollars, a dollar is a dollar. So you spend the money on your's stock as much as twice the money, the RX7 owner should get the same budget ? Or would you have an issue with that ?

See I've heard all the domestic muscle car guys come to the table with their engine size advantages and they rip the Japanese cars for being right there with them with 1/2 the motor and in this case, not even 1/5 an 8L Viper. I guess maybe earlier models of the Viper may have used 6L engines (?), Vettes with 5.7L, but again, @ 1.3L the Mazda has to spot you 4+X the displacement ? Talk about wanting it your way ? Why not start the Viper at the finish line and try to make the RX7 beat it ? Well, that's what you're posting with off the showroom floor nonsense.

Anyway, here's your showroom request:

1992-2002 Dodge Viper Road Test - Consumer Guide Automotive
1993-1995 Mazda RX-7 Road Test - Consumer Guide Automotive

RX7 = 37 Corvette = 36 Viper = 32, Mazda RX7 a better all around vehicle by 1-5 points in the ratings. I'm happy for you that you are happy with the Viper, don't expect the rest of the world to feel the same way you do, because this is but one review that compared the vehicles when they were comparable, that is when the RX7 was in production and so was the Viper. There's a reason the Mazda won and it wasn't because they hate Vipers. The RX7 won here by 5 points, in the category of performance, it spotted the Viper 3 points (10-7), in those other categories it was 8 points better than the Viper overall. That says something about everything else about the car. To lose 10-7 in performance, spotting it 6 times the engine,that's a win for the RX7 in my book. Because the Corvette got an 8 for that vintage car. So obviously the Viper was the best for that. The Corvette scored a 36 by their review, so the RX7 found a way to beat the Vette too.

1991-1996 Chevrolet Corvette - Consumer Guide Automotive

 

[B_Fire-3]

Grey Poopon

:stupid2:

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

shit. he figured out how to use smileys. That's going to keep him entertained for at least another few hours.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Besides, how fair is it to compare a 1.3L to an 8 or 8+L engine.

You're absolutely right. It is completely unfair. My point exactly. There is no comparison.

[edit] you're pulling out the consumer reports? hahaha.. okay. have fun at the grocery store. I'll have fun with my sports car. Is there some reason you can't accept we like different things? Is your ego this fragile?

I'm happy for you that you are happy with the Viper, don't expect the rest of the world to feel the same way you do.

I don't. I've explained this. I'm glad they don't. I want a car that doesn't compromise. I want a car that's not some pansy light-weight with a mass market price point. I want a car that's not designed to appeal to teenage Need For Speed Underground fans AND single moms at the same time. I want a car that I can fit comfortably in. I want a car that's fast as hell right off the assembly line, tuned and engineered by actual professionals. I want a car that stands out and makes a statement and doesn't blend in with the other six of the same model that I passed on one stretch of road.

I'm happy the rest of the world doesn't feel exactly like I do. I don't want to be a clone of every other douche bag out there. I'm THRILLED that a lot of people choose to drive Civics.

but I reserve the right to laugh out loud when someone tells me that X car or Y car is somehow superior to mine, then has to qualify the statement with these kind of logical gymnastics, pulling out obscure salt flat records, upgrade specs, videos with dubious claims on youtube, magazine articles that agree with them or whatever else. Or when they bring a consumer reports score to a drag race. admit it, that's funny. just a little bit.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

also, the $ for $ comparison, another Jap car fan cliche... but a weak argument IMO.

You're going to pay more for performance out of the factory than you will for performance you build in your garage. If ALL you want is a car that goes fast, you could build one completely from scratch that would toast every production car out there and it would probably only cost you $10,000.

but I would no sooner do that than I would build my own computer from scratch. Sure, it's cheaper, but then after it's done it's going to lock up every ten minutes. It won't have any software pre-installed. It will probably be made from cheaper materials. It won't have any tech support.

In other words, you can juice up the engine of any car and make it go fast for pretty cheap. but the Viper is more than just a fast engine, just as any expensive car is more than just a fast engine. It's the whole car, the beautiful PFC body, the consistently high-quality components throughout the entire car, the years of engineering research that went into designing every part to go together.

I'm not denying that there are talented independent engineers out there who can do amazing things with engines and cars and with enough time and attention can tune any factory auto to perform and handle far better than it did when it rolled off the assembly line.

but I don't feel comfortable driving something that's been heavily toyed with. It MIGHT be okay... but it might not. It tends to overtax the engine.. and on those super-high-strung Japanese cars with itty bitty engines... it overtaxes them a lot. Like a Celeron processor overclocked by 300 MHz. I'd rather have a car doing what it was designed to do and performing reliably as it was tested for hundreds of thousands of miles to do by the manufacturer.

