The Most Overrated Cars

[STI-Guy]

Remember, these lists are based on opinion.

Toyota Supra
I love the Supra. But I hate all these ricers yapping about how the Supra beats most cars stock. Well, a little know fact, you spikey haired loser, is that an LS1 Camaro can beat one factory.

Muscle Cars in general
Again, I love 'em, but bumbestic mullets are always preaching about displacement and power beats technology. Gives me a headache.

Nissan Skyline
"MY ULTIMATE DREAM CAR< YOYOYYO DIGGITTYU!!!111!!"
The ricer's wet dream. We already have a Skyline over here - it's called a friggen' SUPRA, people! Better looks, same horsepower, same turbo--the only real advantage the Skyline has over the Supra is the fact that it has AWD. People go ape shit over this car simply because it's not available here.

[buh_buh]

Although that stupid movie played out that car, I still think the Supra's a good car. Not because of what it can do stock, but because of its potential. There are many Supras out there with 1000+hp and your not spending INSANE amounts of money on it. That is the reason why I believe the Supra is respected.

I'm not a big muscle car fan myself, but I do admit I am impressed with the amount of power they make. It is true though that nothing can replace displacement....

And the Skyline has the same story as a Supra. And the reason its everyone's dream car is because we don't have it here. I would love to have a car that can push 400+hp with a few small upgrades.

[T5_X]

honda civic, people would have you believe the civic is the holy grail of all cars :rolleyes:

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by buh_buh
And the Skyline has the same story as a Supra. And the reason its everyone's dream car is because we don't have it here. I would love to have a car that can push 400+hp with a few small upgrades. Never mind that most advanced all wheel drive system available on a street car to date.

[CRXguy]

Originally posted by buh_buh
There are many Supras out there with 1000+hp and your not spending INSANE amounts of money on it. That is the reason why I believe the Supra is respected.

Q:What do 400, 500, 600, 700hp Supra's have in common?

A: 12 second timeslips!

:rofl:

Or something along those lines.

[spyguy]

an STi :rolleyes:

[m@+CH]

del sols
why everyone want them
94 still cost like 16 g's
WTF

[Mikko]

Allthough they aren't cars, I think SUV's are by far the worst.

[dj_honda]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
Never mind that most advanced all wheel drive system available on a street car to date.

and all wheel steering.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by dj_honda


and all wheel steering. Super HICAS is a greatly overrated system, that generally does more to hurt high speed handling than help.

[importadrenelin]

Supra *may" be overrated but only because Fast & Furious did such a good job promoting BS.
Anyhow a Skyline is not overrated, the AWD system is very good plus you have an option of going into RWD if you want to, I believe this was only for R34's, correct me if I am wrong. The price tag to bring one in through Motorex is however OVERRATED..

Muscle Cars vary from make and model so I'm not gonna touch that subject.......

Most overrated car though is probably Audi TT, it's like $50K + brand new

[5.9 R/T]

Originally posted by STI-Guy


Muscle Cars in general
Again, I love 'em, but bumbestic mullets are always preaching about displacement and power beats technology. Gives me a headache.

[/B]

Remember, this is just fact.

There is NO replacement for displacement. If you wish to debate this please try, I'd be happy to oblige.

P.S. It gives me a headache to think that ignorant people like you are even allowed to own cars.

BTW - It's not bumbestic, it's dumbestic.

[Murph]

If you wanna go fast, 1/4 mile, nothing beats an domestic. The amount of speed you can get for cheap is silly.

[Mikko]

There is NO replacement for displacement

What about Turbocharging, anti lag systems, etc? I'm not an expert, just thinking..

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Mikko


What about Turbocharging, anti lag systems, etc? I'm not an expert, just thinking.. For maximum power (maximum POTENTIAL power) you are limited by two things: how much air you can cram into a cylinder and how much fuel. The bigger a given cylinder is, the more air and fuel you can pack into it so you get more power. Turbochargers are just a way of putting more air into a given area by compressing it. With more air you can make more power, but you are still limited by how much air/fuel mixture you can cram in there. Anti-lag doesn't do dick for producing power (since it isn't adding any more air or fuel than normal), it only makes a car with an oversized turbo more drivable by improving throttle response.

[Mikko]

But if it meets the target power, isn't it a perfectly good (if not better) replacement for displacement then due to the smaller and lighter engine (assuming the big displacement one is made of the same materials)?

[Si_FlyGuy]

I'm gunna put a vote in for the Hummer as the most over rated vehicle.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Mikko
But if it meets the target power, isn't it a perfectly good (if not better) replacement for displacement then due to the smaller and lighter engine (assuming the big displacement one is made of the same materials)? For a specific output or for a specific task, yes. But for ultimate, raw power output, displacement wins every time. I'm talking wringing the absolute maximum horsepower out of a motor. Not everyone needs 1200hp or enough torque to tow a mountain, so we can get away with smaller, lighter motors.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by STI-Guy
Remember, these lists are based on opinion.

Toyota Supra
I love the Supra. But I hate all these ricers yapping about how the Supra beats most cars stock. Well, a little know fact, you spikey haired loser, is that an LS1 Camaro can beat one factory. id like to see an 1100hp ls1 w/ stock internals...ya spikey haired loser.

[Glowrider]

There are many Supras out there with 1000+hp and your not spending INSANE amounts of money on it

Whoever told you that modifying Supra's is cheap, lied. You can easily throw $30,000+ into a Supra, and still not be near what it could be.

No doubt they are a force to be reckoned with, on the streets, highways especially. But, they are not a bang for your buck car.

When you get to the level of modifcation that most of the cars in the left over MKIV Supra fleet are at right now, you start spending ALOT of money. And, it takes ALOT of money to get there.

