70mph is pretty hard to break but I did it once. I actually got it up to 103mph. I think I was going a little faster than that but I hit my brakes because I got scared....

 

Toyota reliability .

My mother in law had a 99 Camry that she bought since new and after 2 years it was nothing but problems. From a bad fuel pump, to a bad water pump, to a leaking brake caliper. I convinced her to trade it in for a Regal and she has never been happier. Not to mention the Camry had 32000 miles when traded.

A coworkers 97 Camry has had 3 blown up trannys, blown head gasket, and 2 electric window motors.

Not even my beater with 245,000 miles has so many problems.

 

Outhandle me LMAO . Good stuff, you have a small lightweight car. On the other hand a Camaro is anything but a boat. A 76 caddy now thats a boat but a 4th gen Camaro, not even close. You wanna talk about handling look at the Y87 firebird. Those things handled very nice for an "oversized boat". Also coming off the line my SS pulls like a raped ape so good luck with that one. I don't doubt that after your turbo spools to full boost you start making ground pretty good but I don't have to wait for a turbo. My "oversized boat" of a car dumps out a crap load of power without FI. I'm not the fastest guy on this board. I don't even consider my car all that fast. If I were you though I would be careful cause there are alot more aggressive and faster people than me on here for you to worry about. You drive an MR2 not a Lambo so you need think before you speak or you just might eat your words. BTW 11s aren't that impressive roo you should probably keep your mouth shut as well.

 

Well.

Nice reactions and et, 'Roo. Almost enough to make one overlook the high-handedness in your dictation of posting and moderation etiquette after your whopping three-day membership in this forum.

But that's not why I'm here.

25, 25, why do you make it so easy?

Back in your Evo VIII stat thread, I asked you what the point of a high specific output is, if the smaller engine rarely accomplishes better fuel economy than a larger, lazier engine of comparable overall output - to say nothing of matching the torque. I'm still waiting for your response.

In this thread, you've gone beyond any point for which you've allowed yourself any rational response. Perhaps you were joking?

Now we can discuss reliability and cover the 200,000+ mile endurance some LS1 owners have enjoyed, and we can talk about interior materials, at which GM has trailed the world, no questions asked.

But we're not all here about nice leather and walnut trim, are we?

And so you accuse 'camaro of modifing his car to match the standards of a STOCK MR2. Oh yes, you did say "stock".

Styling. Now that's funny. Would you mean the supercharged flying doorstop of 1988, which managed 0-60 in around seven seconds? Would you mean the Ferrari 348 knockoff of 1990-95, which did the same time or marginally better with its 200-hp turbo? Or would you be referring to the latest Boxter ripoff, with about the same times from its manual (not sequential) tranny?

You say you outbrake, outcorner, outrun, outfox, outrage, outline, outhouse, outland, out-re, out-fillintheblank 'camaro's healthy little LT1. Until you lay more cards on the table, we have to allow for that (remote) possibility.

You sho' as F--K ain't doin' it with that STOCK MR2 you brought up. Let's use that 2nd-gen turbo as an example, the one that based at 26k in 1995. We're gonna modify an LS1 (OR an LT1) to get 1/4-mile times in the 15's? Or a 700-ft slalom time of around 62 mph? Or skidpad grip of around .85 g?

Stop it, 25psi! You're KILLING us!

 

Hey roo, nice job, congrats on breaking into 13's!

Seems a lil funny to me that you have yet to tell us what car you drive, or pics of it...

 

More related? Yes. Same class? No.

A Viper SRT-10 is 50,000 dollars more MSRP than an SS. How can you say that is the same car class? Are you a moron? They are related in the way they create power- big displacement naturally aspirated motors. Other than that, the Viper is in a higher class than the LS1.

YOU

ARE

GAY.

 

25psi, I'm still waiting for you to refute my last post. Where are you???? I'm getting all antsy waiting for you to reply. I guess I'll just assume you had no more valid points to make (not that you had too many to begin with). Oh well, I think I'll go look for an MR2 to on in town.

