At 10/9/09 06:13 AM, Life-Stream wrote:

At 10/9/09 05:31 AM, TheFaces wrote: Well the Porsche Cayenne springs to mind.

Porsche Cayanne? That's like a 4x4! The thing's huge. That's similar to the VW Toureg or the Audi Q7.

The Mito is really quite compact and small, more along the lines of the Renault Clio, Citroen C4, VW Golf etc...

I didn't mean as far as size itself. I was speaking more of the lines.
Just look at this picture, and then scroll up to the other one.

At 10/9/09 07:37 AM, HighWayStar365 wrote: How could you guys say you like ferraris yet fail to mention the '57 250 Testa rossa?!

btw, can I join?

Probably because it looks like a red Batmobile. : P

Sure, why not?

At 10/10/09 07:47 AM, HighWayStar365 wrote: On an unrelated note, who likes those Lancia Stratos?

I always used to love the Lancia Delta. As square as they are they can look pretty nice.

At 10/11/09 05:36 AM, TheFaces wrote: I didn't mean as far as size itself. I was speaking more of the lines.
Just look at this picture, and then scroll up to the other one.

I suppose it does a little bit. Is that a new model Cayanne?

So, how about that internal combustion engine then? Pretty nifty contraption if you ask me.

I really should come here more often, seeing as I was one of the first here. *sigh*

And I want Top Gear back on the telly, NOW.

At 10/10/09 07:47 AM, HighWayStar365 wrote:

At 10/10/09 07:05 AM, Life-Stream wrote: I like Ferrari's but it don't mean I know every Ferrari ever made. I've never even seen that testarossa o_o

Looks awesome though.

To bad it costs thirteen MILLION dollars. (u.s.)

On an unrelated note, who likes those Lancia Stratos?

that is also one of my fav cars of all time, a supercar for the dirt, and that paint job is one of the best of all time.

Oh and heres my car ; )

At 10/16/09 12:52 PM, cronic-22 wrote: Oh and heres my car ; )

Man, there is SOOOO much I would love to do to that car.
The looks just grow on you. After I got used to it I couldn't help but think of all the body/paint work I would like to do.

At 10/22/09 11:06 PM, TheFaces wrote: Man, there is SOOOO much I would love to do to that car.
The looks just grow on you. After I got used to it I couldn't help but think of all the body/paint work I would like to do.

lol. It is a sexy little thing. I would personally change the alloys though. I've never been a big fan of 3 spokes.

Imma throw something out there. Doesn't it make sense to put the drive where the engine (nearly all of the cars weight) is? E.G. Fwd in a front engine car, Rwd in a rear/mid engine car, and of corse all wheel drive is nice in any case.

What I want to focus on though is Fwd (Front engine obviously as well). I have been noticing that a fair amount of people criticize moding a Fwd, and argue that putting more power into a Rwd (Engine in front) would be better. Lets look at the advantages of Fwd cars: higher traction, faster acceleration, stronger gripping on turns, lighter (due less metal being extended to turn the wheels), and over a more efficient car. The disadvantage is a "pull" while accelerating instead of the "push" provided by Rwd. You see it all the time in 1/4 mile races, the Hot Hatch beats the mustang almost every time.

Oh and so far I'm liking how my Integra is coming out. I'm working on the aesthetics and upkeep first. I got 4 new sony explodes, Xenon Yellow after-market headlights, a Zinc-crested stainless steel cut-out grille (From Grillecraft), new wiring, new belts, and high-traction tires, doing all except the tires and belts myself. I plan on putting in some interior lighting (yellow of corse), cleaning under the bonnet entirely and painting the engine block yellow, painting the brakes yellow, do a little bit of gutting (took out the spare tire already and riped out rusty metal from the trunk), either installing a short-ram or a cold air intake, and Apexi-N1 exhaust. I'm keeping the rims stock (they are heavy enough and provide excellent acceleration and grip) and I am not making any more engine modifications, as I do not want to spend the dough nor lose the mpgs.

Sorry I wrote so much, but if ya got the time tell me what you think. Its a 1999 Acura Integra Ls 1.8L DOHC Non-Vtec automatic. I'll update with pictures after the grille arrives and I put it on.

At 10/11/09 08:05 AM, BobbaQ wrote:
So, how about that internal combustion engine then? Pretty nifty contraption if you ask me.

