Lets talk about cars/motorsports

There's worse: the infamous Alfa Romeo Arna*

Saab 600

And here's an interesting article: Badge Engineering.

edited 11th Feb '12 5:49:15 AM by Greenmantle

I've heard of that before, it's just stupid.

Though I have to say, the Re-badged Chevy volt in Europe, the "Ampera" looks better to me.

Chevy Volt◊

"Opel Ampera"◊

^^Oh yeah, I just remembered the Volkswagen Routan - a rebadged Chrysler Town & Country minivan. Also, James May, you are not the first to make an Alfaab!

^I dunno, seems just a bit too Nissan-esque to me.

edited 18th Feb '12 10:10:40 AM by RocketDude

I am not sure I get the point of hot pickup trucks. If they have no cargo and a big f.o engine, they have no weight on the rear axle and crash, if they have cargo on them, they negate the big f.o engine and are slow.

And if you're in Britain...they're just a bit too big to get everywhere. Mind you, that's a problem with a lot of American cars.

Anyway, what do we think of The DeltaWing? I think it's really something but I have to wonder if it'll keep up with the other racers in the 24 Hours of Le Mans and which group it'll be mixing it up with.

Here's the Entry List — lots of Hybrid cars in the LMP1 Class, especially the Audis (which will, no doubt, win again).

The 56th Entry (the DeltaWing) is a special entry:

What about the return of Toyota to LMP? I'm pretty interested in that.

Also, thankfully, Delta Wing will get engines from Nissan. Kinda looked like they wouldn't get an engine supplier.

@Tam:

I think it's for off-road purposes, sometimes, but I only say that because Lamborghini apparently tried building an SUV with a rear-mid-mounted engine and the handling characteristics weren't so good (look up the Lamborghini LM001 on Wikipedia). Granted, there is stuff like the GMC Syclone, which seems to be more about straight-line performance (though it did have AWD).

edited 12th Feb '12 12:47:28 PM by RocketDude

Saw the 2013 Ford Mondeo on Top Gear tonight. Just a pic on one of their monitors but it looked so much like an Aston Martin I am surprised that Ford doesn't get done for copyright infringement. Looks fantastic though.

Yeah, the Fusion (in the UK, known as the Mondeo) has been treated with Ford's new design language, as seen on the Evos concept. As a result, it looks really good.

edited 12th Feb '12 6:59:17 PM by RocketDude

I have one of these - not the EVO, the T/A. Mine is not that fast, nor as pretty, but it still can keep up with pretty much anything on the road today. Only 1550 sold to the public.

pvtnum11, I was waiting for you to show up. I like muscle cars, and while the Trans Am isn't my first choice, they are impressive cars. I prefer Ford as far as domestics go, and I'm quite fond of the Mustang series, especially the GT 500.

People knock on Hyundai a lot, but I've enjoyed my 2006 Tiburon GT ever since I bought it. It doesn't have the best platform for an expansive powerplant, but it's quite capable of handling a decent turbo kit and a modest increase in low-end torque with a lightweight flywheel and a XTD performance clutch. The only two major issues I have with the design of the car are the lack of horsepower for its engine size (2.7 V6) and the fact that it's FWD. To paraphrase other car critics, anything that has the GT emblem stamped on it should have the power to back it up, and 172 HP is a bit low for that trim level.

I recently picked up a 1992 Toyota MR 2, and I plan on replacing certain suspension components to get it back in its original standard of handling. Having a mid-ship car is definitely different, but I've come to enjoy the distinct exhaust report at idling speeds. I just need figure out how to fix the idling issues it's having. Judging from the age and condition of the motor, I'd say that the throttle cable needs to be readjusted. If that doesn't work, I might need to replace the idler tensioner pulley or a vacuum line.

Even with a damaged rear driver's side strut, the car handles exceptionally well. If you want a cheap alternative to a Lotus Elise, get an older MR 2.

edited 12th Feb '12 7:45:56 PM by Aprilla

Hyundai has really been on their game lately. I mean, I don't really care much for the Genesis coupe but the fact that Hyundai even brought out a RWD turbo sport coupe is somewhat impressive given their previous history of cars *coughcougheexcelcoughcough*. Alot of their newer models are, dare I say, nice?

