THE FORD vs HONDA CONTINUANCE....

[BABY J]

---> Since the EFILIATED thread got closed I wanted to put my .02 in on the retarded argument that Honda is better than Ford or ViceVersa.

1) Honda is the shit. PERIOD. If you do not believe this then you are a dork.

2) Honda is an ENGINE MANUFACTURING COMPANY that also makes cars. That makes it pretty tough to compare them to almost any other AUTO MANUFACTURER directly. Furthermore, more RACING technology trickles down to commuter cars in the Honda camp than pretty much ANY other manufacturer - w/ BMW and GM probably a close 2nd, prob followed by Toyota and then Ford.

And for a little history... VTEC is the result of FAILED cvcc technology attempts from Ford. Ford got it started and could not make it work - pitched it to Honda and rejoiced b/c they thought that they just sold some JUNK to the dummies overseas until Honda beat EVERY manufacturer to market for the Clean Air Act regulations. Honda trashed the technology, kept the name (CVCC) and the rest is history. Since then, Honda has prided itself on emissions-friendly engines not gas-guzzling 500hp ozone-killers.

But MAKE NO MISTAKE about it - if they wanted to produce a production v8 the rest of the world would take fucking note, and other companies would be retarded to not buy a couple for reverse-engineering. There's a little race called the Indy 500... you may have heard of it although it's kinda grassroots. The ENTIRE 33 car field for F1 for 2010 had engines manufactured and designed by who? Enough said. IF Honda wanted to build a 2010 SHO-smashing LSx-crushing beast they could do it quite easily (w/ a little rear-axle help from Ford... 9in maybe? LOL).

I said all of this to show you that 1) the argument was dumb (although David represented) and 2) get back to the racing talk b/c you guys are obv lacking on "your roots" LOL. Happy tuning.

And no I am not a "fanboy" of anything. If it has an engine, I'm into it...

Take care kids.

[-EnVus-]

Who the Fuck would try to compare a Honda to a Ford ????
I love fords but for gas mileage and long lasting id go with Honda. I have a Civic and i still want a Mustang or a New Fusion.

[punkr6]

apples and oranges.....

[BABY J]

EXACTLY

[David88vert]

---> Since the EFILIATED thread got closed I wanted to put my .02 in on the retarded argument that Honda is better than Ford or ViceVersa.

1) Honda is the shit. PERIOD. If you do not believe this then you are a dork.

2) Honda is an ENGINE MANUFACTURING COMPANY that also makes cars. That makes it pretty tough to compare them to almost any other AUTO MANUFACTURER directly. Furthermore, more RACING technology trickles down to commuter cars in the Honda camp than pretty much ANY other manufacturer - w/ BMW and GM probably a close 2nd, prob followed by Toyota and then Ford.

And for a little history... VTEC is the result of FAILED cvcc technology attempts from Ford. Ford got it started and could not make it work - pitched it to Honda and rejoiced b/c they thought that they just sold some JUNK to the dummies overseas until Honda beat EVERY manufacturer to market for the Clean Air Act regulations. Honda trashed the technology, kept the name (CVCC) and the rest is history. Since then, Honda has prided itself on emissions-friendly engines not gas-guzzling 500hp ozone-killers.

But MAKE NO MISTAKE about it - if they wanted to produce a production v8 the rest of the world would take fucking note, and other companies would be retarded to not buy a couple for reverse-engineering. There's a little race called the Indy 500... you may have heard of it although it's kinda grassroots. The ENTIRE 33 car field for F1 for 2010 had engines manufactured and designed by who? Enough said. IF Honda wanted to build a 2010 SHO-smashing LSx-crushing beast they could do it quite easily (w/ a little rear-axle help from Ford... 9in maybe? LOL).

I said all of this to show you that 1) the argument was dumb (although David represented) and 2) get back to the racing talk b/c you guys are obv lacking on "your roots" LOL. Happy tuning.

And no I am not a "fanboy" of anything. If it has an engine, I'm into it...

Take care kids.

The Ford F-150 is the best selling vehicle in America. Are you saying that Honda could but does not want to compete with it as a way to increase marketshare? Do you understand basic business concepts? The Ridgeline has not been competition for the F-150.

The facts are that Ford is producing cars that give superior performance for the dollar to the Hondas. This was shown in the other thread.

Honda is happy with what they are producing, as they are competitive in generating revenue with it.

As I stated earlier, it is very different to produce a race engine for a spec series, than to produce a production vehicle that has to have a warranty, and last for years. IF ANY manufacter spends the R&D to develop a comparible product, they should be competitive with marketing. Honda has killed off the NSX, do you know why? It did not generate enough sales.

When did the Indy 500, become Formula 1? Oh yeah, it didn't. It is the IndyCar series of the Indy Racing League (merged with CART in 08). CART was not F1. IndyCAR is a spec series, not an open series. Think of it as minor league.
Honda hasn't been in F1 since 2008. I would hardly say they were dominating in 8th and 9th pace as a constructor.

In comparison, Ford has won:
176 race wins, and 10 manufacturer titles in Formula 1
75 race wins, and 3 manufacturer titles in WRC

And, as I showed in the other thread, Ford is getting as good as, if not better, gas mileage on comparable cars.

[Catnip]

I've had plenty of Hondas and still do, but GOT DANG David knows what's up. Not even getting emotional, just facts, facts, facts.

Reps to you, sir.

[BABY J]

David knows nothing if he thinks that the Ridgeline was developed to compete w/ the F150. It's a UNIBODY - you don't build a truck on a car frame, and slap a v6 in it with the INTENT of going toe to toe w/ the F150... it's more of a El Camino than a truck - LOL. The only real auto in the "truck ALTERNATIVE market" (which is where the Ridgeline was marketed) to compete with would be the Avalanche, which is not a Ford product the last time I checked. LOL

[BABY J]

As far as the NSX goes - it's VINTAGE. When the NSX dropped it was 1991 I think... that makes it comparable w/ EF hatches - LOL. NSXs could be spotted at the next "old school Honda meet" haha... what did Ford have in 1991 to compete w/ it that's even worth honorable mention?? Oh I know... NOTHING. LOL. This is fun. I'll address your post David when I get back from beer. Kudos sir. It'll help MORE illustrate my point on the POINTLESSNESS of trying to compare an ENGINE company to an auto manufacturer.

[Catnip]

it was dropped in '05...?

[Black4DrEK]

^ Nope.. early 90's

[Catnip]

I'm going to assume I read something wrong.

[Black4DrEK]

Whats that? that there was an nsx in 91?

[Catnip]

I thought he was saying they stopped production of the NSX in '91, by saying "dropped."

lol

[h22 jones]

have you ever heard you can do anything if you got enough money well im sure either of the companys could produce similar products .ford has come along way not taking anything away from honda at all. each company produces what they produce for one reason money thats it . if you want to argue ten years ago ok hands down im going with honda . if you want to argue 2010 well thats a good arguement ill let that other two guys in this forum spit facts for that. all im saying is just because a company doesnt do something doesnt mean thay cant just means they choose not to because they dont feel like it is profitable to them . i would love to own a car that gets great gas mileage, cost little to nothing ,runs tens and last for ever but they wouldnt make any money .im sure they make as much in parts sells as car sells .There is a reason they dont desighn stuff to last longer then 100,000 miles because im sure thay could . I do agree that honda dominated engine technology but i cant say they have anymore technology then ford anymore (even if ford stole it from honda they got it lol).

On the note if honda built a v8 ford would buy one tear it down and take notes probably but honda would buy fords v8 tear it down and take notes to start there process of building there first v8 lol so whats the difference.

[h22 jones]

I prefer chevy over ford but i got tired of changing the damn fuel pump everytime you turn around so i bought a expedition this time. you cant tell me chevy cant do something about there piece of shit fuel pumps sure they can but why would they at 400 dollars a pop when they sell one.

[-EnVus-]

have you ever heard you can do anything if you got enough money well im sure either of the companys could produce similar products .ford has come along way not taking anything away from honda at all. each company produces what they produce for one reason money thats it . if you want to argue ten years ago ok hands down im going with honda . if you want to argue 2010 well thats a good arguement ill let that other two guys in this forum spit facts for that. all im saying is just because a company doesnt do something doesnt mean thay cant just means they choose not to because they dont feel like it is profitable to them . i would love to own a car that gets great gas mileage, cost little to nothing ,runs tens and last for ever but they wouldnt make any money .im sure they make as much in parts sells as car sells .There is a reason they dont desighn stuff to last longer then 100,000 miles because im sure thay could . I do agree that honda dominated engine technology but i cant say they have anymore technology then ford anymore (even if ford stole it from honda they got it lol).

On tha note if Honda built a v8 Ford would buy one tear it down and take notes probably but honda would buy fords v8 tear it down and take notes to start there process of building there first v8 lol so whats the difference.
The Japanese and Chinese stick to what they know best and thats 4cylinder engines maybe a few 6 cylinders. Its like European is good with v12,v10 and 6cylinders. America was built with v8 in mind i mean it started with the Ford flathead v8. Also Americans built tractors Asians built push mowers a huge difference in engines lol
Fords new designes and builders are going on the Euro models and this is why Ford is killing it right now with Styling and MPG with good engines. GM in Europe and almost all over seas countries is very cheap or junky made.

[David88vert]

David knows nothing if he thinks that the Ridgeline was developed to compete w/ the F150. It's a UNIBODY - you don't build a truck on a car frame, and slap a v6 in it with the INTENT of going toe to toe w/ the F150... it's more of a El Camino than a truck - LOL. The only real auto in the "truck ALTERNATIVE market" (which is where the Ridgeline was marketed) to compete with would be the Avalanche, which is not a Ford product the last time I checked. LOL

Nice how you avoided the F1 mistake you made.

