Cars

[The King]

Alright, well first of all someone said they saw a civic "tuned" beat a viper? If it beat a viper it was not tuned, it probably had an engine swap, turbo or supercharger, and a shitload of work on it, which means it would not be "40k less than a viper" .

Second, the whole thing about japanese cars last forever is such BS. my family owned an accord, and a camry. Both needed work after like 30k miles, we bought them new. Now, we own 7 cars, ALL American, 6 of them GM. Now I would agree that Ford isn't great, but GM knows what they're doing. We have a 8.1 liter GMC Sierra Dualie truck, that thing is a beast. 2 Cadillacs, one is a 94 Deville, 130k miles, never had anything go wrong with it, still a great car with a smooth ride you could monly get from a caddy. The other we just bought it's a 99 Seville, 30k. Then a Pontiac Montana minivan, 80k, never had problems. a 94 Corvette, 3k, bought it used, the guy never drove it I guess. Then the 99 ford taurus, only thing wrong was the alignment and strut was f'd but that's because my brother slid into a curb, it's really icy here in CO. Last, is a 96 Olds Ciera, 160k. All that was wrong is a leak of engine coolant. So for those who just say well Foreign cars are better just because that's what people are saying it's BS. Plus, buying foreign cars just hurts the American Economy.

My 2cents

[Zerodynamic]

I'll admit King, Gm has a good head on their shoulders, but they lack what a lot of people call "appeal." I love chevy trucks. I think they are awesome, they appeal to people who actually use their truck for work and the like. (actually, I own a Ford, but whatever) Same thing goes with the vette, its for 50 year old people with mid life crisis'. Then you have the economy cars, like the cavilers, cobalts, etc, which lose 1/2 their value in 2 to 3 years cause they are junk. Then you have impalas, which are sweet cruisers, but for the money you can get something else.


I can go on and on as in the GM lineup, but I am far too lazy. Import cars are generally more reliable, have a bigger aftermarket, and hold their value more than their domestic counterparts. As for me, I choose German cars (with the exception of my f-150) because of their build quality and performance. Yeah, they cost a little more to maintain, but the driving experience is so worth it. And if you look at all they major features that have been pioneered over the past 30 years, i.e abs, airbags, side curtain airbags, crumple zone technology, navigation systems, parking sensors, self-leveling suspension, disc brakes, fuel-injection... and hell, power everything in a car.... it was all invented by the Germans first, then copied later down the line. I'll take german steel over japanese aluminum anyday.

[kornkitten42]

i have to admit that japanese cars do hold their value. I had a Scion xB for 2 years, it had 20,000 miles on it. I bought it for 15,000, when i went to sell it, they gave me 13,000 for it. Thats not bad at all.........

In two years i had enough equity built up in it, that the equity was used as my down payment on my mini cooper s. Though i hate my mini now and wish i had just stuck with my xb....... hindsight is 20/20 imo it was a better car and didn't give me as much mechanical hassle as my cooper that is EXPENSIVE AS HELL to maintain. ( i went to get my oil changed and do the engine maintence check up and just for the oil change and fluids and windshield wipers etc they wanted to charge me $450.00...... SCREW THAT......) i wish someone would steal this piece of shit.


I love japanese cars, they are usually well made. All the toyotas my family has had (as well as fords and chevy) the imports last longer and get way better gas milage.

[JonJonello]

i agree my first car was a 1990 honda accord 5 speed manual which i bought from my dad for 1300 dollars. it has 264 thousand miles on it and still runs great, xcept the interior can use some work the car i have now is a 2002 honda accord coupe "special edition" (it has a sunroof) and it runs awesome as well. these import cars are cheap to maintain, good on gas, and run great. plus w/ all the tuner parts u can get on them their started to look really snazzy ....but still my all time favoritesseses dream car is a 1965 Mustang Fastback w/ dark burgandy paint and 2 simple white stripes that'll be the day

[LilTank13]

Alright, well first of all someone said they saw a civic "tuned" beat a viper? If it beat a viper it was not tuned, it probably had an engine swap, turbo or supercharger, and a shitload of work on it, which means it would not be "40k less than a viper" .

