The Future Automotive Thread

[JoshuaLogan]

Originally Posted by raz0rbladez909

I admit I was intrigued by the idea of a "spiritual successor to the ae86", but after owning it for a little over a year I was less than impressed. The S2000 is one of those few cars that I would actually buy again down the line, whereas you'd have to pay me to want to own another FRS. Thanks regarding the c5z. It's kinda funny that I always looked at them as out of my league price wise, yet here I am, driving one and I couldn't be happier, well maybe if it was a C6 Grand Sport. Hah


My z06 averages 3-4 mpg less than the frz twins with double the horsepower. A standard C5 will probably match them or get close on the highway lol.
http://www.fuelly.com/car/chevrolet/corvette/2004 [emoji6]

What did you not like about the FR-S vs the S2000 other than the lack of power? I own an AP2 right now (along with an S14 in need of repair), and I love many things about it... specifically the engine, front-mid engine weight balance, short wheelbase, and double wishbone suspension... The engine also takes boost extremely well (actually ends up being cheaper than building a monster SR when you add up all the costs of building a VET setup).

It's a very fun car to drive, but there are many downsides to it too... Parts are expensive. A good hardtop alone costs $3000-$4000. The car has outdated and poor aero, the transmission is weak, the diff is weak, etc.... The FR-S already has a fixed hardtop. It has a less sophisticated suspension design, but much better aero... It doesn't have as great of an engine, but it's not terrible either, and many believe it's an easier car to drive fast than the S2000. It has a lot going for it.

I'm not in a rush to firesale the S2K for one, simply because a used S2000 is much better value, but prices are dropping on the FR-S/BRZ and they will be a very good used pickup within the next few years.

[dorkidori_s13]

The ecoboost mustang kicks mad ass and overshadows the lame FRS cause it makes a billion more jiggawats with a stock setup


Frs can die in a fire cause its laaaaaaame!


Ps: im drunk and the ur butthurts over the Frs hate is hillarious. people wanr somethinf that makes 400hp with bolt ons on a 4 cylinder... Not somwthing that parks hard with all the other hoonilames in the parking lot at Sonic!

[dorkidori_s13]

Moaaaaaar jiggawatts!!!!!!!

[raz0rbladez909]

Originally Posted by JoshuaLogan

What did you not like about the FR-S vs the S2000 other than the lack of power? I own an AP2 right now (along with an S14 in need of repair), and I love many things about it... specifically the engine, front-mid engine weight balance, short wheelbase, and double wishbone suspension... The engine also takes boost extremely well (actually ends up being cheaper than building a monster SR when you add up all the costs of building a VET setup).

It's a very fun car to drive, but there are many downsides to it too... Parts are expensive. A good hardtop alone costs $3000-$4000. The car has outdated and poor aero, the transmission is weak, the diff is weak, etc.... The FR-S already has a fixed hardtop. It has a less sophisticated suspension design, but much better aero... It doesn't have as great of an engine, but it's not terrible either, and many believe it's an easier car to drive fast than the S2000. It has a lot going for it.

I'm not in a rush to firesale the S2K for one, simply because a used S2000 is much better value, but prices are dropping on the FR-S/BRZ and they will be a very good used pickup within the next few years.

The S2000 to me is just a better car to modify. The driving experience is intoxicating, especially with the top down and the sound of the engine at the vtec crossover. More bang for your buck if you're looking for big power, and a more involved driving experience (at least to me). The S2000 just felt raw in comparison, while still feeling like a quality machine. I had an 01 AP1, with the 9k redline, plastic rear window, door speakers only, bare minimum car, and it was still leaps and bounds ahead of the FRS in fit and finish.

The FRS felt like a budget sports car(which I know it was), but the overall quality left much to be desired. Within the first 10k miles I had the fuel pump chirp(sounds like angry crickets) and it was replaced under warranty, it reoccured within the next 5k miles and they would not replace it because there wasn't a legitimate replacement.(understandable for first model years)
I also had the taillight condensation begin to occur within the first 10k miles and was replaced under warranty. I forget if that returned or not.