They are fast and potent, but not cheap by any definition of the word.

[STI-Guy]

Originally posted by 5.9 R/T


Remember, this is just fact.

There is NO replacement for displacement. If you wish to debate this please try, I'd be happy to oblige.

P.S. It gives me a headache to think that ignorant people like you are even allowed to own cars.

BTW - It's not bumbestic, it's dumbestic.

Typo. Now I know I was wrong, so no need for the insult, man.

[buh_buh]

I meant cheap in relation to other cars when modding.

[Mikko]

So in most cases, displacement is not the limiting factor at all, and it often being desirable to keep displacement down for lower weight and size? Good. :thumbsup:

Hummer.. a SUV.. lol

[5.9 R/T]

Originally posted by STI-Guy


Typo. Now I know I was wrong, so no need for the insult, man.

I am sick and tired of people from both sides (import/domestic) using played out clichés that arn't even true. Take, for example, that guy that cannot stop using the term rice when refering to Japanese import cars. It seems every other day there is someone else who starts a thread like this and I'm tired of this shit. Your basing your opinions (on muscle cars at least) on the people you have met that drive them, and not the cars themselves. That's like me saying that STi's are overrated because you drive one or want one or like them or whatever. Sounds pretty stupid doesn't it? And if your going to blanket the domestic comunity with such insults as "[d]umbestic mullets" such as you did I feel I can insult you all I want. If you can't take it then STFU and stop posting useless shit.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Mikko
So in most cases, displacement is not the limiting factor at all, and it often being desirable to keep displacement down for lower weight and size? Good. :thumbsup:

Hummer.. a SUV.. lol Displacement is the ultimate limiting factor, but in almost all but the most extreme cases you never actually reach the maximum power potential for a given motor anyways, making the argument purely academic.

[Illusionsir]

5.9's right, their is NO replacement for displacement.
i drive an inline 6 putting out damn near 2000 ft/lbs of torque TO THE GROUND everyday... i dont know of any 4 bangers doing that? wait a minute, i have never even seen a v6 do that...

[Silencer]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
id like to see an 1100hp ls1 w/ stock internals...ya spikey haired loser.


Maybe not 1100, but up to 700hp.
And if you want more, look at the Lingenfelter 427 biTurbo. Over 1000 hp, 0-60mph in under two seconds!!!
The difference being that it can put the power to the ground.

[mustang]

Originally posted by Mikko
Hummer.. a SUV.. lol

An SUV, hah. Barely man, barely, I find its closer to a tank on wheels...lol

Most overated car huh? Hmmm thats a tough one, I'm going to try to stray from the overly large blanket statements and try for a specific vehicle. Say we're talking stock off the lot, then my vote goes to Tiburons. My friend test drove one of those and the "200hp V6" is a piece of shit. None of that hp is making it to the ground. Looks decent though.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Silencer



Maybe not 1100, but up to 700hp.
And if you want more, look at the Lingenfelter 427 biTurbo. Over 1000 hp, 0-60mph in under two seconds!!!
The difference being that it can put the power to the ground. The lingenfelter 427biturbo IS NOT stock internals. That cars motor is completely warmed over, from bottom end to the valve cover.

[KoRnJD]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
Never mind that most advanced all wheel drive system available on a street car to date.

Better than Quattro??

http://home.attbi.com/~eliot_www/awd.html

How does the Skyline's system work? I'm unfamiliar with it. Is it a pro-active, or a reactive system?

Thanks,

[KoRnJD]

I found some of my own info...

Super HICAS -> The Skyline's all-wheel-steering enables the rear-wheels to steer the car with a maximum of one degree. A very complex system compares the car's movements with the driver's input at the steering wheel and adjusts the angle of the steering wheel according to the direction the driver intends to go. The result is a steering that makes the GT-R feel much more nimble than its size suggests.

The GT-R uses an electronically controlled all-wheel-drive system (similar to Porsche's 959). A 16-bit microprocessor monitors the car's movements a 100 times per second, including wheel rotation and lateral as well as longitudinal acceleration. When slip is detected at a driving wheel, the system electronically distributes torque from this spinning wheel to one without slip.

In this case the electronic AWD-system offers the advan-tage that actions are enacted much faster than by a viscous-coupling-system (we're speak-ing of hundredths of a second here). In standard setup, ATTESA-ETS distributes the torque to the rear-wheels, but when slip is detected on one of those rear-wheels, it can distribute up to 50% of the torque to the front wheels, i.e. it can adjust the front/rear torque-split from anything between 0:100 to 50:50. Among the rear-wheels, an active LSD can further distribute the torque from one wheel to the other if necessary. Due to this setup, the Skyline GT-R can even drift, although it is an AWD car.

SO,

This is a reactive system, incapable of TorSen (see above link). It can also only transfer up to 50% of the power to the front wheels. Audi's sytem will split 25%/75% both ways, and VW's 4Motion will split 67%/33% both ways. Both utilize the TorSen differential.

I love Quattro/4Motion...

:D

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by KoRnJD
I found some of my own info...

Super HICAS -&gt; The Skyline's all-wheel-steering enables the rear-wheels to steer the car with a maximum of one degree. A very complex system compares the car's movements with the driver's input at the steering wheel and adjusts the angle of the steering wheel according to the direction the driver intends to go. The result is a steering that makes the GT-R feel much more nimble than its size suggests.

The GT-R uses an electronically controlled all-wheel-drive system (similar to Porsche's 959). A 16-bit microprocessor monitors the car's movements a 100 times per second, including wheel rotation and lateral as well as longitudinal acceleration. When slip is detected at a driving wheel, the system electronically distributes torque from this spinning wheel to one without slip.