Yes, I saw the video of a tuned civic owning a viper. What is so hard to believe about it? Unequal drivers, weight advantage-Civic- purchase price of old Civic hatch: 2500-3000, B18 swap-1500-2000, turbo kit:2500, internals:1200, retarded easy horsepower for relatively no money. You can't step into a beat ass 1994 Viper for less than 40 k. Let alone a new one. So, by my estimates, you figure 10k for a retarded fast civic, or 50-60 for a viper... Looks like that 40k isn't too far off. Also, I said tuned. Not riced out like I think you meant I implied. And if Jap cars don't last long, why is my dad's 85 toyota p/u still going strong at 385,000 miles and has never been opened up? Why did his last go 312,000? Why did my mom's accord go 197,000? Why did our cavalier die at 86,000?

Mmmmm. M5's are so yummy!

[ghostofdavid]

I received a 1999 Chevy Cavalier 2 door coupe as a graduation present when I finished high school since I wasn't going to college (at the time). So my parents took the money they had saved over the years and bought it new off the lot with 22 miles for 9000 after taxes. One month before the warranty expired on it at 2 years and 11 months and having only 22 or 32 thousand miles (I forget), the transmission fell out of the car when I was backing up and I babied that thing. Yes, I know its not a nice car but it was nice to me and the only new car our family had ever purchased since cars were affordable in the 60s and 70s. I went to try and dump the car after the dealership in Texas medicorely fixed it (additionally replacing the oil pan) and could only get around 3k dollars out of it. I kept it, moved back to Indiana, and gave it to my sister so I could go to college. I hate entry level American cars.

[Allia22]

I'll admit King, Gm has a good head on their shoulders, but they lack what a lot of people call "appeal." I love chevy trucks. I think they are awesome, they appeal to people who actually use their truck for work and the like. (actually, I own a Ford, but whatever) Same thing goes with the vette, its for 50 year old people with mid life crisis'. Then you have the economy cars, like the cavilers, cobalts, etc, which lose 1/2 their value in 2 to 3 years cause they are junk. Then you have impalas, which are sweet cruisers, but for the money you can get something else.


I can go on and on as in the GM lineup, but I am far too lazy. Import cars are generally more reliable, have a bigger aftermarket, and hold their value more than their domestic counterparts. As for me, I choose German cars (with the exception of my f-150) because of their build quality and performance. Yeah, they cost a little more to maintain, but the driving experience is so worth it. And if you look at all they major features that have been pioneered over the past 30 years, i.e abs, airbags, side curtain airbags, crumple zone technology, navigation systems, parking sensors, self-leveling suspension, disc brakes, fuel-injection... and hell, power everything in a car.... it was all invented by the Germans first, then copied later down the line. I'll take german steel over japanese aluminum anyday.

Dude, the first airbags were in an Olds Toronado. I forget what year, but meh.

I like Subarus, the ones we have are used as workhorses, are ancient and are pushing 260k miles, and are still going. I'll stand by those cars for sure. When I want fun, I go for GMs. (screw Ford)

[Zerodynamic]

Dude, the first airbags were in an Olds Toronado. I forget what year, but meh.

I like Subarus, the ones we have are used as workhorses, are ancient and are pushing 260k miles, and are still going. I'll stand by those cars for sure. When I want fun, I go for GMs. (screw Ford)

I demand proof that GM made the first airbag. Actually, I have a Mercedes brochure that states they pioneered the airbag, but like you said, meh.

And, Liltank... yes, ///M5's are very yummy.. which is why I'm buying another one. I don't need a little 4 banger with a turbo, nor do I need a gas guzzling v8 to make big power. 3.8 liter in-line 6 for the win!