The FRS just ended up being a complete let down to me. So much hype, so much initial interest, and the only way the vehicle has progressed is that they come out with a new color or bodykit, and treat standard features on the GT86 like it's the holy grail. (HID's, Climate control, ETC) I hate the lug pattern, 5x100 can eat a bag of dicks. Handling wise, I appreciate both cars. The S2k is much less forgiving(especially AP1's) whereas the FRS was predictable and easy to control at the limits, but that could be because the stock tires on the FRS are junk anyways, so it's easy to tell when they are going to give way.

The S2000 makes more power stock, and even more with forced induction, all on stock internals. The transmission being weak is news to me(I've always read good things unless you're going for some big power or drag racing), but the diff being delicate is well known (but there is a huge aftermarket to fix that. The s2000 is alot more friendly with wheel selection, so you have that advantage in your corner, especially in the used market. The FRS wheel selection was starting to get better as I got out of the scene but it was literally because of the cars initial hype why manufacturers started producing in 5x100. I was running a 17x9 square setup with 245/40's all around on the s2k fpr ridiculously cheap. In all honesty when it comes to the top, I found some great deals on hardtops over the years for the s2000, you just better have the cash in hand when the deals do come along.

To me though, the top down experience is much more enjoyable than driving a 2 door coupe with subpar power, and a miniscule "backseat", but that's just me. I didn't feel like I needed to upgrade the s2000 to enjoy it, but I did feel that way about the FRS rather quickly. There's no way around it, it's just not that exciting of a car in stock trim. I really think the new miata is going to give the twins a run for the money. If there's something that Mazda has done right all these years it's the Miata. I really can't wait to test drive one!

[JoshuaLogan]

Originally Posted by dorkidori_s13

The ecoboost mustang kicks mad ass and overshadows the lame FRS cause it makes a billion more jiggawats with a stock setup


Frs can die in a fire cause its laaaaaaame!


Ps: im drunk and the ur butthurts over the Frs hate is hillarious. people wanr somethinf that makes 400hp with bolt ons on a 4 cylinder... Not somwthing that parks hard with all the other hoonilames in the parking lot at Sonic!

The Mustang is 3500 pounds. It's not in any way the new Silvia like you claimed, bud. 4 cylinders are great in light cars. Not so much in heavy cars.

As for wanting a car with a 4 cylinder that can make 400hp with bolt-ons, get an S2000.

[JoshuaLogan]

Originally Posted by raz0rbladez909

The S2000 to me is just a better car to modify. The driving experience is intoxicating, especially with the top down and the sound of the engine at the vtec crossover. More bang for your buck if you're looking for big power, and a more involved driving experience (at least to me). The S2000 just felt raw in comparison, while still feeling like a quality machine. I had an 01 AP1, with the 9k redline, plastic rear window, door speakers only, bare minimum car, and it was still leaps and bounds ahead of the FRS in fit and finish.

The FRS felt like a budget sports car(which I know it was), but the overall quality left much to be desired. Within the first 10k miles I had the fuel pump chirp(sounds like angry crickets) and it was replaced under warranty, it reoccured within the next 5k miles and they would not replace it because there wasn't a legitimate replacement.(understandable for first model years)
I also had the taillight condensation begin to occur within the first 10k miles and was replaced under warranty. I forget if that returned or not.

The FRS just ended up being a complete let down to me. So much hype, so much initial interest, and the only way the vehicle has progressed is that they come out with a new color or bodykit, and treat standard features on the GT86 like it's the holy grail. (HID's, Climate control, ETC) I hate the lug pattern, 5x100 can eat a bag of dicks. Handling wise, I appreciate both cars. The S2k is much less forgiving(especially AP1's) whereas the FRS was predictable and easy to control at the limits, but that could be because the stock tires on the FRS are junk anyways, so it's easy to tell when they are going to give way.

The S2000 makes more power stock, and even more with forced induction, all on stock internals. The transmission being weak is news to me(I've always read good things unless you're going for some big power or drag racing), but the diff being delicate is well known (but there is a huge aftermarket to fix that. The s2000 is alot more friendly with wheel selection, so you have that advantage in your corner, especially in the used market. The FRS wheel selection was starting to get better as I got out of the scene but it was literally because of the cars initial hype why manufacturers started producing in 5x100. I was running a 17x9 square setup with 245/40's all around on the s2k fpr ridiculously cheap. In all honesty when it comes to the top, I found some great deals on hardtops over the years for the s2000, you just better have the cash in hand when the deals do come along.

