GTP Cool Wall: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR

[TrievelA7X]

Wait... wait... you're saying people buy cars that can speed just because most cars people can buy can speed? And not because they want to speed?

When just a few posts ago, you were saying:



???

Nope.
Why do most people make fun of Pirus'?

That's funny.

That's very funny.

Said Aveo has a top speed well in excess of 100 mph. And yet most Aveo owners tootle along at just 60-70... whether the legal limit is 50 or 80. Studies show that these are the speeds people are generally comfortable at... which is why many places have limits just be low that, for income enforcement purposes.

And this proves that people are concerned with the law how exactly?
And like I said, you're backwards reasoning of people not being able to buy cars that don't speed doesn't apply either, because of what you just said.

 

[Famine]

Because they're crap.

So is a Chevy Aveo.

And no matter if it wasn't, it'll be a lot harder to accidentally break the speed limit in something economical.

But you just said people want to speed. Why would they buy a car that it'd be "harder" to do it accidentally if that's what they want to achieve on purpose?

And since you're asking "why get anything that can speed" well, you're answer is quite simple.
because 99.999% of cars can.
Because you would actually have to put real effort into finding a car that can't speed, and aside from being able to say "my car can't speed" there's not a whole lot of reason is there?

That would imply that there's a reason why "99.999% of cars" can break 70/75mph limits. Maybe a marketing one... maybe a completely different reason you haven't actually thought of.

However, buying a Corvette has two options, Speed and looks. You don't buy it for comfort, space, practicality, fuel economy, or any other reason. speed or looks.

And what's the problem here? Why would it then "sicken" you to see it driven legally on the road?

Well then I'm glad I didn't say that.
I said "what's the point in buying a fast car if you'll never break those speed limits?"

And we've already established that "99.999%" of cars have a top speed in excess of those speed limits - so what's the point in buying them if you'll never break those speed limits?

That doesn't mean fast cars are pointless, it's means I have been told no reason other than the 3 I provided for buying a fast car and always driving the speed limit.

Why does it matter?

Again, I said always. Big difference.

Always what?

We're obligated to the speed limit, no matter what car we drive. Are you arguing for an exemption to speed limits for fast cars? Or that people shouldn't be allowed to buy them for road use? Or that companies shouldn't be allowed to make them for road use? Or... huh?

like I said, there's no point in having a 6 liter V12 that makes 650HP to mumble about at 25mph.

There's no point me having a bacon sandwich when I can get all the calories and nutrients I need to function from tofu and vitamin tablets. What's your point?

Especially given it's usually less comfortable then other cars that are cheaper, and get better mileage, can carry stuff, including people, and also look good.
Unless: You have the money, and really want to spend it on something pretty.
You want to be cool. You are the rare track goer.
And while attempting to refute my statement, you have yet to give another reason.
Just vague discrepancies.

I haven't refuted nor attempted to refute your statement - though I have rejected it.

Why does it matter so much to you why people buy cars that can break the speed limit by more than double over cars that can break the speed limit by more than 50%? What's the problem that "sickens" you when you see them driving legally on the road?

Name another reason - That's the only thing to argue here, because the rest is simply personal opinion.

Another reason for what? I'm not the one saying fast cars driven legally "sickens" me...

 

[niky]

Nope.

So what are you saying, then? Do people buy cars specifically to speed, or do they buy cars that can go fast simply because most cars can go fast?

Why do most people make fun of Pirus'?

Not because it's "slow". A Prius can hit over 100 mph and accelerate to 60 in under ten seconds. And it gets 40 mpg at 75 mph. Fun, that.

Personally, I make fun of it because it's ugly. But maybe that's just me.

And this proves that people are concerned with the law how exactly?

It doesn't. It indicates that they drive at those speeds merely because they're comfortable with them. Not that they want to break the law or "speed".

And like I said, you're backwards reasoning of people not being able to buy cars that don't speed doesn't apply either, because of what you just said.

I didn't say anything about people not being able to buy cars that don't speed. I was pointing out that whatever the top speed of the car they buy is, they generally drive at the same pace.

Which indicates that they drive at a speed that is comfortable to them, whether or not the car is capable of 100, 150 or 200 mph.

Which doesn't do anything for the assertion that people buy cars because they want to speed... because if they buy cars because they want to speed, as you state here:

And the answer is: Because the greater public wants to speed and doesn't generally care about the law.

Wouldn't they buy a car that can hit exactly the speed they want to drive at, and drive at that speed?

Very few people ever drive at the maximum speed a car is capable of. Ever. Unless it's an electric that can only do 45 mph. Many drive faster than the law wants or allows, but they tend to drive at the same speed as everyone else... 75... 85... etcetera. They don't go around banging off the rev limiter in top gear. Even on the fabled "autobahn", most traffic drives at a rather more leisurely pace than the occassional sports sedan or 911 owner going at 150 or over... around... get this... 70-80... despite the fact that even the cheapest Focii or Astras can do 110-120.

And those Focii, Astras and whatnot... all patently useless cars. Why buy a car that can hit 120 mph when you can get a slower one that's more economical and cheaper to run that will do the job just the same? (as per your argument?)

Answer: We buy them because we want them. And we buy them because we can.

 

[TrievelA7X]

So is a Chevy Aveo.

Do you really want a list of why an Aveo is better in every way than a Yugo? Are we being that simple today?

But you just said people want to speed. Why would they buy a car that it'd be "harder" to do it accidentally if that's what they want to achieve on purpose?

That's what I said. Do you have a point? I understand this, that's why people buy cars with more power. So I guess this means the run-around is on?

That would imply that there's a reason why "99.999% of cars" can break 70/75mph limits. Maybe a marketing one... maybe a completely different reason you haven't actually thought of.

Well we'll die of old age before you state an opinion.
Like I said, people don't want a slow assed car, they want to be able to speed. - The market demands it, the manufactures manufacture it.

And what's the problem here? Why would it then "sicken" you to see it driven legally on the road?

