flobert wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:15:05 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Matt Ion wrote:
>>
>>>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <rc-dnTUEbNHSOQjZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>>>> "Spaz" <yea@right.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>And here it is!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...er=upcomingMS3
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>BYE BYE, HONDA FIT!!!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Let's see, they have exactly zero in common except the idea that
>>>>they're both front wheel drive, 5 door Japanese cars.
>>>>
>>>>Why Mazdaspeed3 instead of WRX?
>>>
>>>
>>>I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
>>
>>i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
>>enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
>>matters more.
>
>
> They've come on a lot in 20+ years. Of course, i've neve seen a
> regular saloon described as better handling than a race-oriented car.

well here's the thing - the dealer let my buddy and i take the the car
out on our own [as in, unsupervised!!!] so you can guess what happened.
basically, we took it out on a canyon trail and redlined it for about
30 minutes. power, yep. brakes, ok. handling, blah. better than a
stock legacy, but still blah. hondas understeer at 9/10ths, but they
still handle better if you know what you're doing because you can use it
to gauge the degree of available traction.

i wonder how many people get to do /real/ test drives like that? [tip:
show up at about 5:30 on a sunday night when there's 5 other people in
the showroom looking at minivans and the sales dude wants to go home.]

 

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 21:37:25 -0400, "G-Man" <shoot.digital@gmail.com>
wrote:

>My son and I test drove a WRX a few months ago when we were shopping for a
>new car for him for graduation.
>
>Fast? Oh yeah.
>
>But it was put together like the cheapo civic DX and even shutting the doors
>sounded tinny. The inside was nothing to write home about. I guess if you
>want raw power, it's for you. Personally I like a balance of both.

They're designed, based on the trim level/spec to be a road legal
track car. As such creature comforts that add weight, like the
soundproofing, and all that, are taken out.

friend of a friend ran a hillclimb car (60's mini) - you had to wear
radio headsets inside your helmets to talk between the ocupants,
because it was too noisy otherwise. Thats how such cars are.

Drove a Metro 6R4 groupB rally car from the early/mid 80s a few yewars
back, you couldn't hear anything in that thing, and it was fast as
hell - 80's civic hatchback size, 450+hp, and 4WD. was banned from
rallys for being too fast and so too dangerous. At the time, they were
able to lap silverstone in them within about 10-15 seconds of the
formula1 cars. but noisy - hell yeah!

>
>He ended up getting an EX-V6 4 door Accord 6-Spd.
>
>G-Man
>
>
>"Spaz" <yea@right.com> wrote in message
>news:rc-dnTUEbNHSOQjZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> And here it is!!!!
>>
>> http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...er=upcomingMS3
>>
>> BYE BYE, HONDA FIT!!!!
>>
>

 

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 21:37:25 -0400, "G-Man" <shoot.digital@gmail.com>
wrote:

>My son and I test drove a WRX a few months ago when we were shopping for a
>new car for him for graduation.
>
>Fast? Oh yeah.
>
>But it was put together like the cheapo civic DX and even shutting the doors
>sounded tinny. The inside was nothing to write home about. I guess if you
>want raw power, it's for you. Personally I like a balance of both.

They're designed, based on the trim level/spec to be a road legal
track car. As such creature comforts that add weight, like the
soundproofing, and all that, are taken out.

friend of a friend ran a hillclimb car (60's mini) - you had to wear
radio headsets inside your helmets to talk between the ocupants,
because it was too noisy otherwise. Thats how such cars are.

Drove a Metro 6R4 groupB rally car from the early/mid 80s a few yewars
back, you couldn't hear anything in that thing, and it was fast as
hell - 80's civic hatchback size, 450+hp, and 4WD. was banned from
rallys for being too fast and so too dangerous. At the time, they were
able to lap silverstone in them within about 10-15 seconds of the
formula1 cars. but noisy - hell yeah!

>
>He ended up getting an EX-V6 4 door Accord 6-Spd.
>
>G-Man
>
>
>"Spaz" <yea@right.com> wrote in message
>news:rc-dnTUEbNHSOQjZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> And here it is!!!!
>>
>> http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...er=upcomingMS3
>>
>> BYE BYE, HONDA FIT!!!!
>>
>

 

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 21:37:25 -0400, "G-Man" <shoot.digital@gmail.com>
wrote:

>My son and I test drove a WRX a few months ago when we were shopping for a
>new car for him for graduation.
>
>Fast? Oh yeah.
>
>But it was put together like the cheapo civic DX and even shutting the doors
>sounded tinny. The inside was nothing to write home about. I guess if you
>want raw power, it's for you. Personally I like a balance of both.