As for the Ridgeline, how about going to its site and seeing who it is targetting:
http://automobiles.honda.com/ridgeline/
Honda claims this design gives it 2.5 times more bending rigidity and 20 times the torsional rigidity than the standard ladder frame only type of chassis construction, while retaining the load carrying capacity of the traditional ladder frame. Sounds like they are claiming it as a truck to me.
Honda decided to advertise the Ridgeline as an alternative to traditional 1/2 ton full-size pickups such as the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado, and Toyota Tundra, all of which had standard V8 engines. This likely harmed Ridgeline sales, as some cited its weak V6 engine (Honda has never developed a V8 for passenger vehicles) and lack of ruggedness due to its unibody construction, while its relatively short cargo bed compared to a standard pickup truck made it unsuitable for contractors. Sounds like they didn't know what their target audience was - and that is a poor design.
Ridgeline sales only average about 1500 trucks per month. That's weak compared to the F-150, which averaged over 34,000 sold per month for its worst year, 2009.

[-EnVus-]

Nice how you avoided the F1 mistake you made.

As for the Ridgeline, how about going to its site and seeing who it is targetting:
http://automobiles.honda.com/ridgeline/
Honda claims this design gives it 2.5 times more bending rigidity and 20 times the torsional rigidity than the standard ladder frame only type of chassis construction, while retaining the load carrying capacity of the traditional ladder frame. Sounds like they are claiming it as a truck to me.
Honda decided to advertise the Ridgeline as an alternative to traditional 1/2 ton full-size pickups such as the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado, and Toyota Tundra, all of which had standard V8 engines. This likely harmed Ridgeline sales, as some cited its weak V6 engine (Honda has never developed a V8 for passenger vehicles) and lack of ruggedness due to its unibody construction, while its relatively short cargo bed compared to a standard pickup truck made it unsuitable for contractors. Sounds like they didn't know what their target audience was - and that is a poor design.
Ridgeline sales only average about 1500 trucks per month. That's weak compared to the F-150, which averaged over 34,000 sold per month for its worst year, 2009.

I was told by a Honda salesman the Ridgeline is gone in 2011 due to its low demand and poor sales.

[David88vert]

As far as the NSX goes - it's VINTAGE. When the NSX dropped it was 1991 I think... that makes it comparable w/ EF hatches - LOL. NSXs could be spotted at the next "old school Honda meet" haha... what did Ford have in 1991 to compete w/ it that's even worth honorable mention?? Oh I know... NOTHING. LOL. This is fun. I'll address your post David when I get back from beer. Kudos sir. It'll help MORE illustrate my point on the POINTLESSNESS of trying to compare an ENGINE company to an auto manufacturer.

Actually, it got cancelled in 2005, but they planned to bring it back with a V10. Due to the economy, it wasn't viable to bring it back and at the end of 2008 they announced that its rebirth was cancelled. So what did that massive V10 do? Nothing, it turned into a V8. In March 2010, the Acura NSX project has changed to the Honda HSV-010 GT and is entering in the Japanese SuperGT Championship. The HSV-010 GT is powered by a 3.4-liter V8 making just above 500 HP.

Ford makes 540hp out of its production Shelby V8. It has a warranty.

As an engine manufacturer, it seems they are being outdone by an auto company with Bubba and Buddy on the payroll.....

[David88vert]

I was told by a Honda salesman the Ridgeline is gone in 2011 due to its low demand and poor sales.


It's a great vehicle, but if it wasn't designed to fit a target market, then it is a poor design.
Currently, the 2011 Ridgeline is on Honda's site, talking up its ruggedness - its built Ford tough....


High-torque 250-hp , 3.5-liter, 24-valve, SOHC VTEC® V-6 Engine
Variable Torque Management® (VTM-4®)
4-wheel-drive system 5,000-lb. towing capacity[5].Up to 1,546 lb. total payload capacity. (RT/RTS)
Integrated closed-box frame
Unit-body construction
Lockable In-Bed Trunk®
Dual-action tailgate
Integrated Class III trailer hitch

[David88vert]

The Japanese and Chinese stick to what they know best and thats 4cylinder engines maybe a few 6 cylinders. Its like European is good with v12,v10 and 6cylinders. America was built with v8 in mind i mean it started with the Ford flathead v8. Also Americans built tractors Asians built push mowers a huge difference in engines lol
Fords new designes and builders are going on the Euro models and this is why Ford is killing it right now with Styling and MPG with good engines. GM in Europe and almost all over seas countries is very cheap or junky made.

Japan makes excellent 4cyls and 6cyls, and they have a few strong V8s - The Toyota Tundra 5.7 V8 is no joke. It is a very nice, strong truck.

[David88vert]

have you ever heard you can do anything if you got enough money well im sure either of the companys could produce similar products .ford has come along way not taking anything away from honda at all. each company produces what they produce for one reason money thats it . if you want to argue ten years ago ok hands down im going with honda . if you want to argue 2010 well thats a good arguement ill let that other two guys in this forum spit facts for that. all im saying is just because a company doesnt do something doesnt mean thay cant just means they choose not to because they dont feel like it is profitable to them . i would love to own a car that gets great gas mileage, cost little to nothing ,runs tens and last for ever but they wouldnt make any money .im sure they make as much in parts sells as car sells .There is a reason they dont desighn stuff to last longer then 100,000 miles because im sure thay could . I do agree that honda dominated engine technology but i cant say they have anymore technology then ford anymore (even if ford stole it from honda they got it lol).

On the note if honda built a v8 ford would buy one tear it down and take notes probably but honda would buy fords v8 tear it down and take notes to start there process of building there first v8 lol so whats the difference.
I agree with you.

[Starrfire]

When it comes to trucks ford has had it down over any other manufacturer for decades. Quality goes to honda since it was made though but ford is stepping up their game. GM and Chrysler are easily behind ford on quality. This is coming from someone who takes the cars apart on a regular basis.

[-EnVus-]

When it comes to trucks ford has had it down over any other manufacturer for decades. Quality goes to honda since it was made though but ford is stepping up their game. GM and Chrysler are easily behind ford on quality. This is coming from someone who takes the cars apart on a regular basis.

lol at Honda being Tough.......They just have long lasting engines but tough i don't think so.

[Starrfire]

Tough=reliable. Think of how many ricers beat the shit out of those cars for 20 years. Still going.

[92ludevtec]

hmMmmm honda and ford huh?

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2007_Ford_Fusion_ext_1.jpg
http://www.theautochannel.com/media/photos/honda/1997/97_honda_prelude.jpg
http://www.kris.1000lecie.pl/preludepics/honda%20prelude%20rear.jpg
http://www.desktopcar.net/wallpaper/26600-2/Ford-Fusion-09.jpg

as they say..."you get it from the best":taun:

[92ludevtec]

i wonder how they got the name "fusion" puAHhahaH!

[Catnip]

Tough=reliable. Think of how many ricers beat the shit out of those cars for 20 years. Still going.

Think how many fox bodies are still going strong. Hell, for that matter, Camaros as well.

[j0nbunklah0m]

finally a thread worth reading lol. this has been a while

[BABY J]

Consider reliability and resale value at 100,000 miles... then 150,000 - then EEEEE --- 200,000 miles (LOL @ Ford). I'd have to give Honda the nod. I don't have numbers on hand to compare repairs over 100,000 miles between both (nor do I care to). But as a Ford owner AS WELL as a Honda owner I think my own personal data is all I need. LOL. Grab the AJC... look for local used car values of each... a 100,000 mile Honda vs. ANY Ford car with 100,000 miles. Ouch!

Funny how most of the Ford talk is "what they are doing now" and "man they are bouncing back" - LOL. Bouncing back from WHAT - that "what" is the thing that they have been doing for a LONG time while Honda has been doing it's thing consistently for a long time. Take fleet sales out (Crown Vics, police car duties, taxi-cabs) and look at just consumer sales I'd betcha that the numbers are less skewed than we'd like to admit.

This has been fun. I started this thread to show that you CAN'T compare 2 companies w/ different mission-statement and methodologies fairly. Honda PRIDES itself onbeing fuel efficient and RELIABLE vehicles... they don't want to build "race" cars for the street. I also think that to toss the Shelby data in is bullshit. Shelby is not Ford, although he modifies them. Why not throw Hennessey in as well? :poke:

http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2009/comparison-test-2010-ford-taurus-vs-2009-honda-accord.html#article_pagination_top_3

[japan4racing]

I could be totally wrong here but I had thought the Shleby name was purchased by Ford. Carrol Shelby does not actually have anything to do with the car anymore. Ford is in control of every aspect of it and the chicken farmer shows up at events and promotes the car and in doing so both Ford and Shelby collect healthy checks. I mean how can you take Shelby serious anymore? The man does zmax commercials...lol!

I think the only way to really compare the 2 is to compare like vehicles.....the accord vs fusion for an example. Honda does not produce a vehicle worth comparing to the mustang, or any f-series truck. I think both sides can agree on that. Now when it comes to the economy lines of cars and full size family cars I think some comparisons can be made. Current models to current models and old models to old models. Any other way and there is no comparison.

[j0nbunklah0m]

HONDA FTW

[boosted347]

^ look at this honda fan boy right here lol

each company has their own plus side and negative side...reliability up until now def goes hands down to honda, performance has always has been and always will be a staple in american car production...wanna look at more facts wuts your wonderful honda v8 run around the ring??? Yea thats right slower than the production zr1 it is the fastest production car around the ring, well damn so much for american only goin in a straight line argument that was sure to come up :( but like it was said earlier in this thread apples to oranges...each have their own reasons as to why people buy them, say you wanna go buy a new car and you are thinkin "hmmm i want a quick performance car thats fun to drive" you dont go buy a honda its simple enough, and up until now when you thought of fuel economy and longevity you always went with honda...its a dumb argument and especially by the fan boys on this website...baby j you started this thread with incorrect information and biased views, david you recieve reps for your facts and h22 you also for bein unbiased, the majority of the people on this site are in love with hondas...hence "import atlanta", go over to muscle car evolution or some other site that is domestic based and it would be totally opposite. But this thread is useless and has run its course, this argument will always come down to personal opinion and preferences. The two shouldnt be compared

[BABY J]

Actually, it got cancelled in 2005, but they planned to bring it back with a V10. Due to the economy, it wasn't viable to bring it back and at the end of 2008 they announced that its rebirth was cancelled. So what did that massive V10 do? Nothing, it turned into a V8. In March 2010, the Acura NSX project has changed to the Honda HSV-010 GT and is entering in the Japanese SuperGT Championship. The HSV-010 GT is powered by a 3.4-liter V8 making just above 500 HP.