I said "always". That doesn't mean "if I see a car once and it's driving the speed limit I vomit" or anything else out of context.
It means If I see a really fast car all the time and know the driver will never put his foot down, I think it's assanine. Like I said, 3 reasons, only the least common is any good. The "trendy a-hole" or the "it was pretty" people I don't care for.
If you like that, feel free too, like I also said, it's a matter of opnion.

And we've already established that "99.999%" of cars have a top speed in excess of those speed limits - so what's the point in buying them if you'll never break those speed limits?

To own a car.
Are you kidding me? Can you not discuss something without this kind of response? Seriously - can everyone go buy a car that cannot speed right now? wait - oh my god, you mean to tell me there's not enough? And people don't want them because they're slow, and can't speed?

Why does it matter?

Why does it matter to you if a guy drives without incident at a higher rate of speed than some bureaucrat set?
We can do this all day I suppose.

Always what?

We're obligated to the speed limit, no matter what car we drive. Are you arguing for an exemption to speed limits for fast cars? Or that people shouldn't be allowed to buy them for road use? Or that companies shouldn't be allowed to make them for road use? Or... huh?

Neither. What part did you miss? All of it?

There's no point me having a bacon sandwich when I can get all the calories and nutrients I need to function from tofu and vitamin tablets. What's your point?

Not really, but ok, and this means what? Do you actually think I'm arguing that fast cars should be illegal? Where do you get this crap?
Just because I say there's no point in buying fast car to go slow in (there's your answer, btw) doesn't mean they should be illegal.

But if your asking, from a "safety" perspective, (since that is the ninnies cry for why we must drive slow), no, there is no reason for 1000HP cars to be on the road. None whatsoever.
Does that mean they should be illegal? No. Nor does it mean any other out of context idea you concoct.

I haven't refuted nor attempted to refute your statement - though I have rejected it.

Do you even know what this means?
So you don't disagree, you reject the statement. Wow. this isn't worth my time.

Why does it matter so much to you why people buy cars that can break the speed limit by more than double over cars that can break the speed limit by more than 50%? What's the problem that "sickens" you when you see them driving legally on the road?

Why does it matter to you why it matters to me when people buy fast cars to go slow?
Would you buy fattening food to lose weight?
Would you crawl inside tanning booths to cure skin cancer?
Would you go swimming if you don't want to get wet?
Would you buy tools to call a repairman?
Do you want more? Because at this point, if you're next post is as meaningless as this, I won't be bothered to waste my time on it.

Make a point, or don't.
I'm pretty sure you're only point is arguing things you somehow "read into".

Another reason for what? I'm not the one saying fast cars driven legally "sickens" me...

Another reason for your combativeness. Where are you going here? What's your end destination plan?
Is it simply to say you disagree? that you think my thought that buying something fast to go slow is inherently illogical?

Seriously, I swear I can't say anything without some of it being taken out of context by you.

So what are you saying, then? Do people buy cars specifically to speed, or do they buy cars that can go fast simply because most cars can go fast?

Well we already know people buy cars specifically so they can speed. That's what started this, people grumbling about "ricers" (which isn't that racist yet?" "driving like idiots".

Not because it's "slow". A Prius can hit over 100 mph and accelerate to 60 in under ten seconds. And it gets 40 mpg at 75 mph. Fun, that.

40? on the highway? Yea, that's funny, especially at 75.
Anyway, if they can go over 100, which I'm not saying they can't, why was the guy in CA stuck at 95mph? The guy whose throttle "stuck".
And yes, people do make fun of them for being slow. Everyday.

Personally, I make fun of it because it's ugly. But maybe that's just me.

It doesn't help, but if they looked good, people would make fun of them for looking good and being slow.

It doesn't. It indicates that they drive at those speeds merely because they're comfortable with them. Not that they want to break the law or "speed".

No thought of the law entering their mind, and you say they do care about the law? Or are you telling me all the cars I see daily going 10-20 over the limit down the highway don't realize it?
the only reason people obey speed limits is fear of tickets, and/or points.

I didn't say anything about people not being able to buy cars that don't speed. I was pointing out that whatever the top speed of the car they buy is, they generally drive at the same pace.

Exactly. So why buy a fast car to do it in?

Which indicates that they drive at a speed that is comfortable to them, whether or not the car is capable of 100, 150 or 200 mph.

Exactly. So why buy a car that can go 200mph?

Which doesn't do anything for the assertion that people buy cars because they want to speed... because if they buy cars because they want to speed, as you state here:



Wouldn't they buy a car that can hit exactly the speed they want to drive at, and drive at that speed?

Now you're talking nonsense. Just because someone wants to speed, doesn't mean they have a personal "speed" at which they drive at, or want to drive at, hell, maybe they want to go as fast as a car can get them at any given spot.

How about this
99 Buick Regal LS top speed - 108mph
99 Buick Regal GS top speed - 108mph
Oh, wait, you guys ignored that part.... what a shame, must be because you have no reasons as to buying the identical car with more power?
So like I said, and neither of you have answered.
"Why buy a faster car to go slow"?
Give me a reason to buy a GS over an LS.
That doesn't mean I think nobody should be allowed, it doesn't mean it should be illegal, it means, what would a reason be?

 

[niky]

Do you really want a list of why an Aveo is better in every way than a Yugo? Are we being that simple today?

Not because it's a safe car, surely?
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/chevrolet_aveo_2006/250.aspx

Or economical (A Yugo will probably get twice the fuel economy)... or refined... or good-handling... or actually worth anything after five years... A Yugo, at least, has sentimental value for a certain number of individuals.

I said "always". That doesn't mean "if I see a car once and it's driving the speed limit I vomit" or anything else out of context.
It means If I see a really fast car all the time and know the driver will never put his foot down, I think it's assanine. Like I said, 3 reasons, only the least common is any good. The "trendy a-hole" or the "it was pretty" people I don't care for.
If you like that, feel free too, like I also said, it's a matter of opnion.