Well, performance enthusiasts originally didn't trust Hyundai because it has its roots in building construction equipment. That's not really the foundation you want when constructing a sports car. However, Hyundai, like Toyota, made a smart economic move by being especially patient in foreign markets. The Camry and the Sonata are modest, affordable cars, and they are also among the best selling sedans on the market right now. This is after several years of mediocre-to-mild engineering on their part, which was an unfortunate side effect of careful and slow planning.

The other reason why Hyundai had its less-than-stellar reputation was because of the affordability of its cars, not despite that fact. As marketing trends go, affordable cars tend to be bought by people who are not always the most responsible in terms of their desire or ability to service their vehicles at proper intervals. As a result, Hyundai cars developed a reputation for being unreliable. This is actually the case with a lot of car manufactures and the consumers. The infamous phantom accelerator issue with Toyota comes to mind.

The Genesis coupe is an excellent car, and I'd love to have one. I want to see it re-tested and formatted for Nürburgring because I believe that a performance should be subjected to one of the most challenging courses in the world in order to fully accredit itself. Having said that, one of the reasons why I'm so impressed with the Genesis is the simple fact that it offers a level of performance on par with the Infiniti G35 coupe, the Mazda RX-8 (another personal favorite of mine) and the Nisssan 350Z without the high price you'd expect at that echelon.

Actually, I'm not that concerned about how much power a GT-badged car has. GT should stand for Grand Touring, not Great Torque. A GT-badged car is simply better as handling a road course than a non-GT vehicle if the same make and model. Better suspension, brakes, weight distribution - it's not a strictly horsepower to the wheels game.

An under-powered vehicle can own a more powerful one, if it has the better suspension and brakes. You can go into turns faster and bleed off unwanted speed quicker, whereas the more powerful but less nimble vehicle has to brake earlier and then play catch-up in the straights.

Of course, the best option is to have lots of power, a good suspension and good brakes all at the same time, but you can get by with less power and still have a really fun car to drive.

The thing that I like about the Firebirds and Trans Am's specifically, is that they're not just designed to go fast in a straight line. The WS6 suspension package is actually pretty good right out of the box, and coupled with four-wheel disc brakes, it can stop decently too. My particular one stole brake parts off of the Corvette bin, meaning it has (for the time period) quite beefy rotors and calipers. Even to this day, it can still handle and brake quite well, but I tend to drive it gently, as it's 23 years old.

Sadly, the Excitement Division of GM became just a shadow of its former self, making rebadged Chevrolet clones, all powered by GM Corporate (read: Chevy) engines. The death of the F-body line in '02 was finally what broke it. Yeah, they imported some Holden stuff recently, but it was just that, rebadged Holden stuff. Gone were the unique offerings, the disregard for Corporate rules regarding horsepower and displacement limits, and no more motorsports - race and win on Sunday, sell on Monday.

The last Pontiac-designed engine in an F-body was the 4-cylinder Iron Duke, also known as the Tech IV. After that, it was pretty much Corporate engines. Until 1989, when the engineers realized that the L98 5.7 V8 wouldn't cut the mustard and shoved in a Buick LC 2 V6 into it. The rest, is history. The forth-gen F-bodies used a naturally-aspirated Buick V6 for the base engine, starting in 1996. They respond very well to turbocharging, being simply more a modern iteration of the LC 2.

I used to own a Trans AM GTA, which does NOT stand for Gran Touring Americano, but Great Tubby Am - it weighed the most out of all of the Firebirds made at the time. Very confortable, smooth ride, still had plenty of power and a great suspension to back up the swagger. Very smooth at high speeds.

The Firebird anaged to set some very high speed records, modified with significant power increases and suspension tweaks, a stock-bodied Trans Am can function fine at over 300 miles an hour. This includes using the stock wraparound aerowing, so every time I see some but monkey rip that off and put some aluminum piece of crap onto their F-body, I want to smack them in the face.

Here's one that went 284 with a modified Buick V6...

@pvtnum11: Nice, that Turbo T/A is one serious monster. Too bad Pontiac got watered down by GM, though.

@Aprilla: Interesting stuff about Hyundai. How much torque does your Tiburon churn out? And yeah, the Genesis Coupe is a nice-looking car, in my opinion.

I have heard lots of nice things about the Genesis. I'm curious to see how they'll hold up after a decade, though.