In this case the electronic AWD-system offers the advan-tage that actions are enacted much faster than by a viscous-coupling-system (we're speak-ing of hundredths of a second here). In standard setup, ATTESA-ETS distributes the torque to the rear-wheels, but when slip is detected on one of those rear-wheels, it can distribute up to 50% of the torque to the front wheels, i.e. it can adjust the front/rear torque-split from anything between 0:100 to 50:50. Among the rear-wheels, an active LSD can further distribute the torque from one wheel to the other if necessary. Due to this setup, the Skyline GT-R can even drift, although it is an AWD car.

SO,

This is a reactive system, incapable of TorSen (see above link). It can also only transfer up to 50% of the power to the front wheels. Audi's sytem will split 25%/75% both ways, and VW's 4Motion will split 67%/33% both ways. Both utilize the TorSen differential.

I love Quattro/4Motion...

:D The latest gen quattro system is very similiar to the ATTESA system used on the skyline, in that it is part time all wheel drive, only engaging the two rear wheels when something slips. After that, both systems behave almost exactly the same, excepting the torque split. The Haldex system used by VW under the Quattro/4motion moniker since 1999 is functionally identical to the ATTESA system, only Nissan developed their version house and has a 10 year head start on developing it.

[rtypeteg]

I think Supra's and RX-7's are over rated ever since that horrible movie called "The Fast and The Furious." They both are very good looking cars, but not near as advanced as what people make them out to be.

I also think Ford Focus' are over rated. I personally think Ford got jealous of Honda outselling them every year. Ford brought out this American Honda Civic. It did make an impact, but believe me, it's not a Honda. Not near as reliable as most Honda's. Get over it.

[KoRnJD]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
The latest gen quattro system is very similiar to the ATTESA system used on the skyline, in that it is part time all wheel drive, only engaging the two rear wheels when something slips. After that, both systems behave almost exactly the same, excepting the torque split. The Haldex system used by VW under the Quattro/4motion moniker since 1999 is functionally identical to the ATTESA system, only Nissan developed their version house and has a 10 year head start on developing it.

Only A4 chassis vehicles (TT, Golf, Jetta, Beetle) equipped with AWD use the Haldex and are therefore part-time AWD. B5 (or B5.5) chassis vehicles (A4, Passat) all use the Torsen still, and are full-time AWD. The Torsen diff in the Passat 4-Motion and the Audi A4 Quattro makes their AWD systems technically superior to a viscous coupling system like Subaru's in the way that they are proactive, and not reactive.

On a B5 chassis vehicle, the torque splits are as follows:
Audi Quattro -> 25/75
Passat 4Motion -> 33/67


Quote:
"The viscous coupling is often found in all-wheel-drive vehicles. It is commonly used to link the back wheels to the front wheels so that when one set of wheels starts to slip, torque will be transferred to the other set. The viscous coupling has two sets of plates inside a sealed housing that is filled with a thick fluid, as shown in below. One set of plates is connected to each output shaft. Under normal conditions, both sets of plates and the viscous fluid spin at the same speed. When one set of wheels tries to spin faster, perhaps because it is slipping, the set of plates corresponding to those wheels spins faster than the other. The viscous fluid, stuck between the plates, tries to catch up with the faster disks, dragging the slower disks along. This transfers more torque to the slower moving wheels -- the wheels that are not slipping.

When a car is turning, the difference in speed between the wheels is not as large as when one wheel is slipping. The faster the plates are spinning relative to each other, the more torque the viscous coupling transfers. The coupling does not interfere with turns because the amount of torque transferred during a turn is so small. However, this also highlights a disadvantage of the viscous coupling: No torque transfer will occur until a wheel actually starts slipping.



Quote:
"The Torsen (from Torque Sensing) works as an open differential when the amount of torque going to each wheel is equal. As soon as one wheel starts to lose traction, the difference in torque causes the gears in the Torsen differential to bind together. The design of the gears in the differential determines the torque bias ratio. For instance, if a particular Torsen differential is designed with a 5:1 bias ratio, it is capable of applying up to five times more torque to the wheel that has good traction. These devices are often used in high-performance all-wheel-drive vehicles. Like the viscous coupling, they are often used to transfer power between the front and rear wheels. In this application, the Torsen is superior to the viscous coupling because it transfers torque to the stable wheels before the actual slipping occurs. "

BUT

"...if one set of wheels loses traction completely, the Torsen differential will be unable to supply any torque to the other set of wheels. The bias ratio determines how much torque can be transferred, and five times zero is zero."

So in that case, the viscous coupling of the Subaru system would work better.

All in all, they are both good, but the viscous coupling systems employ friction and will therefore wear out. The Torsen system is purely mechanical, and is far more long lasting.

My .02

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by KoRnJD


Only A4 chassis vehicles (TT, Golf, Jetta, Beetle) equipped with AWD use the Haldex and are therefore part-time AWD. B5 (or B5.5) chassis vehicles (A4, Passat) all use the Torsen still, and are full-time AWD. The Torsen diff in the Passat 4-Motion and the Audi A4 makes their AWD systems technically superior to a viscous coupling system like Subaru's in the way that they are proactive, and not reactive.

Quote:
&quot;The Torsen (from Torque Sensing) works as an open differential when the amount of torque going to each wheel is equal. As soon as one wheel starts to lose traction, the difference in torque causes the gears in the Torsen differential to bind together. The design of the gears in the differential determines the torque bias ratio. For instance, if a particular Torsen differential is designed with a 5:1 bias ratio, it is capable of applying up to five times more torque to the wheel that has good traction. These devices are often used in high-performance all-wheel-drive vehicles. Like the viscous coupling, they are often used to transfer power between the front and rear wheels. In this application, the Torsen is superior to the viscous coupling because it transfers torque to the stable wheels before the actual slipping occurs. &quot;

BUT

&quot;...if one set of wheels loses traction completely, the Torsen differential will be unable to supply any torque to the other set of wheels. The bias ratio determines how much torque can be transferred, and five times zero is zero.&quot;

So in that case, the viscous coupling of the Subaru system would work better.