So you basically stalk him? Read his diary? I drive at the same speed as everyone else. Merge like a gentleman, corner at under half a gee. You can see me leave the house every morning, tootle along in traffic... get passed by SUVs on the highway...

And then I go rip it up on the racetrack every few months, and fling it around in the mountains when I feel like it.

How do you know how I drive when you can't see me?

Well we already know people buy cars specifically so they can speed. That's what started this, people grumbling about "ricers" (which isn't that racist yet?" "driving like idiots".

No we don't. I'm not of the opinion that the general population buys cars to speed. You are.

40? on the highway? Yea, that's funny, especially at 75.

Yup, real funny. That's what the pump and the V-Box said. When we drove at 40-50 using Eco-Mode, coasting and using EV-Mode at toll gates, we got such ridiculous numbers that I dare not post them here. (somewhere north of 60 and south of 100).

Anyway, if they can go over 100, which I'm not saying they can't, why was the guy in CA stuck at 95mph? The guy whose throttle "stuck".

The bankrupt sex-site owner under investigation for insurance fraud whose story wasn't corroborated by evidence? I dunno. It's a mystery to me. [/humor]

And yes, people do make fun of them for being slow. Everyday.

The same people who drive at 80 and get passed by octogenarians in Prii doing 95 with their foot jammed on the "brake".

Exactly. So why buy a fast car to do it in?

Because I want one. Plain and simple.

Now you're talking nonsense. Just because someone wants to speed, doesn't mean they have a personal "speed" at which they drive at, or want to drive at, hell, maybe they want to go as fast as a car can get them at any given spot.

They're still going 70-80... whatever they're driving. While that's quick, I wouldn't consider that "as fast as a car can get them at any given spot".

 

[Famine]

Do you really want a list of why an Aveo is better in every way than a Yugo?

Do you really want a list of why a Corvette Z06 is better in every way than an Aveo?

Like I said, people don't want a slow assed car, they want to be able to speed.

And we've quite clearly established that this opinion is bollocks.

I said "always". That doesn't mean "if I see a car once and it's driving the speed limit I vomit" or anything else out of context.
It means If I see a really fast car all the time and know the driver will never put his foot down, I think it's assanine.

"Asinine".

And why? Why does it matter so much to you what cars people buy to drive legally on the road?

Why does it matter to you if a guy drives without incident at a higher rate of speed than some bureaucrat set?

Do you remember the AUP? You have, after all, agreed to it twice now.

What part did you miss? All of it?

I missed why people driving cars within legal requirements "sickens" you.

Just because I say there's no point in buying fast car to go slow in (there's your answer, btw).

So why's there any point in buying a Chevy Aveo (capable of 107mph) to go slow (70mph) in?

But if your asking, from a "safety" perspective, (since that is the ninnies cry for why we must drive slow), no, there is no reason for 1000HP cars to be on the road. None whatsoever.

There's no reason for 100hp cars to be on the road, since you can break the limit with half that. So, what's your point?

Do you even know what this means?

Yes, because I am aware of all corners of the English language "Refute" means "prove to be false". It is not synonymous with "reject". I rejected your idea. I did not refute it, nor attempt to.

Why does it matter to you why it matters to me when people buy fast cars to go slow?

I find the notion that someone can think people driving fast cars legally is "sickening" to be quite alarming. It's a vague and indefensible notion that buying a fast car and driving legally is somehow wrong enough to cause nausea.

Make a point, or don't.

I already have. A few times now, actually. If it has escaped you, skip to the last three paragraphes below:

Is it simply to say you disagree?

Nope. It's to get you to think about the foundations of your... "point" that fast cars driving within legal limits is "sickening".

After all, what is a fast car? We've already established that "99.999% of cars" can break the US maximum speed limit of 75mph and the UK national speed limit of 70mph. We seem to have established that having a car capable of 80mph driving within the speed limit isn't "sickening". So at what point - what power, what speed capability - does a car go from being worthwhile to "sickening" if driven legally? And, more importantly, why have you picked that particular crossover point? What is the thinking behind that empirical value being the demarcation between acceptable and "sickening"?

The Aveo will do 107mph. Is it sickening if it's driven it at 70mph? One of my cars will do 141mph. Is it sickening if I drive it at 70mph? One will do 150mph. Is it sickening if I drive it at 70mph? One will do 155mph (though it's in several component pieces right now). Is it sickening if I drive it at 70mph? A couple of months back, someone parked a car on my driveway capable of 195mph. Is it sickening if it's driven it at 70mph?

Where is the point at which, to you, a car stops being fine and becomes "sickening"? Can you even name one?

 

[TrievelA7X]

Not because it's a safe car, surely?
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/chevrolet_aveo_2006/250.aspx

But you didn't pos the crash test for the... wait, did you think this was a Aveo vs. yugo debate?

O

r economical (A Yugo will probably get twice the fuel economy)... or refined... or good-handling... or actually worth anything after five years... A Yugo, at least, has sentimental value for a certain number of individuals.

And I care about any of this why? I'll take an Aveo over a Yugo, thanks. You want a Yugo? Go buy one. Next.

So you basically stalk him? Read his diary?

Stupid, all I can say. Apparently we're going to be ignorant about this, I can see.

I drive at the same speed as everyone else. Merge like a gentleman, corner at under half a gee. You can see me leave the house every morning, tootle along in traffic... get passed by SUVs on the highway...

A "gee" whiz? Or a lateral "G"?
But really, you see that problem in bold up there?
If you're obeying the law, then they must not be, correct?

And then I go rip it up on the racetrack every few months, and fling it around in the mountains when I feel like it.

How do you know how I drive when you can't see me?

So it's gone from defending people obeying the law, and believing most people do care about obeying traffic laws, to "you don't know what they do when you can't see them"? How quickly our arguments change, ain't?

 

[Jim Prower]

You're all doing it again.

 

[Famine]

You're all doing it again.

No we aren't.