I'd also rather have a car that costs $80K, performs like it costs $80K, and looks and feels like it cost $80K... than one that cost $30K and after $20K of upgrades still looks and feels like it cost $30K even though it's now quite a bit faster.

I think we can accept that we like different things in this category as well. but feel free to counterpoint if you're really bored.

 

[transformer_99]

You're absolutely right. It is completely unfair. My point exactly. There is no comparison.

[edit] you're pulling out the consumer reports? hahaha.. okay. have fun at the grocery store. I'll have fun with my sports car. Is there some reason you can't accept we like different things? Is your ego this fragile?



I don't. I've explained this. I'm glad they don't. I want a car that doesn't compromise. I want a car that's not some pansy light-weight with a mass market price point. I want a car that's not designed to appeal to teenage Need For Speed Underground fans AND single moms at the same time. I want a car that I can fit comfortably in. I want a car that's fast as hell right off the assembly line, tuned and engineered by actual professionals. I want a car that stands out and makes a statement and doesn't blend in with the other six of the same model that I passed on one stretch of road.

I'm happy the rest of the world doesn't feel exactly like I do. I don't want to be a clone of every other douche bag out there. I'm THRILLED that a lot of people choose to drive Civics.

but I reserve the right to laugh out loud when someone tells me that X car or Y car is somehow superior to mine, then has to qualify the statement with these kind of logical gymnastics, pulling out obscure salt flat records, upgrade specs, videos with dubious claims on youtube, magazine articles that agree with them or whatever else. Or when they bring a consumer reports score to a drag race. admit it, that's funny. just a little bit.

The comparison, the Salt flat record car was a 1986, that was 6 years ahead of the Viper. Mazda introduced another model by the time a comparison was made. You don't like the results of that comparison. Car and Driver named the RX7 ahead of the Viper, what problem do you have with that, ego can't take that fact ? I can live with it, I have a copy of the magazine somewhere around here.

Mazda RX-7 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The FD RX-7 was Motor Trend's Import\Domestic Car of the Year. When Playboy magazine first reviewed the FD RX-7 in 1993, they tested it in the same issue as the [then] new Dodge Viper. In that issue, Playboy declared the RX-7 to be the better of the two cars. It went on to win Playboy's Car of the Year for 1993. The FD RX-7 also made Car and Driver magazine's Ten Best list for 1993 through 1995, for every year in which it was sold state-side. June, 2007 Road&Track magazine proclaimed "The ace in Mazda's sleeve is the RX-7, a car once touted as the purest, most exhilarating sports car in the world.

That's just awful, MT Car of the Year Import & Domestic, now granted Playboy is the last source I'd quote but even the Bunny magazine came up with the same conclusions. The last statement in the paragraph is simply one of the boldest statements, I believe every year Dodge made a Viper as well, did anyone notice ? Has it garnered such praise ? Now if you show up with one of these, I would say you have your piece de resistance, an argument even.

Chrysler ME Four-Twelve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But these aren't cookie cutter stamp out clones @ $ 80k. And that car is under 3,000 lbs, even with a 6L engine, not the 8L the Viper has.

Pricepoint ?, why isn't the Viper in the same price range as the Ferrari's and so on, you don't want to compromise or be a price point do you ? $ 80K or whatever you dropped on it is a pricepoint isn't it ? I don't think it's funny for you that the consumer report found your Viper 3rd best overall in a 3 car comparison. Further supporting the other magazine's contentions of which is superior. That's the definition of a car, what it is as a sum total, like I said, the RX7 spotted your car of choice 3 points in performance, by the same token the difference between a Corvette and the RX7 was a single point. I agree you have a rare bird there, here in South Florida people of means opt for real sports cars and you won't find a Dodge dealership anywhere near the Porsche, Ferrari, Mercedes, BMW dealerships down here, simply because ugly next to beautiful simply wouldn't sell. Which in the end is what it's about. A Viper is a trade in for a Porsche and usually sits on the back of the lot waiting to go to auction, they don't even try to sell them on the lot unless you literally beg them to show it to you. I live 2-1/2 miles from a Lotus dealership, you won't find a Viper on their lots either:

Lotus Cars USA

Yes, there is something unique about the one Dodge rolled off the assembly line that you wound up buying. Dodge has a bunch of them new & used, because each one, like a snowflake is unique, just like their owners ? Get a latte when you bought it too ?