My .02 But the Skyline IS NOT using TorSen differentials. The skyline is using a fully computer controlled, bias adjustable differentials, similar to the active diffs on a WRC car, that is not prone to this weakness. This is why the AWD system on the skyline is superior to the quattro system, regardless of how much torque is being transferred where (and theoretically, since the system is fully computer controlled you could tell it to route 100% of the power to one drive wheel, if the system was programmed to allow it). A TorSen still requires a bit of slippage (this is why the gears mesh, because the wheels are turning at different speeds indicating that one wheel is slipping), so it reacts more quickly to changes in surface than a conventional Viscous Coupling differential, but the time for a TorSen to take full effect and a computer controlled diff to do the same thing are very similar.

At any rate, the amount of computer control and integration with other systems is what makes the skylines all wheel drive system one of the most advanced avaiable on a road car. It doesn't necessarily work any better than mechanical LSDs at each end, but IT IS a lot more advanced.

[95acc]

Back on topic i am going to give a vote for Mustangs, Sure they are sorta quick of the lot and easy to mod to a point, But tell me it is not fun as hell to smack the hell out of one with less than HALF the displacement!
My .02

[KoRnJD]

Originally posted by 95acc
Back on topic i am going to give a vote for Mustangs, Sure they are sorta quick of the lot and easy to mod to a point, But tell me it is not fun as hell to smack the hell out of one with less than HALF the displacement!
My .02

Quite right (re: Topic). New Thread! :D

[Mikko]

I also think Ford Focus' are over rated. I personally think Ford got jealous of Honda outselling them every year. Ford brought out this American Honda Civic. It did make an impact, but believe me, it's not a Honda. Not near as reliable as most Honda's.

Last year I was reading reliability reports of cars in Europe. Ford Focus (Saarlouis Assembly Plant, Germany) and of cars made in 1998, Focus came out on top, beating Civic and the others. I don't know about the american made ones however.

It also beats Civic in most aspects.

[soloracer]

The NSX is both over rated and over priced. All the magazines from 1990 to 1997 were touting it as the end all, be all of sports cars. After driving one all I can say is they look pretty..........but definately not worth the coin or the praise.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by Mikko


Last year I was reading reliability reports of cars in Europe. Ford Focus (Saarlouis Assembly Plant, Germany) and of cars made in 1998, Focus came out on top, beating Civic and the others. I don't know about the american made ones however.

It also beats Civic in most aspects. in its short lifetime, the focus has had a record setting 12 major recalls already. haha check this out:

-loose bolt in front susp. assembly
-battery cable put in place that could lead to wire melting and engine fire
-throttle cable and servo assembly prone to corrosion...which leads to unexpected throttle..ie the car acccelerates when u dont want it to ie. u will crash and die
-a pillar didnt conform to safety standards for impact protection. haha ford is weak. cant even test their own shit right.
-the cruise control wire can get caught on the sleeve if u go WOT and it will get stuck at WOT. hahahahaha
-rear wheel hub retaining nuts loosen on their own, which causes your wheels and brakes to fall the fuck out while ure driving...hahaha
-wire harness sucks so the brake lights will stop working completely. theres a good way to get rearended
-if u fuck around with the folding seats in the wagons, they will stop providing good crash protection...and u will die in a crash.
-front seat back can unexpectedly recline, and if this happens when ure driving, u will probably crash and die.
-te windshield wiper case overheats and catches on fire...haha CABIN FIRE!
-another cruise control issue where the gas gets stuck on WOT...hahah imagine being stuck at WOT
-and a bunch others for not meeting emissions, engine mounts, clutch problems....etc etc etc

but barring that, the focus is really a civic killer imo. its faster, handles better, and costs less. sure it might not have the build quality, sure your door handles are gona break off the day after u buy it (fast95pony? haha), and sure theres always the risk of engine fires...but hey, its got performance for cheap.

[Ajay]

I don't think the Supra nor the Skyline are overrated cars. Those car's are both capable of amazing 1/4 mile times. I agree with everyone else here that the Fast and the Furious completely made every single ricer out there think they knew everything about a Supra or a Skyline.

Big old school muscle cars are DEFINETLY not overrated. In my opinion...one of the BEST street cars to run in the 1/4 mile is a Buick Grand National. Those things have a 3.0L turbocharged and intercooled V6 that pulls AMAZING times! A friend of a friend owns one in Winnipeg and he doesn't have much done to it and the boy runs 9s on a DAILY DRIVER!

[Ben]

Originally posted by 5.9 R/T


I am sick and tired of people from both sides (import/domestic) using played out clichés that arn't even true. Take, for example, that guy that cannot stop using the term rice when refering to Japanese import cars. It seems every other day there is someone else who starts a thread like this and I'm tired of this shit. Your basing your opinions (on muscle cars at least) on the people you have met that drive them, and not the cars themselves. That's like me saying that STi's are overrated because you drive one or want one or like them or whatever. Sounds pretty stupid doesn't it? And if your going to blanket the domestic comunity with such insults as &quot;[d]umbestic mullets&quot; such as you did I feel I can insult you all I want. If you can't take it then STFU and stop posting useless shit.

Thank you!!!!!!!! About time someone finally said what alot of us didn't feel like typing!:clap:


Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
Displacement is the ultimate limiting factor, but in almost all but the most extreme cases you never actually reach the maximum power potential for a given motor anyways, making the argument purely academic.