(lulz)

 

[Punknoodle]

There is another reason for buying a fast car and only doing the speed limit besides those 3. You state "Being cool", "Pretty" and actually racing it. You missed the fact that someone might actually buy a car because it could be a car that they have a massive passion for.

I bought my car because I have always been in love with the particular breed of car I bought. I love the history of it, the performance, admittedly I like the looks (why would you buy a car you thought was ugly?) and yeah, I do think its cool and like showing it off as I'm proud of it. Will I take it to the track? Yeah, probably, but that has only entered my mind since buying it, it wasn't my reason for buying it.

I simply have a passion for it, and I (mostly) drive at law abiding speeds because if I don't I run the risk of not being allowed to drive my car any more that I have a passion for. Does that mean I shouldn't drive it on the road, as, basically, it was primarily a homilgation model for Toyota to race in the WRC?

I have a friend with a car that he is totally in love with. Treats it like gold (it is impeccable, mint - yes it is a V8 performace car too) and he hardly drives it. He has always wanted one, he drives it (usually at the speed limit for reasons cited above) only rarely, and it sits in his garage covered in blankets. Is that wrong? Should he not be allowed to own his dream car simply because he doesn't go out and thrash it all the time?

 

[TrievelA7X]

Do you really want a list of why a Corvette Z06 is better in every way than an Aveo?

It's not. It gets worse fuel mileage. 💡 So are we going to cut the crap yet?

And we've quite clearly established that this opinion is bollocks.

No, you quite clearly established you have a different one.
I know I'm about the only one that tells you this and can sustain an argument with you Famine, so you're not used to it, but your word actually isn't the end-all-be-all.

"Asinine".

Precisely. <-- wait, was that on your level?

And why? Why does it matter so much to you what cars people buy to drive legally on the road?

You overestimated the value of my original statement. Blew it out of proportion. Even took it the wrong way.

TrievelA7X
Why does it matter to you if a guy drives without incident at a higher rate of speed than some bureaucrat set?

Do you remember the AUP? You have, after all, agreed to it twice now.

What does the AUP have to do with that, exactly?
Is this about that bit about encouraging or speaking about breaking laws? I can assure you I have not broken the AUP here, so is this the "mod muscle" coming in already?

I missed why people driving cars within legal requirements "sickens" you.

Well that's easy. I didn't say that.
I added a word that changes the entire meaning of the sentence.
And I'm not explaining it to you again.

So why's there any point in buying a Chevy Aveo (capable of 107mph) to go slow (70mph) in?

There doesn't have to be, it's doesn't cost more for it's "performance".

There's no reason for 100hp cars to be on the road, since you can break the limit with half that. So, what's your point?

I already said it. Not explaining this a million times Famine, figure it out, or move on.

Yes, because I am aware of all corners of the English language "Refute" means "prove to be false". It is not synonymous with "reject". I rejected your idea. I did not refute it, nor attempt to.

Fantastic. You've still said nothing here.
I reject your opinion. Great, we've accomplished a lot now.

I find the notion that someone can think people driving fast cars legally is "sickening" to be quite alarming. It's a vague and indefensible notion that buying a fast car and driving legally is somehow wrong enough to cause nausea.

Only when you misunderstand it. You notice the American people on this site rarely confuse my words the way you do? Have you stopped to consider that maybe you don't understand American English properly, or rather, the way it is generally used by the greater population?
probably not, I've yet to hear you admit being wrong in any way, so blame this one on me for talking like the people I live with. My bad.
And next time you spell "kerb" I'll make a joke about a 5 year old spelling.
Or you could just ask and verify what I mean, rather than jump to your usually incorrect assumptions.💡

I already have. A few times now, actually. If it has escaped you, skip to the last three paragraphes below:

You're outraged by another persons opinion. <- Is that Irony? Being outraged by something because you don't find it reasonable, when being outraged by that is also unreasonable? I think it is.

Nope. It's to get you to think about the foundations of your... "point" that fast cars driving within legal limits is "sickening".

The foundation - Is that the general owner/driver of a fast car that obeys all traffic laws is that they are most likely a "trendy a-hole". That, or they know nothing about cars. Last but not least, they did it before, and simply don't now because they don't want to get into trouble, which is fine, but that makes it stupid to bother buying the fast car.
You can get style, comfort, sound, and everything else a car has to offer without 11 second quarter miles.
You could buy a Corvette GS, there is no reason to buy the ZR-1, other then to be trendy, or go faster. Whether that be on the track, or off it.

After all, what is a fast car? We've already established that "99.999% of cars" can break the US maximum speed limit of 75mph and the UK national speed limit of 70mph. We seem to have established that having a car capable of 80mph driving within the speed limit isn't "sickening". So at what point - what power, what speed capability - does a car go from being worthwhile to "sickening" if driven legally? And, more importantly, why have you picked that particular crossover point? What is the thinking behind that empirical value being the demarcation between acceptable and "sickening"?

An EVO, is designed to go fast. It is not designed to put around town. If you always (I have to stress that, before it turns back into, stalker talk) obey traffic laws, there wasn't much point was there? No. You wanted to be "cool", so you bought a car seeking others approval.

The Aveo will do 107mph. Is it sickening if it's driven it at 70mph? One of my cars will do 141mph. Is it sickening if I drive it at 70mph? One will do 150mph. Is it sickening if I drive it at 70mph? One will do 155mph (though it's in several component pieces right now). Is it sickening if I drive it at 70mph? A couple of months back, someone parked a car on my driveway capable of 195mph. Is it sickening if it's driven it at 70mph?

If it never sees wide open throttle, yes. It wasn't designed, or built to be driven like an Aveo.
An Aveo was designed for law-abiding driving.

Where is the point at which, to you, a car stops being fine and becomes "sickening"? Can you even name one?

Its all in it's design. You buy a 99 BMW 545i, you drive the speed limit all you want. You buy a car designed with the sole purpose of kicking ass, kick some ass with it.


