Srt-4 Vs S2k
12-12-2005, 10:05 AM
#21
Moderator
Originally Posted by Jakup,Dec 12 2005, 08:54 AM
The S2000 should be appealing to a completely different crowd.
12-12-2005, 10:09 AM
#22
Registered User
Originally Posted by hyun83,Dec 10 2005, 08:07 PM
Maybe steveC or rai can chime in and find me some credible figures?
Different magazines can use a different means of measurement (ie different distance or cone placement) so you can't take them from one magazine to another. However you can look at slalom from the same magazine, and sometimes a FWD car can do well.
Well here are a few times from R&T:
350Z anniversary 67.3 mph
SRT-4 67.3 mph
Ion redline 67.6
Mini cooper 67.6
new Civic Si 68.6
Mini S 69.5
C6 Z06 69.6
S2000 69.7
EVO VIII 70.0
Carrera GT 71.1
Lotus Elise 72.6
Enzo 73 mph
Boxster S 73.9
to sum up, the slalom is (IMO) a meaningless stat, b/c when are you going to be driving on the exact specific course with cones set at the exact same space as in a magazine test? And who care? You can see the BS out slaloms the enzo and CGT
and at least in this test the SR4 was slower than both mini coopers and the ion and the Si so at least from this data it's nothing special.
12-12-2005, 11:16 AM
#23
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: LA
Posts: 825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rai,Dec 12 2005, 02:09 PM
First off, slalom is a kind of made-up test.
Different magazines can use a different means of measurement (ie different distance or cone placement) so you can't take them from one magazine to another. However you can look at slalom from the same magazine, and sometimes a FWD car can do well.
Well here are a few times from R&T:
350Z anniversary 67.3 mph
SRT-4 67.3 mph
Ion redline 67.6
Mini cooper 67.6
new Civic Si 68.6
Mini S 69.5
C6 Z06 69.6
S2000 69.7
EVO VIII 70.0
Carrera GT 71.1
Lotus Elise 72.6
Enzo 73 mph
Boxster S 73.9
to sum up, the slalom is (IMO) a meaningless stat, b/c when are you going to be driving on the exact specific course with cones set at the exact same space as in a magazine test? And who care? You can see the BS out slaloms the enzo and CGT and at least in this test the SR4 was slower than both mini coopers and the ion and the Si so at least from this data it's nothing special.
Different magazines can use a different means of measurement (ie different distance or cone placement) so you can't take them from one magazine to another. However you can look at slalom from the same magazine, and sometimes a FWD car can do well.
Well here are a few times from R&T:
350Z anniversary 67.3 mph
SRT-4 67.3 mph
Ion redline 67.6
Mini cooper 67.6
new Civic Si 68.6
Mini S 69.5
C6 Z06 69.6
S2000 69.7
EVO VIII 70.0
Carrera GT 71.1
Lotus Elise 72.6
Enzo 73 mph
Boxster S 73.9
to sum up, the slalom is (IMO) a meaningless stat, b/c when are you going to be driving on the exact specific course with cones set at the exact same space as in a magazine test? And who care? You can see the BS out slaloms the enzo and CGT
and at least in this test the SR4 was slower than both mini coopers and the ion and the Si so at least from this data it's nothing special.
12-12-2005, 01:06 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Purple sky
Posts: 2,899
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hyun83,Dec 10 2005, 05:42 PM
"the srt's slalom time is actually 3 mph faster then the quickest SUPERCHARGED S2K ever tested."
12-12-2005, 01:12 PM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scatterbrainia
Posts: 8,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is so lame. If the dude is running off his mouth in person, why don't you just RACE HIM???
If you're not interested in racing, then who really cares whose car is faster? Why does it even matter if your car does the slalom x.x MPH faster if you two are just going to magazine race all day long?
Just give the guy his props for having an easily modifiable FWD car straight from the factory, and move along with your life.
I'm not trying to race...
Just give the guy his props for having an easily modifiable FWD car straight from the factory, and move along with your life.
12-12-2005, 02:16 PM
#27
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: LA
Posts: 825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by i_heart_my_DB8,Dec 12 2005, 05:12 PM
This thread is so lame. If the dude is running off his mouth in person, why don't you just RACE HIM???
If you're not interested in racing, then who really cares whose car is faster? Why does it even matter if your car does the slalom x.x MPH faster if you two are just going to magazine race all day long?
Just give the guy his props for having an easily modifiable FWD car straight from the factory, and move along with your life.