The video link was an ugly 23+ year old RX7 dragging a Viper, sorry but the Viper lost, there was no consumer reports at that location. Even you have to admit it, it was hillarious to see the reality and not some self proclamation of superiority. I wonder who went home with the title to a Viper that day, We know the Viper owner wasn't going to own that RX7 based on "actual" documented results.

I assure you, you are not a clone of the same douche bags you speak of and I pass Vipers quite often, it's not difficult they're too busy looking around for a standing ovation for something they had nothing more to do with except make a vehicle purchase. This may be hard to believe but cars are bought and sold everyday. It must be rough knowing your car has more personality than you do ? And that isn't funny, it's really more sad & pathetic. Anyway this is getting old. I hope that you can still chuckle, I've been all night after reading these posts.

 

[simcha]

Coming from a place where it snowed often and we had lots of icy roads, I'd have to say that I loathed having RWD. FWD was much better for handling on the ice and snow. AWD was better, of course.

I guess for racing you'd want something different. I guess I've always looked at my car as something to get me from point A to point B and not a fashion statement, ego booster, or racing machine.

 

[uncut1234]

fwd drive is crap. torque steer is horrible on any car that is putting out respectable power through the front wheels... why not look for a demo model STI orsomethin like that with a few thousand miles on it but basically brand new.. i wouldnt settle for some shitbox gti or mini cooper if your first choice was an STI, they are in different ball feilds

 

[HazelGod]

Yeah, but how many production cars can smoke a jet right off the assembly line? :wink:

Dream...


Man, I miss the days when ads were actually creative...

 

[dickman45885]

I would not mind smoking a joint right off the assembly line....but I did not know they had assembly lines for them...

 

[Phil Ayesho]

I gotta side with 9inch on the ladies issue.
The viper wins in the babe magnet arena...

But a word of reason....

fwd drive is crap. torque steer is horrible on any car that is putting out respectable power through the front wheels...

Fer cryin out loud...

There are so many RWD accolytes...
funny thing is, they simply don't have the experience to drive an AWD car at its limit, and so are unqualified to evaluate them.

Actuarials prove that FWD is safer. Period. For most folks, driving in variable weather, FWD is the best option.


RWD cars fishtail and spin out at the slightest provocation... the internet is festooned with pictures of them wrapped sideways around trees and poles.
( that's some great handling )
the neutral steering of the Mustang actually makes it more likely to fly of the road at high accelerations ( the reason why SoCal street racers eschew mustangs)

RWD is best for flat out straight line acceleration... or for drifting (i.e. buying new tires) but sucks ass for any other kind of actual driving, because a high powered car can so easily exceed the traction of the two tires that drive it.

But AWD, properly executed and driven by someone who knows how to drive one, is simply the best driveline you can get.

You want to compare?... screw your weights and displacements and quarter mile straights and compare real race circuits. Driving on the street is a rally course.

AWD cars have actually been banned from rally circuits and hill climbs because other drive schemes simply can not compete, regardless of horsepower. regardless of 0-60 times.

AWD cars, driven by those that know how they differ from RWD, consistently perform better because ALL driving and handling come down to one simple fact.
Traction.

Its all down to rubber. How much and what are you asking of it in terms of cornering and thrust.

Downforce, spoilers and damns? it all about increasing traction. Big as drive tires in back? same thing. Suspension? its about maintaining contact with the road.

I highly recommend the Audi Driving school... where they will teach you why skidding thru a turn may sound fast, feel fast or look fast, but how a stopwatch shows that its slower. You are generating a lubricant between your tires and the road.

...Where they will explain that distributing power thru all 4 wheels allows you to lay down more continuous power because you simply have more square inches of rubber on the road. distributing thrust to all four results in Less thrust per tire, which means you maintain a safe margin of traction under high thrust--which means you maintain control and accrue speed.

And drive on the steering wheels actually helps hold the car to curves at higher speeds.



At Audi Driving school you will learn how understeer is actually good, because it makes you slow down... whereas neutral or oversteer is unforgiving and likely to get you in a wreck. ( unless what you like is the adrenaline of nearly dying when you drive fast)

While An expert RWD driver can impressively oversteer a car thru a turn pretty damn well... he is merely managing a partial loss of control... And handling that allows you to hit a turn much faster than is prudent is also likely to result in a wreck.

A great sports car STAYS on the road to finish the course. In my book, that's handling.


But again,,, all this is moot...