[McDarragh]

Well i currently have 2 cars a VL (87) and a statesman (95) the Vl is running on 5 cylinders and i cant work out why so i guess i'll have to go to some overpriced wanker to fix it . Statesman just fucked up on me tonight, hopefully nothing drastic, too dark to have a look yet but i'm hoping it's not my diff or axle....

[ghostofdavid]

I thought I read that Volvos had the first airbags!

[Allia22]

I'll see if I can find a different source. I was doing a senior report on Toronados cuz of my obsession with my baby, and found it in the history section of the Oldsmobile website. But since they went out of business...

[aldonb1]

im actually looking to buy my "college car" just looking to buy something fun and sporty to last another 3 years w/ college driving aka not a whole lot.

here is what im looking at:
http://baltimore.craigslist.org/car/298324011.html

[Scheetz]

im actually looking to buy my "college car" just looking to buy something fun and sporty to last another 3 years w/ college driving aka not a whole lot.

here is what im looking at:
http://baltimore.craigslist.org/car/298324011.html

"only issues are sunroof does not work, a/c needs to be recharged"

that right there will run you close to $1,000. While those cars are fun as hell, they are not the best maintenance wise nor cost wise. A couple friends have them, one ended up selling it, the other 2 still have them. 1 has no working interior electronics, he has no money to fix it, the cost is to high. The third works for Porsche in maintenance so when something breaks he just brings it in and works on it during his breaks.


Little break down for everyone maintenance and quality wise. Toyota/Lexus,Honda/Acura,Mazda are far cheaper maintenance wise than any Euro or Domestic you can come up with. Euros are great cars, but their maintenance cost is huge compared to everything else. They are also known for their shitty wiring. Audi's stand out the most at this.

And Domestics well, its nice to know that they use the same parts on all there cars. Mostly when that 1 part is recalled because it starts fires and every car on their line up has to come back for a fix.

As far as it comes to Luxury cars. Lexus dominates that with quality, maintenance costs and the like. BMW and Mercedes are pretty highly priced because of the fact that they are Euros.

Sad about the Mini, they could have been much better cars. To bad BMW took that over, now they are just overpriced on parts and maintenance. Too bad you had to find that out the hard way.

Alright, well first of all someone said they saw a civic "tuned" beat a viper? If it beat a viper it was not tuned, it probably had an engine swap, turbo or supercharger, and a shitload of work on it, which means it would not be "40k less than a viper" .

if that isn't tuned, then what is it? If anything I would call it race tuned. Because the car is still tuned. Otherwise it would run lean or rich.

[MrBubbler]

damn, I'm the odd one out here... yes turboed rsx's are sad.

My dream car which I'm almost ready to buy (again) 1995 Euro BMW M5. It'll blow the doors off of an evo or an sti.

i dont know what you have been smoking. you get the m5 and i will personally pay for a track day and or drag strip day against for you and i will drive a stock evo. to each his own but look at the capabilities of both cars before spouting of sentences.

and as far as reliability is concerned ive been pushing over 400whp and right around 387 foot pounds of torque on 91 piss gas for almost 4 years (55k miles)

hell to each his own both imports and muscle cars and euros can be awsome cars with the right mods and care, i had a 04 cobra for a long time and loved it. I just prefer the evo over any car for the performance it has in a straight line and on a road course. and for the money the only thing thats close to it would be the sti or a used super car of sorts(cars being stock). Edited March 27, 2007 by MrBubbler

[Scheetz]

damn, I'm the odd one out here... yes turboed rsx's are sad.

My dream car which I'm almost ready to buy (again) 1995 Euro BMW M5. It'll blow the doors off of an evo or an sti.

i dont know what you have been smoking. you get the m5 and i will personally pay for a track day and or drag strip day against for you and i will drive a stock evo. to each his own but look at the capabilities of both cars before spouting of sentences.

and as far as reliability is concerned ive been pushing over 400whp and right around 387 foot pounds of torque on 91 piss gas for almost 4 years (55k miles)

hell to each his own both imports and muscle cars and euros can be awsome cars with the right mods and care, i had a 04 cobra for a long time and loved it. I just prefer the evo over any car for the performance it has in a straight line and on a road course. and for the money the only thing thats close to it would be the sti or a used super car of sorts(cars being stock).

