Better Car Than S2k ??
09-05-2002, 02:24 AM
#111
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Somewhere in SE Michigan
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With SMALL cars there is no way to fit a large displacement, large torque engine. It just won't fit. The only other way to make power is to either force induct a small displacement engine [kinda like Viagra if you ask me 
] or rev the engine.
And as Chris S accurately stated, the F20C is not lacking torque. It's specific torque is among the highest in the industry. Only the BMW M3 and Ferrari 360 Modena have higher specific torque.
] or rev the engine.And as Chris S accurately stated, the F20C is not lacking torque. It's specific torque is among the highest in the industry. Only the BMW M3 and Ferrari 360 Modena have higher specific torque.
09-05-2002, 02:32 AM
#112
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Alhambra
Posts: 953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Chui
With SMALL cars there is no way to fit a large displacement, large torque engine. It just won't fit. The only other way to make power is to either force induct a small displacement engine [kinda like Viagra if you ask me] or rev the engine.
And as Chris S accurately stated, the F20C is not lacking torque. It's specific torque is among the highest in the industry. Only the BMW M3 and Ferrari 360 Modena have higher specific torque.
With SMALL cars there is no way to fit a large displacement, large torque engine. It just won't fit. The only other way to make power is to either force induct a small displacement engine [kinda like Viagra if you ask me
] or rev the engine.And as Chris S accurately stated, the F20C is not lacking torque. It's specific torque is among the highest in the industry. Only the BMW M3 and Ferrari 360 Modena have higher specific torque.
specific xxx might not mean much... and it all depends on application...
09-05-2002, 04:18 AM
#113
The point of a smaller engine is that it's lighter for better handling; more compact to allow the entire engine to fit behind the front axle for better weight dist. and a lower polar moment of inertia (someone correct me if that's not the correct term); and a high redline for a more visceral experience.
09-05-2002, 01:20 PM
#115
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Somewhere in SE Michigan
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by JT-KGY
But so is a 1 liter engine with 38 ftlb of torque... Not trying to argue but just saying that
specific xxx might not mean much... and it all depends on application...
But so is a 1 liter engine with 38 ftlb of torque... Not trying to argue but just saying that
specific xxx might not mean much... and it all depends on application...
09-06-2002, 11:15 AM
#116
Registered User
Remember ANYTHING can be built for the right amount of MONEY!!!! So a small engine can be made to fit in a small car...look at the ford Festiva Shogun.
Chui this is not a flame you speak well and your posts seem to be very genuine..but quoting magazines as a reason a car is substandard is kinda like asking 200 people their opinion on any car and using what they say as "THE STANDARD". Magazines do offer good information but it must be taken with a grain of salt. As for the mid engine thing there are many other factors that go into handling...Just b/c a car is mid-engine DOES NOT make it a better track car or better handler..possibly the potential is there but that potential may not be realized when other variables are thrown in...this is the reason corvettes, vipers and other heavy front engine cars can and do well in auto racing. THERE ARE MANY FACTORS..text book info about low polar moments and such is great but with out all parameters that is a BLANKET statement that really doesn't cover a thing. No flames intended.
Chui this is not a flame you speak well and your posts seem to be very genuine..but quoting magazines as a reason a car is substandard is kinda like asking 200 people their opinion on any car and using what they say as "THE STANDARD". Magazines do offer good information but it must be taken with a grain of salt. As for the mid engine thing there are many other factors that go into handling...Just b/c a car is mid-engine DOES NOT make it a better track car or better handler..possibly the potential is there but that potential may not be realized when other variables are thrown in...this is the reason corvettes, vipers and other heavy front engine cars can and do well in auto racing. THERE ARE MANY FACTORS..text book info about low polar moments and such is great but with out all parameters that is a BLANKET statement that really doesn't cover a thing. No flames intended.
09-06-2002, 11:36 AM
#117
Registered User
chui,
going back to our posts from a few weeks ago.....you should check out the post in S2000 talk (or maybe it was Car Talk) about all the accolades and headlines that the S2000 has received over it's short life.....i've never heard the ITR receive that level of regard....nor compared to the type of vehicles that the S2000 was compared to.......
not flaming....but when i read it, i immediately thought of you and our "exchange" in this thread
though you're not as "keen" on the S2000 as i am, i thought you may enjoy it as you are an enthusiast nonetheless.......
regards.
going back to our posts from a few weeks ago.....you should check out the post in S2000 talk (or maybe it was Car Talk) about all the accolades and headlines that the S2000 has received over it's short life.....i've never heard the ITR receive that level of regard....nor compared to the type of vehicles that the S2000 was compared to.......
not flaming....but when i read it, i immediately thought of you and our "exchange" in this thread
though you're not as "keen" on the S2000 as i am, i thought you may enjoy it as you are an enthusiast nonetheless.......
regards.
09-06-2002, 01:28 PM
#118
i've never heard the ITR receive that level of regard....
What makes the ITR inherently more interesting is that it's derived from a 5 person sedan yet shares few if any characteristics with that sedan -- for only a few grand more.
09-06-2002, 03:01 PM
#119
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: san antonio
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by amuses2k
as you guys know S2k is the perfect car.
with all the respect for s2k, which car or cars out there will you respect more?
If you guys have a budget of 50,000....would you still get the s2k??
as you guys know S2k is the perfect car.
with all the respect for s2k, which car or cars out there will you respect more?
If you guys have a budget of 50,000....would you still get the s2k??
You ask better than S2K???
2 S2Ks!!!
09-06-2002, 08:05 PM
#120
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Somewhere in SE Michigan
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by My R2
[B]Chui, this is not a flame you speak well and your posts seem to be very genuine..but quoting magazines as a reason a car is substandard is kinda like asking 200 people their opinion on any car and using what they say as "THE STANDARD". Magazines do offer good information but it must be taken with a grain of salt.
[B]Chui, this is not a flame you speak well and your posts seem to be very genuine..but quoting magazines as a reason a car is substandard is kinda like asking 200 people their opinion on any car and using what they say as "THE STANDARD". Magazines do offer good information but it must be taken with a grain of salt.