Ford makes 540hp out of its production Shelby V8. It has a warranty.

As an engine manufacturer, it seems they are being outdone by an auto company with Bubba and Buddy on the payroll.....

That's bc only Bubba and Buddy would think that they are trying to compete w/ them. LOL... which is my point. It's easy to win a race when the person you're racing ISN'T. These 2 companies have NOTHING similar in terms of their methodologies. But some people will continue to compare bicycles to watermelons. *shrugs*

[-EnVus-]

I drive Honda by Choice but id take a Ford anyday im a Ford Fanatic. My family has been with ford for over 60 years.
We have raced them we have built them for fun and used them as work horses. I can say i have bough and used some Chevrolet like an S10 and a Camaro and both crapped out after about 50 issues.

[BABY J]

This actually led me to some kool "trivia" that I'd otherwise never know. Seems Honda had their sites much higher than Ford when they envisioned the NSX - it was targeted at Ferrari, and then McLaren used the NSX as a target for the McLaren F1. HAHA. Not bad for some old bolts thrown together by 4 feet tall rice eating dorks in the late 80s and brought to life in 1991.

exerpt from the NSX wiki:

Honda's breakthrough engineering in the NSX was a major contributor to the design of the McLaren F1 as mentioned in an interview with McLaren F1 designer Gordon Murray (translated from original Japanese into English).[18] "The moment I drove the NSX, all the benchmark cars—Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborghini—I had been using as references in the development of my car vanished from my mind. Of course the car we would create, the McLaren F1, needed to be faster than the NSX, but the NSX's ride quality and handling would become our new design target." The NSX was marketed as the first "Everyday Supercar" thanks in part to its ease of use, quality and reliability. Murray himself remained an NSX owner for 7 years.


On a side-note. I think that Honda does not handle defeat too well. I looked at the "new" car... the HSV-010 is HARDLY comparable to the NSX. It's front-engine and RWD... I wonder what Honda will do with this data from the track and what they have up their sleeves in years to come. We never know... check out this guy : http://world.honda.com/HSV-010_GT/

[boosted347]

i honestly wish they would make a street version of the car that way it isnt only a bunch of economy cars from them on the road...though i drive a ford i am not a fan boy i would much rater have a chevy...but competition only makes the cars produced better...look at all the american companies making more fuel efficient cars to compete with honda and toyota, imagine if they came out with a v8 that wold compete and/or beat the american v8s

[BABY J]

My back yard looks like this...

B13 SeR + n2o
RHD Eg6
2 EF hatches
Datsun 510
81 Mazda GLC
Olds Bravada + n2o
77 Civic Hatch
90 Mustang GT

and a few others - so I like it all. I agree - but I think that goes against the principles that the company was founded under... I'd love to see a real effort from them in the sports car market though.

[japan4racing]

My back yard looks like this...

B13 SeR + n2o
RHD Eg6
2 EF hatches
Datsun 510
81 Mazda GLC
Olds Bravada + n2o
77 Civic Hatch
90 Mustang GT

and a few others - so I like it all. I agree - but I think that goes against the principles that the company was founded under... I'd love to see a real effort from them in the sports car market though.

we are gonna need some details on said 510

[boosted347]

haha i agree i would love to see them come in and compete with the mustang gt, the new 5.0, the 4.6 other than the dohc is horrible...but a 3.4L v8 is totally unpractical for street use cause you would have to rev so high to get the power and it is for sure 13:1 compression at least so no pump gas there...but with some massive changes they could bring a v8 to the scene

[boosted347]

My back yard looks like this...

B13 SeR + n2o
RHD Eg6
2 EF hatches
Datsun 510
81 Mazda GLC
Olds Bravada + n2o
77 Civic Hatch
90 Mustang GT

and a few others - so I like it all. I agree - but I think that goes against the principles that the company was founded under... I'd love to see a real effort from them in the sports car market though.

you need to do some thinning out of some cars lol ;)

[Catnip]

haha i agree i would love to see them come in and compete with the mustang gt, the new 5.0, the 4.6 other than the dohc is horrible...but a 3.4L v8 is totally unpractical for street use cause you would have to rev so high to get the power and it is for sure 13:1 compression at least so no pump gas there...but with some massive changes they could bring a v8 to the scene

E85 my friend, lol

*crosses fingers*

[boosted347]

but they dont sell it at all pumps so still not very streetable...but i wouldnt hold my breath on it comin to a street near you lol

[j0nbunklah0m]

^ look at this honda fan boy right here lol

each company has their own plus side and negative side...reliability up until now def goes hands down to honda, performance has always has been and always will be a staple in american car production...wanna look at more facts wuts your wonderful honda v8 run around the ring??? Yea thats right slower than the production zr1 it is the fastest production car around the ring, well damn so much for american only goin in a straight line argument that was sure to come up :( but like it was said earlier in this thread apples to oranges...each have their own reasons as to why people buy them, say you wanna go buy a new car and you are thinkin "hmmm i want a quick performance car thats fun to drive" you dont go buy a honda its simple enough, and up until now when you thought of fuel economy and longevity you always went with honda...its a dumb argument and especially by the fan boys on this website...baby j you started this thread with incorrect information and biased views, david you recieve reps for your facts and h22 you also for bein unbiased, the majority of the people on this site are in love with hondas...hence "import atlanta", go over to muscle car evolution or some other site that is domestic based and it would be totally opposite. But this thread is useless and has run its course, this argument will always come down to personal opinion and preferences. The two shouldnt be compared

^look at this cock sucker right here lol.

[David88vert]

Consider reliability and resale value at 100,000 miles... then 150,000 - then EEEEE --- 200,000 miles (LOL @ Ford). I'd have to give Honda the nod. I don't have numbers on hand to compare repairs over 100,000 miles between both (nor do I care to). But as a Ford owner AS WELL as a Honda owner I think my own personal data is all I need. LOL. Grab the AJC... look for local used car values of each... a 100,000 mile Honda vs. ANY Ford car with 100,000 miles. Ouch!

Funny how most of the Ford talk is "what they are doing now" and "man they are bouncing back" - LOL. Bouncing back from WHAT - that "what" is the thing that they have been doing for a LONG time while Honda has been doing it's thing consistently for a long time. Take fleet sales out (Crown Vics, police car duties, taxi-cabs) and look at just consumer sales I'd betcha that the numbers are less skewed than we'd like to admit.

This has been fun. I started this thread to show that you CAN'T compare 2 companies w/ different mission-statement and methodologies fairly. Honda PRIDES itself onbeing fuel efficient and RELIABLE vehicles... they don't want to build "race" cars for the street. I also think that to toss the Shelby data in is bullshit. Shelby is not Ford, although he modifies them. Why not throw Hennessey in as well? :poke:

http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2009/comparison-test-2010-ford-taurus-vs-2009-honda-accord.html#article_pagination_top_3

I only need to say 3 things concerning this post:
1) You are grasping now by jumping to resale value - that is completely unrelated to earlier facts that I stated. You personally like Honda, so you should buy it. In my opinion, they look better than most of Fords offerings, and they do what I need. So I have a Honda Accord as well.
2) You started this thread stating your opinion as though it was a fact - see #1. And since you stated it as a continuance, that opened up the opportunity to clarify statements with facts.
3) The Shelby Cobra can be purchased as a production car at the Ford dealership with a warranty. A Mugen-package Civic that can be purchased from the dealership with a warranty woulde be the same. Buying a car, and taking to another shop, would technically not be covered under the original warranty, and I will not include that type in comparisons. Look at Ford's site, the Shelby is listed as an offering from the Ford manufacterer, Hennesy and Roush are not.

Honda has prided itself of low emission output and efficiency. Their key concepts are safety, environmental leadership, and innovation - just read their corporate site.

[David88vert]

That's bc only Bubba and Buddy would think that they are trying to compete w/ them. LOL... which is my point. It's easy to win a race when the person you're racing ISN'T. These 2 companies have NOTHING similar in terms of their methodologies. But some people will continue to compare bicycles to watermelons. *shrugs*
I didn't say that Ford was trying to compete with Honda.
The fact is, Honda's ENGINE performance is being outperformed by Ford's engine performance, at lower costs. MPG, HP, TQ - all go to Ford on similar offers - as I showed in the last thread.
So, do you think that comparing the Fit and the Fiesta is unfair? Please explain.

[David88vert]

This actually led me to some kool "trivia" that I'd otherwise never know. Seems Honda had their sites much higher than Ford when they envisioned the NSX - it was targeted at Ferrari, and then McLaren used the NSX as a target for the McLaren F1. HAHA. Not bad for some old bolts thrown together by 4 feet tall rice eating dorks in the late 80s and brought to life in 1991.

exerpt from the NSX wiki:

Honda's breakthrough engineering in the NSX was a major contributor to the design of the McLaren F1 as mentioned in an interview with McLaren F1 designer Gordon Murray (translated from original Japanese into English).[18] "The moment I drove the NSX, all the benchmark cars—Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborghini—I had been using as references in the development of my car vanished from my mind. Of course the car we would create, the McLaren F1, needed to be faster than the NSX, but the NSX's ride quality and handling would become our new design target." The NSX was marketed as the first "Everyday Supercar" thanks in part to its ease of use, quality and reliability. Murray himself remained an NSX owner for 7 years.


