GTP Member's cars directory. What do you drive?

[nd 4 holden spd]

Thanks people! Woah i started something here , wouldnt have minded getting a larger engine but being 19 its pretty bad on insurance as it is. Its not a big car either weighs less than 1200kg plus the handling is good anyway which i find more important, its plenty fast enough for where i live (for now anyway ).

Ah, looked bigger in the photo.👍

He can gloat all he likes, I wouldn't trade our quick, nimble, light and fuel efficient cars for anything

Not gloating, but I do like having a muscular engine. But if you want to be serious here, the old Commodore sedans weigh just under 1400kg, and some even under 1300kg. The VN-VR Commodore sedans can be made to handle very well and very nimble with the added extra of having that straight line grunt. I speak from first hand experience.

I think it was a personal opinion thing, and came off as a bit arrogant. I've been seeing how n4hs posts, and I'm fairly sure he didn't mean to put the Alfa down in any way, he just has some sort of bias for larger capacity engines.

Each to their own, I'd much, much rather drive a slow 1.6 Alfa than be caught dead driving an old v6 Commodore ute, but I appreciate that he likes the things, and that's all there is to it.

I concur about the handling thing 100% though, I'd much rather have a slow, nimble car that can carve corners than a massively powerful boat that can't turn. The fact that I have a fairly decent mix of both is a bonus.

Not bias, that would be incredibly bogan of me, but I do prefer them, and that is just perference, nothing wrong with that.

 

[slidesquad#1]

Not bias, that would be incredibly bogan of me, but I do prefer them, and that is just perference, nothing wrong with that.

I realise that now, but it came through as incredibly brash when you started posting here to me too. While you might prefer larger engines, I think it's the way you convey it that might tick some people here off.

"Alfa's are cool, but I would probably rather have one with a bigger engine than a 1.6" sounds a lot better, and non confrontational than "Alfa's are cool, 1.6's are not," especially given that a V6 Commodore ute wouldn't see which way a little, uncool 1.6 litre Civic Type-R went.

 

[Jay]

Not bias, that would be incredibly bogan of me,

I have a few friends that are large engine and V8 biased, and they are far away from Boguns. Bogun is a lifestyle not just a car choice.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I realise that now, but it came through as incredibly brash when you started posting here to me too. While you might prefer larger engines, I think it's the way you convey it that might tick some people here off.

"Alfa's are cool, but I would probably rather have one with a bigger engine than a 1.6" sounds a lot better, and non confrontational than "Alfa's are cool, 1.6's are not," especially given that a V6 Commodore ute wouldn't see which way a little, uncool 1.6 litre Civic Type-R went.

Unless it was a drag race, they'd see me in front. You forgot about my smilie in the first post When I use the sly smilie it implies I'm having a joke with all of you.

I have a few friends that are large engine and V8 biased, and they are far away from Boguns. Bogun is a lifestyle not just a car choice.

But a characteristic of being Bogan is being biased towards Holden or Ford, but being V8 biased doesn't make you a bogan, see the context I put it in now?

 

[Jay]

When I use the sly smilie it implies I'm having a joke with all of you.

Then maybe you shouldn't if you want people to think you are open minded.

But a characteristic of being Bogan is being biased towards Holden or Ford, but being V8 biased doesn't make you a bogan, see the context I put it in now?

Lots of people are biased toward Holden and Ford (I know a few of them also), so few are boguns, that would just be labeling.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Then maybe you shouldn't if you want people to think you are open minded.



Lots of people are biased toward Holden and Ford (I know a few of them also), so few are boguns, that would just be labeling.

a) What's wrong with jokes if I can use smilies to illustrate the damn point

b) I did not say those who are biased are bogans, I said bogans are biased. Please read my posts before replying.

 

[slidesquad#1]

Unless it was a drag race, they'd see me in front. You forgot about my smilie in the first post When I use the sly smilie it implies I'm having a joke with all of you.

Let's see, the only hope you have is that it's a really really long drag race. You have less power, (~15hp) and a lot more weight (~300 kg). You have a lot more torque, and I'm assuming the Civic is geared shorter (still, the UK versions have a claimed 235 km/h top speed) but if I had to put money on the outcome...

What kind of times did the VR ute run in the quarter anyways (the Buicks, that is)?