To me though, the top down experience is much more enjoyable than driving a 2 door coupe with subpar power, and a miniscule "backseat", but that's just me. I didn't feel like I needed to upgrade the s2000 to enjoy it, but I did feel that way about the FRS rather quickly. There's no way around it, it's just not that exciting of a car in stock trim. I really think the new miata is going to give the twins a run for the money. If there's something that Mazda has done right all these years it's the Miata. I really can't wait to test drive one!

Understandable. I don't think the FR-S/BRZ would really shine until it got forced induction and some sticky tires. It's no question a used S2000 is the better bang for the buck when thinking about the initial cost to get a hold of one and then adding a few mods, but when considering going all out for a track car, I'm not so sure. The S2K has the better engine, suspension, and weight balance, but worse stability, aero, torque, overall weight, cost of parts, etc.... Both have pros and cons, but there are a few highly modded FR-S/BRZs out there doing very well... the Evasive FR-S, especially.

[exitspeed]

The 370z is a full 6 model years old now. I can't believe we're not on the verge of the debut of the new car.

[simmode1]

JoshauLogan, I don't think that we outright hate the FRS. We just think is way overhyped. Imo, it's worth about as much attention & acclaim as a hardtop Miata. We're tired of morons saying "its the next 240sx!". Because its not. Its the next AE86. Get it right. And most of us give zero fucks about wanting another 240sx anyway. We want another Silvia with a factory turbo engine. We're over the idea of buying a car & having to swap the engine or bolt-on an aftermarket turbo/supercharger to give it some balls. The s2000 gets a pass from me because that engine is so damn strong that its a keeper. A turbo FRS with stock internals would blow up so quick if it tried making half the power a turbo s2000 was capable of on stock internals. Keep in mind, the S2K may be cheap now, but it was like $35k+ when it was on sale & worth every penny. It was regularly judged against BMWs & Porsches.

As for why we compliment the heavy Genesis coupe & Mustang, while deflating the FRS hype.... We're just looking at reality, man. The Genesis & Mustang cost the same thing as the FRS, but in terms of speed, they rape that thing so bad they should be in prison. Not to even mention fit & finish... I don't know if you've ever driven a GC or new Mustang, but a lot of us have. And have found their weight to not be that much of a deal breaker, because the performance was still there.

So go ahead. Buy an FRS. Enjoy the nirvana of its sublime handling experience while getting stomped at the track by the 600-700lbs heavier Genesis & Mustang. Enjoy not having enough passing power to merge onto the highway because a fucking Yukon won't let you over. Enjoy looking for wheels in the only lug pattern shittier than 4x114.3. Go ahead, man. We're not stopping you.

[Rustys14]

Originally Posted by simmode1

We're tired of morons saying "its the next 240sx!". Because its not. Its the next AE86. Get it right.

I'm not sure about this. I've driven the FRS several times and it has never reminded of my old AE86 in the slightest. Driving the frs does however feel almost exactly the same as driving a 240 to me (which is actually the most unappealing factor of the entire car imo).

I love the way s2000's drive and the pricing is appealing but there are still better cars out there in the same price range that would keep me from personally taking the plunge. Hell, you can get a low mileage 986 boxster for under 8k around here and those are an absolute blast to drive.

As for me, I'm personally looking to get a E46 M3 as soon as work picks up again. The new Mustang is tempting as well but my 240 has gotten me to the point where I want to step away from turbocharged vehicles for a bit plus, I'm not sure if I want payments lol.

[Corbic]

Yeah, 5x100. - wtf Toyota.

Are WRXs even 5x100 anymore?

[Rustys14]

Originally Posted by Corbic

Yeah, 5x100. - wtf Toyota.

Are WRXs even 5x100 anymore?

The STI's switched to 5x114.3 in around 2005 but I'm pretty sure the WRX and standard models are still 5x100. I never thought about it but I wonder if the FRS ended up with the same pattern as a result of the joint venture. Its such an obscure pattern to go with...