On a side-note. I think that Honda does not handle defeat too well. I looked at the "new" car... the HSV-010 is HARDLY comparable to the NSX. It's front-engine and RWD... I wonder what Honda will do with this data from the track and what they have up their sleeves in years to come. We never know... check out this guy : http://world.honda.com/HSV-010_GT/

Yes, they set their sights high, and produced an excellent car (the NSX), but they did not understand the concept of marketing a high end car. No one wants to say they need to move their Honda, instead of their Ferrari. People's ego are a factor in what they purchase.

I hope Honda does produce a high end sports car again. They have good engineers, they just need to target their market better on the performance side. Right now, they can produce a car that gets worse gas mileage and has less performance than the comparable Ford model, for just a couple of reasons:
1) The perception of many is that Ford offerings are unreliable. Obviously, car people know that Ford ahs improved quality over the years, and that Honda's quality is not what it once was - but the general public doesn't follow cars as closely.
2) Honda produces a better looking car, in most comparable offerings. To me, the Honda's have a more appealing look in comparisons, and so, even with less performance, they are likely to stay the first choice. If the car can do what you need, then function can take second place to form.

[David88vert]

we are gonna need some details on said 510

the only detail you need to know is that Baby J needs to sell me that 510 for $1, so I can put a 13B-REW in it..... :-p

[David88vert]

lol at Honda being Tough.......They just have long lasting engines but tough i don't think so.

Tough enough to win the Baja:
http://automobiles.honda.com/ridgeline/baja-racing.aspx
Honda wouldn't have spent all that money to go racing, if they didn't think that it would help sales.

Seems to me that they want to market the Ridgeline as a tough truck, and that puts it in direct contention with the F-150.

[SPOOLIN]

I just want a T-Rex lol

[BABY J]

Dave you're stuck on the performance bit so there is no argument that we can agree on - LOL. No1 buys an Accord b/c they want to go to Moreland and rape boosted SHOs. The Datto actually is for sale as long as you don't live in Ga - I have a problem with seeing cars again after I sell them. The RHD hatch is for sale, as well as the B13. I'm trying to grow up this year - but I have to do it ittle by little - LOL. 16 years of hoarding cars doesn't go away overnight - LOL.

[boosted347]

^look at this cock sucker right here lol.

dont get butt hurt because someone called you what you are, and nice use of words, it shows your astounding intelligence i called you honda fan boy and you retort with cock sucker lol you my friend are am immature little fuck ;)

[David88vert]

Dave you're stuck on the performance bit so there is no argument that we can agree on - LOL.

So what are you wanting to compare on them? Resale value or what they did 10-20 years ago? Is that part of the engine design or output? The fact is, you said they are an engine manufacturer - when in reality, they make the engine AND the rest of the car. You generally compare engines with horsepower and torque output specifications, plus possibly the mpg.

I have clearly shown that on competitive offerings, Ford offers more value and performance per dollar, and that Honda does not offer anything to compete with Fords higher output vehicles.
I have shown facts to correct statements that were based on opinions, not on reality.
I have revealed errors in postings that were blatently wrong.
Only someone living in complete denial would still sit there and type that Honda is outperforming Ford in the engine department.

I'll clearly state this though. Even though Ford offers more bang-for-the-buck, I'll probably replace the Accord next year with another Accord. The Taurus doesn't look as good, and my wife loves Honda. The Accord will do everything that I need it to - and that is why you should buy the Honda - just because you are happy with it.

[Moseley]

Hmmmm Honda vs. Ford?

Here's the list of Hondas my immediate family has owned:

84 accord 4 door
84 civic 1500S
85 CRX HF
86 legend 4 door
88 integra RS
89 integra RS
90 civic DX hatch
93 civic SI
93 civic CX
93 integra GS
94 integra GSR 4 door
95 civic EX coupe (two of them)
95 civic DX coupe
95 del sol VTEC
95 integra SE 4 door
97 civic EX coupe
98 Integra GSR
98 CRV
00 civic EX coupe
03 Accord EX
04 Accord V6
06 civic SI
10 Fit (x2)

The '03 accord had seat quality issues... every other car was flawless and never required more than normal maintenance. we grew up around road racing and we drive our cars hard. So at this point I basically feel like anyone who buys a car for practicality and doesn't by a Honda is ignorant ;)

[-EnVus-]

Hmmmm Honda vs. Ford?

Here's the list of Hondas my immediate family has owned:

84 accord 4 door
84 civic 1500S
85 CRX HF
86 legend 4 door
88 integra RS
89 integra RS
90 civic DX hatch
93 civic SI
93 civic CX
93 integra GS
94 integra GSR 4 door
95 civic EX coupe (two of them)
95 civic DX coupe
95 del sol VTEC
95 integra SE 4 door
97 civic EX coupe
98 Integra GSR
98 CRV
00 civic EX coupe
03 Accord EX
04 Accord V6
06 civic SI
10 Fit (x2)

The '03 accord had seat quality issues... every other car was flawless and never required more than normal maintenance. we grew up around road racing and we drive our cars hard. So at this point I basically feel like anyone who buys a car for practicality and doesn't by a Honda is ignorant ;)

Yet you drive a BMW lol

[David88vert]

Hmmmm Honda vs. Ford?

Here's the list of Hondas my immediate family has owned:

84 accord 4 door
84 civic 1500S
85 CRX HF
86 legend 4 door
88 integra RS
89 integra RS
90 civic DX hatch
93 civic SI
93 civic CX
93 integra GS
94 integra GSR 4 door
95 civic EX coupe (two of them)
95 civic DX coupe
95 del sol VTEC
95 integra SE 4 door
97 civic EX coupe
98 Integra GSR
98 CRV
00 civic EX coupe
03 Accord EX
04 Accord V6
06 civic SI
10 Fit (x2)

The '03 accord had seat quality issues... every other car was flawless and never required more than normal maintenance. we grew up around road racing and we drive our cars hard. So at this point I basically feel like anyone who buys a car for practicality and doesn't by a Honda is ignorant ;)

So, you are really telling us that you haven't been able to experience owning other makes of cars then ....
At least you are trying something different now though.....

[Moseley]

So, you are really telling us that you haven't been able to experience owning other makes of cars then ....
At least you are trying something different now though.....

Nah we had other vehicles. Mostly GMs before an '83 626 and the '84 accord. Quite a few toyotas, a few mazdas, and a few minis. And then there were these:

88 wrangler - wiper motor died, various electrical issues, wouldn't start frequently
92 explorer - transmission died
94 explorer - exhaust leak after being 1 year old, transmission died after 2.5 years.
97 tahoe - every few months it would not crank... something wrong with fuel relay or pump but the dealer could never figure it out. It also warped rotors every 10-20k miles.
06 tahoe - this one was good

So... 1 out of 25 hondas had a problem. 1 of 7 toyotas had problems. The non-rotary mazdas have been good. The 1 subaru was good. 3 out of 5 minis had problems (2 were lemons), and the bimmer has been good so far.

That has been my experience so you can imagine how negative I am towards domestic brands.

[Moseley]

For Honda fans and haters alike: http://world.honda.com/history/

of particular interest is the 1981 article.

So there have been several "modern processes" cropping up and buzzing around in the US for the past decade. Business practices, manufacturing processes, software engineering practices, etc... these all have their roots in what might be called "lean manufacturing" and it all started in japan in the late 70s. The 1981 article is proof of how far ahead of their time Honda was. They were worried about product changes discovered during testing, and how long of a production ramp up period they would have before being able to roll out a new model etc. Basically they understood what we're finally implementing all across the US now... that waste in the process spawns additional waste and so on. So in 1981 their assembly lines were not only highly automated (to be productive and improve reliability) but also highly interchangeable so that they could delay the production of components until the last possible moment, which opens up a world of opportunity in how they stock resources, schedule production runs, and ultimately respond to changes in the market. This shit was brilliant and 20+ years ahead of the US. That is one of the reasons why Honda completely dominated in the 90s. There are other gems on that site too. have fun reading...

[RemoteX-7]

---> Since the EFILIATED thread got closed I wanted to put my .02 in on the retarded argument that Honda is better than Ford or ViceVersa.

1) Honda is the shit. PERIOD. If you do not believe this then you are a dork.

2) Honda is an ENGINE MANUFACTURING COMPANY that also makes cars. That makes it pretty tough to compare them to almost any other AUTO MANUFACTURER directly. Furthermore, more RACING technology trickles down to commuter cars in the Honda camp than pretty much ANY other manufacturer - w/ BMW and GM probably a close 2nd, prob followed by Toyota and then Ford.

And for a little history... VTEC is the result of FAILED cvcc technology attempts from Ford. Ford got it started and could not make it work - pitched it to Honda and rejoiced b/c they thought that they just sold some JUNK to the dummies overseas until Honda beat EVERY manufacturer to market for the Clean Air Act regulations. Honda trashed the technology, kept the name (CVCC) and the rest is history. Since then, Honda has prided itself on emissions-friendly engines not gas-guzzling 500hp ozone-killers.

But MAKE NO MISTAKE about it - if they wanted to produce a production v8 the rest of the world would take fucking note, and other companies would be retarded to not buy a couple for reverse-engineering. There's a little race called the Indy 500... you may have heard of it although it's kinda grassroots. The ENTIRE 33 car field for F1 for 2010 had engines manufactured and designed by who? Enough said. IF Honda wanted to build a 2010 SHO-smashing LSx-crushing beast they could do it quite easily (w/ a little rear-axle help from Ford... 9in maybe? LOL).

I said all of this to show you that 1) the argument was dumb (although David represented) and 2) get back to the racing talk b/c you guys are obv lacking on "your roots" LOL. Happy tuning.

And no I am not a "fanboy" of anything. If it has an engine, I'm into it...