Edit: If you prefer something over others, doesn't that make you biased anyways? And I don't mean that in a bad way, nothing wrong with it unless it's taken to extremes, but doesn't that fact that you prefer x over everything mean your'e biased towards x?

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Let's see, the only hope you have is that it's a really really long drag race. You have less power, (~15hp) and a lot more weight (~300 kg). You have a lot more torque, and I'm assuming the Civic is geared shorter (still, the UK versions have a claimed 235 km/h top speed) but if I had to put money on the outcome...

What kind of times did the VR ute run in the quarter anyways (the Buicks, that is)?

This is the part where I remind you how restricted GM engines were back then, when the Civics were more highly strung from the factory. Aerodynamics hurt the top speed, and the computer cuts power above 100km/hr (yes you read that right). But otherwise top speed was 200km/hr, and the 1/4mile was done in around 16.0sec. It's hard to know 1/4mile times though, because many sources claim different times, but I believe that to be the accepted average (or was it 17.0sec?).
My brother's car, with the only major things done being an exhaust, CAI, chip and Ignition coils can run 15.0sec or just under (he didn't have an LSD, but he's getting one soon with a steeper ratio and apart from obvious acceleration advantages he's hoping most for traction, so probably 14s) and goes 230km/hr easily enough. (Before running out of gears)

Edit: It doesn't make you biased in a way the means you're blind to the truth of what might be faster, but it would make something like purchase decisions biased because you like those cars, in the same way you're biased towards small cars.

 

[Jay]

b) I did not say those who are biased are bogans, I said bogans are biased. Please read my posts before replying.

You did the first time.

"Not bias, that would be incredibly bogan of me"


Not to meantion a lot of people mask their true feelings (biases) by making jokes and sarcasm (over and over again)

R35 GTR is a good example of this (no referring to you), when the same type comments are made over and over again with only smilies to mask, it gets old and clear feeling becomes obvious.

and the computer cuts power above 100km/hr (yes you read that right).

You have proof of that? I have driven every generation Commodore (and owned a few) also most of the V8 models and have never noticed power cut above 100?

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

You did the first time.

"Not bias, that would be incredibly bogan of me"


Not to meantion a lot of people mask their true feelings (biases) by making jokes and sarcasm (over and over again)

R35 GTR is a good example of this (no referring to you), when the same type comments are made over and over again with only smilies to mask, it gets old and clear feeling becomes obvious.

Yeah, I said that I'd be acting like a bogan if I were biased, because bogans are biased, I fail to see your point yet.

By the way, just because a car has a big V8 up front doesn't instantly make it a bad handler, you guys should jump in a Corvette, or even GTS/M3/RS4/C63 AMG/V8 Vantage and go for a spin. I'm pretty sure they're all very fast. (No I haven't driven them myself) If I go fast on the straights and slightly slower in the corners, and we all get similar lap times I fail to see the big problem. Obviously with my Ute I will go too slow in the corners, but I'm having fun never the less. I don't have fun in a car that's under powered and too easy to drive. (And I have driven them, read: Hyundai Excel, Ford Fiesta, Ford Focus, Subaru Sport Wagon from '80s).

Edit: Re: Power Cut. Have you ever noticed the difference before and after a chip? When I flaw it it flies through 1st and 2nd, then 3rd is such a drop in speed I feel like I've been teleported into a different car. My brother's car on the other hand just keeps going like a bat out of hell.

 

[Jay]

I fail to see your point yet.

Then forget it.

Edit: Re: Power Cut. Have you ever noticed the difference before and after a chip? When I flaw it it flies through 1st and 2nd, then 3rd is such a drop in speed I feel like I've been teleported into a different car. My brother's car on the other hand just keeps going like a bat out of hell.

I have been in tuned ones, they were fast cause was modded and tuned accordingly. I have also personally done 3.8L V6 swaps and driven them, without Commodore speed sensor installed (so the ECU doesn't have a clue what speed I am doing) and have noticed no difference at all.

 

[slidesquad#1]

This is the part where I remind you how restricted GM engines were back then, when the Civics were more highly strung from the factory. Aerodynamics hurt the top speed, and the computer cuts power above 100km/hr (yes you read that right). But otherwise top speed was 200km/hr, and the 1/4mile was done in around 16.0sec. It's hard to know 1/4mile times though, because many sources claim different times, but I believe that to be the accepted average (or was it 17.0sec?).

