Cars you thought you GREAT but ended up being CRAP!

[C-ZETA]

I've noted a few K-Cars, the Alto Works models were very disappointing, as was the AZ-1. I think their acceleration is their flaw...which fortunately, many other K-Cars do not have
(i.e. Honda Beat, Suzuki Cappuccino).

 

[Rotary Junkie]

When I do get my PS2 back up and running, I'm getting every color of the Hemi cars. Which is a damn lot

 

[I-ROC]

When I do get my PS2 back up and running, I'm getting every color of the Hemi cars. Which is a damn lot

That would fill up be hard with having to win the super bee. Good luck.

 

[Lucas]

If one could only drive those arcade cars in Phototravel... Then it wouldn't be a problem for me to not be able to drive those precious cars... But then again, damn you, PD!!!

 

[Rotary Junkie]

You could get pics of them in a race or free run though, just save the replay.

 

[Andy GT]

D'oh! that's soooooo obivous...

 

[Jonn 79]

Wow i think this topic about Evos versus Stis has gone a bit overboard till the point where i am not sure what started this whole thing.

I must admit i've not driven either Spec C nor Evo 8 MR. Lets try not to be too antagonistic k?

 

[Smallhorses]

D'oh! that's soooooo obivous...

So obivous it's obvious?

 

[mistamontiel]

Skylines GT-S were a bit disappointing...

DUDE, look at the stats for all Skylines, look at what mark they have after their word Skyline. If it's GT-S then it's the UNDERPOWERED VERSION, the "civilized" version of the real thing, those are slow as heck !!

 

[Lucas]

Or FR, for that matter. Even GT-R Skylines are not as fast as one may think they should be. At least for me.

 

[SaberFire]

The R34 in particular is rather disappointing for me, no matter how much I actually love the car. It handles like a truck when stock.

 

[I-ROC]

Skylines GT-S were a bit disappointing...

Whats so disappointing? IMO, there better than the GTR in everything except the acceleraition

 

[Pvt Zac]

I would say the spoon civic type r, the (rather low) power is completely useless because it barely kicks in at 9000 rpm, i had seen youtube videos on how this is like a race car that you can drive on the road but it's geared awfully and the power curve is as sharp as a pin.

 

[mistamontiel]

Whats so disappointing? IMO, there better than the GTR in everything except the acceleraition

Why ?? That it's a Honda Skyline ?? It obviously handles better cuz it's so frickin slow, the drivetrain is FR dude !! I'll never buy those !!

 

[I-ROC]

Yep the Honda Skyline. Its actually Nissan. [sarcasm]212 hp is slow, like a grandparents car! And obvisusly it handles better becuase it is FR and has no power![/sarcasm]

212 Hp isnt bad at all, it isnt that slow! In fact, Im almost positive there was different suspension used on the GT-S! And the GTR is also heavier!

 

[Maas]

Actually, I hated the Race of the red "R" emblem.
I never really liked skylines that much...

Though I love the Nismo 400R, but lets discuss that in another thread...

 

[mistamontiel]

Bow down to the Nismo fools l0l0l. GT1 set it off..now I go NISMO 4 liiife look at NFS NEED FOR SPEED for those who don't know *sarcasm* they totally wanted the Skyline and they made it the best ride in all of their games

Yo, the only Skyline I can remember hating definitely so much, the "Road Car" or something it was called. 300 HP, I'm pretty sure it was R33. That thing was a pain to maneuver !!

 

[Lucas]

Sometimes a forum isn't the right place for sarcasm. Especifically with your kind of writing, I find hard to difference reality from sarcasm.

 

[mafia_boy]

Get ready for a novel guys and girls, been away for a few days (tuning cars for GME) but had time to deal with this issue aswell.

Why do you have to make so much trouble out of it? I really don't understand you. Even more, your words don't mean nothing. You haven't still been able to prove this point: "Why should a car be called a piece of crap if there's another faster than it?" You haven't answered that yet, instead you are wasting your time comparing the Evo and the Spec-C in useless time trials. All that you seem to do is looking for trouble.