THANK YOU!!!!!!! Bench Racing never wins!

I dont know anyone who has a vehicle at the limit of its power capability as of yet. Friends of mine have a 3000 hp nitro drag truck that isn't even close. Pistons the size of a honeydew melon.



Originally posted by Silencer



Maybe not 1100, but up to 700hp.
And if you want more, look at the Lingenfelter 427 biTurbo. Over 1000 hp, 0-60mph in under two seconds!!!
The difference being that it can put the power to the ground.

What you just wrote has no weight in any of that, that TT vette isn't on stock internals anymore, so that just cancelled that arguement. I have seen supras pulling very similar accel times...In fact, I'm willing to wager a bit of coin that a member of this forum will be close to that. You can get a hell of alot of performance out of a supra motor with not as much money as you would think.


Dont get me wrong, that Vette is a sweet sweet sweet ride, but supras can definatly hang with the big dogs. As can RX-7's. Twin Rotary Twin Turbo 7's are very very nice.


Originally posted by rtypeteg
I think Supra's and RX-7's are over rated ever since that horrible movie called &quot;The Fast and The Furious.&quot; They both are very good looking cars, but not near as advanced as what people make them out to be.

I also think Ford Focus' are over rated. I personally think Ford got jealous of Honda outselling them every year. Ford brought out this American Honda Civic. It did make an impact, but believe me, it's not a Honda. Not near as reliable as most Honda's. Get over it.

Your first point about RX7's and Supras, no, hardly, those are amazing machines, I highly doubt you have never driven both, so your opinion is null and void.
Just cause a movie played them out, doesn't make them any less of a vehicle...tell that to T51R :rolleyes:

But I'm not a focus fan either, so strike down a point for your favor, haha

[Dr. Evil]

Originally posted by Si_FlyGuy
I'm gunna put a vote in for the Hummer as the most over rated vehicle.

:werd:

[theken]

im gonna have to say honda :thumbsup: everyone thinks they are so fast but they are not :thumbsdow and how can a muscle car, supra, or skyline be overrated ???? :dunno: think before you type :D

[fast95pony]

Originally posted by rtypeteg


I also think Ford Focus' are over rated. I personally think Ford got jealous of Honda outselling them every year. Ford brought out this American Honda Civic. It did make an impact, but believe me, it's not a Honda. Not near as reliable as most Honda's. Get over it.


Do you remember the first Civics ?? They rusted out before they left the dealer !!

The Focus had some problems too, but there pretty good now..

(Yes, I'm a tad biased.;)...)

[fast95pony]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R

....sure your door handles are gona break off the day after u buy it (fast95pony? haha),


DOH !!!


:confused:

:nut:

[No.not.again]

im gonna have to say honda everyone thinks they are so fast but they are not and how can a muscle car, supra, or skyline be overrated ???? think before you type

you're just askin' for trouble when you post stupid shit like this. dude, do me a favor and practice what you preach!!!:guns:

[Arthur Dent]

Honda S2000 - looks good on paper but really disapointing when actually drive.

[Redlyne_mr2]

Supras and Skylines are so far from being overrated, they deserve all the respect and attention that they get. As said earlier how many cars out there can withstand +1000 hp on stock internals, how many cars can run 11 sec 1/4 mile times without opening the valve cover and retaining their full interior? True skylines and supras arent the best handling cars in the world but for the price they are worth every penny. Saying that muscle cars are overrated is such an ignorant and general comment that I wont even debate it. When it comes to modifying the supra and skyline it really isnt all that expensive, if you know what youre doing you only need to invest about 10gs cnd into a supra to get it into the 11's. I'd have to agree that the civic is very overrated when it comes to considering it a sports car.

[Mikko]

Redlyne_MR2, you speak of them as if they were just great muscle cars. :tongue:

[Redlyne_mr2]

Originally posted by Mikko
Redlyne_MR2, you speak of them as if they were just great muscle cars. :tongue:
Very true Mikko, the Supra and Skylne are basically Japans versions of the muscle car

[Mikko]

Hmm, I don't agree. Well, I don't know about the Supra, but the Skyline R34 seems like a car that has a most remarkable chassis, being so easy to corner at the limit and get away with it. From reports I have read, they do extremely well on twisty roads. However, the high weight is a constant curse, so it's not the ideal twisty road racer.

It's some sort of.. well behaved hybrid. Fun and easy to drive despite the mad weight. I guess it's not as fun when the roads get worse.

[strlen]

Over rated? I'd say E46 generation of BMW's, with the exception of E46 M3. Not to say they're not fabulous cars, but given their price and their performance, they're nothing special.

Audi TT. Looks cool, somewhat ok, but a 225 (or 180 in some cases)hp car for $45,000 (US), with a rather weak AWD system (Haldex vs. other AWD systems out there), which isn't even standard? Too much. I'd much rather pick up a new or slightly used Audi S4.

NSX can be said to be over-rated as well, but in my view, is because of Honda's mistaken decision to market it as a sports car, rather than as a Grand Tourer (in that category it would compete rather well). Ditto for BMW doing the same for the 8-series, which again, are GT's, and not sports cars.

E36 M3 may too be over-hyped nowadays, especially in the bay area, but I can't really say they're over-rated: excellent performance for the time it was released, and yet it's perfectly daily driveable and is likely the most streetable and reliable M out there.

Supra is an excellent car in my view, but as of now, it simly over-hyped, rather than over-rated. It's not a Ferrari, it doesn't have 1000 hp stock, it's the ratio of money you spend on modification in comparison to power you'll gain, that sets it appart.

Skyline.. can't say much. I've seen a few around the city, and saw one (R32 GTR) at an auto-cross. The driver put on quite a show, putting the diferential into RWD mode and drifting, yet managed to score quite a weak score (likely precise due to the show he put on).