And this is when I remind you it's still a "little" 1.6. Which, when new, would beat your car down the quarter by a second. Or two.

It doesn't matter what they're like with mods, even if they're simple ones, because the Honda's don't respond too badly to those themselves. There are plenty of 13/14 second B16 Civic's running around.

And granted standard Type-R's would be slower today, i think that the fact that the "muscular" engine needs an exhaust, air filter and coils to match, or just beat a 1.6, albeit a highly strung one, says something about the performance capabilities of that particular mill.

And I'm not really biased towards small cars, I'll take just about anything if it 1. goes 2. turns and 3. stops well. But I'm willing to overlook 1 for 2 and 3. And I personally feel v6 commodores are a pretty poor base for a performance build unless you're willing to throw a LOT of money at it.
To be perfectly honest, to me (and I realise you feel differently, and I appreciate that), needing to go as far as changing the diff to have a consistant, reliable 14 second car is a waste of time for me.

 

[eiriksmil]

The B16s are crazy, 160+ bhp in a EG shell goes.
I have huge respect for smaller engines, but that doesn't make my respect for huge engines smaller

 

[slidesquad#1]

I've never driven a B16, but was a passenger in a very well looked after Type-R. I was pretty impressed. Then there was my mate's 1984 180 fwkw 4AG turbo FX-GT. That was ridiculous. No traction through to 3rd, but when it hooked up, **** me it pulled.

 

[Joey D]

Forgive me for being American but what is a bogun? Google seems to think it's an Australian redneck, would this be correct?

On the topic of smaller engines I will always prefer a smaller engine in a lighter weight car to a large engine in a heavier car. Case in point: The Blazer had a giant 4.3L V6 which got worse mileage and delivered less performance then the 1.6L engine in the Cooper. Bigger engines don't mean anything performance wise. They also tend to be rather inefficient therefore I don't really want one.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

And this is when I remind you it's still a "little" 1.6. Which, when new, would beat your car down the quarter by a second. Or two.

It doesn't matter what they're like with mods, even if they're simple ones, because the Honda's don't respond too badly to those themselves. There are plenty of 13/14 second B16 Civic's running around.

And granted standard Type-R's would be slower today, i think that the fact that the "muscular" engine needs an exhaust, air filter and coils to match, or just beat a 1.6, albeit a highly strung one, says something about the performance capabilities of that particular mill.

And I'm not really biased towards small cars, I'll take just about anything if it 1. goes 2. turns and 3. stops well. But I'm willing to overlook 1 for 2 and 3. And I personally feel v6 commodores are a pretty poor base for a performance build unless you're willing to throw a LOT of money at it.
To be perfectly honest, to me (and I realise you feel differently, and I appreciate that), needing to go as far as changing the diff to have a consistant, reliable 14 second car is a waste of time for me.

You don't need much money to make a VN Commodore handle really well though, my brother's car is testament. I also know that my particular engine has been pushed over 1000hp in USA in Grand Nationals, shows the performance capabilities of my engine too. There is no right or wrong way here, we get lap times on straights, you get lap times in corners, so it depends on the track. Not even an Elise can beat an HSV at Bathurst, and the Evo only runs level with it. Surprisingly their brakes are about equal.

The B16s are crazy, 160+ bhp in a EG shell goes.
I have huge respect for smaller engines, but that doesn't make my respect for huge engines smaller

No, it just makes your respect for those driving them smaller. I have honestly had people bash me on this site just for my name.

Edit: @ Joey D, you can hardly use a truck engine as a basis. 317kw from an N/A V8 in the GTS, 385kw from an N/A V8 in the Z06, show me an N/A L4 making that power from the factory. Bigger engines=bigger power, it's simple: More air and more fuel = bigger combustion.

 

[slidesquad#1]

Not even an Elise can beat an HSV at Bathurst, and the Evo only runs level with it. Surprisingly their brakes are about equal.

I'll have to disagree there mate. Talking track cars changes the ball park considerably. What category are the Evos/HSV's you mention?

And as far as production car racing goes, I lost all respect for HSV when they campaigned their bespoke 7.0 litre Chev powered "production" Monaro's for the Nation's Cup/Bathurst 24hours etc.