A sports car is about style... and feel

As a designer I can tell you the WRX is Ugly- most souped up jap rice burners are even uglier, no matter how much paint or lighting effects you put on them.

And, honestly, those tall spoilers on the back of those slab sided econobox cars? Makes them look exactly like PRAMS.
( is that the image you want to evoke?)



I could care less about your stats, reviews and ratings.


Give me a classic design, a fast enough drive with a responsive feel...
and a winding road... and I am happy.

 

[uncut1234]

front wheel drive is better for the average driver,, but for someone who knows how to drive a car, rear wheel drives handles 10 times better.. when you lose control of a front wheel drive you are pretty much fucked... you steer rear wheel drive with your right foot, front wheel drive is crap and should stay on minivans and econo cars, drive any decent performance sedan with adequate power, and torque steer is horrible, they handle like shit

 

[Phil Ayesho]

front wheel drive is better for the average driver,, but for someone who knows how to drive a car, rear wheel drives handles 10 times better.. when you lose control of a front wheel drive you are pretty much fucked... you steer rear wheel drive with your right foot, front wheel drive is crap and should stay on minivans and econo cars, drive any decent performance sedan with adequate power, and torque steer is horrible, they handle like shit

Sorry... but you're wrong.

Again, ask insurance companies.

No, FWD does not handle like RWD... but it handles in a way that AVERAGE drivers can more reliably control, and keep out of trouble.

RWD cars are the culprit in almost ALL freeway mishaps involving wet roads.
Why?
Because some jackass who thinks he's Richard Petty imagines he is STEERING with his right foot.

When your rear tires are skidding, you are driving them beyond their ability to grip.
That is inherently dangerous.
You imagine that letting up slightly on the gas when the car is pointed the way you want will result in better grip and drive the car out of the skid...

But if the road surface is not what you think it is- if its wet, or oily, or covered with fine pebbles, then you don't get grip back and you are out of control.



Really... what we have here is a bunch of hot rodders who love to spin their rear tires, make smoke and hear tires squeal.

They THINK that is driving fast. Or driving well.

They get into an AWD car and complain that it doesn't drive like what they are used to...
Which is precisely why they can't get them to perform.

Your inexperience at how to handle a FWD or AWD car is not a valid basis for determining their performance.


RWD cars almost alwasy out-race AWD cars. On a short straight track.

AWD car almost always wax the ass of RWD cars when it comes to long distance rally courses. ( and half the reason is that they actually finish the course without a wreck)


If your a street drag racer... get something like the Mcoupe RWD.

But for street driving... for fun AND safety, go AWD.

 

[dong20]

Anyway, here's your showroom request:

1992-2002 Dodge Viper Road Test - Consumer Guide Automotive
1993-1995 Mazda RX-7 Road Test - Consumer Guide Automotive

You're missing the point.

Those reports are all very neat and tidy but...who buys a car like a Viper based on a consumer report, really who?

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

You're missing the point.

Those reports are all very neat and tidy but...who buys a car like a Viper based on a consumer report, really who?

dong you're too smart for this thread. go work on something like world hunger or the Palestinian issue.



transformer: I know there are lots of Vipers in Florida. Not really so much around Northern Virginia. For that matter there are plenty of Ferraris, Lamborghinis, and everything else in Florida. I was in Ft Lauderdale for two days and saw lots of each. and you can buy them all on lots in Ft Lauderdale not far apart. I don't know what you're talking about, in one sentence you say nobody in FL would opt to buy a Viper then in the next you say you see lots of them. whatever. I find them to be more beautiful than most Ferraris and certainly more attractive than Porsches. I thought about it some and I guess I misspoke when I talked about price points and compromising. I don't want a race car that is totally uncompromising: that would mean no AC, no headlights, etc. and I also can't afford a less compromising (in cost) car like a Veyron or a Murcielago. but Japanese cars make too many compromises for me. The Viper is, for me, the exact right amount of compromise.

Viper could be lighter, but they would have to either make the front end shorter (reducing engine performance and probably leading to overheating), make the engine smaller (that's most of the 500 lb difference right there, but that's the soul of the car, bad idea), make the massive wheels smaller (reducing grip), reduce the overall size of the car (making so only Japanese people can fit inside of it, as a 6'6" tall man this isn't an option for me), use different more lightweight materials (either lower in quality or higher in price), or take out certain amenities (but it's already got a spartan interior and I like the power windows over the plastic inserts they used to use). The 500 lbs extra weight is worth it to keep all of the above.

As for everything else you've said...

This keeps getting progressively stupider with each successive post so I'm just going to duck out.