TR Forums

JohnC wrote:

Fast enough. You can find official numbers on an official site.

I'll try again. How fast have you gone in it?

About 100mph, for a VERY brief amount of time, with no other cars nearby. I don't want to get my driver's license suspended and I haven't visited any race tracks with it yet. The car's speed is electronically limited to 155mph in stock form, with "development package" option the speed limit is raised to 174mph. It is possible to just flash its ECU with custom software which completely removes limiter and allows the car to reach even higher speeds (as well as add more stuff like an aftermarket supercharger from Weistec, high flow exhaust and other bolt-ons to raise the engine power up to 1000hp and go even faster) but not sure why would anyone do that...

JohnC wrote:

About 100mph, for a VERY brief amount of time, with no other cars nearby. I don't want to get my driver's license suspended and I haven't visited any race tracks with it yet. The car's speed is electronically limited to 155mph in stock form, with "development package" option the speed limit is raised to 174mph. It is possible to just flash its ECU with custom software which completely removes limiter and allows the car to reach even higher speeds (as well as add more stuff like an aftermarket supercharger from Weistec, high flow exhaust and other bolt-ons to raise the engine power up to 1000hp and go even faster) but not sure why would anyone do that...

My 69 Cutlass would do 160 mph. It was scary though, those things were never meant to go anywhere near that fast. My Lincoln Mark VIII is a pussy cat at high speed. Sweet and solid on the road. 140 mph is no big deal for her.

Lord I used to ask hitchhikers if they wanted to go 100mph. My Cutlass did 115 in second on the turbo 400. It was built for the highway. She hit third hard and it was great fun.

You kids today. I dunno. I guess we boomers used up all the fun ... sorry.

jss21382 wrote:

Kia is no longer a value brand, it took over Hyundai's position when Hyundai moved up to the luxury segment. You pay for styling and fit/finish. Take a look at a Yaris or Aveo for a true entry level car. Look at the new Dodge Dart, it has tons of features, and drives great, but they put a cheap looking finish on the interior to keep it from upstaging the 200 which from most aspects except for size it's superior to.

Kia is an Asian car, it drives like an asian car, it's quality isn't quite as high as Toyota or Honda, but they're similar. The Euro cars are a totally different animal. Everything about them is more complicated and sophisticated and have much higher standards for everything, sometimes to a fault. Most shops in the US can't even do an alignment on a german luxury car because of specialized tools required. But a properly aligned bmw/mercedes will out handle just about any of the japanese or us vehicles. There is a lot of value in the German Luxury segment, but most of the owners would never know the difference. They might know the asian cars just aren't as nice, but they wouldn't know why.

Kept seeing this post and finally clicked on it,lol, not much of a lean in but we bought the new dodge dart a few months ago and the damn thing drives and feels like it costs at least double the price.

We went in their already knowing we wanted the dart, it was about building it our way, but they kept trying to sell us the 200,lol, we almost walked out.

I think that they botched the release of this car, they could have had more of the customized ones out on the lots first.

As you said, there is no comparing to the German cars, its like they have some special feel to them that can't be matched by other cars and like you said the tech that's in them.

PenGun wrote:

You kids today. I dunno. I guess we boomers used up all the fun ... sorry.

The traffic there is usually too heavy for any kind of high speed experiments, and repeating dumb things leading to this is not really what I'd consider as "fun":

mnecaise wrote:

duke_nukem_3D wrote:

Yikes! My apologies for starting such a controversial thread. I meant no ill intentions with it. Was simply curious as to what others thought of the level playing field in the industry when it comes to things like GPS, HID/LED lights, push-start and other electronic gizmos that used to differentiate different tiers which can now be had on any car. This was the "commodity" idea I was referring to. Apologies to anyone I've offended.

I for one am not offended. I pointed out my car as a "commodity" vehicle only because, well, it is. These guys are arguing over their favorite brands and a lot of top of the line automobile models are being thrown in the mix.

JohnC wrote:

it's always fun to see how overly serious/jealous/protective/naive or stereotypical people can get when discussing different brands of cars in different price ranges

This. I'm rather enjoying the arguing. It's like the old school days when people would argue over which was better, Chevy or Ford. Usually a friendly argument settled by buying someone a beer or making a trip to the local track. All in good fun.

Perhaps we should arrange for a TR day at a drag strip somewhere... Unfortunately, my truck isn't ready yet, still in about a thousand pieces.

Edit: text got broken when I hit the submit button.

This.

JohnC wrote:

PenGun wrote:

You kids today. I dunno. I guess we boomers used up all the fun ... sorry.