 

[Joey D]

Edit: @ Joey D, you can hardly use a truck engine as a basis. 317kw from an N/A V8 in the GTS, 385kw from an N/A V8 in the Z06, show me an N/A L4 making that power from the factory. Bigger engines=bigger power, it's simple: More air and more fuel = bigger combustion.

You realise the 4.3L was just 3/4 of the 5.7L, yes? Bigger engines also don't mean more power or better performance. A lot of things go into making a car perform well. If you just slap a big, inefficient V8 into a big car, ya it's going to be fast, but it's probably not going to be very sophisticated or even very well engineered. Efficiency is everything with a machine, and no I'm not talking about fuel consumption.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I'll have to disagree there mate. Talking track cars changes the ball park considerably. What category are the Evos/HSV's you mention?

And as far as production car racing goes, I lost all respect for HSV when they campaigned their bespoke 7.0 litre Chev powered "production" Monaro's for the Nation's Cup/Bathurst 24hours etc.

Hold up there so I can correct you.
The Evos and HSVs were road/production spec vehicles, possibly all with semi-slicks. The 7.0L 427 Monaro was in the Nations Cup which was not a production based event, and that 7.0L was only a stroked LS1 anyway.

You realise the 4.3L was just 3/4 of the 5.7L, yes? Bigger engines also don't mean more power or better performance. A lot of things go into making a car perform well. If you just slap a big, inefficient V8 into a big car, ya it's going to be fast, but it's probably not going to be very sophisticated or even very well engineered. Efficiency is everything with a machine, and no I'm not talking about fuel consumption.

Err, yeah they do. That's why Top Fuellers are V8s running 4sec 1/4miles. Sophisticated is not as important as end result is. And a big V8 will go plenty fast.

 

[Joey D]

A specific built race car that has many of it's part last one race is hardly comparable to a road going vehicle. Try again.

 

[slidesquad#1]

If I can get 2 litre turbo, with arguably similar levels of performace, with less power, and arguably better handling, why do I need 317 kw? What's NA/turbo/sc got to do with it? Yes, I realise a LSx with a twin turbo kit will make a billion hp etc., but I'm talking about stock standard cars here.

 

[slidesquad#1]

Hold up there so I can correct you.
The Evos and HSVs were road/production spec vehicles, possibly all with semi-slicks. The 7.0L 427 Monaro was in the Nations Cup which was not a production based event, and that 7.0L was only a stroked LS1 anyway.

I might be wrong on the Nations cup, though I can't recall any of the other car's running stroked engines. And I'm fairly certain I read somewhere that the 427 was a Callaway mill. Could be wrong on that.

But yeah, what event are you talking about re: the Evo/HSV times? I'd be quite interested to see that actually. But thinking about it, the new cars would actually be quite similar. I was still thinking along the lines of Evo 6's/the old 185 kw HSV's of that era.

Aaaand double post. Sorry.

 

[eiriksmil]

No, it just makes your respect for those driving them smaller. I have honestly had people bash me on this site just for my name.

If you're trying to say I have less respect for those driving big-engined cars, you're wrong. It is though, more than often, idiots and ignorants behind the wheel of these cars. I don't know why.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

A specific built race car that has many of it's part last one race is hardly comparable to a road going vehicle. Try again.

What on Earth are you talking about? I'm comparing production spec cars used in a race series.

If I can get 2 litre turbo, with arguably similar levels of performace, with less power, and arguably better handling, why do I need 317 kw? What's NA/turbo/sc got to do with it? Yes, I realise a LSx with a twin turbo kit will make a billion hp etc., but I'm talking about stock standard cars here.

On that same reasoning, if I can get big levels of power from my big V8, and go faster on the straights for it, why do I need better handling? We get the same/similar (up to driver now) lap times.

I might be wrong on the Nations cup, though I can't recall any of the other car's running stroked engines. And I'm fairly certain I read somewhere that the 427 was a Callaway mill. Could be wrong on that.

But yeah, what event are you talking about re: the Evo/HSV times? I'd be quite interested to see that actually. But thinking about it, the new cars would actually be quite similar. I was still thinking along the lines of Evo 6's/the old 185 kw HSV's of that era.

Aaaand double post. Sorry.

Just forget the Nations Cup alright, it was a high end racing series with aero kits, better engines (yes, the others ran race spec engines too), less weight and racing slicks.