[JoshuaLogan]

Originally Posted by simmode1

JoshauLogan, I don't think that we outright hate the FRS. We just think is way overhyped. Imo, it's worth about as much attention & acclaim as a hardtop Miata. We're tired of morons saying "its the next 240sx!". Because its not. Its the next AE86. Get it right. And most of us give zero fucks about wanting another 240sx anyway. We want another Silvia with a factory turbo engine. We're over the idea of buying a car & having to swap the engine or bolt-on an aftermarket turbo/supercharger to give it some balls. The s2000 gets a pass from me because that engine is so damn strong that its a keeper. A turbo FRS with stock internals would blow up so quick if it tried making half the power a turbo s2000 was capable of on stock internals. Keep in mind, the S2K may be cheap now, but it was like $35k+ when it was on sale & worth every penny. It was regularly judged against BMWs & Porsches.

As for why we compliment the heavy Genesis coupe & Mustang, while deflating the FRS hype.... We're just looking at reality, man. The Genesis & Mustang cost the same thing as the FRS, but in terms of speed, they rape that thing so bad they should be in prison. Not to even mention fit & finish... I don't know if you've ever driven a GC or new Mustang, but a lot of us have. And have found their weight to not be that much of a deal breaker, because the performance was still there.

So go ahead. Buy an FRS. Enjoy the nirvana of its sublime handling experience while getting stomped at the track by the 600-700lbs heavier Genesis & Mustang. Enjoy not having enough passing power to merge onto the highway because a fucking Yukon won't let you over. Enjoy looking for wheels in the only lug pattern shittier than 4x114.3. Go ahead, man. We're not stopping you.

The FR-S/BRZ/GT86 has way more in common with a 240sx than an AE86. Almost everything about it (which I already listed in a previous post) is reminiscent of an s-chassis. Obviously, they wouldn't market it as the successor of a competitor's car. Just look at the specs and look at a picture of it next to an S15. If you think it wasn't influenced by the S-chassis cars you're out of your mind.

Realistically, in today's dollars (when taking inflation into account), it's no more expensive than an S14 was when it came out, but is better handling and makes the same power the SR20DET S14 made stock without a turbo. It's not nearly as bad as you guys are making it out to be. You will NEVER get a RWD sports car of that size and weight with that caliber of handling with a turbo from the factory for $25k in today's world. It's never going to happen. Try $35k at the least, and that's only if anyone is actually willing to make one. Sure, I'd like to see the FR-S as it is for $20k instead of $25k, or at $25k with a turbo adding 50-100hp, but it's not going to happen. If they added a turbo it would cost more from the factory than just doing it yourself. Sure, you don't get a warranty if you do it yourself, but if it came with a turbo from the factory you'd upgrade it and lose your warranty anyway. Offering backseats and less power let's them get it out the door cheaper and makes it cheaper to insure.

It doesn't matter how much power the Genesis has. It won't satisfy people that want a sports car. It's heavy, it has sloppy handling, and it has a terrible transmission. It's not a sports car. By that logic, you could be happy with any number of luxury sedan boats or FWD hot hatches on the market right now. Power isn't the only metric of performance.

[JoshuaLogan]

Originally Posted by Rustys14

The STI's switched to 5x114.3 in around 2005 but I'm pretty sure the WRX and standard models are still 5x100. I never thought about it but I wonder if the FRS ended up with the same pattern as a result of the joint venture. Its such an obscure pattern to go with...

It is. The car is heavily based on the Impreza chassis.

[simmode1]

Originally Posted by JoshuaLogan

The FR-S/BRZ/GT86 has way more in common with a 240sx than an AE86. Almost everything about it (which I already listed in a previous post) is reminiscent of an s-chassis. Obviously, they wouldn't market it as the successor of a competitor's car. Just look at the specs and look at a picture of it next to an S15. If you think it wasn't influenced by the S-chassis cars you're out of your mind.

Realistically, in today's dollars (when taking inflation into account), it's no more expensive than an S14 was when it came out, but is better handling and makes the same power the SR20DET S14 made stock without a turbo. It's not nearly as bad as you guys are making it out to be. You will NEVER get a RWD sports car of that size and weight with that caliber of handling with a turbo from the factory for $25k in today's world. It's never going to happen. Try $35k at the least, and that's only if anyone is actually willing to make one. Sure, I'd like to see the FR-S as it is for $20k instead of $25k, or at $25k with a turbo adding 50-100hp, but it's not going to happen. If they added a turbo it would cost more from the factory than just doing it yourself. Sure, you don't get a warranty if you do it yourself, but if it came with a turbo from the factory you'd upgrade it and lose your warranty anyway. Offering backseats and less power let's them get it out the door cheaper and makes it cheaper to insure.

