this whole thread is now pointless
so what it’s still funny :asshole
GEO METRO’S FTW! :crackup
I will take you up on that, but only if we each get to ride in each others car after, and I can buy a round at the bar afterwards.
seriously guys, its a car. its been done 5000 times before. We aren’t pioneering any new technologies, everything has already been made/engineered/worked out for us.
They are cars. we like cars. why do we have the car we have? because we love to tinker with shit.
I will probably be the one die hard honda owner that will come forwards and say, a built vr6 is a crazy fucking ride. I rode in a friends who has “mild” power adders. we rode it, then installed the CF driveshaft, and drove it again, I honestly could not believe the transformation. they are truly a very well put together car.
and on a side note. this k20 vs srt4 debate, you guys are comparing apples to oranges.
the talk went this engine that engine, to this car that car. The k20 wasnt even made when the eg coupe came out. so comparing that car to anything is redundant. want to make it even? put it in an older expresso neon, barebones model.
cliff notes : it really doesn’t matter. and hondas are so popular with people who modify cars because they are an ECONOMICAL way to get into motorsports, thus allowing a much larger spectrum of enthusiasts. (although I cannot vouch for the quality of said spectrum.)
Oh, and I 1434243% agree with the comments in regards to the “wait til spring” comments. I’ve been “waiting til spring” for 4 years now. this is the 4th time I’ve built it up again. 4th times the charm right?
we were not comparing the eg to another car at all, actually. srt4 and rsx-s are in the same class, so comparing the engines to each other is completely legit. And they both existed at the same time.
:haha ill takr on your geo metro with my go kart. this thread is now offically useless. :deadhorse
post pics of your go kart.
What would be better a srt4 powered kart or a K20 powered one?.. and now the thread lives on… :mwahaha
K20 go kart > srt-4 go kart
I just read this entire thread and I only have one thing to say. The 3000GT VR-4 was originally meant to compete with the Supra TT, 300ZX TT, and RX-7 TT, which it completely failed at. Its funny how it was said that it can beat any stock Civic in a race. I would certainly hope so as its original price tag was about 5x that of a Civic of the same year. Is the VR-4 a great looking car? Yes Is the VR-4 the performance car it was meant to be? No Would a stock VR-4 get walked by a stock K20 swapped Civic? Probably. I’m not trying to start up a new debate, I just thought this was funny.
The Vr4 was meant to compete on a “marketing” level with those cars, yes. However, your information is incorrect about it failing against the others. There was no race bewteen those cars as far as performance goes. The Vr4, Supra, and 300ZX all came out with relativaly identical peformance specs and they were all sold for around the same price. The reason you see more Supra’s and RX-7’s is that they have a much larger and cheaper aftermarket than our cars. Every one of the prementioned cars are something special because they were all limited production, not so much for the Rx-7 but the other three were.
The Vr4 is eveything it was meant to be, including heavy, its major downfall. However a 90’s era car with AWD AWS Twin Turbo’s 320BHP and the looks it has, it was way ahead of its time. And according the posted quarter times a stock K20 swapped into a civic without nitrous would lose by almost a second to my car. But weve already had this discussion. I just wanted to defend my car expecially when you said it, “completely failed” against its competitors back in the day. Thats nieve and incomplete.
Actually a stock type r k20 swapped into a hatch, STOCK k20, will run mid 12s all day long
Here we go, did I say Type R in my sentence? Ummm, nope
Please explain both of these statements.
The only thing the stock 3000gt VR-4 compared in was 1/4 mile times to those cars. I remember a Car and Driver review of all of them and the 3000gt ranked last with the 300zx barely above it. Theres a reason why there are 0 gt300 or gt500 cars based on the 3000gt platform. Its stock curb weight and ridiculous initial price, despite it being similarly priced to its competitors, tended to lead people away from it.It was definitely ahead of its time with the active-aero, AWD and twin turbo platform. And I have seen great numbers out of 3000gt’s. I was only comparing stock to stock as far as all around performance. Tuned 3000gt’s can produce great numbers and performance, and its a shame that the aftermarket is so limited for them.
Aftermarket is getting better but not sure why people emphasize the weight. I am not saving it is light but the Supra is god of the streets and 3000GT is a fat pig yet like 300LBS or so seperates the two. Why? AWD/AWS/etc… I don’t understand that logic.
Everyone has their opinion and I am very criticial of the 3/S but are you really using Car and Driver to make your comparison? I love the MotorTrend that said it maxed out at 150MPH with a 1G 3/S TT. :lol:
Mark IV Supra : 320HP/315ft/lbs : 1/4 mile, 13.1 @ 109: Curb weight, 3505
97-99 3000GT VR4 : 320HP/315ft/lbs : 1/4 mile, 13.5 @ 105: Curb weight, 3770
Nissan 300ZX : 300HP/283ft/lbs : 1/4 mile, 13.8 @ 101: Curb weight, 3550
Mazda Rx7,3rd Geb : 290HP/243ft/lbs : 1/4 mile, 13.9 @ 102: Curb weight, 2550
According to stock specs on each car, I dont know how anyone can say any of these cars can’t compare to the others. The VR4, the heaviest, has the 2nd fastest 1/4. Two dont have as much HP as the VR4. The ONLY reason you dont see VR4’s as much as you do the other three is very simple. They have a tiny, tiny aftermarket. If we had the market that Nissan has or Toyota, you can bet your ass we would be right up there.
109? 105? Exactly why you can’t trust any of that information. Those traps speeds are inflated and do not represent what that car can do with an average drive or even a better than average driver.
Also, take a look at the stock vs stock dyno’s of the 4. The 3000gt has a weak powerband when compared to the others stock. This is the end of my argument. My opinion still stands that a stock 3000gt cannot beat a k20 swapped civic in a 1/4 mile.
- Drivetrain loss?
- 307TQ at 3K and 300HP at 5K. Not too bad? The power does drop off due to the very small turbos
- Stock 3S vs a swapped Civic? Weird comparison.
No argument here. I rarely see a stock car on any of these platforms so not sure why the emphasis.
The only reason for the stock argument was because of the previous statements claiming that a stock 3000gt could beat k-20 power’s civic in the 1/4. And the dropoff is what I was referring too on the dyno… but like I said, I’m not here to argue.
the fuckin K20 comes in a Integra Type-r(DC5) in japan (same motor i have) ok so thank you.
so what you may have proved LKSi wrong about your car sucking against the Supra, RX-7 and 300zx, but your car will not beat a K20 swapped civic, my car’s not even tuned with K-Pro and has a SMALL shot of nitrous when i ran the 13.1…if i had K-Pro it would have given me the same little bit of extra power the nitrous did and i would have run the 13.1 on a stock K20 running as it should in a civic.