Now, just to familiarize you with American law, since I won't claim to know whether it's different, the same, or nearly the same as any other countries law, specifically, PA law, opposed to other states, as even they vary quite greatly.
Driving around a bend at the posted speed limit while the cars on the brink of traction = illegal.
Pulling off a stoplight at 1/2 throttle in a 500HP car = Racing on highways, (6 month suspension) depending on what ordinances your current township has.
Anything that constitutes a "display of power", speed, etc, etc.
Using Brembo brakes to 80% of their capacity on an EVO = Careless or reckless driving.
Holding vehicle in a lower gear to hear the sound of the engine or turbo = disrupting the peace, disorderly conduct with a motor vehicle, careless driving.
So with all those neat little laws, if your not going to break any laws, what are the good reasons to buy a fast car again? I don't recall you giving any.

You've asked for "foundations" and you've gotten them, and I've defended my opinion to you completely.
Now for your reasons to buy a fast car and obey all laws? (and not track it)

There is another reason for buying a fast car and only doing the speed limit besides those 3. You state "Being cool", "Pretty" and actually racing it. You missed the fact that someone might actually buy a car because it could be a car that they have a massive passion for.

And what causes this passion - I see it's below.

I bought my car because I have always been in love with the particular breed of car I bought. I love the history of it, the performance, admittedly I like the looks (why would you buy a car you thought was ugly?) and yeah, I do think its cool and like showing it off as I'm proud of it. Will I take it to the track? Yeah, probably, but that has only entered my mind since buying it, it wasn't my reason for buying it.

So you list my 3 exact reasons for having this passion, combined with the illegal one. No, it isn't illegal to have it, it's just illegal to use it in any way, shape, or form, unless off the road.
So you were saying something about another reason? You have a "passion" for it for all the reasons I stated, including the illegal one, thanks for illustrating.

I simply have a passion for it, and I (mostly) drive at law abiding speeds because if I don't I run the risk of not being allowed to drive my car any more that I have a passion for. Does that mean I shouldn't drive it on the road, as, basically, it was primarily a homilgation model for Toyota to race in the WRC?

Mostly, means you do break the laws, as over 90% of drivers do from time to time at least. And, the only thing that stops you from going faster is fear of getting caught? Again, thanks for illustrating my points perfectly.

I have a friend with a car that he is totally in love with. Treats it like gold (it is impeccable, mint - yes it is a V8 performace car too) and he hardly drives it. He has always wanted one, he drives it (usually at the speed limit for reasons cited above) only rarely, and it sits in his garage covered in blankets. Is that wrong? Should he not be allowed to own his dream car simply because he doesn't go out and thrash it all the time?

Quote me saying anyone "should not be allowed" and you'll have a point, until then, you're putting words in my fingers just like Famine and Niky tried to do.
It isn't about whether anyone "should be allowed".
I simply said it's stupid. Yes, to all who haven't understood, that's the general jist of "makes me sick" Because it's stupid, and there's that awesome car, with so much potential, destined to die a boring and long painful death.
Let me ask you, to elaborate 100% - Does you friend also own a racing horse that he keeps in a petting zoo?
Wait - people don't spend all kinds of money on racing bred horses to put into petting zoos? That's not the common idea? The way this thread is going, I damn well better see a million race horses the next zoo I go to, or you'll all be lying to me. (exaggeration)

 

[Sharky.]

So are we going to cut the crap yet?

Oh the irony.

Why are you so intent on wittering on with completely nonsensical arguments? You did it in the Cutlass thread, now here... it's starting to grind my gears (badum-tish). Your argument is holier than the Pope, let it go before you make yourself look like even more of a clown.

There's no point in buying a car that'll crack 70? Then why do we buy cars at all? Pretty much everything these days will crack three figures...

 

[Famine]

*white noise*

So you're not able to come up with a defining "fast/slow" figure in either power or speed that means one always legally driven car sickens you and the other does not?

Didn't think so.

What does the AUP have to do with that, exactly?
Is this about that bit about encouraging or speaking about breaking laws? I can assure you I have not broken the AUP here, so is this the "mod muscle" coming in already?

I'm sorry, I don't recall saying you'd broken the AUP or flexing any "mod muscle". I was directly answering your question.

Only when you misunderstand it. You notice the American people on this site rarely confuse my words the way you do? Have you stopped to consider that maybe you don't understand American English properly, or rather, the way it is generally used by the greater population?

And yet, oddly, the regular phone conversations I have with Americans involve no "misunderstanding" and, somehow, I managed to get married in California entirely without misinterpreting anyone.

Quit hiding behind fabricated reasons.

You're outraged by another persons opinion. <- Is that Irony? Being outraged by something because you don't find it reasonable, when being outraged by that is also unreasonable? I think it is.

Who is outraged?

*looks about*

Can't see anyone. Oh wait... another fabricated reason.

An EVO, is designed to go fast. It is not designed to put around town.

Astonishingly, you are about as wrong as you can actually be here. A Mitsubishi Lancer is a compact car. The design parameters are for it to be usable around town, seat five adults and be practical. The Evo versions are merely performance tacked onto the base car.

If it never sees wide open throttle, yes.

Which of the five cars I mentioned are you talking about now?

An Aveo was designed for law-abiding driving.

An Aveo can do 107mph. So no, it wasn't.

So with all those neat little laws, if your not going to break any laws, what are the good reasons to buy a fast car again? I don't recall you giving any.

That's because you're still missing everything I'm saying.

I want you to give me a numerical value where power or speed capability turn a vehicle from being a car to "sickening" you when both are always driven within legal requirements.

Take your time.

 

[TrievelA7X]

Oh the irony.

Why are you so intent on wittering on with completely nonsensical arguments? You did it in the Cutlass thread, now here... it's starting to grind my gears (badum-tish). Your argument is holier than the Pope, let it go before you make yourself look like even more of a clown.

