Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

MR is different to RR derp derp derp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rear_mid-engine,_rear-wheel_drive_vehicles

mind you, the only car in that list that handles like a bag of dicks is the MR2. Mostly thanks to its transversely mounted engine, which is exactly what happens when you drive a civic really fast in reverse while facing the wrong way.

Lol, I love the amount of shit given to MR2s, but how many of you guys have actually been in one?

It handles beautifully. Never understeers. Never oversteers. Ever. Drop the clutch in the wet, sticks like shit to a blanket.

Can't say the same about the GTS(T)'s I've driven. No point arguing it here though, everyone is too closed minded.

my brother and i test drove a few when he was looking at them

noisey, sketchy in wet, understeered.... he ended up buying a v35 instead, wise move

turning onto sharpes rd in tullamarine once we saw a mr2 that lost it around the bend there, only car that i know of to ever lose it there

i would rather a gtst the weight is on the front for turning with the engine, and the rear wheels will have traction depending how heavy ur foot is

Jeremy I can guarantee you have never driven your car hard enough to oversteer/understeer lol

A lambo and a Ferrari will understeer and oversteer. I don't think Toyota put more r&d into a little supercar mockup 15 years ago then lambo and Ferrari do right now

Lol, I love the amount of shit given to MR2s, but how many of you guys have actually been in one?

fuck off. I've owned 2 MR2's. the first was a supercharged AW11 while you were still suckin on your momma's teat and then when the 15 year rule kicked in back in 2005(?) I bought an SW20 GTS. SW20 handled like a bag of dicks, even with all the TRD suspension on it, and I actually preferred the AW11 compared to that cramped up excuse for a shopping trolley.

Toyota totally bitched out with the second gen MR2. First gen was half decent, simple suspension layout, simple engine layout, no spooling of turbos or any predictability issues due to non linear power delivery, was awesome to drive on the limit and through the twisties. Compared to that the SW20 was just made for fat fucker white guys in the UK and US who couldn't afford a 911.

dude if you got 40k get a sweet ass daily and a sweet as weekender i mean you could split 50/50 and get 33gtr and like i dunno a bommodore, or vw polo (see homo spec) heaps of otpions. i'd be gettign something with towing capability myself.

thats what i'd be doing i dont see imports as dailys anymore its just not worht it.

edit: should have read ssxrichos post first lol. Spot on though.

well i forgot to add one thing i have no room for 2 cars at the moment lol. the first thing that came to my mind was 2 cars but i really cant do it yet. And id never own a VW i dont like any of them at all.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Cool to see you're on the forum man, think you've met my twin brother a few times (Brent).
    • Yeah...but NA Mercedes V12.
    • Yeah everyone always seems to refer to them as S13 wheels however they came on R32 Skyline, A31 Cefiro, C33 Laurel etc., and also came polished diamond cut or painted depending on the model. Congrats on your GTS purchase! I'd personally leave it NA.
    • In this thing about this 100% renewal energy stuff I hear no one really talking about anything other than power and fuel really Power and fuel, whilst being a huge part of how we use the billion year old Dinosaur juices, are only 2, of the probably thousands of things that we need to use it for in the chemicals industries for making nearly everything we use nowadays I'm all for a clean planet, but if we want to continue to have all the day to day appliances and stuff that we rely on everyday we will still need fossil fuels Whilst I do love science, and how it can bring innovation, there's really a limit to how far it can go in relation to "going green" As for EV's, unless your charging of your own solar panels, it isn't helping the environment when you consider the the batteries, the mining processes required,  the manufacturing process required, and how long a batteries (read: the vehicle) lasts long term If I was supreme dictator of the world, I would ban the use of sugar for fizzy drinks and food additives and use that for ethanol manufacturing, petrol engines would be happier, and people would be alot healthier  Disclaimer: Whiskey manufacturing would still be required, so says the supreme dictator of the world Same same for all the vegetable oils that get pumped into all our food, use that for bio diesel Disclaimer: the supreme dictator would still require olive oil to dip his bread in This would take some of heat off the use of the use of fossil fuels which are required for everything we use, unless you want to go back to pre 1800 for heat and power, or the early 1900's for plastics and every thing else that has come from cracking ethylene  Would I be a fair and just dictator, nope, and I would probably be assassinated within my first few months, but would my cunning plan work, maybe, for a while, maybe not Meh, in the end in an over opinionated mildly educated arsehole typing out my vomit on my mobile phone, which wouldn't be possible without fossil fuels And if your into conspiracies, we only need the fossil fuels to last until a meteor hits, or thermonuclear annihilation, that would definitely fix our need for fossil fuels for manufacturing and power issues for quite some time  Meh, time for this boomer to cook his lunch on his electric stove and then maybe go for a drive in my petrol car, for fun    
    • It really helps that light duty vehicles have absolutely appalling average efficiency due to poor average load. Like 25% average brake thermal efficiency when peak is somewhere around 38% these days. So even a 60% BTE stationary natural gas plant + transmission and charging losses still doing much better with an EV than conventional ICE. And that's before we get into renewables or "low carbon nonrenewable" nuclear which makes it a no-brainer, basically. In commercial aircraft or heavy duty diesel pulling some ridiculous amount of weight across a continent the numbers are much more difficult to make work. I honestly think in 5-10 years we will still be seeing something like the Achates opposed piston diesels in most semi trucks running on a blend of renewable/biodiesel. Applications where the energy density of diesel is just too critical to compromise. CARB is running trials of those engines right now to evaluate in real world drayage ops, probably because they're noticing that the numbers just don't work for electrification unless our plan is to make glorified electric trains with high voltage wires running along every major highway and only a token amount of battery to make it 30 miles or something like that after detaching. Transport emissions is not insignificant especially in the US, but yes there's a lot of industrial processes that also need to be decarbonized. I agree the scale of the problem is pretty insane but EDF managed to generate ~360 TWh from their nuclear reactors last year and this is with decades of underinvestment after the initial big push in the 70s and 80s. I don't think the frame of reference should be solar-limited. France is not exactly a big country either. Maybe it doesn't work everywhere, but it doesn't have to either. We just can't live off of fracking forever and expect things to be ok.
×
×
  • Create New...