The traffic there is usually too heavy for any kind of high speed experiments, and repeating dumb things leading to this is not really what I'd consider as "fun":

Not nice, thankfully they only appear to be superficial wounds:)

Yea... Noone got hurt, both drivers had good insurance coverage, the officer didn't request me to see the recording from my dashboard camera (the videos had a speed stamp on them and the speed was not really appropriate for this type of street), so it's all good and lesson was learned

JohnC wrote:

PenGun wrote:

You kids today. I dunno. I guess we boomers used up all the fun ... sorry.

The traffic there is usually too heavy for any kind of high speed experiments, and repeating dumb things leading to this is not really what I'd consider as "fun":

Umm only Ghost Rider does these things in traffic. I spent 30 years driving highway semi trailer, city semi trailer and city garbage truck and have no accidents.

Ghost Rider trolling for police:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qS6HjV1-1M

I have played on the highway with my several cars. I built the Cutlass to humiliate 5 lite Fords and did so many times. It would put 560ft/lbs into the ground at about 70 mph in second. I have retrieved that car from 360 events that started at over 100 mph. Now I'm quite a bit older and I don't push the Mark VIII all that hard very often.

I do wonder through about people with potent cars that never use the potential. What's up with that?

PenGun wrote:

My 69 Cutlass would do 160 mph. It was scary though, those things were never meant to go anywhere near that fast. My Lincoln Mark VIII is a pussy cat at high speed. Sweet and solid on the road. 140 mph is no big deal for her.

Nova was still pulling when I backed off the throttle at 130mph. That was fast enough, for that car, on that day. Never got it to a track to thoroughly shake it out.

PenGun wrote:

You kids today. I dunno. I guess we boomers used up all the fun ... sorry.

Nope. decided to build my next vehicle... Just put the reprogramming kit in the transmission. Foundation for "Mild" truck engine going on the stand in my workshop to start assembly this week. I could buy one, but where would be the fun in that?

peartart wrote:

Let's be honest, unless you are on a track, if you are having fun while driving either you are needlessly putting other people in danger or you have a very sad idea of fun.

If your idea of "fun" is to drive recklessly in traffic like a high school sophomore who just got Flirt Eyes from a hottie in a Mustang, then sure.

I like driving and I'd still say commodity, at least for me.

credible wrote:

Kept seeing this post and finally clicked on it,lol, not much of a lean in but we bought the new dodge dart a few months ago and the damn thing drives and feels like it costs at least double the price.

I think that they botched the release of this car, they could have had more of the customized ones out on the lots first.

Yeah...The handling on those and the interior with the exception of the plastic is comparable to my Altima SE-R, which stickered in the mid 30's. Did you drive a 200 or avenger? In my experience the Dart just goes where you put it and doesn't complain. The 200/avenger on the other hand is super twitchy/unstable doing moderate speed cornering and has a ton of torque steer.

As far as the release, they weren't ready. They held up the release trying to get the dual clutch trans to act like an american transmission, then they ended up releasing only manual trans versions, then they sourced a Hyundai auto trans as a stop gap measure, then finally released the dual clutch as an option in between an auto and a manual. On the engine side, it was supposed to be released with a 1.4, 2.0, or 2.4 available, the pre-existing 1.4 fiat engine was the only one ready at release time, they phased on the redesigned tigershark engines later as their redesigned and quality control finished up. If this car was released under Daimler it would have had all options available at launch, regardless of whether they were ready. Kinda like a lot of software we deal with.

JohnC wrote:

About 100mph, for a VERY brief amount of time, with no other cars nearby.

I can't help but laugh at this sentiment.. earlier in this thread yammerpickle2 said that driving at such speeds may be a reason to buy something other than an entry level car, because supposedly they were designed for it. Yet here you are, proud owner of a C63 and you have only briefly enjoyed just a smidgen of its potential, with your bum puckered up for fear of losing your license.

For me, this means that cars really are a commodity. People drive econoboxes like the aformentioned Toyota Yaris over the autobahn at 100+mph every single day, cars with so little power that the manufacturers don't even bother selling them in the US! And for all the money you spent on getting an awesome car with a 400+hp V8 engine, what do you do with it? Nothing that I couldn't do with that 1 liter 3-cylinder tin box full of airbags.

I realize this sounds like me talking **** about your car or about your choice of buying it, that is really not what I'm trying to say. What I'm trying to say is that for most intents and purposes (excluding towing or farm work), the only reason to get something other than a cheap econobox (or maybe a 7-seater if you have a big family) is because you want to, never because you need to.

Firestarter wrote:

I realize this sounds like me talking **** about your car or about your choice of buying it, that is really not what I'm trying to say. What I'm trying to say is that for most intents and purposes (excluding towing or farm work), the only reason to get something other than a cheap econobox (or maybe a 7-seater if you have a big family) is because you want to, never because you need to.

This is true for nearly everything in life. :shrug:

As for never taking a C63 past 100 MPH...at least take it to a track once in its boring life!