Motorsports: World Rally Crash and Autocross are where it's at. I'd love it if we could host WRC events in the States, but those crazy spectators and liability concerns wouldn't jive with us here. It's on my bucket list to see a rally event from the roadside.

edited 12th Feb '12 9:53:03 PM by pvtnum11

"Actually, I'm not that concerned about how much power a GT-badged car has. GT should stand for Grand Touring, not Great Torque. A GT-badged car is simply better as handling a road course than a non-GT vehicle if the same make and model. Better suspension, brakes, weight distribution - it's not a strictly horsepower to the wheels game."

A valid point, but part of the handling aspect of the GT moniker means that your car can attack turns without creating an unnecessary sinking sensation in the distribution of power between the front and rear wheels. The Tiburon GT has good suspension, and it's definitely above it's base model counterpart, but these cars are notorious for their tendency to get a bit sluggish in turns. I've been eying a set of Tein coilovers for my car to resolve this issue. And of course, it's not the Tiburon GT's particular fault. That's just a natural disadvantage of having a FWD V6. Any car with an FF layout and an unsteady power-weight ratio is going to have easily reached platform limits. My friends who drive TC's, Celicas and Eclipses have the same problem. Getting bigger brakes or simply lowering tightening the suspension can make a world of a difference.

By the way, a stock Tiburon GT generates about 181 ft-lbs of torque, which is funny because it seems to make up for the somewhat low horsepower for a good takeoff in a straight line. It's not devastatingly agile, but I can wake it up if I'm good with the clutch. Of course, I don't pop the clutch, even when I'm playing around with the car on a quiet, windy road. Slow is fast.

edited 12th Feb '12 9:55:45 PM by Aprilla

Man, I don't know what I'd give to see a WRC event in person.

Aprilla: Definitely upgrade suspension when you can. Better tires are also a must-have. I'm more into old-school AE-86 Corollas, myself, as they're RWD and they respond wonderfully to suspension goodies, for as you state, FF cars have a hefty weight distribution problem; the majority is biased to the front tires that have to do pretty much everything.

I have a wish-list of stuff I want for the TTA, but I've done a few things like rebuilding the steering linkages and some polyurethane front sway-bar bushings. What I really want is a set of weld-in sub-frame connectors and a replacement torque arm. After some suspension work is done, I can think about doing some exhaust tweaks (better after-turbo downpipe to reduce turbo spool-up time).

Interestingly enough, Pontiac had done some R&D work on making the rear of the Firebird an independent suspension, versus a simple live axle, but the cost was prohibitive and it was dropped. For most cars, a live rear axle is enough. Strong, durable, and simple. I have a nice bulletproof Borg-Warner 9-bolt, probably one of the best factory differentials they put on those cars. The ten-bolt Corporate rear isn't nearly as durable, but the aftermarket is huge, in comparison.

The current iteration of the Camaro does have an independent rear, though.

Fun facts: Getting a TTA to run ten-second 1/4-mile times is fairly simple. You can even keep the factory block, crank, rods, pistons, camshaft and heads (port work needed). Of course, those factory parts will eventually fail, when you're running 25PSI and racing fuel...

pffft, who cares, as long as you have a 10 second car.

Alas, mine is only a high-13 second car, and that's being generous. I've yet to actually take it to the track, but that's what the previous owner managed to eke out of it, 13.8 bone stock, and 13.2 with a chip. (which they kept BLARGH)

25 psi?! Yeah, that will definitely shorten the lifespan of the motor.

Well, stock boost is 16.5... We have really low compression, 8:1 from the factory. Most keep it there.

The typical thing to prevent grenading the engine with that level of boost is to go with more studs clamping the heads to the block (14 versus 8 - six studs per cylinder, instead of only four) and going with a block girdle to shore up the bottom end. Some go with a special headgaskets, too, since they're already having to take the heads off. Upgrading injectors to handle increased fuel needs, as running lean sucks. Also, running methanol injection to keep knock under control. Detonation sucks. After that, it's a simple matter of keeping the transmission alive, most will drop in a TH-400 (so no more overdrive) or go with an upgraded TH-200R4.

edited 13th Feb '12 12:30:35 AM by pvtnum11

Not being a car nut to the extent of some of you guys here, I have one rule that I would stick to if they were ever daft enough to give me a driving license. Never buy a car with more rows of seats than doors.

btw, what do folks think of the Subaru Impreza? The old four-door sedan model, not the current, /spit ugly as sin hatchback?

edited 13th Feb '12 12:37:01 AM by TamH70