[5.9 R/T]

Originally posted by Mikko
Hmm, I don't agree. Well, I don't know about the Supra, but the Skyline R34 seems like a car that has a most remarkable chassis, being so easy to corner at the limit and get away with it. From reports I have read, they do extremely well on twisty roads. However, the high weight is a constant curse, so it's not the ideal twisty road racer.

It's some sort of.. well behaved hybrid. Fun and easy to drive despite the mad weight. I guess it's not as fun when the roads get worse.

Your idea of a muscle car just having straight line performance with no ability to take corners is a general misconception. For their time muscle cars were some of the best handling cars on the road. So just because a car today can handle well does not mean that it cannot fit into the catagory of muscle car. 30 years from now do you think todays skyline will be able to handle as well as most passenger sedans built? Probably not.

[Mikko]

I am sure skylines make a great muscle car - but unlike the classical muscle cars, I don't think they had that in mind at Nissan when they engineered it. It's just a byproduct from the exceptionally good engine. So, it's not intended to be one, unlike the Camaro and Mustang which are clearly built to deliver looks and quarter mile times over most other things, sacrificing handling, etc.

[Nix87]

Id hafta agree that the Audi TT is a majorly overrated car..big bux for not that much car..

Nick

[Glowrider]

I agree! I can't stand Audi TT's! They make me so mad...

[LUDELVR]

Originally posted by STI-Guy
Remember, these lists are based on opinion.

Toyota Supra
I love the Supra. But I hate all these ricers yapping about how the Supra beats most cars stock. Well, a little know fact, you spikey haired loser, is that an LS1 Camaro can beat one factory.


I know what can beat an LS1 Camaro

4th gen lude schools LS1 (http://www.solid-technology.com/movies/prelude_turbo_v_z28.wmv)

But then again, there's nothing that a little nitros can't cure!!

Lude gets owned by Nitros!! (http://www.solid-technology.com/movies/prelude_turbo_v_z28_n2o.wmv)

[Hakkola]

Originally posted by Nix87
Id hafta agree that the Audi TT is a majorly overrated car..big bux for not that much car..

Nick

I think we have a winner.

[350hp_or_Bust]

I'll agree with the Audi TT .. but I'll also throw the Acura RSX Type-S into the pot. waaaaay over rated .. 200hp, sure .. but only between 7800 and 8000 RPM. And the thing looks jacked up, like it should be a 4X4.

edit: also for a sticker price around $35000 for the Type-S! for that price, I'd rather a WRX ... or even a 2.5 RS Impreza for cheaper.

[___2PaC___]

Originally posted by rtypeteg
I think Supra's and RX-7's are over rated ever since that horrible movie called &quot;The Fast and The Furious.&quot; They both are very good looking cars, but not near as advanced as what people make them out to be....


:werd: just think about when the second movie comes out...then it'll be about honda's and VW's and everythin like that, oh well, the media does the shit it wants to, always messin somethin up, or twistin something up

[pHaCeLeSs]

Id probably say integras or civics.... dont get me wrong, i love them both, i believe they both have potential, but thing is you hafta put lots of money into it to make it worth while.

I just hate seeing every 3rd car as a civic...

OR WORSE YET:

Cavaliers and Sunfires... those bastards are EVERYWHERE! Let alone sunfire has worst safety rating ... ever lol


Focus isnt bad but over played... but i still like it... I really like mustangs... 95 and older

Hmmm what else... celicas & supras too... celicas are getting to common. Sure nice cars should be bought but its a pain when you see so many of them on the road.

When i buy a new car im gonna get something less seen. MX3's are still pretty common so im thinking around a MX6 or even a ford probe.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by pHaCeLeSs
OR WORSE YET:

Cavaliers and Sunfires... those bastards are EVERYWHERE! Let alone sunfire has worst safety rating ... ever lol
THIS MAN IS MY HERO!

[pHaCeLeSs]

oh man you know its so true

(lol nice quote btw of crazy playa, he was goin off on the Calgaryplanet forums of how his mini van can beat civics... made me sick)

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by 350hp_or_Bust
I'll agree with the Audi TT .. but I'll also throw the Acura RSX Type-S into the pot. waaaaay over rated .. 200hp, sure .. but only between 7800 and 8000 RPM. And the thing looks jacked up, like it should be a 4X4.

edit: also for a sticker price around $35000 for the Type-S! for that price, I'd rather a WRX ... or even a 2.5 RS Impreza for cheaper. u are an idiot. fyi, ANY properly tuned engine will be putting out the most horsepower at its highest revs. look at this dyno u ignorant fool. this torque curve is flatter than your moms chest and the horsepower curve is completely linear. the engine could not be more perfectly tuned.

[pHaCeLeSs]

I just also wanna make it clear when i said civics and integras are overated, i feel they arent bad cars, its just everybody expects civics to put out like supras... least the under educated people.

However integras and civics do kick ass, seeing as how i drive a teg ;)

[kevie88]

Originally posted by Murph
If you wanna go fast, 1/4 mile, nothing beats an domestic. The amount of speed you can get for cheap is silly.

I dunno about that.. Bang for the buck, a modern sportbike rules all!!

[legendboy]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
u are an idiot. fyi........u ignorant fool.........flatter than your moms chest.....

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: I love your tactful aruguments Jeff! LMAO :rofl:

[350hp_or_Bust]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
u are an idiot. fyi, ANY properly tuned engine will be putting out the most horsepower at its highest revs. look at this dyno u ignorant fool. this torque curve is flatter than your moms chest and the horsepower curve is completely linear. the engine could not be more perfectly tuned.

no shit you fucking retard. all I'm saying is that everyone with one brags about how it has 200 hp ... how much USEFUL hp does it have though? take the premium RSX for example ... it has more TQ than the Type-S over most of the powerband, AND it has variable geometry intake (which they dropped from the Type-S for some stupid reason .. probably space constraints). It probably keeps up with the Type-S pretty good and with 15 less hp.