No, because I compare a lot of cars through the 1/4 mile. There is no set standard for comparing cars, but in all proper road tests you will find the cars being put on the strip against eachother or time trialled on their own. Simple enough??
Look at a lot of races where the handling car goes well passing all of the other cars all lap only to be smashed on the pit straight by the cars with better straight line performance and having to redo it all again.

Yeah, a tuned comparison is not a comparison at all 👎

Yes it is.

To some extent, to me a stock vs stock comparison is worthless. Mostly because I don't keep the cars stock very long at all, and the difference between the two might become reversed fully tuned.

Lastly, I think Mafs' point is that the Evo is crap as despite it being expected to be good it gets destroyed by the Spec-C. Not just beaten, destroyed.

To add to RJ's comment, a tuned comparison IS a comparison because you have the same tuner going all out on two different rides. If it was two tuners, two rides then I'd agree with you, it would be just a Spot Race then to me.
If you had two tuners with the same car, that would be another type of tuned comparison because you find out who's the better tuning garage, not which car is better.

Remember, the thread is cars YOU thought were great but were crap. I find the Evo is crap when compared to it's opposition, especially after throwing 300,000cr at it!! The results as I will show after the next set of quotes proved the tuned version is crap.

Now this next bit I found funny, because you had already answered the question but decided to break it down 500 times more for me for some reason.

But you are still saying the same thing as Mafs, with other words. No one has still being able to say why a car is crap if there's another faster than it. I don't care if it's in a higher category or the same. "The Evo VIII handles like a dream, looks great, beats a lot of cars. The Spec-C is even better. The Evo VIII is thus crap." I am not saying each and everyone of those points is 100% accurate. But there's something obviously wrong in that statement.

Remember also that the title is "Cars you thought GREAT but ended up being CRAP!". Crap because it wasn't able to beat the Spec-C? Then many cars are crap to me: Plymouth Barracuda, can't beat the Elise. Plymouth Superbird, can't beat the Elise. Every muscle car for that matter. But I still like them, though not love them, since I'm not a car fan by any means, since I know nothing about cars other than I have learned from the game.

Now you're going from comparing apples and apples to comparing apples and bananas and taking what I said out of context. The Spec-C and the Evo are both RALLY cars. The Elise and Barracuda are completely different to eachother, not just in eras (1969 vs 1998-today) but also in categorising the car with the Elise being designed as a light weight track racer vs the 'cuda being for the ovals of NASCAR. I see where you're going with it, it's not just it's crap because it's this. But I'll add more into it as we go along.

But hey, you had no problems in doing the same thing by comparing the Spoon Civic to the Superbird straight after being sarcastic to me. But from reading the reasons why I think you just can't drive the Spoon or tune it....one or the other.

EDIT: Just spent more time reading your post thoroughly, and this is what I came up with:

So you just breeze over posts and don't read properly......

1) I just pointed out that in your post, compared the Evo and the Spec-C in their quarter mile times. Prove me wrong, but in your original post, other than that claim, I don't see anything about handling. Take a note in my original post I did not say anything about the Alfa or any other car, other than those two. Read carefully.

2) No. I have drove the Spec-C before, and I know how fast it is without nitrous. And I have a good enough especulation about how fast the Evo VIII may be. You are the one who has gone off the assumption that I included Nitrous in the equation, my friend.

Hang on.......may be?? You mean to tell me you have never, ever ever ever, driven an E8 all out?? Okay, now to break it down for you. All out the Evo has 40hp on the Spec-C, and they have almost identical torque and weight figures, with both using Stage 5 turbos.....with Stage 3, it's worse...the Evo is 53hp up on the Spec C, same result with the torque, almost identical. Logically, the Evo should win easily on the straights but it doesn't. It's destroyed by the Scooby.

3) First of all, I don't like the use of caps lock in your post. I'm not a blind man by any means, so there's no need for it. Other than that, it seems that what you are trying to say is that the STi has evolved more than the Evolution, am I right? Good for it, but that still isn't a valid point to say that the Evolution sucks.

The point of caps lock was emphasizing my point, and it was easier than going italic....happy? And yes it is a reason for it as you put it, sucking. It should've evolved a similar way and got the same gains. PD didn't do that.

4) And in those examples I didn't criticize you about anything. But I pointed out that in your post, all about comparing the Evo and the STi was clearly based on the Dragstrip. Or so you made it look like.