Yeah, a bit too intricate. Lets compare it to an electric car motor. For starters, only 35% of the energy produced by a combustion engine is actually put into moving the wheels, the rest is given off as heat. An electric car motor puts 85% of the power generated towards the wheels (It also requires a smaller liquid cooling system, which reduces weight). When you want to increase the horse power to weight ratio of a normal combustion engine, you either have to buy expensive and gas gulping superchargers, attach turbos which takes higher gears and revs to produce more power, increase engine liters, or replace heavy engine parts with expensive and lighter aluminum or alloy metals. All you have to do to an electric car is increase the size of the motor, or increase the amps flown out of the batteries. With Combustion engines take up a much larger amount of space than a electric motor and generator, requiring more car, reducing acceleration and efficiency. Electric motors produce 100% torque before you even touch the accelerator, combustion engines have to build up torque over switching gears. An electric motor revs almost twice as much as a gasoline engine, up to 14,000 rpm (more in electric dragsters). The are over 100 moving parts in a combustion engine, under the hood in an electric car there are only two, the motor and generator; 4 if you count the wheels and A/C fans. In countries like Switzerland, you can even recharge a battery faster than you can fill up a gas tank. There are companies that have set up charging stations that mechanically swap out an empty battery pack for a charged one, and you pay only a few dollars (around $3 U.S.). Electric motors are indisputably more reliable than a combustion engine, only requiring service every 100,000 miles (usually only to wind and lubricate the motor). When you purchase an electric car, some governments (Including the U.S.) may give you incentives or grants. These grants may be in excess of $5,000, depending on the type of vehicle you purchase. On average with gas around $2.50/gal, It costs $35 to fill a 14-gal tank, it costs only a little over $3 to fully charge a battery pack of the average electric car. Charging electric cars over night makes use of the wasted electricity provided by power plants, producing virtually no extra greenhouse gases. An electric car usually only has 3 settings with one gear (some with 2 gears for some reason), park, reverse (except for racing motors), and drive. There isn't any time-consuming gear-shifting in an electric car, nor any extra weight provided by a transmission (its all digital).

Now I know electricity has three setbacks (two of which are solved already in certain cases), miles on a charge, charge time, and lack of noise for some is a drawback. If you are loaded enough to buy a highly superb electric car ($108k before tax benefits and grants) , then the Tesla Roadster blows two of the setback out of the water. It gets 244 miles to the charge, and can be charged to 75% power in less than 3 hours, or in 8 with a normal charge. The average american worker puts in 8 hours of labor a day, so that settles nicely, just charge your car while your at work. Also, the average individual car trip in America is only composed of just 10 miles. This car travels 0-60mph in 3.7 sec (2010 Tesla Roadster Sport, it doesn't cost any more than the hard top) with only 248 horse power. That is impossible for a mass-produced gasoline car. As for the noise, electric cars do produce a sound, much like a power-drill hooked up to batteries that draw out enough amps to produce 14,000 Rpm. It sounds very intense, too intense for the majority of the population, and the noise is dampened a little under the bonnet (as there is no exhaust flow). Instead, why not turn up the radio instead? If that doesn't work for you, then you can always purchase a sound box that produces sounds similar to a Lambo or a Ferrari, and you'll have the speed to show for it. There, all cliche' electric car setbacks solved. Also keep this in mind, as technology advances, strides in electric automotive engineering will too. Battery technology grows rapidly every, along with computer processing power. All electronics are getting smaller, more powerful, more capable, and more efficient, with each passing year. Electric cars will in return, follow the same growth, as they are powered by batteries and motors, which are in every electronic device.

Once again, sorry for writing alot, just want to make my point.

Oh and heres a picture. Mid-mounted motor, it is the size of a watermelon. The batteries are also place in the mid/rear in order to provide more traction and grip to the tires. Carbon-fiber body, Rwd, about 2,700 lbs. The roadster sport now accelerates faster than the little Tango 0-60, 3.7 < 3.8. Top speed, 144 mph (due to only 288 Hp). Oh and never-mind, its $19k more than the hard top now, I double checked the Hard-Top, its $101k not $108k, my bad.

Oh and I finally got that Grillecraft cut-out grille installed, had to take off the whole front bumper and drill 3 holes in it. Now all I have to do is get an Apexi N-1 muffler, paint the engine block and brakes yellow, and buy a cold-air intake.

At 12/8/09 07:28 PM, Saen wrote: Oh and I finally got that Grillecraft cut-out grille installed

You should have saved up a buck or two more and gone for an awesome aggressive looking body kit.

On a different note, am i the only one here that thinks the Lancer Evo 9 is sexier than the Evo 10?

At 12/8/09 07:51 PM, Life-Stream wrote:
You should have saved up a buck or two more and gone for an awesome aggressive looking body kit.

Well I figured if I was going to spend any extra money, it would be on Sony Explode amp, radio, and subs.

On a different note, am i the only one here that thinks the Lancer Evo 9 is sexier than the Evo 10?

Probably. The 10 is way more defined and fierce, but the 9 should be faster, due to the extra weight added to the 10.