It doesn't matter how much power the Genesis has. It won't satisfy people that want a sports car. It's heavy, it has sloppy handling, and it has a terrible transmission. It's not a sports car. By that logic, you could be happy with any number of luxury sedan boats or FWD hot hatches on the market right now. Power isn't the only metric of performance.

Dude, I'm not arguing about it. I am not interested in the FRS. I'd be more interested in the new Miata before I ever considered the FRS. And you're talking out of your ass about the Genesis Coupe. It may not be as sharp as the FRS, but it's every bit as capable as similar offerings from Inifinti & BWM. I've got a few friends with GC's. Never heard any of them complain about the trans, except for the hanging revs, which isn't mechanical since it can be fixed with a ecu reflash.

[!Zar!]

The Genesis sucks too.

[simmode1]

^^^Yeah. Not saying it's the bee's knees or anything. But it murders the FRS in any contest aside from tactile steering feel. The only place the FRS has an advantage over it is MAYBE on a downhill canyon/mountain road or at a tiny autocross track. GC>FRS in the real world. But, yeah, they certainly are far from perfect & I'd take a used 135i or 335i BMW before I seriously considered either of them.

[Corbic]

Josh your babbling a whole bunch of nonsense.

First. As I originally said years ago. No one thinks S-Chassis = KA/CA. We want a SR20det Silvia/180sx.

The S14 made 225hp with VTC and a turbo. It's going to have a dramatically different torque curve and power delivery to the FRS's FA20.

The FA20 has no mid range punch and pukes up high. My 200hp Boxster laughs all day long to redline at the FRS - it maybe low on power but it will pull till the rod bolts snap all the while sounding like you got Sasha Grey hog tied in the trunk.

Same goes for the S2k, it's wheezy engine just screams like a banshee.

But back to our points- for a "real modern Silvia" to happen, an S16... It would need to be a 2.3-2.6l I4 turbo making 290-310hp in a 2+2 coupe that weights 2.900-3,100lbs and costs $29k.

Nissan killed the S-car when it made the Z33. The Z33 took the low end Z32 and mated it to the top end S15 and until we see a 500hp $50k Z35 - we won't ever see a S16 again.

As far as price...

A factory turbo would have added what, $3k to the cost of the car? It's in the $26k WRX already! 268hp and 258lb/tq.

Or put a 2.5l in the FRS, gig it some torque and a 15-20hp boost. Then at least your in 17 year old S2k territory. Trying to convince us that this car is on par with a car sold nearly 25 years ago is a fools errand.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by simmode1

Dude, I'm not arguing about it. I am not interested in the FRS. I'd be more interested in the new Miata before I ever considered the FRS. And you're talking out of your ass about the Genesis Coupe. It may not be as sharp as the FRS, but it's every bit as capable as similar offerings from Inifinti & BWM. I've got a few friends with GC's. Never heard any of them complain about the trans, except for the hanging revs, which isn't mechanical since it can be fixed with a ecu reflash.

First year had some second gear synchro issues. Old news just like the Z33 trans problems. I had an 03 with 120k no tire feathering, no oil burning and no trans problems.

[raz0rbladez909]

Originally Posted by JoshuaLogan

The Mustang is 3500 pounds. It's not in any way the new Silvia like you claimed, bud. 4 cylinders are great in light cars. Not so much in heavy cars.

As for wanting a car with a 4 cylinder that can make 400hp with bolt-ons, get an S2000.

The Mustang is still a performance bargain. Even the V6 gives the 370z a run for its money, and it's almost $10k less. They just keep getting better, whereas Nissan is too worried about making the Z uglier.

Originally Posted by JoshuaLogan

Understandable. I don't think the FR-S/BRZ would really shine until it got forced induction and some sticky tires. It's no question a used S2000 is the better bang for the buck when thinking about the initial cost to get a hold of one and then adding a few mods, but when considering going all out for a track car, I'm not so sure. The S2K has the better engine, suspension, and weight balance, but worse stability, aero, torque, overall weight, cost of parts, etc.... Both have pros and cons, but there are a few highly modded FR-S/BRZs out there doing very well... the Evasive FR-S, especially.