That's cute and all, but your opinion means to me exactly what my opinion means to you.
And once again, you can thank Famine for arguing it.
As I've said, there's nothing to argue, it's my opinion, like it or don't, it's that simple.
Go pay millions for prize racing horses and put them in a stable, it's your money, but don't expect me not to call you an idiot for it.
Oh, and I'll remind, since there's always the straggling nitpickers, it takes 2 to tango, so if you call me a fool for it, you call Famine a fool for it, don't be fooled into thinking there's any other way around it.

 

[Sharky.]

As I've said, there's nothing to argue, it's my opinion, like it or don't, it's that simple.

Why are you arguing with Famine then??

The Evo versions are merely performance tacked onto the base car.

I tried to say that earlier in the thread... didn't go terribly well

 

[Famine]

I tried to say that earlier in the thread... didn't go terribly well

To be fair, it's not quite as simple as that - and different Lancer Evos have been based on different cars (one not even based on a Lancer). It's pretty much the same thing as silhouette racing - the car looks the same, but the grimy bits and wires can be wholly different.

It is, though, ultimately, a regular, four door, practical family sedan. Its home environment is the suburbs and shopping malls. It just happens to be able to do 0-60mph in 5s flat and corner like a housefly. Both of which are a large part of the appeal.

 

[TrievelA7X]

So you're not able to come up with a defining "fast/slow" figure in either power or speed that means one always legally driven car sickens you and the other does not?

Didn't think so.

I already gave you the "figure" What it's designed for. HP and weight are of no exact matter. You can buy the most powerful BMW, and it's not designed for speed the way an M5 is.
So would I say that the more powerful cruiser should be driven faster? No, because I don't need to put exact specifications on it, it's what the car was designed for.
An M5, even, is not strictly designed for going fast, or racing. But there's no real reason to buying it if you're not going to use it, is there? Nothing you've come up with, nor I, nor anyone else, besides bad ones. That makes it stupid. A beautiful car designed for speed being wasted on nothing makes me sick, not literally, figuratively.

I'm sorry, I don't recall saying you'd broken the AUP or flexing any "mod muscle". I was directly answering your question.

It didn't do a very good job with it.

And yet, oddly, the regular phone conversations I have with Americans involve no "misunderstanding" and, somehow, I managed to get married in California entirely without misinterpreting anyone.

Quit hiding behind fabricated reasons.

Well I can't give any other explanation why everything I say is taken out of context by you. Feel free to give reasons.

Who is outraged?

*looks about*

Can't see anyone. Oh wait... another fabricated reason.

Well I can't define your exact emotional state for you, but there must be some reason you pursue this reasoning I have so much, correct?

Astonishingly, you are about as wrong as you can actually be here. A Mitsubishi Lancer is a compact car. The design parameters are for it to be usable around town, seat five adults and be practical. The Evo versions are merely performance tacked onto the base car.

To take away from everything you just said, and turn it into a performance car, for people who want - go ahead, answer it. For people who want what? Attention? Adoration? Girls that see money signs? To be cool? or, to race it, or otherwise go fast.

Which of the five cars I mentioned are you talking about now?

Specifically would have been the uber-fast one, though I won't bother to check whatever numbers you posted.

An Aveo can do 107mph. So no, it wasn't.

Yes it was. Feel free to provide some type of information besides having an electronically governed top-speed that's lower than most cars.
And that also brings the question, why does an Aveo have a top speed of 107mph? Is it because nobody wants to speed? Because nobody is willing to break the law?
That's right, people do want to speed, and don't care about breaking laws, they only care about getting caught, isn't that right?



That's because you're still missing everything I'm saying.

I want you to give me a numerical value where power or speed capability turn a vehicle from being a car to "sickening" you when both are always driven within legal requirements.

Take your time.[/QUOTE]There isn't one.Take for example, the Nissan Sunny with 227-231HP (confused between sources) with it's performance. Why buy that model if you want to drive the same speed?
Assuming you could get the appearence package without the engine, of course, we wouldn't want to let that "because it's pretty" reason to slip in, despite having it's own questionable merit.

And like I said, It isn't that people shouldn't be allowed to, it's that there are no good reasons for it, and it's all going to waste.
So consider me a person that hates seeing performance go to waste.

Now, I have to ask, why didn't you question the people who complained about people buying fast cars, to go fast in?
You see reason to argue that it's not stupid or senseless to buy a fast car to go slow, yet you saw no reason to argue that it's not stupid to buy a fast car to go fast? And you question my reasoning?
Like you asked, if you can't or shouldn't use it, why is it there?

To be fair, it's not quite as simple as that - and different Lancer Evos have been based on different cars (one not even based on a Lancer). It's pretty much the same thing as silhouette racing - the car looks the same, but the grimy bits and wires can be wholly different.

It is, though, ultimately, a regular, four door, practical family sedan. Its home environment is the suburbs and shopping malls. It just happens to be able to do 0-60mph in 5s flat and corner like a housefly. Both of which are a large part of the appeal.

Exactly. And since that is a large part of the appeal, why buy it if you don't intend to use it?
Logic dictates you must have a reason to do something, rather than simply not have a reason not to.
So, for it to not be illogical, what is the reason apart from being some form of attention-whore?

Why are you arguing with Famine then??

Technically I'm not. I just replying. He argued my original statement. I've just defended it.

 

[Famine]

So consider me a person that hates seeing performance go to waste.

The crux, if not the answer.

People who buy cars which can exceed the speed limit easily but choose not to are not people by whom you should be sickened. They are people you should be praising. Perhaps you're familiar with the phrase so ubiquitous in the Spiderman films "With great power comes great responsibility"?

These are people who can blow away the road laws in the blink of an eye and yet... you always see them behaving responsibly and legally.

Now let us compare people who buy cars that can exceed the speed limit easily (which, as we have all noted, is most cars - my slowest car is capable of 141mph) and choose to drive like absolute sockets. These are the people who should sicken you. The ones who decide laws don't apply to them (including, commonly, the laws of physics), the idiots who push all our insurance premiums up by running out of talent testing their own limits on the public highway, the morons who have to drive their cars at eleven tenths everywhere and mean the rest of us who enjoy cars get tarnished with the brush of irresponsibility, speed-obsession and "boy racer".


