[Shaolin Crane]

Originally Posted by BADDASSC6

-Your logic is that cars don't perform because they are not driven hard. So why do 80% of the new 5.0s you see at the track run hard and 90% of the SS suck dick? By your logic it's because the 5.0 owners drive harder and are more willing to through caution to the wind and wad their cars up. By your logic Evo drivers are more aggressive and skilled drivers than STI drivers.
I go to the track every week and see slow 5.0's, slow everything. I've also seen a 6 second Ice Cream truck, are ice cream trucks fast?
Here is reality: AN NSX is a slow POS. I have personally seen a COMPTECH SC NSX get smoked by a LS1 SS with the factory cam and longblock. Slap some chamber plates, springs and shocks on the SS and it will go faster than the NSX on the twisties. I know this because I have seen it. NSX is like the the new BRZ, all the value is placed on the driving experience. Lap times and numbers were not a priority. The 2.8L or 3.2 L makes N/A two rotor wankel torque. The FX motorsports NSX has a fully built motor on boost and spray with MASSIVE aero to be competitive. Not to mention the Ringer they use for a driver. I cannot believe some one let you drive their car. J/K. I an happy to hear that you have actually been to the track. I started to believe that all your knowledge was simply internet based.
I'm not arguing, I've stated the same thing many times. And whether you believe my knowledge is "internet" based. I went every thursday for years and dragged either my trucks or my car. That's where I met my ex, many close friends etc. Were they fast? Not particularly, but an 8.8 out a my dually and a 90mph trap speed in my 08 was pretty damn good. Stock motor fox I ran an 8.5. Fast nope, but I have a damn near perfect reaction time. That doesn't happen with internet knowledge. Do I prefer drag racing? Nope, but i'll take what I can get. Did I crash a ClubLexus car meet at irwindale in my truck and end up being the 5th fastest time and reaction time? Yup. I know what I know cause my hands have done it. I've stated many times I enjoy the build probably more than the use, doesn't mean I don't use them
-You just made my point: LP-640 is slow. You may think it's fast because of what you saw on the internet. At a track it's EVO IX fast (stock). Why there are so many 9-10 sec Gallardos, but how many 9 sec LP-640's are there? Because it's a piece. It was developed before Audi took over and it's a one trick pony. LP-640 are not quick and don't handle however they do top out like a champ.
It's fast, I've driven one. Though, I just have internet knowledge.
-Not going to sporting events blah blah blah drivers blah blah you are just stating the obvious. I took the stang to the roval and smoked a Boss, ZL1 and a Superleggera only because of driving.
-In the other thread you thought your stang was going to run 9's and make 700 hp?? What happened.
It should make 600hp but I said there's nothing stopping me from shooting for 9's and in excess of 700hp if I need do. My block was the weak link, no longer.

You just told me when you knew you wanted a fox. You didn't answer the question asked which was why you wanted a fox? The "Basis" of your decision. When you were a kid did you know Fox's were quick? BTW, That was a question for Justin
My step mom never took her car over 2000rpm. I wanted it because I like the car, I liked how it looked and liked the areo even more. I was 4 years old, I had no clue was fast was, or even what the car was for years. Just wanted it.
So since we struggle with reading comprehension I will try to dumb it down. Motorgen is an Automotive enthusiast site. What ever from that takes for an individual. If guys talk about performance then logic leads me to believe that they purchased a vehicle to suite their performance needs. So why is this decision made by so many base on what youtube, magazines, forums tell them and not what they see kicking ass on the track, the streets, or the trail.

I didn't buy my trucks for performance needs, neither my mustangs. They certainly didnt suit what I wanted them to do out of the box. Even slightly.

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by BADDASSC6

. . I intentionally said fast because it's descriptive enough to make the point.

This is my only real objection, you're attempting an objective argument with subjective terms. Fast is an impression or experience of speed, not a measurement of speed. You're assuming we agree on the scope and nature of a subjective term. That no worky so good unless we happen to agree, which we kind of don't, but you seemed to have assumed we would maybe.

Basically you're telling us what you think, not "what is." The first clue is an interrogative sentence ending with an exclamation point!

Why would you buy a performance car and claim it can perform if is just doesn't.

Uhh, cuz they think it does . . .which is well understand by manufacturers and marketers.