It WON'T shine at all until it gets forced induction. As far as track cars go, you can find AP1's all day for 10k no problem. It will still be a few years before the FRS reaches that pricepoint, and by then the S2k's will be even cheaper. Worse stability? Where are we talking? Aero, TQ, and cost of parts are all relative to what you're planning on doing and how you're going to mod the car. The FRZ and S2000 are nearly the same exact weight. Don't believe me? http://www.bowtie6.com/how-much-does-honda-s2000-weigh/ http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7881
That "lightweight" hype is exactly what it is. It's light compared to most modern cars, but it's far from being a Lotus Elise or Miata. The Evasive car has been extensively modified and worked, so I'd be surprised if it weren't doing well, especially considering the fact that it's Evasive Motorsports were talking.

Originally Posted by exitspeed

The 370z is a full 6 model years old now. I can't believe we're not on the verge of the debut of the new car.

No shit man, I'm hoping they go more towards the styling of the 240z once again, but I won't be holding my breath.

Originally Posted by Rustys14

I'm not sure about this. I've driven the FRS several times and it has never reminded of my old AE86 in the slightest. Driving the frs does however feel almost exactly the same as driving a 240 to me (which is actually the most unappealing factor of the entire car imo).

I love the way s2000's drive and the pricing is appealing but there are still better cars out there in the same price range that would keep me from personally taking the plunge. Hell, you can get a low mileage 986 boxster for under 8k around here and those are an absolute blast to drive.

I pretty much agree with everything you said about the FRS and comparing it to driving a 240sx. It has all the same driving feel and handling with the same disappointment you get when stepping on the gas like driving a KA

Your second point is why I didn't buy another S2000. Not because I didn't think it would've been nice to have another(I will eventually), but I couldn't resist the appeal of getting into a car with double the horsepower(and potential power), and nearly the same MPG for the price lol and the Corvette is cheap as fuck on insurance if any of you were ever wondering. As far as Porsche goes, I've never had good luck with anything German so you can have that.

[simmode1]

Originally Posted by Corbic

First year had some second gear synchro issues. Old news just like the Z33 trans problems. I had an 03 with 120k no tire feathering, no oil burning and no trans problems.

^^^Ahhh. Maybe that's why my GC friends down complain about trans issues. They don't have 1st years. I guess the 2012's & 2013's must have gotten a fix. Either way, just like the Z33: not a deal breaker. I don't expect perfect at this price range. I wouldn't be surprised if the FRS has had trans issues too.

Originally Posted by raz0rbladez909

That "lightweight" hype is exactly what it is. It's light compared to most modern cars, but it's far from being a Lotus Elise or Miata. .

I'm glad you mentioned that. Ppl call the GC & Mustang boats... but in comparison to what? Miatas, 240's & FRZ's? They gotta compare apples to apples. You don't hear these fanboys griping about JDM legends that weighed similar weights like the Supra, GTR & Z32TT. And those 3 would also similarly wipe the floor with Miata, 240 & FRZ...

[raz0rbladez909]

Originally Posted by simmode1

I'm glad you mentioned that. Ppl call the GC & Mustang boats... but in comparison to what? Miatas, 240's & FRZ's? They gotta compare apples to apples. You don't hear these fanboys griping about JDM legends that weighed similar weights like the Supra, GTR & Z32TT. And those 3 would also similarly wipe the floor with Miata, 240 & FRZ...

LOL Right?!? The Supra, GTR and Z32 were all pretty damn heavy cars for their time. Don't forget about the 3000GT VR-4. That thing was nearly 4k lbs lol

[simmode1]

^^^Hey, Raz0rblade... Previously, I'd only been interested in the C6 & C7 Vette, but you got me curious about the C5. Are the Z06's all notchbacks? I'd prefer a fastback...

[raz0rbladez909]

Originally Posted by simmode1

^^^Hey, Raz0rblade... Previously, I'd only been interested in the C6 & C7 Vette, but you got me curious about the C5. Are the Z06's all notchbacks? I'd prefer a fastback...