You show me a show-off driving a Ford GT on the public road legally and a show-off driving a 1.5 litre Civic like his cock is on fire, and the one that I'd cover in vomit isn't gazing at a blue oval on his wheel.

 

[TrievelA7X]

The crux, if not the answer.

People who buy cars which can exceed the speed limit easily but choose not to are not people by whom you should be sickened. They are people you should be praising. Perhaps you're familiar with the phrase so ubiquitous in the Spiderman films "With great power comes great responsibility"?

These are people who can blow away the road laws in the blink of an eye and yet... you always see them behaving responsibly and legally.

Now let us compare people who buy cars that can exceed the speed limit easily (which, as we have all noted, is most cars - my slowest car is capable of 141mph) and choose to drive like absolute sockets. These are the people who should sicken you. The ones who decide laws don't apply to them (including, commonly, the laws of physics), the idiots who push all our insurance premiums up by running out of talent testing their own limits on the public highway, the morons who have to drive their cars at eleven tenths everywhere and mean the rest of us who enjoy cars get tarnished with the brush of irresponsibility, speed-obsession and "boy racer".


You show me a show-off driving a Ford GT on the public road legally and a show-off driving a 1.5 litre Civic like his cock is on fire, and the one that I'd cover in vomit isn't gazing at a blue oval on his wheel.

You know, for the most part I agree with this.
Mostly, the people that go to fast. But there are plenty of ways to enjoy power responsibly. One of them would be going to a track, others would still be illegal, but at the very least, only dangerous to themselves, if they're that stupid.
However, one could very safely on many roads in this country, break every traffic law known to mankind while only driving his EVO at 7/10ths.
It also doesn't refute (no you didn't claim it to either) the fact that unless you're going to use it, there's no sense buying extra power.
Like all the families I've seen in supercharged Grand Prix GTP's.

So I can appreciate you're distaste for people that drive like idiots, we all can, but then you also have to understand we each have our own definition of "driving like an idiot", and this is where people generally lose tolerance for any opinion but their own.
I once witnessed an old man throw a beer bottle at my brothers car for "going to god-**** fast" (he yelled) while we were going 25-30mph in a 35mph non-posted residential area. (35 is PA law mandated speed limit for non posted residential areas)
So I argue against both sides to a point.
I don't care for the guy in the Ford GT that never uses his vehicle for what it was greatly and time-consumingly designed for, nor do I care for the boy racer that could get somebody killed.
But remember my definition of driving within safe limits is probably different than yours, strictly because I'm a different person. Even if you leave place of residence (for example, Germany) race, age, sex, ability, or any other considerable factor out, our opinions would still likely be different on what is safe.

And this post, is where I was asking you to get about 6 posts ago.

 

[Punknoodle]

I simply said it's stupid. Yes, to all who haven't understood, that's the general jist of "makes me sick" Because it's stupid, and there's that awesome car, with so much potential, destined to die a boring and long painful death.
Let me ask you, to elaborate 100% - Does you friend also own a racing horse that he keeps in a petting zoo?
Wait - people don't spend all kinds of money on racing bred horses to put into petting zoos? That's not the common idea? The way this thread is going, I damn well better see a million race horses the next zoo I go to, or you'll all be lying to me. (exaggeration)

OK, so you've never been to a car show before? Or a motorsport museam? Think those cars get belted along the highway?

Oh, and no, I do not agree with your summary of my previous comment - because I din't buy the car simply for those reasons. I admire and have a passion for my vehicle. And what is so wrong with someone with a fast car wanting to keep their licence? I just don't get it...

 

[Famine]

However, one could very safely on many roads in this country, break every traffic law known to mankind while only driving his EVO at 7/10ths.

Which is why you never drive at even that level on a public road. In any car.

But then, whenever you saw them, they'd be driving legally and that'd sicken you.


You don't want to be running at 70% of either your ability or the car's on a public road, because you've only got 30% left if there's an emergency - that's why there is no such thing as "safely" driving at 7/10ths. Public road driving is for getting from one point to another, safely, and safely means responsibly. That's why roads go from places to other places. There is never any need or reason to drive in a manner that even comes close to the limits of yourself or your car on public roads.

 

[Jondot]

Very aware that I'm a whole argument behind here, but...

Time Attack already touched on this, but you are describing the driver, not the car. And to be perfectly clear, I'm not asking you to compliment any color, any car, or anything. As I said in the original post, if you see a Evo, and you see just another wannabe ricer, you have completely missed the point. Cool, uncool, I can respect whatever your taste in cars. I'm just saying that this car actually have merit, substance, etc., even if you don't appreciate it.

Oh I appreciate the car just fine - I'm aware that it's an extremely quick bit of engineering. I don't instantly see ricers driving Lancers out of pure figure of imagination - it's just that every Lancer Evo or Impreza WRX STI driven past me in the last... lifetime has been driven ridiculously, and modified with some dreadful Halfords exhaust.

I haven't really addresed the car's performance merits because this isn't the 'good' wall. And as far as I'm concerned, any coolness has been erroded by said crowd.

What makes you think because someone "takes off at twice the speed limit" (whatever that exactly is supposed to mean)

Means 'taking off at twice the speed limit' dear. I hadn't realised it was a particularly complicated concept, but I'll explain.

Road's speed limit = 30mph
Lancer driver on said road = 60mph

60 / 30 = 2

they're "begging for attention"?

...because they're doing 60 in a 30 - usually at 5000rpm in 3rd. What other reason is there for it?

Not to mention the huge exhausts people slap on, which are loud enough to wake a small town.

What makes you think you can discern the difference between a guy having fun and "begging for attention"?

I can't - I can only speculate. But...