I'll agree with that. I am still holding out to my purchase this summer of my FD.

[aldonb1]

im actually looking to buy my "college car" just looking to buy something fun and sporty to last another 3 years w/ college driving aka not a whole lot.

here is what im looking at:
http://baltimore.craigslist.org/car/298324011.html

"only issues are sunroof does not work, a/c needs to be recharged"

that right there will run you close to $1,000. While those cars are fun as hell, they are not the best maintenance wise nor cost wise. A couple friends have them, one ended up selling it, the other 2 still have them. 1 has no working interior electronics, he has no money to fix it, the cost is to high. The third works for Porsche in maintenance so when something breaks he just brings it in and works on it during his breaks.


Little break down for everyone maintenance and quality wise. Toyota/Lexus,Honda/Acura,Mazda are far cheaper maintenance wise than any Euro or Domestic you can come up with. Euros are great cars, but their maintenance cost is huge compared to everything else. They are also known for their shitty wiring. Audi's stand out the most at this.

And Domestics well, its nice to know that they use the same parts on all there cars. Mostly when that 1 part is recalled because it starts fires and every car on their line up has to come back for a fix.

As far as it comes to Luxury cars. Lexus dominates that with quality, maintenance costs and the like. BMW and Mercedes are pretty highly priced because of the fact that they are Euros.

Sad about the Mini, they could have been much better cars. To bad BMW took that over, now they are just overpriced on parts and maintenance. Too bad you had to find that out the hard way.

Alright, well first of all someone said they saw a civic "tuned" beat a viper? If it beat a viper it was not tuned, it probably had an engine swap, turbo or supercharger, and a shitload of work on it, which means it would not be "40k less than a viper" .

if that isn't tuned, then what is it? If anything I would call it race tuned. Because the car is still tuned. Otherwise it would run lean or rich.

hehe well i dont plan on fixing the sunroof. also, recharging the a/c shouldn't be too bad. My g/f's father is a masters certified mechanic or something and he said he would help me with any repairs i've needed. Yeah i was a little concerned w/ the repair costs, (so are my parents). Sigh... i just dont want to have the same old accord/camry/civic as every other undergrad student

[james]

Look for a non-turbo FC or FB. Super cheap, still cool, nice handling, big aftermarket (FC for sure). If the motor ever dumps on you, V8 swap ftw.

[MrBubbler]

damn, I'm the odd one out here... yes turboed rsx's are sad.

My dream car which I'm almost ready to buy (again) 1995 Euro BMW M5. It'll blow the doors off of an evo or an sti.

i dont know what you have been smoking. you get the m5 and i will personally pay for a track day and or drag strip day against for you and i will drive a stock evo. to each his own but look at the capabilities of both cars before spouting of sentences.

and as far as reliability is concerned ive been pushing over 400whp and right around 387 foot pounds of torque on 91 piss gas for almost 4 years (55k miles)

hell to each his own both imports and muscle cars and euros can be awsome cars with the right mods and care, i had a 04 cobra for a long time and loved it. I just prefer the evo over any car for the performance it has in a straight line and on a road course. and for the money the only thing thats close to it would be the sti or a used super car of sorts(cars being stock).

I'll agree with that. I am still holding out to my purchase this summer of my FD.

]


FD's are sexy beast! local guy here with a built motor and turbo upgrade has around 500 whp and over 80k miles on the built motor! everything in California is so expensive as far as used good cars, i wish i was in middle america some times -= (

[james]

The only good FD is one with eight god-like cylinders of LS1 under the hood.

[Scheetz]

Sigh... i just dont want to have the same old accord/camry/civic as every other undergrad student

Well, dont look at honda then. If you are looking for something with low repair costs I would not touch any RX7s. They are great cars, if you do want one and willing to possibly rebuild the Rotary then an NA FC would be your best option. Unless you want the Turbo II. But then you will risk having to rebuild and deal with all the bad (good/fun) things about a rotary.