Did I say it was a poorly tuned engine? NO .. I said it was over rated! and it still is.

And here you go ... why can a wrx with this dyno curve and weighing 142kg more than the RSX Type-S spank the Type-S? Even though RSX bench racers say they have more hp (175ish vs 165ish for the WRX). ... hence: OVERRATED!

[pHaCeLeSs]

where do you guys get these charts?

[rage2]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R
ANY properly tuned engine will be putting out the most horsepower at its highest revs.

That's not true, because of restrictions in airflow from it's head designs. Take an "economy" head, and TQ will drop off so harsh at high revs that HP will drop as well.

[350hp_or_Bust]

Originally posted by pHaCeLeSs
where do you guys get these charts?

off the net ... the wrx one was from vishnutuning.com

[max_boost]

Originally posted by nosoup4u
These car are not made for the 1/4, IRS makes a big deal.
why some supras/imports are slow down the 1/4 &quot;TRACTION&quot; they are not quick cars(measured in the 1/4) but extremely fast car(look at their mile and hour)

Heres some faqs about supra performance costs.
1. greddy t78 turbo kit 3500us
2. titan/SP/GA 850cc fuel system 1700US
3.AEM 1400us
4. exhaust 500US

total retail 7100us thats about 11000cnd retail without labor.

11000cnd is alot of money but 650rwhp/leather/power,heated seats/stereo/daily driver THATS PRETTY CHEAP!!!

this is proven not just keyboard BS

why i know , i own and work on a few.

How reliable is a setup like this? I haven't heard of many problems with the Supra, are the motors like bullet proof?

[nosoup4u]

Originally posted by CRXguy


Q:What do 400, 500, 600, 700hp Supra's have in common?

A: 12 second timeslips!

:rofl:

Or something along those lines.

These car are not made for the 1/4, IRS makes a big deal.
why some supras/imports are slow down the 1/4 "TRACTION" they are not quick cars(measured in the 1/4) but extremely fast car(look at their mile and hour)

Heres some faqs about supra performance costs.
1. greddy t78 turbo kit 3500us
2. titan/SP/GA 850cc fuel system 1700US
3.AEM 1400us
4. exhaust 500US

total retail 7100us thats about 11000cnd retail without labor.

11000cnd is alot of money but 650rwhp/leather/power,heated seats/stereo/daily driver THATS PRETTY CHEAP!!!

this is proven not just keyboard BS

why i know , i own and work on a few.

[nosoup4u]

I have my car for 3 years,
2 straight year of racing, drag every friday nite and dyno every other sat.

i run consistent 125-130mph down the 1/4 on low boost(23psi compaired to 30psi)now

3 years of racing 90000km after car still runs fine/ no oil burn, idle smooth and still made 703rwhp


no the motor is not bullet proof, its all in the tunning but toyota did build a pretty stout motor with a big fuel system stock/550cc injectors(55lbs)

1/4 time for 10sec and 9sec passes can only be achieve by seat time, there is no short cuts, you can have all the power but without actual seat time in the same car you would most likely get 12's passes.

Not everyone is a drag racer

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by 350hp_or_Bust


no shit you fucking retard. all I'm saying is that everyone with one brags about how it has 200 hp ... how much USEFUL hp does it have though? take the premium RSX for example ... it has more TQ than the Type-S over most of the powerband, AND it has variable geometry intake (which they dropped from the Type-S for some stupid reason .. probably space constraints). It probably keeps up with the Type-S pretty good and with 15 less hp.

Did I say it was a poorly tuned engine? NO .. I said it was over rated! and it still is.

And here you go ... why can a wrx with this dyno curve and weighing 142kg more than the RSX Type-S spank the Type-S? Even though RSX bench racers say they have more hp (175ish vs 165ish for the WRX). ... hence: OVERRATED!

the points u make are valid, but have no relevance here. the wrx is faster due to its awd. the base model rsx hardly keeps up with the rsx-s at all. it has 40hp less, not 15. if u are going to argue, at least get your facts straight. it has only slightly more torque (1lb-ft), and it has a variable geometry intake, which fyi is called variable intake runners. the s doesnt have them to give more high end power. honda did the same thing with the dc2 itr and the dc2 gsr. its completely ridiculous to blame the lack of a variable intake runners on space constraints

Originally posted by rage2


That's not true, because of restrictions in airflow from it's head designs. Take an &quot;economy&quot; head, and TQ will drop off so harsh at high revs that HP will drop as well.

when i said "properly tuned" i meant "properly tuned for performance". which the rsx is.

[350hp_or_Bust]

Originally posted by Jeff TYPE R

the points u make are valid, but have no relevance here. the wrx is faster due to its awd. the base model rsx hardly keeps up with the rsx-s at all. it has 40hp less, not 15. if u are going to argue, at least get your facts straight. it has only slightly more torque (1lb-ft), and it has a variable geometry intake, which fyi is called variable intake runners. the s doesnt have them to give more high end power. honda did the same thing with the dc2 itr and the dc2 gsr. its completely ridiculous to blame the lack of a variable intake runners on space constraints


First, the WRX isn't faster because of its AWD. That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. maybe on a dirt, gravel or snow course it would be. .. but the AWD on pavement is a whole different discussion. Its all about area under the hp curve .. or the net effective usable horsepower, or the average horsepower over the used RPM range .. whatever you want to call it.