I hate all the GPS/Nav systems and all the other useless electronics auto companies are slapping onto cars these days. Unnecessary weight and complications, what ever happened to the basic, compact, and lightweight car?

Hey, ill go for joining, I just hope you guys talk about others cars than imports. What About american muscle? ive got a hot rod heart

At 12/8/09 07:51 PM, Life-Stream wrote: On a different note, am i the only one here that thinks the Lancer Evo 9 is sexier than the Evo 10?

They both look really sexy, but I do think the evo 9 is better.

At 12/9/09 06:37 AM, 64nailhead wrote: Hey, ill go for joining, I just hope you guys talk about others cars than imports. What About american muscle? ive got a hot rod heart

Yeah my favorite car is an American car, the Tesla Roadster. Other than that, imports are way more efficient, agile, safe, and quick.

American cars are FAR to overrated.

Just hear me out, when you have some evo or skyline you have to have a degree from ITT Tech just to change a wire. On good old american cars its just pop the plug wire off take spark plug off, put new one in, put new plug wire on Viola! done. (not like im saying i hate imports and their high performance ideas) but i just like simplicity.

Nailheads Are Kool(with twin garrett turbos and dual quad holleys) FYI

At 12/8/09 08:32 PM, Saen wrote: I hate all the GPS/Nav systems and all the other useless electronics auto companies are slapping onto cars these days. Unnecessary weight and complications, what ever happened to the basic, compact, and lightweight car?

The best, and only, good example I can think of to support your idea is the McLaren F1. Probablly the single greatest car ever made.

At 12/8/09 08:32 PM, Saen wrote: I hate all the GPS/Nav systems and all the other useless electronics auto companies are slapping onto cars these days. Unnecessary weight and complications, what ever happened to the basic, compact, and lightweight car?

Dude, it's nearly 2010. If a new car doesn't come with these things it'd be pretty shitty.
Sure each gizmo might add 10...maybe 15 kilos at most onto your car, but who cares really, it's not like you're gonna be drag racing on the streets, right? And if someone buys a car to race or tune and really think that the extra weight is a factor in that aspect, then they can just take it out.

Cars that are designed to be sold as actual race cars don't have all those luxurys anyway, hell, most of those crazy supercars don't even have radios.
But if i was to buy a new car for daily road use in this day and age, it better have all those gadgets and gizmos, however unnecessary they may be.

At 12/10/09 07:53 PM, Life-Stream wrote: But if i was to buy a new car for daily road use in this day and age, it better have all those gadgets and gizmos, however unnecessary they may be.

I need a gps / satnav because I have ZERO sence of direction.

even then it might not help...

At 12/10/09 07:58 PM, HighWayStar365 wrote: I need a gps / satnav because I have ZERO sence of direction.

The complete opposite of me :P
Don't wanna brag about it, but i have great sense of direction.
A few months ago me and a few friends drove to a city quite far, that we had never been to before, and parked up and had a long ass walk around.

Then when we wanted to find the car everyone was lost.....apart from me. I'm like a damn GPS myself :D

At 12/11/09 06:51 AM, Life-Stream wrote: I'm like a damn GPS myself :D

I envy people like you...

At 12/10/09 07:53 PM, Life-Stream wrote:
Dude, it's nearly 2010. If a new car doesn't come with these things it'd be pretty shitty.
Sure each gizmo might add 10...maybe 15 kilos at most onto your car, but who cares really, it's not like you're gonna be drag racing on the streets, right? And if someone buys a car to race or tune and really think that the extra weight is a factor in that aspect, then they can just take it out.

Cars are so expensive these days because of this unnecessary technology (and weight). Heck i'd rather rather have a nicer engine or interior (leather, sunroof, armrest) than a GPS system, fancy dash, or air-conditioning. If you look at most of the new cars today, the whole interior is plastic, heck even half of the exterior is plastic, whatever happened to a good solid bumper? Even my Integra has a full leather and vinyl interior, very few new cars (even $20k cars have fully plastic dashes, door panels, handles, hubcaps, and of corse bumpers) are like that today. I don't mind the extra weight, as long as it serves a consistently useful purpose.

Lets say all the unnecessary technology in your car (GPS, Sat. Radio, A/C, Computer and screen) adds up to around $3000. That could get you a turbo or a nice set of rims or leather and wood finished interior or a full aftermarket exhaust system.

At 12/10/09 07:39 PM, 64nailhead wrote: Just hear me out, when you have some evo or skyline you have to have a degree from ITT Tech just to change a wire. On good old american cars its just pop the plug wire off take spark plug off, put new one in, put new plug wire on Viola! done. (not like im saying i hate imports and their high performance ideas) but i just like simplicity.

