|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,975
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,975 |
My Uncle's Citroen Xsara Picasso has a digital realtime MPG and miles till empty. I found IT amusing because going slight downhills at 80 MPH he was getting 140+ mpg 
1992 Ford Escort LX-E
-Tracer LTS spoiler
-GT Grille
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 735
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 735 |
Originally posted by sigma:
Hm. An MPG gauge. Never seen such a thing.
I had one in an '82 Mercury station wagon I had. It was amusing to watch...... 
Oh yeh, nice car!!
Last edited by gearhead; 10/25/04 01:54 AM.
'99 Sport TropicGreen,Duratec, SVT exhaust, Brembo rotors, Ceramic pads, K&N filters(oil & air), Alpine CDM7874, Polk DB570 speakers front and rear. Fog light mod. 50% Formula One tint.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 322
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 322 |
Originally posted by TheGreatOne:
There's tons (I mean tonnes) of G35's and 350Z's running around Vancouver. Lots of richkids modifying them too, and everytime I hear that engine at WOT, it sounds like a dying mule being flogged. Not particularly revvy either, but that would be alright if it made it up in gobs of torque, none of that.
I don't understand "best engine designs ever" either ? Why ?
It's a nice car, but for the money I'd probably get something else (off the top of my head, the new Legacy turbo, Mazda6). But I'd never spend that much on a new car. If I'm still in Vancouver in two years or so, I'm pretty sure I'd be looking at a used Mazda 6 GT Sport 4cyl.
That's just me however, enjoy the car man !
Not sure why you think the VQ doesn't have torque. I gave up my SVT in favor of a G35. 260 lb-ft of torque is nothing to sneeze at, and a nice step up for me coming from the SVT. Heck, the Legacy GT (the other car I seriously cross shopped) doesn't have as much torque (250 lb-ft). And for '05 the VQ in the G35 gets a bump to 298HP in the 6MT (the auto goes to 280HP/270 lb-ft).
And when it came down to price, it was VERY reasonable (got into the G35 for less than a Legacy GT LTD would have run me). Luv me my RWD.
Jim H
95 Midnight Blue SE (Sold)
98.5 Silver Frost E1 (Sold)
'04 G35 6MT Sedan (Sold)
'01 Aurora 4.0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 443
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 443 |
Originally posted by Yankees25:
Not sure why you think the VQ doesn't have torque. I gave up my SVT in favor of a G35. 260 lb-ft of torque is nothing to sneeze at, and a nice step up for me coming from the SVT. Heck, the Legacy GT (the other car I seriously cross shopped) doesn't have as much torque (250 lb-ft). And for '05 the VQ in the G35 gets a bump to 298HP in the 6MT (the auto goes to 280HP/270 lb-ft).
And when it came down to price, it was VERY reasonable (got into the G35 for less than a Legacy GT LTD would have run me). Luv me my RWD.
Yankee, NICE CAR man. You got any pics?  I agree, torque is in no short supply as compared to the old SVT. It's nice not to have to go over 3k-4k RPMs to get any kind of oomph out of the SE-R, unlike the SVT. Short example, usually when I leave my development, which exits onto a highway right after the crest of a hill, I get on the throttle a little bit since cars come flying over the hill at a good clip. In the SVT, I'd have to wind it up to 5k RPM in 1st/2nd to get going. In the SE-R, I can keep it well under 4k RPM and get better acceleration short shifting the 6-spd, due to the torque.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 759
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 759 |
Looks like a nice car, good luck with it. I would have personally opted for a 2005 MazdaSpeed 6, G35, IS300, Maxima in that order The Evo and STI are nice and all, but sacrifce too much comfort for my personal taste. I'll stick with the Contour, which is paid off and still runs great. A 3.0 project this Winter will help the SVT keep up with the latest gen sport sedans. Later
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 759
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 759 |
Originally posted by cjbaldw:
I agree, torque is in no short supply as compared to the old SVT. It's nice not to have to go over 3k-4k RPMs to get any kind of oomph out of the SE-R, unlike the SVT. Short example, usually when I leave my development, which exits onto a highway right after the crest of a hill, I get on the throttle a little bit since cars come flying over the hill at a good clip. In the SVT, I'd have to wind it up to 5k RPM in 1st/2nd to get going. In the SE-R, I can keep it well under 4k RPM and get better acceleration short shifting the 6-spd, due to the torque.
Yeah, same experience in our Spec-V. Nice to be able to short shift without bogging the engine. The 6-speed it a little too closely spaced for my taste, but it adds to the torque multiplication so it is fun
|
|
|
|
|