Take care kids.

I'm a little late, but i couldn't sleep..... so trolling time


first off.... honda and ford suck ass so why argue?

second off..... Mazda trickles WAY more engineering down to its production cars from its race cars than ANY other manufacturer.

ZOOM ZOOM BITCHES!

that is all.

EDIT: why do i keep seeing you guys say honda doesn't have anything to compete with the mustang??? isn't that what the S2K is for?? shit, i've heard enough s2k drivers talk shit to assure myself they were competitors......... so wtf?!

[Boosted FC]

I'm a little late, but i couldn't sleep..... so trolling time


first off.... honda and ford suck ass so why argue?

second off..... Mazda trickles WAY more engineering down to its production cars from its race cars than ANY other manufacturer.

ZOOM ZOOM BITCHES!

that is all.

EDIT: why do i keep seeing you guys say honda doesn't have anything to compete with the mustang??? isn't that what the S2K is for?? shit, i've heard enough s2k drivers talk shit to assure myself they were competitors......... so wtf?!

I would have to disagree with that statement, and say that Honda actually does that. What Mazda car out there right now has engineering in it from their race cars, the RX8? Do not mistake the saying that more Mazdas are raced every weekend, with Mazda dumping engineering from their racecars into production cars.

[RemoteX-7]

I would have to disagree with that statement, and say that Honda actually does that. What Mazda car out there right now has engineering in it from their race cars, the RX8? Do not mistake the saying that more Mazdas are raced every weekend, with Mazda dumping engineering from their racecars into production cars.

are you kidding? the mazda 3 and mazda 6, and the speed versions of both those cars are easily better performance wise than any of there competitors, and when you drive one you can feel the racing engineering in it from turn to turn. and the rx-8 is okay... good hp for a shitty built rotary.... if they had put more time into building the Renaissance motor; I'd love it. but since they didnt. I'll keep my FB and drive in peace.

[-EnVus-]

I'm a little late, but i couldn't sleep..... so trolling time


first off.... honda and ford suck ass so why argue?

second off..... Mazda trickles WAY more engineering down to its production cars from its race cars than ANY other manufacturer.

ZOOM ZOOM BITCHES!

that is all.

EDIT: why do i keep seeing you guys say honda doesn't have anything to compete with the mustang??? isn't that what the S2K is for?? shit, i've heard enough s2k drivers talk shit to assure myself they were competitors......... so wtf?!

lol at you saying Ford and Honda suck

[Moseley]

are you kidding? the mazda 3 and mazda 6, and the speed versions of both those cars are easily better performance wise than any of there competitors, and when you drive one you can feel the racing engineering in it from turn to turn. and the rx-8 is okay... good hp for a shitty built rotary.... if they had put more time into building the Renaissance motor; I'd love it. but since they didnt. I'll keep my FB and drive in peace.

Wow a Mazda RX fan boy that talks about the shitty Renaissance motor. lol its renesis dude.

I have to agree that the mazda 3 and 6 will both outrun all of their direct competitors on a track... and there's a good chance that I'd buy a new Mazda for myself before I'd buy a new Honda. But please don't try to say that Mazda has more race inspired engineering in their cars than anyone else... I never saw a Mazda in F1, and most of their US racing experience does not go all the way back to Japan. It stays here in the form of mazdaspeed aftermarket parts.

[RemoteX-7]

Wow a Mazda RX fan boy that talks about the shitty Renaissance motor. lol its renesis dude.

I have to agree that the mazda 3 and 6 will both outrun all of their direct competitors on a track... and there's a good chance that I'd buy a new Mazda for myself before I'd buy a new Honda. But please don't try to say that Mazda has more race inspired engineering in their cars than anyone else... I never saw a Mazda in F1, and most of their US racing experience does not go all the way back to Japan. It stays here in the form of mazdaspeed aftermarket parts.

w.e that was my auto correct at work...

and Im not a fan boy. I drive a 1985 rx-7 FB. ive owned a Porsche and a Celica before that and a pos dodge, and a pos nissan... with the exception of the Porsche, Mazda has been the winner of anything ive owned. and the reason i got it was because of the unique similarity's, and greatness to its competition to the Porsche I owned.

and really? I'm pretty sure mazda holds down D1 with the Fd's and the Lemans, and American Lemans seriers with the other cars they run, pretty well. like, back in 1992 Lemans BANNED mazda from running rotor engine, because they were beating everyone on the course with out trying, and were more reliable than there piston competitors. i mean SKIP BARBER even uses mazdas to teach driving schools and racing schools.... why dont they use honda for that if honda is so great?

I'm so fucking tired of you honda guys acting like your little turbo 4 banger is the quickest, most well made shit ever to hit the road.... yeah it might be quick going the 1/8 mile from light to light on the street next to miss bundy's sienna. but in reality, thats all its good for.

My Porsche 924s was a stock NA 4 banger pushing 160hp. I took on a kid in a mustang fox body with 410hp, and ate him till i ran out of power in the top of 4th gear @ 138mph with 5th gear giving me no power, and he walked on me.

needless to say i didnt want to race him from the beginning, but when he caught me on the road alone, i had no choice. and he still respects me for being able to handle that ride.

NOW, that being said, if someone was to tell me that Porsche didnt put race engineering in there street cars id laugh at them. cuz theres no way a 160hp 4 banger should even keep up with 410hp v8.

its the same with mazda, for you to say youd buy a mazda over its competitors, and that they out perform there competitors car for car on the street, BUT mazda doesnt use its race engineering to do so...... WTF?! where do they get the ideas from, elmo, big bird, bert and ernie?!

as for never seeing an F1 mazda...... http://www.japanesesportcars.com/galleries/img2998.htm
mazda doesnt run F1 but they have there own class in SCCA thats close to Formula 3... so, even though its not quite the big guns, its not like they havent done it before.

[-EnVus-]

w.e that was my auto correct at work...

and Im not a fan boy. I drive a 1985 rx-7 FB. ive owned a Porsche and a Celica before that and a pos dodge, and a pos nissan... with the exception of the Porsche, Mazda has been the winner of anything ive owned. and the reason i got it was because of the unique similarity's, and greatness to its competition to the Porsche I owned.

and really? I'm pretty sure mazda holds down D1 with the Fd's and the Lemans, and American Lemans seriers with the other cars they run, pretty well. like, back in 1992 Lemans BANNED mazda from running rotor engine, because they were beating everyone on the course with out trying, and were more reliable than there piston competitors. i mean SKIP BARBER even uses mazdas to teach driving schools and racing schools.... why dont they use honda for that if honda is so great?

I'm so fucking tired of you honda guys acting like your little turbo 4 banger is the quickest, most well made shit ever to hit the road.... yeah it might be quick going the 1/8 mile from light to light on the street next to miss bundy's sienna. but in reality, thats all its good for.

My Porsche 924s was a stock NA 4 banger pushing 160hp. I took on a kid in a mustang fox body with 410hp, and ate him till i ran out of power in the top of 4th gear @ 138mph with 5th gear giving me no power, and he walked on me.

needless to say i didnt want to race him from the beginning, but when he caught me on the road alone, i had no choice. and he still respects me for being able to handle that ride.

NOW, that being said, if someone was to tell me that Porsche didnt put race engineering in there street cars id laugh at them. cuz theres no way a 160hp 4 banger should even keep up with 410hp v8.

its the same with mazda, for you to say youd buy a mazda over its competitors, and that they out perform there competitors car for car on the street, BUT mazda doesnt use its race engineering to do so...... WTF?! where do they get the ideas from, elmo, big bird, bert and ernie?!

as for never seeing an F1 mazda...... http://www.japanesesportcars.com/galleries/img2998.htm
mazda doesnt run F1 but they have there own class in SCCA thats close to Formula 3... so, even though its not quite the big guns, its not like they havent done it before.

You do know that up till 2008 Ford owned over 30% of Mazda and even played a role in most of its Design and modeling.
So Ford must not suck to bad if you love Mazda....

[thundercatz1]

I wish a all motor rotary would pull up beside me, I woud straight shit on it without wiping!!!!.....

03 MACH 1 AND 06 ACURA RSX-S FTW

[David88vert]

To clarify earlier posts on Mazda:
Mazdaspeed Motorsports (http://www.mazdamotorsports.com/) does get some feedback from their racers. I do not know if that feedback makes it to the factory engineers and designers.

Almost everyone on here knows that I have long been a fan of the rotary, and have been able to get excellent performance and reliability out of my motors. I will not however say that Mazda gets more feedback from its racing than other manufacturers. Mazda itself is not very active in racing as a factory entry anymore.

As for the Renesis, it is a good, solid motor, but NA rotarys need to be in a lightweight car since they are low on torque by design. The full weight RX8 is a little heavy until you strip it down to race trim for the NA motor.

[RemoteX-7]

You do know that up till 2008 Ford owned over 30% of Mazda and even played a role in most of its Design and modeling.
So Ford must not suck to bad if you love Mazda....


I drive a 1985 mazda... Ford didnt own them back then, and ford didnt have to much to do with mazda when they owned them... yes they did have pull but not much.



I wish a all motor rotary would pull up beside me, I woud straight shit on it without wiping!!!!.....

03 MACH 1 AND 06 ACURA RSX-S FTW


............................You do realize that there are 6sec 1/4mi. rx7's riding around right?
I know plenty of all motor rx7s that would eat anything you got.. mustang or acura.

come january mine will easily eat your cars... im waiting to do some porting.

[japan4racing]

OMG...This is quickly turning into a "my dick is bigger than yours" type situation!

[BABY J]

I love bumping into the 6 second Mazdas just "riding around". :poke:

[RemoteX-7]

yeah, I feel the same way with 900+hp mustangs and vettes. that all theses muscle guys seem to think exist on every corner.

