Play toy

audiobliss

Oh yeah, I'm all for a RX-7!!!

Face

You have a LOT of room to grow with the F-body. There's a tremendous selection of parts available as far as handling, motor, chassis, etc.. I'd recommended a 98+ though, the LS1 motor is the way to go.

As far as the RX-7, those old rotory motors are fun when they work and the apex seals aren't leaking. :rolleyes: I'd avoid them unless they have a LS1 dropped into it.

MSALLA

Face wrote: »

As far as the RX-7, those old rotory motors are fun when they work and the apex seals aren't leaking. :rolleyes: I'd avoid them unless they have a LS1 dropped into it.

All part of the game. Don't be a puss. I love V8's and have built them for fun and for customers (back in the day) but you can't be scared of something new.

Face

Who's scared of something new? I have a few friends that have had and still own RX-7's. Those rotory motors are crap and aren't cheap to repair either. Two of them swapped to LS1's and couldn't be happier.

If you want to talk about people being scared about doing new things, let's start a discussion on rear mounted turbos.

MSALLA

I disagree with them being crapbut the Ls1 in a small car like that is a good time.
Rear mounted turbos............very cool. I haven't done it yet but I have seen them.

Jstas

Silverti wrote: »

Wow lol, couldn’t disagree any more...

You know what's funny about you? You just don't know that you don't know.


A punk can be any age. I've met punks in their teens and punks in their 50's. It spans all generations.

As for the rest of your post, audiobliss said it right. Imports do not fit the budget. They are no where near your best "bang for the buck" at all. The biggest reason all the "older guys" that are still stuck in the past recommend American iron is because it's not costly at all. Especially when compared to imports. Besides, for "bang for the buck" I do believe that Fox chassied Mustangs still take that title and will likely do so for a long time. A $30K STi may be hot stuff on a race track but if one took a 1984 SVO Mustang and dropped 30K in to that, including the price of the car, it'd take your STi to school. There's your apples to apples, the only difference is the STi has AWD and that's a disadvantage on a track like the Nürburgring. The Mustang will end up lighter, balanced much better with better suspension geometry and the turbocharged 4-cylinder in racing trim will punch out 450+ horses all day long, 350 on pump gas. It'd still have a useful interior, unlike the STi which sounds like BB's rattling around in an empty coffee can. I know that from experience with both cars. It's old but not a "60's Mustang" by far. The "younger generations" overlook it because it's a "Mustang", the bane of the ricer's existence. The older generations overlook it because it has fuel injection and turbochargers and they just don't want to deal with it. People like me love it because a boring old Mustang pulls up at the light next to a "supped up Import" and the backwards-hat-wearing-know-it-all-punk looks down his nose at it until the green light drops. I've watched many "import enthusiasts" get their aft regions handed to them by some "old guy" with an ancient relic like a 66 Belvedere.

It's not about price, it's about performance and the most expensive part is not always the best part. A system of parts is only as good as it's weakest part, no matter how much it costs. Real performance lies in how well those parts work together, not how much they cost.

For a guy who gets so bent out of shape at "generalizations" and "inflammatory" remarks to auto enthusiasts that are "incorrect", you sure do make alot of generalizations and assumptions yourself. I honestly wonder how old you think I am.


Lastly, since you decided to harp on one section of my post where I mentioned imports, why not use your nifty little search engine and go and look up some racing results, especially club racing results from across the country. Most tracks will post results to their websites. Take a look at what's winning races. It's not Hondas or Nissans or Subarus or Mitsubishis. It's Mazdas and BMWs and Porsches and even Lotuses (Loti?). Those are the cars that are going up against the Corvettes and Vipers and Camaros and Mustangs and either hanging right there with them or beating then. Cars like Civics and Sentras and even S2000's get put in different classes because they cannot compete on those levels. Imprezas and Lancers rarely see track duty because they are not suited too it. The AWD systems carry too much unsprung weight and they do not respond quickly enough. Rally racing and autocross they excel at because those types of events do not require the high responsiveness that high speed turns and hard braking do. But that's right, I'm just "older folk in to old cars like my parents". What the hell could I possibly know?

You make alot of claims that you back up with nothing more than the implication that you are an auto enthusiast. That's nothing more than ego stroking. Get real dude and go take a look at the actual cost of your $5K argument and then we'll see how well it really holds up.


I gave my suggestions, I'm out of this thread, sorry for the derail.