Jump to content
SAU Community

Best N/A Car 2000 Models Upwards


dale
 Share

Recommended Posts

Mini Cooper S (Not Turbocharged, Supercharged!)

The Cooper S is probably not gonna be classified as naturally aspirated, as a supercharger is also a form of forced induction like the turbo, in fact I think I read somewhere that turbocharger is derived from supercharger.

The 02-06 model is supercharged, but the new 07 Cooper S has gone down the turbocharger path.

Reviews says they're laggier but the turbocharger deliver better fuel economy and 3kw more on the top,

since its more efficient and not running/spooling up all the times like the supercharger did.

Won't be long till petrol heads with cash start tinkering with the 07 Cooper S turbo! boost controller, exhaust, dump pipes, BOV, FMIC, etc... LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Peugeot 206 GTi180 or Clio Sport will kill any of the others bar maybe the Integra. Through the twisties an S2000 or Ford hasn't got a chance.

Very old post I know.. but just to clear this up the S2000 is one of the best handling cars with a perfect 50/50 weight distribution! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RX8 doesnt really compare to be honest... mid 15 second car versus mid to low 14 second car that is lighter handles better and ISNT a rotary :P

will have to agree with you there john... although for what the two cars are, family orientated sports sedan/coupe they are quite cool... just not worth the money from a purely performance factor.

Drop 30K into an NA R32

~220 NA KW is freakin quick! Lookin at 12's!

that would be awesome, and sound totally horny.

bragging rights would be well off the scale.

but 30K for a 12second pass is a poor return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

anything with an LS1 (yes I know, blasphemy, but face facts, they're a lightweight powerful engine)

V35 350GT... which is basically a Z33 with better suspension and handling.

Honda S2000

Honda Civic Type R

Lotus Elise

Anything that sports the new Hemi engine, ie 300C or Jeep

Don't know if an M3 would make it under the 40K mark, but that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

you can't beat the c6 z06 from factory for dollar-power ratio and for what you get.

it'll only get even better when they release the supercharged version with the new LS9 engine.

but then it wouldn't apply to this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Maybe SAUNSW could see howany members would do a motorkhana day if Schofield's is still available for a reasonable price...
    • Skip the concrete, we just need to smooth a field. Mark knows how to drive a grader Duncan   I reckon 100x100 flat area for skid pan style, and then some sort tracks for rally... Duncan's already got a rally car on the premises to...
    • Well, yeah, the RB26 is definitely that far off the mark. From a pure technology point of view it is closer to the engines of the 60s than it is to the engines of the last 10 years. There is absolutely nothing special about an RB26 that wasn't present in engines going all the way back to the 60s, except probably the four valve head. The bottom end is just bog standard Japanese stuff. The head is nothing special. Celicas in the 70s were the same thing, in 4cyl 2 valve form. The ITBs are nothing special when you consider that the same Celicas had twin Solexes on them, and so had throttle plates in the exact same place. There's no variable valve timing, no variable inlet manifold, which even other RBs had either before the 26 came out or shortly afterward. The ECU is pretty rude and crude. The only things it has going for it are that the physical structure was pretty bloody tough for a mass produced engine, the twin-turbos and ITBs made for a bit of uniqueness against the competition (and even Toyota were ahead on the twin turbs thing, weren't they?) and the electronic controls and measuring devices (ie, AFMs, CAS, etc) were good enough to make it run well. Oh, and it sounds better than almost anything else, ever. The VR38 is absolutely halfway between the RB generation and the current generation, so it definitely has a massive increase in the sophistication of the electronics, allowing for a lot more dynamic optimisation of mapping. Then there's things like metal treatments and other coatings on things, adoption of variable cam stuff, and a bunch of other little improvements that mean it has to be a better thing than the RB26. But I otherwise agree with you that it is approximately the same thing as a 26. But, skip forward another 10 years from that engine and then the things that I mentioned in previous post come out to play. High compression, massively sophisticated computers, direct injection, clever measuring sensors, etc etc. They are the real difference between trying to make big power with a 26 and trying to make big power with a S/B50/54 (or whatever the preferred BMW engine of the week is).
    • Is the RB26 actually that far off the mark? Honestly from where I'm sitting a VR38DETT is not actually that much more advanced than the RB26. Yes, there is a scavenge pump on the VR38, it's smarter in a number of ways but it's not actually jumping out to me as alien technology. Something like a B58 or V35A-FTS on the other hand has so many surprising little design features that add up to be something that just isn't comparable. 
×
×
  • Create New...