 

EX. Stang I never said camaro was a bad car. What I am saying is that, you are not going to get top calibre track performance from any domestic type vechicle(ZO6) unless you change the whole car & even then, you only bring it to par with a stock MR2.

Camaros have inferior race platforms designs when compared with the like of sports cars. Your high center of gravity and weight, makes it an ideal canidate for an unstable car. Sure you can mod the hell out of it, but only then you are making it handle like a stock mr2.

The bottom lines is you can throw money at anything & make it go fast in a straight line. You can throw just about as much money at an inferior platform & will not handle as well as a car that was designed from ground zero to be a race car.

I don't know where you are recieving your info about the mr2, but your stats are clearly wrong. The stock mr2, does .92-.94g and does the quarter in 14.3(my times) at 99mph.

The point is I can go on and on and on and on about this Anyone can throw money at a car. "I think the key point here is trying to get a Camaro, 'Bird, or Stang to perform the same in all categories as a 2 is going to cause you to modify the car so much it won't be the same platform anymore. Its easier to start out with a platform that was designed from the start to be nothing but a race car (then build/modify according to taste"

 

And we love it!
Wouldn't this description apply to a NASCAR also when comparing them to go karts? Seriously, our cars are bloated big, lumbering, sloppy pieces of American engineering. They WERE discontinued. They ARE wicked fast.
The only thing that impresses me more than a big, fast car is a bigger, faster truck.

 

DISCLAIMER: I am not claiming my car is faster or better than anything else. It's a car I can drive everyday of the year and it's what works for me.

I have a fairly modified 99 Eclipse GSX (AWD). I also have a 2001 Z71 LT Ext cab. I'm not on this site to start arguements. I'm here to learn more about LS1's and stuff. I've owned a 2001 Corvette and it was an awesome car and I hope to have another one soon. The reason I stepped into this thread was because people were completely bashing on the new EVO. I'll be the first one to say it's not faster or does it have more "potential" than a vette. When it comes to potential it's anyones game, more based on money. Where the EVO does shine is that it's a car that could be driven every day and still have good performance. You just can't drive a lot of cars every day here in Denver.

Just my thoughts......

PS. That was a new SVT Cobra in the right lane.

 

For snow, I see your point. Your Eclipse is hands down a much nicer car than the EVO. The EVO looks like it belongs on a shelf in Radio Shack, ready to consume Size "D" batteries.

 

LOL (radio shack)

The evo is nice because of the 4 doors when you have people with you. It really seems like the trend now is that people want more practical cars that have performance to them. This is one of the reasons they designed the RX8 the way they did having 4 doors.

That being said, the EVO is not really a luxury to ride in. The suspension is hard as a rock and for 30k you would think it would come fully loaded, but you can't get cruise control on it. I guess it's the same with the STI though. It doesn't even come standard with a radio.

 

To answer your question, 25psi, I went digging through all my Road & Track "Sports & GT" issues for both the early manufacturer's claims and the actual tested performance of the 2nd gen MR2 - the '94 and '95 Turbo models of which trapped in the mid to low 15's. It also did about 62 mph in the 700-ft slalom, where the F-cars of the same day did the high 61's (a '98 WS6 'vert would later beat that time). Had to go with Toyota's estimate for lateral acceleration, and even so, it was either even or marginally ahead against contemporary F-cars.

Even by R&T's arguably conservative standards, the LT1 F-cars of the day were more than a second ahead to 60 mph, and had even more of an advantage in the 1/4. Accepting a 3500-lb weight for the F-car, its 275-hp rating gave it weight-to-power ratio 12.7lbs/hp, roughly one less pound per hp than the 2700-lb Turbo MR2, so you'd expect a narrower gap between the cars. But that's not the way it worked out for what one would suppose was a consistent testing methodology from one car to the next. Torque and gearing probably played their factors here.