And how are my points valid, but have no relevance here? They're points saying why the Type-S is overrated ... this is a thread about overrated cars is it not?

Also, yes the premium has 40hp less, I knew that .. don't know where I got the 15 hp number from ... I even thought I caught that mistake and edited it, but I guess not. sorry

And it is more than just 1 ft-lbs difference over most of the RPM, its closer to 10 ft-lbs at the peak (look at the dyno chart straight from the brochure). the Premium puts out more TQ and hp right up to about 5500RPM .. in fact, the _peak_ TQ number for the Type-S is actually only 1 ft-lbs higher than the Premium (I suspect they did that just to save face and not have their lower priced engine have a higher performance number attached to it).

Also, fyi, if you want to get technical they call it a 'dual stage intake manifold.' whatever you want to call it, it all operates off the same principles.

And no its not rediculous to suspect they left out the variable intake for space constraints .. engineers do it all the time .. its called compromising. What _is_ rediculous is to say they didn't incorporate a variable system on the 'S' so they could get more high end power. Granted they'd probably have to design a different one .. or even a three stage one (which could lead to space constraints), but a variable system would always outperform a fixed one. Do you even know _why_ all these variable systems work? I know you know _how_ they work, physically (as in what parts move and how they move etc.), but do you know why?

I guess to the RSX's credit, the Type-S has a 6 speed .. which would help a little more to keep it at a decent power level.

I suppose if all you do is drive between 6000-8000RPM the Type-S isn't over-rated, but otherwise, I still vote for it being over-rated.

PS .. thanks for addressing me in a half respectful manner this time

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by 350hp_or_Bust


First, the WRX isn't faster because of its AWD. That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. maybe on a dirt, gravel or snow course it would be. .. but the AWD on pavement is a whole different discussion. Its all about area under the hp curve .. or the net effective usable horsepower, or the average horsepower over the used RPM range .. whatever you want to call it. true, but im not talking about that. im talking about launching. on any surface, awd will launch a heck of a lot harder than fwd.


Originally posted by 350hp_or_Bust
And it is more than just 1 ft-lbs difference over most of the RPM, its closer to 10 ft-lbs at the peak (look at the dyno chart straight from the brochure). the Premium puts out more TQ and hp right up to about 5500RPM .. in fact, the _peak_ TQ number for the Type-S is actually only 1 ft-lbs higher than the Premium (I suspect they did that just to save face and not have their lower priced engine have a higher performance number attached to it).

Also, fyi, if you want to get technical they call it a 'dual stage intake manifold.' whatever you want to call it, it all operates off the same principles.

And no its not rediculous to suspect they left out the variable intake for space constraints .. engineers do it all the time .. its called compromising. What _is_ rediculous is to say they didn't incorporate a variable system on the 'S' so they could get more high end power. Granted they'd probably have to design a different one .. or even a three stage one (which could lead to space constraints), but a variable system would always outperform a fixed one. Do you even know _why_ all these variable systems work? I know you know _how_ they work, physically (as in what parts move and how they move etc.), but do you know why?

I guess to the RSX's credit, the Type-S has a 6 speed .. which would help a little more to keep it at a decent power level.

I suppose if all you do is drive between 6000-8000RPM the Type-S isn't over-rated, but otherwise, I still vote for it being over-rated.

PS .. thanks for addressing me in a half respectful manner this time well actually the base model is the one with 141 and the s has 140lb-ft. and i know that the base has more torque from 3-5grand...but so what? as uve said, with a close ratio 6 speed, its pretty simple to keep the revs above 6 grand. just because its missing a few ft-lb below vtec engagement doesnt make it "overrated".

anyway, i know exactly how variable intake runners work and i know "why" as well. do u? and actually, u might be right about the space constraints now that i think about it...the intake manifold on the s is made of aluminum and its some short funky shape with velocity stacks cast in it. the intake manifold on the base model is made of plastic and switches runners with a rotary valve. i could see how it would be hard to make dual runners with the short runners following the shape of the runners on the s.

but all of this is academic. u make it sound like the engine is gutless below 6 grand, which it isnt. its flat torque curve shows that it is quite capable at all rpms. this isnt typical of honda engines at all and the k20a is way better than the older b series engines in that its not peaky at all. right now, the k series engines imo are the most respectable engines out there.

[350hp_or_Bust]

yeah I agree they are very respectable ... but I still think they're over rated. Its not the be all end all of engines that it claims to be. I definitely wouldn't go so far as to say its the MOST respectable engine out there right now.

you're right though, this is getting silly... lets just leave it at that. and for the record, yes I know the how and why behind variable intakes and valve lift and timing etc ... moreso the why than the specifics on how though admitedly.

Say, do you have any good websites with some pics/drawings of the intake manifolds? I'm curious what the S one looks like now .. I was just under the impression that it was a simple plenum and runner design.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by 350hp_or_Bust
yeah I agree they are very respectable ... but I still think they're over rated. Its not the be all end all of engines that it claims to be. I definitely wouldn't go so far as to say its the MOST respectable engine out there right now.

you're right though, this is getting silly... lets just leave it at that. and for the record, yes I know the how and why behind variable intakes and valve lift and timing etc ... moreso the why than the specifics on how though admitedly.

Say, do you have any good websites with some pics/drawings of the intake manifolds? I'm curious what the S one looks like now .. I was just under the impression that it was a simple plenum and runner design. hm it basically looks like a crooked snail....i dont have a pic tho. ill try to find one later.

[Toms-Celica]

This thread is overrated

[FN49]

The Civic is highly overrated in one sense. As an economy car they are reliable and fuel efficient, which is what they were designed for. However as a platform for a performance car they are a poor choice.

[Joe Malms]

nsx...especially when considering price.