[BADDASSC6]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Crane

I didn't buy my trucks for performance needs, neither my mustangs. They certainly didnt suit what I wanted them to do out of the box. Even slightly.

If you insist on answering a question asked to someone else at least answer the question asked. There are a million reasons why you didn't buy the vehicle you are struggling stating why you did. Whatever reason you purchased your truck, you for sure got a tune on it and started modifying it. When I met you, you were jabbering about how bad ass it was.

[BADDASSC6]

Originally Posted by fiveohwblow

Not trying to take it the wrong way Carlos. In fact, I agree with you immensely and you are making the point I have always discussed in person with other enthusiasts but actually much better, so for that hats off.

As to my car, Guy was spot on. I bought it solely on looks. I realize some people might even have a visceral response to that and that's fine. When I was 7 years old in the 80's I thought it was the coolest car ever. I had no inclination of speed. It was only after purchasing one at the age of driving (15) that I realized its potential and began building and educating myself.

Roger all. Understand that you have wanted a fox before you new what was fast.That makes sense.

[fiveohwblow]

Originally Posted by BADDASSC6

Roger all. Understand that you have wanted a fox before you new what was fast.That makes sense.

Sadly, I parted with it a couple of months ago and not by my choice

I now rely on others for any speed.

[Shaolin Crane]

Originally Posted by BADDASSC6

If you insist on answering a question asked to someone else at least answer the question asked. There are a million reasons why you didn't buy the vehicle you are struggling stating why you did. Whatever reason you purchased your truck, you for sure got a tune on it and started modifying it. When I met you, you were jabbering about how bad ass it was.

But I didn't buy it because it was intended to be fast. I bought it because it wasn't a dually, it was a better suspension design, smoother ride, quieter/nicer interior, better fuel economy, and most importantly not a dually. The fact that I was able to break traction at the 1000' mark was a bonus. Badass, sure. Still would be if I had a place to put my lift to fix it, since I don't, just another paper weight.

Again, bought my car cause I wanted that car. I had no knowledge of the engine, transmission, horsepower, interior. I was 4-5 years old and liked the car. Through my own experience I learned how much of a piece of shit the car was and what it needed to perform. Wait, scratch that. Internet told me what I needed to do, wait scratch that, bought them this way.

[BADDASSC6]

Originally Posted by Vettezuki

This is my only real objection, you're attempting an objective argument with subjective terms. Fast is an impression or experience of speed, not a measurement of speed. You're assuming we agree on the scope and nature of a subjective term. That no worky so good unless we happen to agree, which we kind of don't, but you seemed to have assumed we would maybe.

Ben, the question was what do you think is fast. If the whole OP is read it very clearly states what do you think is fast based on what you've seen at the track. It's subjective and based experiences.

Basically you're telling us what you think, not "what is." The first clue is an interrogative sentence ending with an exclamation point!

Uhh, cuz they think it does . . .which is well understand by manufacturers and marketers.

I told you what I think and the basis why I think that way. The problem is that Manufactures and marketeers understand that people are stupid. So they are selling shitboxes and fools think they are fast.

[Shaolin Crane]

i don't think it's the auto manufacturers as much as people are stupd. all it takes is one youtube video of a car beating a termi or a vette for a car to be labeled fast regardless of the circumstances. I'm with you completely. I think the BRZ/FRS is a piece of shit and it got spanked by a 4 door non ecoboost focus in a test race. But it goes both ways too, there are cars that are fast that no one recognizes.

End of the day there will always be people running theirs mouths, or their cars. Just gotta make sure its the latter.

[Vettezuki]

This is what led me to believe you were trying make a defensible point as opposed to express an opinion.

"What car do you think is fast!

Here is what I don't get. How people think some cars are fast. "

As for manufacturers, marketers, and "stupid" people they are doing and getting what they want. You can't really make interpersonal comparisons of utility very well. It would be interesting to know how many people REGRET their purchase on grounds of "it ain't as fast as I thought it would be."


BTW, ever seen an Ariel Atom or Caterham (Lotus 7 knockoff), or any Lotus for that matter? I would think they would all be pretty fast on a track, especially tighter more technical ones.

[Vettezuki]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Crane

i don't think it's the auto manufacturers as much as people are stupd. .

Uh, that's pretty much what he said.