What is your budget right now? That will help.

Heres a little help:

Old School Beetles (buddy has one, thing is badass) WRX (had for 10,000 or less), 240sx, 300zx, Old VW GTIs (fun to drive), celicas (All-Trac if you like those bodies)

[Scheetz]

The only good FD is one with eight god-like cylinders of LS1 under the hood.

False


































LS7 (my goal )

[Zerodynamic]

damn, I'm the odd one out here... yes turboed rsx's are sad.

My dream car which I'm almost ready to buy (again) 1995 Euro BMW M5. It'll blow the doors off of an evo or an sti.

i dont know what you have been smoking. you get the m5 and i will personally pay for a track day and or drag strip day against for you and i will drive a stock evo. to each his own but look at the capabilities of both cars before spouting of sentences.

and as far as reliability is concerned ive been pushing over 400whp and right around 387 foot pounds of torque on 91 piss gas for almost 4 years (55k miles)

hell to each his own both imports and muscle cars and euros can be awsome cars with the right mods and care, i had a 04 cobra for a long time and loved it. I just prefer the evo over any car for the performance it has in a straight line and on a road course. and for the money the only thing thats close to it would be the sti or a used super car of sorts(cars being stock).

Haha, dude, stock for stock the euro m5 will pwn you... Evos are nice but since they get all of their power from that boost, after 100 mph, they start to lag out. The M5 I'm talking about (which is over 10 years old mind you) will easily do 170 mph +.

As far a reliablity is concerned, you got me there, the m5 requires lots of cash to keep that motor running. A N/A 3.8 liter in-line 6 making 340hp is a def high maintainace.

As for the track, I would take the m5 anyway... this thing was designed for road courses and DTM after all.

Now, if we wanna talk 2007 M5, and 2007 Evo stock for stock... we can leave it at that. I'm not saying Evo's are bad cars, hell if I owned one I would be rockin it too! They just aren't my thing, thats all.

[james]

Old School Beetles (buddy has one, thing is badass)

I agree completely. This is your best option if you don't need an AC. And if you actually spend a little money on it you'll get to see the shocked faces of people as you murder their <insert car here> from a stop. Wheelies are nice, too.

240sx

Still overpriced from the dorifto craze. Cool car if you can find the one out of a million that hasn't been beat to death. And keep the KA. By the time you get all the bugs worked out from a SR swap, you could have completely reworked the KA two times over.

I still bet you could pick up a clean non-turbo FC for under $2k. The only thing you should have to worry about is the rotary. Even at that, the non-turbos can last forever (lol @ apex seals). Now you've got a nice handling car with some character that has a healthy enthusiast following. Save up $2k more and swap out the rotary for a random V8 and you'll have a stupid fast car.

Oh, and LS is a mathmatical equation. LS1=hotness. LS7 is just hotness to the 7th power.

[MrBubbler]

damn, I'm the odd one out here... yes turboed rsx's are sad.

My dream car which I'm almost ready to buy (again) 1995 Euro BMW M5. It'll blow the doors off of an evo or an sti.

i dont know what you have been smoking. you get the m5 and i will personally pay for a track day and or drag strip day against for you and i will drive a stock evo. to each his own but look at the capabilities of both cars before spouting of sentences.

and as far as reliability is concerned ive been pushing over 400whp and right around 387 foot pounds of torque on 91 piss gas for almost 4 years (55k miles)

hell to each his own both imports and muscle cars and euros can be awsome cars with the right mods and care, i had a 04 cobra for a long time and loved it. I just prefer the evo over any car for the performance it has in a straight line and on a road course. and for the money the only thing thats close to it would be the sti or a used super car of sorts(cars being stock).

Haha, dude, stock for stock the euro m5 will pwn you... Evos are nice but since they get all of their power from that boost, after 100 mph, they start to lag out. The M5 I'm talking about (which is over 10 years old mind you) will easily do 170 mph +.

