Super-Supra
(Banned)
- 4,111
Originally posted by CerberaLM
The sure sign of one who doesn't want to be embarrassed by his lack of flaming and/or reasoning ability.
It's better than ruining another thread.
my dad just ordered an s2000
- Thread starter advanR
- 70 comments
- 1,724 views
It's better than ruining another thread.
Super-Supra
(Banned)
- 4,111
I Agree, With BlazinXtreme all the way.
Super-Supra
(Banned)
- 4,111
Exactly why I Insisted on going to the Test Forum.
geez man...You got it out for me huh?...As I recall the first stone wasn't thrown by me...What did I do so wrong to you cobra?...Did I prove you wrong? Do you hate me for my brain?..I can't help but be both intelligent and witty.
Originally posted by Super-Supra
What kind of a person would say that. They seruisly must be a stupid dumb***. V8 Muscle Is Music to the ears.
The person is probably one of those Rice Lovers. Stick his head in a Rice Exhaust Pipe and lets see how much fun he has.
Do I get my point straight.
......
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
All right, pal, 27 strikes and you're out. I've warned you several times myself to knock this crap off, and so have several other moderators. You're just not getting it - and you're the common denominator in a lot of pointless arguments.
We've all had enough of your "witty and intelligent" talk. Go sign up at www.manilovemyself.com , but don't expect to be welcome here any longer.
- 871
i think buying corvettes is STUPID
- 335
How much does a s2000 cost?
ShobThaBob
Premium
- 2,651
- rosooftw
The Z06 is an amazing car, no matter how you look at it. It owns the 1/4 and owns the twisties. But comparing a 50k vette to an s2000 isnt very fair. I have heard that the s2000 is an absolute blast to drive because of its versatility as being a useful track car as well as a normal everyday car.
PS...Is Shinez banned? That guy was really getting on my nerves, a lot of unnessecary flaming went has gone on bc of him.
PS...Is Shinez banned? That guy was really getting on my nerves, a lot of unnessecary flaming went has gone on bc of him.
- 1,494
hmmm im not entirely convinced by that. i'd like to see a direct comparison, i think it might be a close run.
i get very confused by people with car names as their forum names
like when u are talking about V8's and mention cerbera. anyway... 
there is a black s2000 on my street and the guy literally uses it once a month, dunno where he takes it to. i don't particularly like the looks and the torque seems a little small to me. but im sure it will provide you with many thrilling rides so good on you.
- 804
i think i would have to disagree with this, the Z06 may beat an E46 M3 (even though i wouldnt count on it) but i'm pretty certain it wouldent smoke it. well anyway the S2000 is a great car, the engine is amazing you could be cruising along nice and quiet one minute but the next you could be screaming along in the VTEC mode, oh by the way does the S2000 have i-VTEC like the new civic type R or is just VTEC?
- 1,494
i never thought i'd see the day when advan wouldn't be offering his full support for the m3. but like bmw power says, beat perhaps, but hardly smoke it.
m3 stats:
Top Speed 155.0 mph / 249.6 kph
0 - 30 mph 1.7 seconds
0 - 60 mph 4.7 seconds
0 - 100 mph 11.6 seconds
0 - ¼ mile 13.6 seconds
vette:
Top Speed 171.0 mph / 275.2 kph
0 - 30 mph 2.0 seconds
0 - 60 mph 4.2 seconds
0 - 100 mph 10.1 seconds
0 - ¼ mile 12.6 seconds
about a second difference in 1/4 mile and 0-100. since the vette is 157kg's lighter and has 116lb/ft more torque you'd expect it to be at least this much faster. though through the corners much more depends on balance and aerodynamics, though im not championing the m3 i wouldn't quite put it down as much as you do.
advanR
(Banned)
- 1,389
I am not at all putting the m3 down. for gods sake i own one. i would kill for an e46 m3 csl. even though it is less extreme than the z06 i would rather have an m3. it is more refined (not more compromising), it has a better motor imo, high revving, and i have a certain attachment to bimmers.
but a one second difference in the quarter is a huge gap. and when you start talking about track times, like you said, it is more about balance, cornering, grip, aerodynamics. it is odd that everyone gives the m3 the upper hand in this region without thinking about it. the vette is not lacking in this area. it is not a piggish american car. it is like you said lighter than the m3.
and about the vette being "expected to be at least this much faster", torque doesnt mean ****. torque vs. hp is just brute power vs actual power when geared correctly. torque only has the advantage when at lower rpms. when you are in the powerband all that matters is hp.
the vette is a monster. i would rather have an m3 though........