Back in those days of the 185kw V8s we would have lost, but that was over a decade ago now. The Evo/HSV was in the Production Cars series, I'm not sure if they still run. Evo VIIIs were in it, and Z-Series Clubsports, no E-Series was around.

Edit:

If you're trying to say I have less respect for those driving big-engined cars, you're wrong. It is though, more than often, idiots and ignorants behind the wheel of these cars. I don't know why.

I could say the same of people driving imports, as is often the case. The fact that you jumped on me after a little joke shows you have no respect, you didn't care what I really thought, you just bashed on me because I obviously like Holdens.

 

[Joey D]

What on Earth are you talking about? I'm comparing production spec cars used in a race series.

Uhhh you were talking about these?

 

[homeforsummer]

It is though, more than often, idiots and ignorants behind the wheel of these cars. I don't know why.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would go as far as to suggest people who drive vehicles with bigger engines are complacent about their performance and don't appreciate what smaller engined cars can do. I've heard people before saying that "overtaking was almost impossible" with a 90bhp car, which is nonsence because I can overtake perfectly well with 60bhp.

Many people nowadays just want to put their foot down in one gear and go so don't understand how to make best use of less performance.

In effect, it would be like new bikers going straight to 600cc+ machines after their test. I don't know about anywhere else but in the UK you have to ride a machine with 33bhp or less for two years after passing your test at 17 before you can move up to bigger bikes, and until you've passed your test you can only ride a 125cc bike, which are generally less than 15bhp when restricted. Having to make use of the limited power you've got makes you appreciate something with more power a lot more, and it also teaches you how to use that power better. The same applies in cars.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Uhhh you were talking about these?

No.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would go as far as to suggest people who drive vehicles with bigger engines are complacent about their performance and don't appreciate what smaller engined cars can do. I've heard people before saying that "overtaking was almost impossible" with a 90bhp car, which is nonsence because I can overtake perfectly well with 60bhp.

Many people nowadays just want to put their foot down in one gear and go so don't understand how to make best use of less performance.

In effect, it would be like new bikers going straight to 600cc+ machines after their test. I don't know about anywhere else but in the UK you have to ride a machine with 33bhp or less for two years after passing your test at 17 before you can move up to bigger bikes, and until you've passed your test you can only ride a 125cc bike, which are generally less than 15bhp when restricted. Having to make use of the limited power you've got makes you appreciate something with more power a lot more, and it also teaches you how to use that power better. The same applies in cars.

The same could be said of import drivers: That they think anything with a V8 in it is instantly a POS dinosaur capable of nothing.

 

[slidesquad#1]

On that same reasoning, if I can get big levels of power from my big V8, and go faster on the straights for it, why do I need better handling? We get the same/similar (up to driver now) lap times.

You asked me/us to show you a 2 litre car with power approaching 317 kw. I stated that you don't always need similar kinds of power to go fast in a straight line. An Evo 9 with a mere 206 kw was actually marginally faster down the quarter than the old VZ Clubsport was, according to Wheels.

And re: the dinosaurs comment, everyone expects the big V8's to pull hard in a straight line. Not as many people expect them to turn as well as they go. It works the other way as well though, there are plenty of morons on both sides.

 

[Joey D]

No.

Did you forget what you wrote?

Err, yeah they do. That's why Top Fuellers are V8s running 4sec 1/4miles. Sophisticated is not as important as end result is. And a big V8 will go plenty fast.

From that statement it appears you are saying bigger engines are good because in a Top Fuel dragster you can do a 1/4 in 4 seconds.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

You asked me/us to show you a 2 litre car with power approaching 317 kw. I stated that you don't always need that kind of power to go that fast. An Evo 9 with a mere 206 kw was actually marginally faster down the quarter than the old VZ Clubsport was, according to Wheels.

Wheels have never been good at launches, and with the Evo's AWD that's not a problem. On top end though the HSV is marginally quicker.

Did you forget what you wrote?

From that statement it appears you are saying bigger engines are good because in a Top Fuel dragster you can do a 1/4 in 4 seconds.

Didn't I write that saying that in terms of ultimate, the V8 gets more power, the best L4s in the world are something like just over 1000hp, and that V8 is 7000hp. Look, the point is, bigger engines=bigger power.