Quote:
Originally Posted by fecurtis
Again, that's subjective. If I'm tracking a car, admittedly I'd rather an NA, but as a DD I actually prefer a turbo or other FI car, just love the low end grunt plus from a practicality standpoint, I don't have to let it hit 6500 RPM just to merge onto an interstate, hell even in my F30, I can simply apply a little more pressure on the accelerate and off it goes.
Yeah I remember vividly driving an S2000 and RSX Type S...which was just a somewhat more refined Integra. Great fun, but tiresome in everyday driving. By the time I was done, I had a great time driving them but in scooting around town, it got tiresome having to wail on it just to get any power. Again, that's just my preference.
I'd love to take one onto a track where I couldn't careless about keeping it in the upper RPM band and listening to the engine wail but around the streets of urban DC? Not so much.
|
I agree the Hondas are tiresome, which is why I never bought one. The brilliance of BMW was the sporty experience combined with the high quality materials (including sound deadening). I mentioned them because previously I got ridden for only mentioning a car at a high price point (the Aston in the video), so this time it seemed worthwhile to point out that this was true of drivers cars at any/all price points.
But, the S62 in my M5 is easily my least favorite thing about the car.. and it doesn't even suffer from the throttle response/lag issue of turbo engines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W///
Yup, exactly. The 2002 guys probably think his beloved E46 M3 is a big pile of crap too, with ricer mods such as quad exhausts and fake fender vents.  |
The quad exhaust is crap-- I'd much rather have 2 pipes (on one side) and a spare tire hole. Whoever thought 4 exhaust pipes was a good idea was a moron.
One of the fender vents is slightly functional-- ecu cooling
The other is for symmetry. I'd rather have none, but the 2002 owner probably wouldn't get too upset since the 3.0 CS(L) also had them.