As far a reliablity is concerned, you got me there, the m5 requires lots of cash to keep that motor running. A N/A 3.8 liter in-line 6 making 340hp is a def high maintainace.

As for the track, I would take the m5 anyway... this thing was designed for road courses and DTM after all.

Now, if we wanna talk 2007 M5, and 2007 Evo stock for stock... we can leave it at that. I'm not saying Evo's are bad cars, hell if I owned one I would be rockin it too! They just aren't my thing, thats all.

Who here races to 170mph? no one. the evo will whoop the m5's butt in the quarter mile, on the race track and anywhere else you put the two cars. The m5 is a nice car and is quick for its large size and very comfortable interior. the evo lags out because of regulation of the car for the united states, the boost tapers from 17 to 14-15 psi after 5500-6000 rpm, add a 50$ boost controller and fix the problem and the evo pulls quite nice top end and would most def. be in head of the m5 well above 120mph the best recorded 1/4 mile time for the evo that ive found was 12.98 sec (stock evo) and an average of 13.3 sec(stock) ,please send me some information that would prove your statements as such as i have proven mine.
Year 1995
Make BMW
Model M5 E34
Engine Location Front
Drive Type Rear Wheel
Weight 3788 lbs | 1718.2 kg

Performance
0-60 mph 5.9 seconds.
Top Speed 156 mph | 251 km/h Similar top speeds

Engine
Engine Configuration I
Cylinders 6
Aspiration/Induction Normal
Displacement 3795.00 cc | 231.6 cu in. | 3.8 L.
Valves 32 valves.
5 valves per cylinder.
Valvetrain DOHC
Horsepower 340.00 BHP (250.2 KW) @ 6900.00 RPM
Torque 295.00 Ft-Lbs (400 NM) @ 4750.00 RPM
HP to Weight Ratio 11.1 LB / HP

VS


Engine Type dual overhead cam 16-valve turbocharged
and intercooled inline 4-cylinder Engine Size 2.0 liters / 122 cu. in.
Horsepower 271 @ 6500 rpm
Torque (lb-ft) 273 @ 3500 rpm
Transmission 5-speed manual
Wheelbase / Length 103.3 in. / x in.
Curb Weight 3298 lbs.
Pounds Per Horsepower 12.2

[maramos]

Haha, dude, stock for stock the euro m5 will pwn you... Evos are nice but since they get all of their power from that boost, after 100 mph, they start to lag out. The M5 I'm talking about (which is over 10 years old mind you) will easily do 170 mph +.

As far a reliablity is concerned, you got me there, the m5 requires lots of cash to keep that motor running. A N/A 3.8 liter in-line 6 making 340hp is a def high maintainace.

As for the track, I would take the m5 anyway... this thing was designed for road courses and DTM after all.

Now, if we wanna talk 2007 M5, and 2007 Evo stock for stock... we can leave it at that. I'm not saying Evo's are bad cars, hell if I owned one I would be rockin it too! They just aren't my thing, thats all.

Stock for stock any evo I-IX would beat a euro spec E34 M5 on a strip, if you want to talk Evo XIII or IX it’s not even a competition. Also the car would be lucky to do anything over 170, especially now that the car is over 10 years old and could barely do it stock. Maybe from a 150mph roll you might stand a chance because of the extra 80 hp, but when would you ever see those speeds. Also if you want to talk 07 to 07, the M5 costs over twice as much as a base Evo so compare it something more comparable like a Euro Ralliart Evo. Seeing as a Euro Ralliart Evo XIII was faster then the E60 M5 around top gears track I think an IX which is even faster would destroy it and still cost significantly less, and in case you don't know Ralliart is Mitsubishi's motor sports division.

The cars are designed for 2 completely different things. The M5 is a luxury sports sedan large enough to haul around the family but also fun. The Evo is a homologated rally car which I personally don't see the appeal other then if you rally/track it or want an extremely fast car for less than comparative cars.