.

clone wrote:

when I put the down payment on the 200 I had already lined up a new set of tires (the stock lS2's are the reason for the torque steer)

Torque steer doesn't have anything to do with tires -- it's totally due to the drivetrain. Tires with more grip can mask it though...

Waco wrote:

Torque steer doesn't have anything to do with tires -- it's totally due to the drivetrain. Tires with more grip can mask it though...

Yep, caused by unequal-length drive shafts coming out of the transaxle. The car will torque-steer to the short shaft. I once owned a 1988 Mazda 323GT (for 10 years, actually), a little econobox with a 140hp or so turbo motor in it. Once that turbo spooled up you'd best have a firm hand on the wheel or you were going LEFT and in a hurry.

I have two cars. My Suzuki Swift which is FWD and is a bit of a pig, but quite drivable. My Lincoln Mark VIII has RWD and IRS. The difference is very large.

I can precisely take the Lincoln through ridiculously sharp corners in a smooth and relaxed manner. A big ol sports car really. The Suzuki would be in the weeds long before it achieved the Gs the Licnoln will do.

It's FWD that makes car handling suck. Even my kid's 99 Prelude which has some pretty trick suspension stuff happening is not as confidence inspiring as my Lincoln in the twisties, although it is probably quicker.

No one is doubting the fact that RWD cars handle better. That said, the ever-increasing CAFE requirements make it very difficult to engineer a well-handling RWD sedan that also makes the city MPG grade. At the rate we're going I'm afraid that Subaru will have to ditch AWD at some point just to avoid gas-guzzler status.

Captain Ned wrote:

Waco wrote:

Torque steer doesn't have anything to do with tires -- it's totally due to the drivetrain. Tires with more grip can mask it though...

Yep, caused by unequal-length drive shafts coming out of the transaxle. The car will torque-steer to the short shaft.

Even with equal length drive shafts one tyre will lose grip before the other (difference in road surface) and it will head off to one side. It's the FWD that's the issue.

PenGun wrote:

It's FWD that makes car handling suck. Even my kid's 99 Prelude which has some pretty trick suspension stuff happening is not as confidence inspiring as my Lincoln in the twisties, although it is probably quicker.

I have to disagree. Sure, FWD is usually worse, but my Cobalt SS would corner like crazy and was extremely inspiring in terms of confidence.

Sure, my Miata is better, but I won't try and pin that down entirely on the drivetrain. Both handle extremely well.

notfred wrote:

Even with equal length drive shafts one tyre will lose grip before the other (difference in road surface) and it will head off to one side. It's the FWD that's the issue.

That's not torque steer, at least not IMO. Torque steer is when more power goes to the same wheel because of unequal length drive shafts. What you're talking about is just lack of traction and applies to both FWD, RWD, and AWD cars (in different manners, but it still applies). A proper limited slip setup will cure much of it.

Captain Ned wrote:

No one is doubting the fact that RWD cars handle better. That said, the ever-increasing CAFE requirements make it very difficult to engineer a well-handling RWD sedan that also makes the city MPG grade. At the rate we're going I'm afraid that Subaru will have to ditch AWD at some point just to avoid gas-guzzler status.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong...but aren't most RWD transmissions more efficient than their FWD counterparts?

Waco wrote:

notfred wrote:

Even with equal length drive shafts one tyre will lose grip before the other (difference in road surface) and it will head off to one side. It's the FWD that's the issue.

That's not torque steer, at least not IMO. Torque steer is when more power goes to the same wheel because of unequal length drive shafts. What you're talking about is just lack of traction and applies to both FWD, RWD, and AWD cars (in different manners, but it still applies).

We're going to have to disagree on the definition. Lack of traction in a RWD or AWD car doesn't result in the car heading sideways across the road, that's what I really hate.

notfred wrote:

We're going to have to disagree on the definition. Lack of traction in a RWD or AWD car doesn't result in the car heading sideways across the road, that's what I really hate.

Never driven a RWD car sideways then I take it? Sure, AWD isn't as bad, but if you have the drivers side of the car in traction and the passenger side slipping...the car is going to veer off to the right. Same thing with a RWD car, just less extreme (though I would argue harder to correct).

Torque steer, IMO, has everything to do with the wheel ripping itself in a specific direction when tromping on the go pedal. Random steering based on traction is just...driving.

Torque steer is simply the effects of torque on steering. It is common in FWD cars and almost unavoidable if there is considerable power involved.

There is actually torque steer in RWD cars as well but as it does not come through the steering it's not at all the same.

.

I'm going to have to agree on the tires and torque steer, the v8 grand prix has insane torque steer if you run anything less than the OE Potenza's, traditionally you wouldn't expect it, but driving the car before and after tends to make you a believer.

FWD V8 just never made sense to start with.

.