There are 3 different body styles, Vert, Coupe(targa top), and Fixed roof coupe(or notchback). The Z06 only came in Fixed roof coupe, but some creative people have converted theirs to targa tops being that the entire exterior is fiberglass. Most of the drivetrain/suspension from the c6 can be swapped onto the c5 as well.

[Corbic]

I just can't learn to like the C5.

[raz0rbladez909]

Originally Posted by Corbic

I just can't learn to like the C5.

Admittedly I wasn't originally a fan of the looks of the C5. But with a little help from the aftermarket, they look just as good as any other car. You can also lower the car on the stock hardware since it doesn't use a typical spring and strut combo.


They really are a performance bargain, especially since earlier c5's can be had for under 10k. A better chassis than the 240sx and it already has an LS in it, so it's not like you need to do a motor swap.

[johnydoesit]

My biggest gripe with the c5 (c6 too) is the interior. Though I suppose some nice buckets seats, aftermarket wheel, and maybe even a cluster would help that.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by johnydoesit

My biggest gripe with the c5 (c6 too) is the interior. Though I suppose some nice buckets seats, aftermarket wheel, and maybe even a cluster would help that.

There is no saving the C5. It's pure 90's GM.



It's not even a "material quality" issue as it is GMs whole design styling and approach. A lowly WRX has a Steering wheel that's a billion times nicer.



Really?!!

[iRONDONkey]

i cringe every time i see the interior of the C5.

it's legit.......... poverty.

[DRIFTER-M]

Originally Posted by JoshuaLogan

Also. what's with all the BRZ/FR-S hate on this site? Sure, everyone would like to see it coming with a turbo, but it's literally the second coming of the S-chassis. Pretty much the same weight, very similar MacPherson struts front/multi-link rear suspension design and a wider track and longer wheelbase than an S14 (which itself has the widest track and longest wheelbase of the S cars), yet MORE agile than an S13 or S15 with quicker, tighter steering (one of the best steering feels in any new car under $50k-$60k), more stability, and all-around better handling, in general, than any of them.

Sure, it's a lot of money compared to what you can get a used 240sx for now, but the 240 is old as hell. If you compare the new price of an S14 when it was first released to the price of a base FR-S and take inflation into account, it's not in any way, shape, or form an "expensive" car. It's only expensive to people who only buy 20 year old used cars.

And what's with all the Mustang, Z, Genesis worship? Especially the Genesis.... that thing is a boat. This is literally the only forum other than the Genesis forum where I've seen people have anything positive to say about the Genesis...

I agree with this up to a point...

Just because we like "old" cars doesn't mean we can't afford new cars. I have owned a Genesis as well, an Oldsmobile for a daily, a Dodge Dart currently, and even a Nissan Versa as a daily all of which along side at least 1 s-chassis and at times with multiple s-chassis in the background. Generalizations like that will make people tune out any of the positive comments you made prior.

I don't think there is much Genesis love here either, you are off. Most people here dislike the Genesis, but %99 of those have no experience with it. I bought my Gen as a daily driver because at the time, it felt more like an s-chassis than any other new sub 30k FR sport car. I had the full intention of buying a v6 mustang, but that thing was a flat SNOOZER. Besides the weight of the gen, the steering was snappy, it was quick, looked decent, etc. unwarranted hate simply because of the manufacturers badge.

Z worship is obvious. One, it's a legendary chassis, for 2 - you are on a website devoted to Z's and S-Chassis.

[Corbic]

^ gotta disagree.

First of all, the Z31-Z34s receive a good amount of criticism here. It's really only the 240Z-280Z that get the endless praise.


Second, the GC earned its hate. The original car was very underpowered. The 210hp engine blows. It's also a micro-turbo meaning you'll be dumping $15k into the car to make it hot.

Turbo, FMIC, exhaust, manifold, tune, injectors....

The wheels are awful, the body work questionable - so forth. Yes there are some hot cars, but they have $15k into them.


The updated 270hp car is on the money. Better interior and power that the car should have started with - except they fucked the fucking front end fucking up. It's hideous and miss matched a Veloster front on a RSX with droopy windows : thanks Hyundai. Assholes.


The Kia Stinger was lauded here for everything it promised. I don't think the GCs hate has anything to do with the badge, it's simply the delivery.