Now you're talking "designed to be a race car"? Huh? The MR2 was designed to be a road-going sports car. The earliest ones had an artful rearrangement of Corolla suspension parts. Its mid-engine configuration certainly gives the MR2 lower polar moments of inertia and greater perceived responsiveness than the F-cars, but I'm not going to accept the notion of a higher center of gravity as a given without data.

Even so, the test mags put a STOCK 2nd-gen MR2 right in the same neighborhood as the F-cars for cornering grip and transient response. The MR2 may let go more gradually. It may be easier to gather back under control at the limit (though I remember something about a snap-oversteer tendency in the early Turbo models).

But published test numbers don't bear out your assertion that the MR2 is light-years ahead of the F-cars in ultimate handling performance. They don't even suggest that Mister Two is as far ahead of the F-car in handling as the F-car is ahead of the MR2 in acceleration.

Now the new one. That little beast corners at nearly a full g.

It's also got weight-to-power of about 15.7 lbs/hp. And we haven't even brought the LS1 F-car into this discussion yet.

 

Ahem ... I'm not really sure why this is getting so far off topic, but let me try to clarify this. I believe MAYBE 1 out of every 10 owners of a f-bod give 2 ***** about cornering capabilty. Personally, my car can corner way better then I have the ***** to drive it. It has NEVER slid or broken loose under a hard fast corner, or failed me in any way, so it is plenty good enough.

Second ... here we are again comparing 2 cars that are completely different. The MR2 was built for autox or cornering as 25psi has said, and the f-bod was obviously built to go FAST straight line, but was definately built with cornering and braking in mind. I am sorry 25psi, but the only thing you could accomplish with your little car is to marginally outhandle us ... your stock MR2 would get absolutely assraped by either camaro's car, or any stock ls1 in a straight speed contest. Btw, I have read through all the performance information I could find on all the different model year mr2's ... and I am speaking this with knowledge, not out of my ***.

 

That's cool then, I guess. The GSX is a nice car. I never said anything about the Evo besides criticizing the way it looks. I respect it's speed, but a stock one still isn't fast enough to keep up with me. Of course there are modded Evo's that run quick. There are modded versions of every car that run insanely fast.

If your here to learn about LS1s, your gonna have to deal with all our rock-hard stubborn attitudes about everything. I wouldn't say that we're anti-import as much as pro-domestic. It doesn't take much to blow up a thread into a huge pissing contest, as you have seen. 25psi is exceptionally good at it, which is why we've named him a troll of the board.

 

milehipro

I don't think there really is a lot of hate. 25psi tends to come on and use convinient arguements with "my import has less c.i. and is better than your overweigth domestic" bullshit and all the regulars on this part of the board have gotten pretty tired of it.

There are a lot here, including me, who respect quick imports but people like 25psi just come on to **** people off. He pretty much instigates nothing but flame fests,plain and simple.

 

I figured everyone could be decent, it just seemed like at first there was a lot of hate towards other vehicles.


On a side note I can see why people get pissed sometimes.

 

Stick around for a while and post a few kill stories and you'll see why he annoys everyone. I'm actually still waiting for him to refute my earlier points in this post, but I guess he probably realized he had no argument and got OWNED .

 

well I guess I will not post anymore EVO kill stories......But I could add that I ran into the SAME kid in the EVO and worked him AGAIN. I did it for 25 psi....The car may not be a drag car, but that is what the general 16-25 yo group that buy them thinks they are for.

25 PSI go home......Loser

 

This is a stock mr2 turbo with 245 hp. 25 more than the stock US spec. Scroll to half page. MR2 vs RX7.
The Jspec mr2 with slicks, can easily hit high 12's.

http://mr2cp.cynikal.net/Gallery.html

I also have some more vids that I will post of US spec mr2 running low 14's at 99-101mph.

Dude I garauntee you that there is NO way a stock mr2 does mid to low 15's stock.

http://www.japmobiles.com/cars/index.asp?offset=10 theres one from a 225hp mr2 14.7 which is real conservative. Like I said, I ran a 14.28 at 99mph with a bad air flow meter.

http://www.japmobiles.com/cars/cars_detail.asp?id=11

There's the article.