[Moseley]

w.e that was my auto correct at work...

and Im not a fan boy. I drive a 1985 rx-7 FB. ive owned a Porsche and a Celica before that and a pos dodge, and a pos nissan... with the exception of the Porsche, Mazda has been the winner of anything ive owned. and the reason i got it was because of the unique similarity's, and greatness to its competition to the Porsche I owned.

and really? I'm pretty sure mazda holds down D1 with the Fd's and the Lemans, and American Lemans seriers with the other cars they run, pretty well. like, back in 1992 Lemans BANNED mazda from running rotor engine, because they were beating everyone on the course with out trying, and were more reliable than there piston competitors. i mean SKIP BARBER even uses mazdas to teach driving schools and racing schools.... why dont they use honda for that if honda is so great?

Wow you should read up on some facts before posting again.

D1 is racing? hmm.

Mazda doesn't "hold down" Lemans or ALMS. The car they had at Lemans the year that they won was not the fastest on the track by any means. The cards fell in their favor. They have been running in ALMS for a few years with marginal results. Up until recently it was a "P2" car which was not competing with the real fast shit like the Audis. Acura and Porsche came into the series and pretty much creamed everyone anyway.



I'm so fucking tired of you honda guys acting like your little turbo 4 banger is the quickest, most well made shit ever to hit the road.... yeah it might be quick going the 1/8 mile from light to light on the street next to miss bundy's sienna. but in reality, thats all its good for.

Here's the civic I usually wrench on and it doesn't really need a turbo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F-6_EoVWQ0 It has been a DD for nearly 4 years now and I'm willing to bet it would eat your RX-7 on any road coarse, auto cross track, or at the drag strip.



My Porsche 924s was a stock NA 4 banger pushing 160hp. I took on a kid in a mustang fox body with 410hp, and ate him till i ran out of power in the top of 4th gear @ 138mph with 5th gear giving me no power, and he walked on me.

needless to say i didnt want to race him from the beginning, but when he caught me on the road alone, i had no choice. and he still respects me for being able to handle that ride.

NOW, that being said, if someone was to tell me that Porsche didnt put race engineering in there street cars id laugh at them. cuz theres no way a 160hp 4 banger should even keep up with 410hp v8.


The 924s was nowhere near as fast as a stock 5.0, it was a low 16 second car. If you had a 944s2 I would say nice porsche... they were slightly quicker than the 5.0. You must be delusional to think that you could hang with a 410hp foxbody.

[Moseley]

Almost everyone on here knows that I have long been a fan of the rotary, and have been able to get excellent performance and reliability out of my motors. I will not however say that Mazda gets more feedback from its racing than other manufacturers. Mazda itself is not very active in racing as a factory entry anymore.

Exactly... people choose to race Mazdas, and they are typically out of production or not production based cars at all.

[DeeAOne]

the only series that i can think of right now that mazda even competes in is the U.S. touring car championship, and last time i checked i dont think they even did worth a damn. you think a BP miata with bolt-ons is going to keep up with an S52 e36 with the same amount of suspension work? i think not.

so RemoteX-7, youre an idiot.

as for the Honda VS. Ford. ive never owned a domestic car so i cant share my experience with one. i will say that my 88 integra was the most reliable car i have had so far though.

[David88vert]

I wish a all motor rotary would pull up beside me, I woud straight shit on it without wiping!!!!.....

03 MACH 1 AND 06 ACURA RSX-S FTW

You wouldn't have a chance against a ported rotary. You would beat a full weight, stock port one though.
Do not line up against any Puerto Rican though, he will drag you with a blown motor even..... and I don't mean boosted....

[David88vert]

I drive a 1985 mazda... Ford didnt own them back then, and ford didnt have to much to do with mazda when they owned them... yes they did have pull but not much.
............................You do realize that there are 6sec 1/4mi. rx7's riding around right?
I know plenty of all motor rx7s that would eat anything you got.. mustang or acura.
come january mine will easily eat your cars... im waiting to do some porting.

Please, come back to reality.
I have owned multiple 85's (and other FBs). Based on your posts, you either have a stock port 12A or stock port 13B. At best, you are putting down no more than 150 rwhp. Your car weighs about 2500 lbs at least.
In stock form, the 12A ran about a 16 sec 1/4. 13B is only slightly better.

A 410 rwhp Mustang will run 12s on crappy street tires and stock gearing. If the driver can't drive well, he'll still run high 13s. I call BS on you dragging him.

I want to see these 6 sec 1/4 RX7s riding around. You won't see them, as they are not street legal. I know a lot of the rotary builders around here, and none of them are running anywhere near that speed. In fact, the quick street legal ones are only in the high 8s. http://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?t=825042
The fastest non-street legal should be 6.74 @ 209mph - I haven't followed the results in a while, but I know they are not to 6.2 yet.

As for your porting, exactly which motor and what port are you planning?

[David88vert]

yeah, I feel the same way with 900+hp mustangs and vettes. that all theses muscle guys seem to think exist on every corner.

I know of a lot more 900+ hp Mustangs and Corvettes in GA on the street, than there are total of 6 sec RX7s on the track - worldwide.

[thundercatz1]

............................You do realize that there are 6sec 1/4mi. rx7's riding around right?
I know plenty of all motor rx7s that would eat anything you got.. mustang or acura.

come january mine will easily eat your cars... im waiting to do some porting.[/QUOTE]

Highly unlikely

[Z0_o6]

I'm so fucking tired of you honda guys acting like your little turbo 4 banger is the quickest, most well made shit ever to hit the road.... yeah it might be quick going the 1/8 mile from light to light on the street next to miss bundy's sienna. but in reality, thats all its good for.

I just wanted to quote this YET AGAIN. Let me know if you want to try out my turbo honda, cupcake.

[RemoteX-7]

D1 is racing? hmm.

The 924s was nowhere near as fast as a stock 5.0, it was a low 16 second car. If you had a 944s2 I would say nice porsche... they were slightly quicker than the 5.0. You must be delusional to think that you could hang with a 410hp foxbody.

technically D1 is racing... its just a different type of race, judged on different standards... ANNNND, FYI the 924, and the 944 had the same exact engine... the 944 engine was just turned a bit better. and I know I ran him, and everyone that was there knows it, and that kid still has mad respect for me. I mean you dont have to believe, I have a habit of taking cars to their limits.


Please, come back to reality.
I have owned multiple 85's (and other FBs). Based on your posts, you either have a stock port 12A or stock port 13B. At best, you are putting down no more than 150 rwhp. Your car weighs about 2500 lbs at least.
In stock form, the 12A ran about a 16 sec 1/4. 13B is only slightly better.

A 410 rwhp Mustang will run 12s on crappy street tires and stock gearing. If the driver can't drive well, he'll still run high 13s. I call BS on you dragging him.

I want to see these 6 sec 1/4 RX7s riding around. You won't see them, as they are not street legal. I know a lot of the rotary builders around here, and none of them are running anywhere near that speed. In fact, the quick street legal ones are only in the high 8s. http://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?t=825042
The fastest non-street legal should be 6.74 @ 209mph - I haven't followed the results in a while, but I know they are not to 6.2 yet.

As for your porting, exactly which motor and what port are you planning?

Yeah, right now i'm running a stock port 12a with a weber 45 carb. but my cars semi stripped so im at about 1900-2100lbs currently.

and I havent decided on the Port. I gotta find the cash first I lost my job and am quickly running out of money; but it'll either be a big street port, or a bridge port. and maybe a turbo after that, but i doubt ill need the turbo.

But, I also wanna do a FD/FB project. Drop a single turbo FD engine in a FB body and run a Holly Carb...... OMG.. I wanna do that project so bad.

[TougeGTR-33]

Honda has a fuckin robot. / thread.

[David88vert]

Yeah, right now i'm running a stock port 12a with a weber 45 carb. but my cars semi stripped so im at about 1900-2100lbs currently.

and I havent decided on the Port. I gotta find the cash first I lost my job and am quickly running out of money; but it'll either be a big street port, or a bridge port. and maybe a turbo after that, but i doubt ill need the turbo.

But, I also wanna do a FD/FB project. Drop a single turbo FD engine in a FB body and run a Holly Carb...... OMG.. I wanna do that project so bad.

First off, the 85 was the heaviest body, and without some major modifications and cutting, there is no way you weigh in at 1900-2100. 2300 is about the lightest. The 81 without the sunroof can get down to the 2000-2100 range without some major cutting.
Have you actually gone to a scale to check? It is heavier than you think.

Second, the major limiting factors for your setup, are: carb, ports, exhaust - not in that order. With your stock port engine, dual downdraft Webers tend to make the best power - dayton on here runs that setup currently, in fact, and he only makes about 135 hp.

Since we know these limiting factors, I can clearly call BS on you beating a 410hp foxbody. You are not even going to run in the 14s at the track on street tires.

As for a single turbo 13B-REW in a FB, that is what dayton is doing to his FB now. He got my complete FD motor (Haltech, T-76, etc). It is good for just over 600rwhp, but in a light car like an FB, you really have trouble utilizing more than 400 rwhp on the street.

You don't use a big port with a turbo, unless you are only drag racing it. Its not as streetable. If you are going NA, you want a bridge or P port to get flow. If you are going turbo, either stay with a mild street port, or a semi-P.
If you don't have a good job, your best route is to put in a TII swap. Easy to get 250rwhp out of it with a couple of bolt-ons.

[thundercatz1]

I tell you what remotex-7 all you gotta do is just line up with my rsx-s and see what you can do plain and simple becauseI know I cant beat a 410hp foxbody.

Lets just try and see where you are at? Im curious, because if david88verts statement is even close to true you are in trouble, not tryna be a dick or anything I just wanna see what its got.

[boosted347]

so houston are you boosting the car, before tax time?

[Catnip]

technically D1 is racing... its just a different type of race, judged on different standards...

LOLOL. It's based on what, the angle, speed, amount of smoke, and crowd noise?