Nailheads Are Kool(with twin garrett turbos and dual quad holleys) FYI

Er... I have an 87 300zx (Nissan/Datsun) that's as simple to work on as any of my old muscle cars were. The only difference is that I can't sit in my engine bay to do it.
But I have nothing against American cars.
Honestly the only cars I dislike are the ones that carry a price tag of over $100,000. If you have to spend that much for a nice car, you're doing something wrong.

that's why I didn't post much when that's all we were talking about.

At 12/12/09 09:55 PM, Saen wrote: Heck i'd rather rather have a nicer engine or interior (leather, sunroof, armrest) than a GPS system, fancy dash, or air-conditioning. If you look at most of the new cars today, the whole interior is plastic, heck even half of the exterior is plastic, whatever happened to a good solid bumper?

When you say nicer engine, what exactly do you mean? New engines are statistically more efficient and reliable than older ones. If you mean more power or 'adding a turbo' as you mentioned, it would only result in less mpg, which means more expensive maintenance.

Even my Integra has a full leather and vinyl interior, very few new cars (even $20k cars have fully plastic dashes, door panels, handles, hubcaps, and of corse bumpers) are like that today. I don't mind the extra weight, as long as it serves a consistently useful purpose.

It is true that car manufacturers are trying to save alot of money on cheap interiors, and you won't find a real nice leather/wood finish if you don't spend 50k or more (unless you but a 2nd hand luxury car or something).

I remember my dad brought a Bentley some time ago to sell on again to make a profit, and it had the most elegant interior i'd ever seen. Sheep skin wool carpets. HUGE comfortable leather heated seats, and a beautiful wooden dash.

Lets say all the unnecessary technology in your car (GPS, Sat. Radio, A/C, Computer and screen) adds up to around $3000. That could get you a turbo or a nice set of rims or leather and wood finished interior or a full aftermarket exhaust system.

But let's be honest. Not everyone that buys a car wants a turbo, rims or a full exhaust system. I'd say the majority of cars that are sold are for family use, or for every day work runs etc...so why would people want turbos on those cars?

Most new sports cars do have turbo versions, for those that do want that extra push, but I don't think there's any reason to loose all the technology.

At 12/13/09 02:06 PM, Life-Stream wrote:
When you say nicer engine, what exactly do you mean? New engines are statistically more efficient and reliable than older ones. If you mean more power or 'adding a turbo' as you mentioned, it would only result in less mpg, which means more expensive maintenance.

Aluminum head, stainless steel trim, just higher quality bits and parts in general. As for these new engines, they just keep taking up less space and becoming more powerful at the same time, its incredible. Turbos do increase the upkeep, but if they are used for casual driving, it can increase the mpg and overall efficiency of the engine. My dad has owned his turbo-diesel E-300 for over 11 years now and we have never had any engine problems, including the turbo. He also gets 30+ mpg on the car.

It is true that car manufacturers are trying to save alot of money on cheap interiors, and you won't find a real nice leather/wood finish if you don't spend 50k or more (unless you but a 2nd hand luxury car or something).

I remember my dad brought a Bentley some time ago to sell on again to make a profit, and it had the most elegant interior i'd ever seen. Sheep skin wool carpets. HUGE comfortable leather heated seats, and a beautiful wooden dash.

Exactly, back in the day cars were built as if each one was a work of art. The overall driving experience (comfort, agility, luxury) was more important than how "loaded" (GPS, TVS, lights and shit) a car was.

But let's be honest. Not everyone that buys a car wants a turbo, rims or a full exhaust system. I'd say the majority of cars that are sold are for family use, or for every day work runs etc...so why would people want turbos on those cars?

Ok lets put these out as an example. Lets say a car company takes the cheaper way out by using a V-6 to power a larger sedan. I would rather have the extra money spent on a twin charged I-4, rather than a cheap, bulky V-6 and electronics. The twin charged I-4 would be more powerful, more fuel efficient, and more reliable, due to less cylinders and the mutual relationship between the turbo and supercharger.

Most new sports cars do have turbo versions, for those that do want that extra push, but I don't think there's any reason to loose all the technology.

All I'm saying is that engine efficiency should be more of a priority than cheap electronics.

yea, my Dads 2000 Ranger is pretty simple too but tahts just a 4 cylinder so there isnt much there. If anyone pays 100,000 bucks for any cars, seriously would you drive or just tell everyone to come to your house to look at it? My dream car is something i can afford and make it go fast thats it. But a Red '86 Ferrari Testarossa would be my most envied dream car( Kavinsky Style)

Nailheads are Kool(with twin garrets and dual quad holleys) FYI

I really wish I had a car right now... any car that doesn't break down all the time and keeps the cold out. Walking around in the freezing cold weather isn't ideal for someone who is built for comfort like I am ;P

Also hi haven't posted here in a while.