You didn't criticize, you were being sarcastic which to some people is condescending.

5) Yes, it is called "Objectivity". Ever heard of it?

Yeah and it seems like you have "Selective Objectivity".

6) Congratulations! I never said the Evo was better than the Spec-C, but merely remarking the fact that a car can't be called crap just because one is faster than it in its category.

Not just one.........quite a few AWD's are faster.

7) If I knew you were going to do that, I would have told you "Don't even bother". I know the Spec-C is faster than the Evo. Still, you are not explaining why the Evo is a crap car. And you won't get any results from that test.

Um, if I'm comparing them stock vs stock AND tuned vs tuned then I get all the results from that test. So here's the tuned results, and the stock results after that.

Tuned
Evo: 1'43.180
Spec-C: 1'41.886

Stock
Evo: 2'07.723
Spec-C: 2'07.626

Now while it was a win for the Spec-C on both sides, it showed one thing to me. The Evo was surprisingly quick in stock form head to head. However, to get the best out of the Evo in either form (stock or tuned) it needs to be kept really really low in the rev range (3000-6500rpm) whereas the Spec-C does it's magic above the 4000rpm mark all the way to 7500-8000rpm. And from that it restricted the Evo's performance on the tuned side, not really unleashing that extra hp it had on tap and when you tried to, the lower torque figure up high stopped it from doing so.

So, to round it out.......this is why it's crap, piss poor performance for something with 550hp+. I will say, it is better than a CTR2.

Look all that you made me write. I appreciate this as a way to increase my english's skills. Feel free to spot any spelling mistake. In the end, my friend, you were the one to lit the fuse.

Not really worried about the spelling mistakes as I know a few dyslexic people anyway. But throughout all this, my points still stand as I'm looking from them in both lights, not just one and the sarcasm wasn't needed for it.

Now, back to GME tuning....this has really delayed putting the finishing touches on some cars.

 

[mistamontiel]

Codename L you moron, I-ROC started it, what, we get banned for sarcasm too ?? The world keeps going round and round..;]

 

[Jonn 79]

Well guess i am sold on the evo and spec c debate.... after a lot of reading :S

 

[Jonn 79]

So back to the discussion, isn't it amazing when people are respected for their opinions of particular cars.

I mean yeah the Spoon CTR is a mess in stock form but a few parts here and there - voila ass kicker!

Another car that has been a complete let down is *drum roll* the BMW Mclaren F1. But it's not in the way you imagine, as in bad handling etc etc.

But more in terms of sound. I was salivating at the mouth waiting to hear what joyous chorus and cacophony of sound the F1 could produce but in the end... it sounded so... normal gt car.

At any rate let's open the discussion further to involve evocative sounds that were not present that you hoped to hear.

 

[Boffin]

Are we talking noise? all mercs then.
SLR - LET DOWN!!
and all the SLs.

The only half decent one was the 300SL

 

[Jonn 79]

yeah i was referring to the noise. i've seen videos that could cause a lack of space issue in my pants but some how... gt4 failed to arouse the same physical response hahaha.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

mafs....codename....please settle down and have a beer with me *clink*. Unless of course you're underage, then you'll have to have some pop.

 

[Lucas]

Yeah, I'm already tired with arguing. These kind of conversations won't get anywhere. About the beer, not only am I underage, but I don't drink either

 

[I-ROC]

Codename L you moron,

You cant get banned for sarcasm, but you can get into some hot water if you call somebody else a moron.
He was just being friendly.

 

[Maas]

Mistamontiel, just so you know, I reported your whining.
Now everybody get a beer, Parnelli will buy us a round.

Thank you! *hips*

 

[mafia_boy]

mafs....codename....please settle down and have a beer with me *clink*. Unless of course you're underage, then you'll have to have some pop.

Beerage in 3,2,1.........



I have to wait until after midday, don't want to be classed as an alcoholic.

C-L, I'm debating with you, not arguing....big difference there. Let's just agree to disagree. 👍

 

[mistamontiel]

Mistamontiel, just so you know, I reported your whining.

Ye feeble minded human. Why does everybody think I'm whining when I'm sarcastic ?? Get a sense of humor, foo