but a one second difference in the quarter is a huge gap. and when you start talking about track times, like you said, it is more about balance, cornering, grip, aerodynamics. it is odd that everyone gives the m3 the upper hand in this region without thinking about it. the vette is not lacking in this area. it is not a piggish american car. it is like you said lighter than the m3.
and about the vette being "expected to be at least this much faster", torque doesnt mean ****. torque vs. hp is just brute power vs actual power when geared correctly. torque only has the advantage when at lower rpms. when you are in the powerband all that matters is hp.
the vette is a monster. i would rather have an m3 though........
advanR
(Banned)
- 1,389
here is a comparision. i should get exact times for this, and maybe will later, but at the track people goto around here, a z06 would probably run a 1:49, while an e46 m3 would run a 1:54. that is a huge gap.
my e30 m3 runs 2:06s. a friend with an m3 with totally decked out s14 motor, 2.5 evo conversion 270hp+ (mine is 205 probably), and atleast an eibach prokit runs 2:01s. He is breaking 145 at the end of the straight, going *what he says* is flat into turn one. I barely hit 120 at end of straight, and am lifting slightly going into one and two.
so the illustration is that 5secs is a ****ing huge gap.
my e30 m3 runs 2:06s. a friend with an m3 with totally decked out s14 motor, 2.5 evo conversion 270hp+ (mine is 205 probably), and atleast an eibach prokit runs 2:01s. He is breaking 145 at the end of the straight, going *what he says* is flat into turn one. I barely hit 120 at end of straight, and am lifting slightly going into one and two.
so the illustration is that 5secs is a ****ing huge gap.
- 1,494
true 5 seconds around a 2 minute track is a very great difference indeed. i've never driven an m3 or a vette so my opinion is largely based on others'.
interesting about the torque thing, i thought acceleration had everything to do with torque... gotta go read some more manuals and guides
interesting about the torque thing, i thought acceleration had everything to do with torque... gotta go read some more manuals and guides
- 1,494
yeah i read it, isn't it one of the stickys? i know more torque means a greater force of acceleration and therefore a quicker 0-30 and 0-60 time but a 1/4 mile requires slightly more than that, maybe thats exactly where HP comes into play... though F1 cars have no torque and loads of hp. but they are light too.
advanR
(Banned)
- 1,389
i will try my best to help you understand.
torque to the wheels is what makes a car quick, but power from the motor must first go through the transmission and the diff. These two parts change ratios and all of that ****. So a car can have a motor that makes tons of ACTUAL power (torque), or it can have less torque and just put all of the power to the wheels by revving like crazy and gearing the revs down to the wheels. Both cars might have the same torque to the wheels.
torque is power. a honda motor doesnt make a lot of power, but because they rev so high, it can all be geared down to have more torque to the wheels. Just like an f1 car.
so, once you are in the powerband, hp is all that matters (or torque to the wheels). but, ........ since a non revvy motor, "torquey" if you will, has all of that torque right away, from a dead stop that car would have an advantage. An s2000 woulnt be making all of its power until it gets up to 7k or so. So from a dead stop, the torquey car would blow the s2000 in first gear. but like i said, once out of first gear it doesnt matter, because you are in the powerband for every gear anyways.
understand? think of hp as a function of torque and rpm. think of what the differences between a dyno graph for an s2000 and a hummer would look like.
You should really reread that post, there is some really good explanaitions in it. The windmill vs m3, and vette vs vette comparisons really helped.
torque to the wheels is what makes a car quick, but power from the motor must first go through the transmission and the diff. These two parts change ratios and all of that ****. So a car can have a motor that makes tons of ACTUAL power (torque), or it can have less torque and just put all of the power to the wheels by revving like crazy and gearing the revs down to the wheels. Both cars might have the same torque to the wheels.
torque is power. a honda motor doesnt make a lot of power, but because they rev so high, it can all be geared down to have more torque to the wheels. Just like an f1 car.
so, once you are in the powerband, hp is all that matters (or torque to the wheels). but, ........ since a non revvy motor, "torquey" if you will, has all of that torque right away, from a dead stop that car would have an advantage. An s2000 woulnt be making all of its power until it gets up to 7k or so. So from a dead stop, the torquey car would blow the s2000 in first gear. but like i said, once out of first gear it doesnt matter, because you are in the powerband for every gear anyways.
understand? think of hp as a function of torque and rpm. think of what the differences between a dyno graph for an s2000 and a hummer would look like.
You should really reread that post, there is some really good explanaitions in it. The windmill vs m3, and vette vs vette comparisons really helped.