That sounds like real racing to me. Not knocking on the guys that do it, because it is fun, but GOT DAMN get real.


ANNNND, FYI the 924, and the 944 had the same exact engine... the 944 engine was just turned a bit better. and I know I ran him, and everyone that was there knows it, and that kid still has mad respect for me. I mean you dont have to believe, I have a habit of taking cars to their limits.

He has mad respect for you? Are you fucking Paul Walker? No one gives two shits if some "kid" has "mad respect" for you. You didn't beat a 410whp Mustang. Did he have it dynoed? Did he show you the dyno sheets? That's like saying my Sentra makes 651whp but gets beats by stock full size trucks.... Bullshit, asshole.

You have a habit of taking cars to their limits? LMFAO. Please tell me you're kidding about the old worn out rx and you drive a bright green 420a Eclipse.






Yeah, right now i'm running a stock port 12a with a weber 45 carb. but my cars semi stripped so im at about 1900-2100lbs currently.

and I havent decided on the Port. I gotta find the cash first I lost my job and am quickly running out of money; but it'll either be a big street port, or a bridge port. and maybe a turbo after that, but i doubt ill need the turbo.

But, I also wanna do a FD/FB project. Drop a single turbo FD engine in a FB body and run a Holly Carb...... OMG.. I wanna do that project so bad.

Built motor, maybe turbo, FD/FB project, blah blah blah... no job. Good one. You think anyone cares of the shitty dreams you have? When you HAVE it, talk; until then, go the fuck out thinking you're big shit.

[thundercatz1]

so houston are you boosting the car, before tax time?

Since my car is paid for I'm thinking about purchasing a 2011 ford mustang gt and save myself the hassle of turboing, I like muscle car the honda thing was temporary...

[Catnip]

Since my car is paid for I'm thinking about purchasing a 2011 ford mustang gt and save myself the hassle of turboing, I like muscle car the honda thing was temporary...

Do it. 3.73s, drag radials, exhaust... DONE.

[thundercatz1]

Yea I saw a nice black one i want to get.

[TougeGTR-33]

LOLOL. It's based on what, the angle, speed, amount of smoke, and crowd noise?

That sounds like real racing to me. Not knocking on the guys that do it, because it is fun, but GOT DAMN get real.

Speed, angle, clipping points, while in tandem keeping side by side, engine control. There is alot more than you would think. Also Going sideways next to another car at 90-120 is more intense than any other racing ive seen. Except rally racing. I know its not traditional racing, but at-least there is something new for a car enthusiast to watch, and do.

[boosted347]

Since my car is paid for I'm thinking about purchasing a 2011 ford mustang gt and save myself the hassle of turboing, I like muscle car the honda thing was temporary...

i second this motion lol but they just released a turbo setup for them :) 560 whp on 6 psi with just exhaust lol those bitches are so bad ass...but i kno on a 125 shot on stickies with 3.73s (and a driver mod :) ) they get into the tens

[RemoteX-7]

First off, the 85 was the heaviest body, and without some major modifications and cutting, there is no way you weigh in at 1900-2100. 2300 is about the lightest. The 81 without the sunroof can get down to the 2000-2100 range without some major cutting.
Have you actually gone to a scale to check? It is heavier than you think.

Second, the major limiting factors for your setup, are: carb, ports, exhaust - not in that order. With your stock port engine, dual downdraft Webers tend to make the best power - dayton on here runs that setup currently, in fact, and he only makes about 135 hp.

Since we know these limiting factors, I can clearly call BS on you beating a 410hp foxbody. You are not even going to run in the 14s at the track on street tires.

As for a single turbo 13B-REW in a FB, that is what dayton is doing to his FB now. He got my complete FD motor (Haltech, T-76, etc). It is good for just over 600rwhp, but in a light car like an FB, you really have trouble utilizing more than 400 rwhp on the street.

You don't use a big port with a turbo, unless you are only drag racing it. Its not as streetable. If you are going NA, you want a bridge or P port to get flow. If you are going turbo, either stay with a mild street port, or a semi-P.
If you don't have a good job, your best route is to put in a TII swap. Easy to get 250rwhp out of it with a couple of bolt-ons.

No i havent Weighed it. but I have a GSL-SE body, with a 79 suspension swap and 12a engine swap, So i ASSUMED i dropped a good bit of weight in the process. forgive me.

I got a custom exhaust and headers, so that gave me a bit more power.

BUT, I dont remember saying I BEAT a 410hp mustang in my rx7... I dont remember saying i BEAT him at all. first off i ran him in my PORSCHE.... second I said i was beating him till i ran out of power in the top of 4th gear and he walked on me.... I never said how i was beating him. it was partly because he took me from a roll on a 2 to 1 lane road and i was able to keep him from passing me during my hard ass accel from 2nd through 4th. but once i hit the top of fourth, fifth had nothing for me, and he easily walked by me.


LOLOL. It's based on what, the angle, speed, amount of smoke, and crowd noise?

That sounds like real racing to me. Not knocking on the guys that do it, because it is fun, but GOT DAMN get real.



He has mad respect for you? Are you fucking Paul Walker? No one gives two shits if some "kid" has "mad respect" for you. You didn't beat a 410whp Mustang. Did he have it dynoed? Did he show you the dyno sheets? That's like saying my Sentra makes 651whp but gets beats by stock full size trucks.... Bullshit, asshole.

You have a habit of taking cars to their limits? LMFAO. Please tell me you're kidding about the old worn out rx and you drive a bright green 420a Eclipse.







Built motor, maybe turbo, FD/FB project, blah blah blah... no job. Good one. You think anyone cares of the shitty dreams you have? When you HAVE it, talk; until then, go the fuck out thinking you're big shit.


I dont remember saying I BEAT a 410hp mustang in my rx7... I dont remember saying i BEAT him at all. first off i ran him in my PORSCHE.... second I said i was beating him till i ran out of power in the top of 4th gear and he walked on me.... I never said how i was beating him. it was partly because he took me from a roll on a 2 to 1 lane road and i was able to keep him from passing me during my hard ass accel from 2nd through 4th. but once i hit the top of fourth, fifth had nothing for me, and he easily walked by me.

And yes, I quite enjoy the idea of respect... Its something you should learn. His friends and him used to talk hella shit to me, because they always had nice cars that i semi correctly assumed that mommy and daddy mostly bought for them. given the few exceptions. and then my dad buys me a semi classic Porsche, and I was on top, and started talking shit, cuz they all ran honda civics, and jeeps and I'd walk on all of them. he gets wind of this and starts bashing me, saying he wants to race. i take a look at his engine, and shit and say HELL THE FUCK NO... and he bashed me for like a month and a half, maybe longer. so call me paul walker if you want, but dudes a good friend of mine now because of that run.

lastly, I'm newly 20 years old, and I just walked away from a job where i was making roughly 26k+ a year.... I made those FD to Fb plans when I was under the impression i was going to stay at that job and it would take about a pay check or two to buy the engine and tranny. i recently decided that job wasnt for me. so the plans are getting pushed back... hence why i said I WANNA..... because I'm still goign to do it. I just have to wait till i find another job.

[Catnip]

My Porsche 924s was a stock NA 4 banger pushing 160hp. I took on a kid in a mustang fox body with 410hp, and ate him till i ran out of power in the top of 4th gear @ 138mph

NOW, that being said, if someone was to tell me that Porsche didnt put race engineering in there street cars id laugh at them. cuz theres no way a 160hp 4 banger should even keep up with 410hp v8.




I dont remember saying I BEAT a 410hp mustang in my rx7... I dont remember saying i BEAT him at all. first off i ran him in my PORSCHE.... second I said i was beating him till i ran out of power in the top of 4th gear and he walked on me.... I never said how i was beating him. it was partly because he took me from a roll on a 2 to 1 lane road and i was able to keep him from passing me during my hard ass accel from 2nd through 4th. but once i hit the top of fourth, fifth had nothing for me, and he easily walked by me.

And yes, I quite enjoy the idea of respect... Its something you should learn. His friends and him used to talk hella shit to me, because they always had nice cars that i semi correctly assumed that mommy and daddy mostly bought for them. given the few exceptions. and then my dad buys me a semi classic Porsche, and I was on top, and started talking shit, cuz they all ran honda civics, and jeeps and I'd walk on all of them. he gets wind of this and starts bashing me, saying he wants to race. i take a look at his engine, and shit and say HELL THE FUCK NO... and he bashed me for like a month and a half, maybe longer. so call me paul walker if you want, but dudes a good friend of mine now because of that run.

lastly, I'm newly 20 years old, and I just walked away from a job where i was making roughly 26k+ a year.... I made those FD to Fb plans when I was under the impression i was going to stay at that job and it would take about a pay check or two to buy the engine and tranny. i recently decided that job wasnt for me. so the plans are getting pushed back... hence why i said I WANNA..... because I'm still goign to do it. I just have to wait till i find another job.

I need to learn about respect? LOL. I think everyone here would agree I've gained A LOT of respect coming from my 16.5 second Thunderbird days to now with a 12 second reliable and fully loaded DD. Not dominating by any means, but still respectable. I like having respect, but going around mentioning I have respect from someone is not something I do (until this post, I guess) or praise.

[David88vert]

No i havent Weighed it. but I have a GSL-SE body, with a 79 suspension swap and 12a engine swap, So i ASSUMED i dropped a good bit of weight in the process. forgive me.

I got a custom exhaust and headers, so that gave me a bit more power.