If you're not interested in racing, then who really cares whose car is faster? Why does it even matter if your car does the slalom x.x MPH faster if you two are just going to magazine race all day long?
Just give the guy his props for having an easily modifiable FWD car straight from the factory, and move along with your life.
And if you READ what I wrote originally, then maybe you would know why.
Look at my sig, do I have an s2k currently?
I'm not trashing the srt4 by any means, I just think the S is a better car.
So before you talk like you've been around here forever, get your facts straight and you "move along with your life."
12-12-2005, 02:20 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SF, California
Posts: 3,759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer is simple....explain to him what SCCA Solo competition is. If you're looking at handling similar to what slalom courses would exhibit.
Stock classifciations
SRT-4 D Stock
S2000 A Stock
http://www.scca.com/_Filelibrary/File/stoc...tionsbymake.pdf
The SRT-4 is four levels below that of the s2000. Similar to having someone from Single A Baseball play someone from the MLB. Not to say there aren't SRT-4 drivers that can complete with some s2000 drivers on autoX courses(Hey there are guys in single A ball that could play for a MLB team
), but it's just not competitive on average.
Stock classifciations
SRT-4 D Stock
S2000 A Stock
http://www.scca.com/_Filelibrary/File/stoc...tionsbymake.pdf
The SRT-4 is four levels below that of the s2000. Similar to having someone from Single A Baseball play someone from the MLB. Not to say there aren't SRT-4 drivers that can complete with some s2000 drivers on autoX courses(Hey there are guys in single A ball that could play for a MLB team
), but it's just not competitive on average.
12-12-2005, 03:11 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scatterbrainia
Posts: 8,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hyun83,Dec 12 2005, 03:16 PM
If its so lame, why do you have the desire to reply to this thread?
And if you READ what I wrote originally, then maybe you would know why.
Look at my sig, do I have an s2k currently?
I'm not trashing the srt4 by any means, I just think the S is a better car.
So before you talk like you've been around here forever, get your facts straight and you "move along with your life."
And if you READ what I wrote originally, then maybe you would know why.
Look at my sig, do I have an s2k currently?
I'm not trashing the srt4 by any means, I just think the S is a better car.
So before you talk like you've been around here forever, get your facts straight and you "move along with your life."
Sorry for not reading your signature in detail to get caught up on what vehicle you are currently driving. I've grown rather numb to people listing off every automobile they've had (or not had) since they were 16. So where everyone else sees your automotive resume, I just see a blurry box.
I think I've pretty much got the facts straight:
-YOU are having an issue with a dude who drives an SRT4.
-YOU came onto a public forum asking us to help you prove the S2000 is a better car.
-YOU are unable to search the internet yourself for magazine times and slalom speeds that the rest of us realize are relatively useless in the real world.
-I think this thread is lame.
What's next? Comparing an e46 M3 to a Mustang GT?
One thing we are in 100% agreement with however, is wondering why on earth I had the desire to reply to this thread. TWICE!
12-12-2005, 04:56 PM
#30
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: LA
Posts: 825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by i_heart_my_DB8,Dec 12 2005, 07:11 PM
I think I've pretty much got the facts straight:
-YOU are having an issue with a dude who drives an SRT4.
-YOU came onto a public forum asking us to help you prove the S2000 is a better car.
-YOU are unable to search the internet yourself for magazine times and slalom speeds that the rest of us realize are relatively useless in the real world.
-I think this thread is lame.
What's next? Comparing an e46 M3 to a Mustang GT?
One thing we are in 100% agreement with however, is wondering why on earth I had the desire to reply to this thread. TWICE!
-YOU are having an issue with a dude who drives an SRT4.
-YOU came onto a public forum asking us to help you prove the S2000 is a better car.
-YOU are unable to search the internet yourself for magazine times and slalom speeds that the rest of us realize are relatively useless in the real world.
-I think this thread is lame.
What's next? Comparing an e46 M3 to a Mustang GT?
One thing we are in 100% agreement with however, is wondering why on earth I had the desire to reply to this thread. TWICE!
Yes, I came to a public forum asking for help. Did you help? or did you just reply to antagonize?
Yes ,I am unable to search the info on the net bc I didnt come up with anything plausible.
And yes, this thread might be lame to you, but you're the sucker still replying. Go figure.
How are you contributing to this thread except stating your opinion about the thread and not the actual topic?
Like I said previously, I already know the S is a better car.. Just wanted some figures to back up the truth. You dont write a paper w/out showing credible information do you? Go troll somewhere else you ppd whore.