I'd say it's where he chooses to have 'fun'. It can't be sheer thrill from going at 60, as that's 10mph under the national speed limit, so I must deduce that it's because he's doing it in a built up area. Where there are people.

There are plenty of back roads near me where 60 is pushing the limit of the car, and yet is bang on the speed limit - not to mention there are no 80 year old women in Yarises getting in the way. Why don't I ever see any Lancer/Impreza drivers on these much more twisty, more challenging routes where there's nobody to run over?

I just work with what I'm given.

If I "take off at twice the speed limit" I'm usually hoping nobody's watching. Of course, when I take off, I'm usually stopped, but I'll quit poking fun at this silly statement now.

It's not silly, it's maths. We've been over this.

I personally am more sickened by the fast cars I see always going the speed limit. I can't find any reason to buying a high HP go-fast car just to trickle down the road like a 40mpg car could, can you?
Why buy a Corvette with only 2 seats when an Aveo seats 5 and gets almost 40mpg?

What on earth makes you think that the only appeal of a performance car is sheer top speed? Speed is a dull, dull mistress - there's not really any more thrill from going at 100mph on a motorway than there is from going at 70, you just get there a bit quicker.

Acceleration is what you need to be paying attention to. And handling, of course. That's what differenciates the Aveo from the Lancer without making you break the law.

 

[Murcie_LP640]

To be perfectly honest this argument is a complete waste of 3 pages.

Why even argue when its consistently obvious with EVERY post being made that neither Famine nor Trievel are actually going to change their minds and "admit defeat", for lack of a better phrase?

More to the point, it had absolutely nothing to do with whether a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR was Cool or not.

 

[a6m5]

I tried to say that earlier in the thread... didn't go terribly well

Very aware that I'm a whole argument behind here, but...



Oh I appreciate the car just fine - I'm aware that it's an extremely quick bit of engineering. I don't instantly see ricers driving Lancers out of pure figure of imagination - it's just that every Lancer Evo or Impreza WRX STI driven past me in the last... lifetime has been driven ridiculously, and modified with some dreadful Halfords exhaust.

I'm still not getting through to you two.

My point isn't if you guys appreciate the car, or what the car is about. My whole argument is that this car actually have a legitimate purpose. I'm not asking you to appreciate that purpose, and could not care less if you did.

And again, I don't know what to tell you about the drivers, owners you've personally encountered. That doesn't have anything to do with the car, or my argument. I'm not arguing this car is cool, or it isn't. In my neighborhood, through my personal experience, STi & Evo drivers are some of the most responsible drivers. I'm not making this up, god's honest truth. But what does that, or my personal experience have to do with the point I'm making? Absolutely nothing.

 

[Famine]

To be perfectly honest this argument is a complete waste of 3 pages.

Why even argue when its consistently obvious with EVERY post being made that neither Famine nor Trievel are actually going to change their minds and "admit defeat", for lack of a better phrase?

More to the point, it had absolutely nothing to do with whether a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR was Cool or not.

If that's your attitude, why contribute at all with a post that is also a waste of time and also nothing to do with the Cool status of the car?

Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the phrase "discussion board". Or even the word "forum" itself.

 

[Jim Prower]

If that's your attitude, why contribute at all with a post that is also a waste of time and also nothing to do with the Cool status of the car?

Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the phrase "discussion board". Or even the word "forum" itself.

What's a discussion when you can't get a word in edgewise? There's a REASON more than one of us find this kind of offtopic banter just to prove who's right or wrong irritating...it's not very interesting, usually cyclical, and leaves with people just being angry at one another.

 

[Famine]

What's a discussion when you can't get a word in edgewise?

Errr...

Didn't you just do that?

There's a REASON more than one of us find this kind of offtopic banter just to prove who's right or wrong irritating...it's not very interesting, usually cyclical, and leaves with people just being angry at one another.

Then ignore it.

Also, I'd suggest that you shouldn't be getting angry at pixels on a screen. The internets isn't actually srs business, you know.

 

[Jim Prower]

So, basically, no-one's serious and everyone's trying to troll everyone else for LULZ, is that it?

Probably not.

Look, I'd ignore it, but I can't put you on my ignore list, so I'm faced with picking through pages of text to find anything I'm interested in, or relevant to the topic at hand. But, pah, you're opinionated, so there's no point, even if I point out that as a mod, you should try to keep things on topic.

 

[Famine]

So, basically, no-one's serious and everyone's trying to troll everyone else for LULZ, is that it?

I wouldn't say "troll", but come on. They're words on a screen from a guy you'll never meet who could, for all it's worth, be a billion miles away. What on Earth would the point of getting angry about it be?

Look, I'd ignore it, but I can't put you on my ignore list, so I'm faced with picking through pages of text to find anything I'm interested in, or relevant to the topic at hand.

Then ignore the topic. I ignore entire forums because I simply can't be bothered with the reams of idiocy going on in there.

But, pah, you're opinionated, so there's no point, even if I point out that as a mod, you should try to keep things on topic.

But I'm also (in fact primarily) a member and, as a member, topics evolve over time. We haven't gone: Discuss the EvoVI; FAST CARS MAKE ME VOMIT!!111. The topic has evolved along those lines (for some reason which still escapes me).

Of course I could just up and lock every thread on the site the instant a post is made not on the topic - I have that ability. But, as I said earlier, with great power comes great responsibility. No member of any moderating team on any site should ever seek to stifle genuine discussion.

 

[a6m5]

So, basically, no-one's serious and everyone's trying to troll everyone else for LULZ, is that it?

Probably not.

Look, I'd ignore it, but I can't put you on my ignore list, so I'm faced with picking through pages of text to find anything I'm interested in, or relevant to the topic at hand. But, pah, you're opinionated, so there's no point, even if I point out that as a mod, you should try to keep things on topic.

Or you can just scroll through. When niky joined in, I was like "for the love of god!", but I just kept on scrolling right through. 100% on-topic thread can be a very uneasy, and boring thread.