If you have GSL-SE body, then you weigh at least 2400 lbs, and probably closer to 2500lbs. The 79 suspension does not save you more than 50 lbs, and is worse than the 85 suspension, as it puts you out of position by 20mm. You actually hurt the handling of the car with the 79 suspension, and if you went for weight savings, you save a tiny amount to going to smaller brake rotors in the front - and thus, hurt your braking a little.
Next, you are using a 12a stock port, and a custom exhaust, with a Weber 45. If you did not go to a rotary expert for that exhaust, and get the flow set right, you actually did not improve performance much - usually less than 15 rwhp gain, and with the age of your car, you were probably down to about 90rwhp prior to the exhaust and carb. Based on what you have revealed so far, I would expect you to make less than 120rwhp, and probably less than 110rwhp. The variance is due to not seeing a picture of your exhaust.
With your factory tranny, on street tires, you are likely to only run a 15.8-16.0 at best, and this depends on whether you are running the GSL-SE rear end with a 4.10, or a GSL rear with a 3.90. I don't see you even close to running a stock Foxbody in the 1/4 if the driver was decent.

If you put a FD motor in there with a single turbo, you can easily get up to about 350rwhp, and then the car would be quick.

[thundercatz1]

i second this motion lol but they just released a turbo setup for them :) 560 whp on 6 psi with just exhaust lol those bitches are so bad ass...but i kno on a 125 shot on stickies with 3.73s (and a driver mod :) ) they get into the tens

Oh yeah, when i come back out, im coming out hard!

[boosted347]

do it maybe you can play with me then :ninja: maybeeee

[RemoteX-7]

If you have GSL-SE body, then you weigh at least 2400 lbs, and probably closer to 2500lbs. The 79 suspension does not save you more than 50 lbs, and is worse than the 85 suspension, as it puts you out of position by 20mm. You actually hurt the handling of the car with the 79 suspension, and if you went for weight savings, you save a tiny amount to going to smaller brake rotors in the front - and thus, hurt your braking a little.
Next, you are using a 12a stock port, and a custom exhaust, with a Weber 45. If you did not go to a rotary expert for that exhaust, and get the flow set right, you actually did not improve performance much - usually less than 15 rwhp gain, and with the age of your car, you were probably down to about 90rwhp prior to the exhaust and carb. Based on what you have revealed so far, I would expect you to make less than 120rwhp, and probably less than 110rwhp. The variance is due to not seeing a picture of your exhaust.
With your factory tranny, on street tires, you are likely to only run a 15.8-16.0 at best, and this depends on whether you are running the GSL-SE rear end with a 4.10, or a GSL rear with a 3.90. I don't see you even close to running a stock Foxbody in the 1/4 if the driver was decent.



do you not fucking read???? I put it in caps, and said it like 10 times... I RAN THIS KID IN MY 1988 PORSCHE 924s. NOT MY RX-7.... THIS WAS BEFORE I BOUGHT THE SEVEN.

[-EnVus-]

Point being the older rx7s are the ugliest and slowest of them all i wouldnt want one unless it was FC or FD.
Shit i wouldnt claim to be fast or that i have anything unless it was a T2 or FD lol
Any grocery getter can beat the older rx7s unless built clearly for a strip and that be a waste of money and poor choice in a car.

[RemoteX-7]

Point being the older rx7s are the ugliest and slowest of them all i wouldnt want one unless it was FC or FD.
Shit i wouldnt claim to be fast or that i have anything unless it was a T2 or FD lol
Any grocery getter can beat the older rx7s unless built clearly for a strip and that be a waste of money and poor choice in a car.

incorrect... the FC's are lame as shit. FD>FB>FC. the 1984/1985 GSLSE were FI NA 13b's and are much better than the NA FC's 13b's.... and the FB's are lighter than FC's, and 12a's can be quick very cheaply.

[-EnVus-]

incorrect... the FC's are lame as shit. FD>FB>FC. the 1984/1985 GSLSE were FI NA 13b's and are much better than the NA FC's 13b's.... and the FB's are lighter than FC's, and 12a's can be quick very cheaply.

Besides the FD the T2 Owns all

[David88vert]

do you not fucking read???? I put it in caps, and said it like 10 times... I RAN THIS KID IN MY 1988 PORSCHE 924s. NOT MY RX-7.... THIS WAS BEFORE I BOUGHT THE SEVEN.

I was being nice and chose the faster car for your comparison to show the futility of your argument. Since you want me to be blunt, let me break it down to you like this. You stated, "My Porsche 924s was a stock NA 4 banger pushing 160hp." Obviously, you did not have the turbo model.

In the 87 model with 150 bhp:
0-60 mph: 8.00 s
0-100 mph: 21.40 s
Quarter mile ET: 16.30 s @ 87.00 mph
Top speed: 134 mph
Power-to-weight: 133.89 bhp/ton


As you can see, it is NO quicker than the FB. The 88 only had 10 more hp - at best it is a 16 sec car. Magazines reported they only got a 16.4 out of it.

You stated that he only overtook you when you reached the top of 4th. With stock gearing i the 924S, you would not have topped 4th until after you had passed the 1/4 mile mark. This is a physical limitation that you cannot talk your way out of.
A 410 rwhp Foxbody at full weight, should be a high 11s car in the quarter. Assuming that he is a bad driver, had crappy street tires, on an unprepped street, we will limit him to a 2.8 60' and assume that you are a great driver and managed a 2.1 60'.
He would have been running the equivalent of a 13.8, and you would have had to made a 14.0 to hold him off.
With your earlier statements, you expect us to believe that you managed to magically drive your car past its physical limitations of engine and gearing, and found an extra 2.0 seconds over professional drivers? Exactly, how stupid are you?
I definitely call BS.

A STOCK Foxbody has 190 rwhp, and weighs 3200 lbs - and ran 15.4. Your 924S wouldn't have been able to beat it in the 1/4.

[BABY J]

I've seen plenty of people that don't know how to get a 400hp rwd + street tires + street race moving from the dig. In fact - MOST people that I have met even in drag-racing circles don't know how to drive their cars to anywhere near it's potential, ESPECIALLY on the street. But I still call BS - not that it matters bc I don't really give a shit - LOL.

I didn't happen to be there for this magical race that probably didn't happen, but I have lost money on a race just bc the wrong guy was driving the right car (LOL). I hate it when that happens.

On a side note - as a fox owner for the last 16 years I'll say that there are plenty of "domestic ricers" that claim HP that doesn't exist. Maybe he should say that that guy CLAIMED to have 400. I've walked notches w/ bolt on single-cams in an eg6. I've SMASHED "semi-built" notches w/ a 50 shot on a single cam in the same eg6.

Could his Porsche roll out on a stock notch? Tough call - nothing really leaves w/ a well setup notch even if they drive around it on the big end - something I tried to teach BTSTONE but he never brought that magic carpet s2k out - LOL. But w/ this kids power (or lack of - LOL) he would have HAD to leave on the notch bc he would have never pulled it on top w/ so little power. Hell maybe the guy didn't even know they were racing and then was like "oh - he's trying to race me, guess I'll try to run him down" - LOL.

[David88vert]

Baby J - I agree with you. My point is that he wasn't going to run against what he claimed that he could run against. I even gave him the benefit of the doubt on launch. Even with the other driver sleeping for a full second - and being a bad driver, the Foxbody would easily beat a 924S.
I haven't met too many guys that claim double the hp that they are putting out - they usually claim less.

[BABY J]

I think we know that that guy was nowhere NEAR 400 - LOL. But it was a funny story.

[boosted347]

I was being nice and chose the faster car for your comparison to show the futility of your argument. Since you want me to be blunt, let me break it down to you like this. You stated, "My Porsche 924s was a stock NA 4 banger pushing 160hp." Obviously, you did not have the turbo model.

In the 87 model with 150 bhp:
0-60 mph: 8.00 s
0-100 mph: 21.40 s
Quarter mile ET: 16.30 s @ 87.00 mph
Top speed: 134 mph
Power-to-weight: 133.89 bhp/ton


As you can see, it is NO quicker than the FB. The 88 only had 10 more hp - at best it is a 16 sec car. Magazines reported they only got a 16.4 out of it.

You stated that he only overtook you when you reached the top of 4th. With stock gearing i the 924S, you would not have topped 4th until after you had passed the 1/4 mile mark. This is a physical limitation that you cannot talk your way out of.
A 410 rwhp Foxbody at full weight, should be a high 11s car in the quarter. Assuming that he is a bad driver, had crappy street tires, on an unprepped street, we will limit him to a 2.8 60' and assume that you are a great driver and managed a 2.1 60'.
He would have been running the equivalent of a 13.8, and you would have had to made a 14.0 to hold him off.
With your earlier statements, you expect us to believe that you managed to magically drive your car past its physical limitations of engine and gearing, and found an extra 2.0 seconds over professional drivers? Exactly, how stupid are you?
I definitely call BS.

A STOCK Foxbody has 190 rwhp, and weighs 3200 lbs - and ran 15.4. Your 924S wouldn't have been able to beat it in the 1/4.

lulz
:own3d:

[BABY J]

Kool read :

http://www.hondatuningmagazine.com/editorial/htup_1009_we_were_spoiled_in_99/index.html

[RUFFIAN]

As far as the NSX goes - it's VINTAGE. When the NSX dropped it was 1991 I think... that makes it comparable w/ EF hatches - LOL. NSXs could be spotted at the next "old school Honda meet" haha... what did Ford have in 1991 to compete w/ it that's even worth honorable mention?? Oh I know... NOTHING. LOL. This is fun. I'll address your post David when I get back from beer. Kudos sir. It'll help MORE illustrate my point on the POINTLESSNESS of trying to compare an ENGINE company to an auto manufacturer.

I would say the Ford had the RS200. it was made between 1984-86 and the specs are very comparable to the NSX............A double wishbone suspension setup with twin dampers on all four wheels aided handling and helped give the car what was often regarded as being the best balanced platform of any of the RS200's contemporary competitors.It had a mid-ship mounted engine with power that came from a 1.8 litre, single turbocharged Ford/Cosworth "BDT" engine producing 250 horsepower (190 kW) in road-going trim, and between 350 and 450 horsepower (340 kW) in racing trim; upgrade kits were available for road-going versions to boost power output to over 300 horsepower (220 kW).