They're designed, based on the trim level/spec to be a road legal
track car. As such creature comforts that add weight, like the
soundproofing, and all that, are taken out.

friend of a friend ran a hillclimb car (60's mini) - you had to wear
radio headsets inside your helmets to talk between the ocupants,
because it was too noisy otherwise. Thats how such cars are.

Drove a Metro 6R4 groupB rally car from the early/mid 80s a few yewars
back, you couldn't hear anything in that thing, and it was fast as
hell - 80's civic hatchback size, 450+hp, and 4WD. was banned from
rallys for being too fast and so too dangerous. At the time, they were
able to lap silverstone in them within about 10-15 seconds of the
formula1 cars. but noisy - hell yeah!

>
>He ended up getting an EX-V6 4 door Accord 6-Spd.
>
>G-Man
>
>
>"Spaz" <yea@right.com> wrote in message
>news:rc-dnTUEbNHSOQjZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> And here it is!!!!
>>
>> http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...er=upcomingMS3
>>
>> BYE BYE, HONDA FIT!!!!
>>
>

 

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:56:08 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
wrote:

>flobert wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:15:05 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Matt Ion wrote:
>>>
>>>>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In article <rc-dnTUEbNHSOQjZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>>>>> "Spaz" <yea@right.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>And here it is!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...er=upcomingMS3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>BYE BYE, HONDA FIT!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Let's see, they have exactly zero in common except the idea that
>>>>>they're both front wheel drive, 5 door Japanese cars.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why Mazdaspeed3 instead of WRX?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
>>>
>>>i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
>>>enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
>>>matters more.
>>
>>
>> They've come on a lot in 20+ years. Of course, i've neve seen a
>> regular saloon described as better handling than a race-oriented car.
>
>well here's the thing - the dealer let my buddy and i take the the car
>out on our own [as in, unsupervised!!!] so you can guess what happened.
> basically, we took it out on a canyon trail and redlined it for about
>30 minutes. power, yep. brakes, ok. handling, blah. better than a
>stock legacy, but still blah. hondas understeer at 9/10ths, but they
>still handle better if you know what you're doing because you can use it
>to gauge the degree of available traction.
>
>i wonder how many people get to do /real/ test drives like that? [tip:
>show up at about 5:30 on a sunday night when there's 5 other people in
>the showroom looking at minivans and the sales dude wants to go home.]

I did back in Jan, with a volvo v70r. turned up with a buddy 9a local
state patrol cop) and he got it on an unsupervised test. They're
actually looking into buying one or two for pursuit vehicles, so we
get on the interstate, with a pair of friends in marked cars, and
floor it - 135mph and the crown vics were tapped out - volvo was a
dream, and is limited to 155...(so if you saw 2 state trooppers, with
a black V70 between them flashing past you in Jan, here's a belated
wave :-)

 

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:56:08 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
wrote:

>flobert wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:15:05 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Matt Ion wrote:
>>>
>>>>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In article <rc-dnTUEbNHSOQjZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>>>>> "Spaz" <yea@right.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>And here it is!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...er=upcomingMS3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>BYE BYE, HONDA FIT!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Let's see, they have exactly zero in common except the idea that
>>>>>they're both front wheel drive, 5 door Japanese cars.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why Mazdaspeed3 instead of WRX?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
>>>
>>>i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
>>>enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
>>>matters more.
>>
>>
>> They've come on a lot in 20+ years. Of course, i've neve seen a
>> regular saloon described as better handling than a race-oriented car.
>
>well here's the thing - the dealer let my buddy and i take the the car
>out on our own [as in, unsupervised!!!] so you can guess what happened.
> basically, we took it out on a canyon trail and redlined it for about
>30 minutes. power, yep. brakes, ok. handling, blah. better than a
>stock legacy, but still blah. hondas understeer at 9/10ths, but they
>still handle better if you know what you're doing because you can use it
>to gauge the degree of available traction.
>
>i wonder how many people get to do /real/ test drives like that? [tip:
>show up at about 5:30 on a sunday night when there's 5 other people in
>the showroom looking at minivans and the sales dude wants to go home.]

I did back in Jan, with a volvo v70r. turned up with a buddy 9a local
state patrol cop) and he got it on an unsupervised test. They're
actually looking into buying one or two for pursuit vehicles, so we
get on the interstate, with a pair of friends in marked cars, and
floor it - 135mph and the crown vics were tapped out - volvo was a
dream, and is limited to 155...(so if you saw 2 state trooppers, with
a black V70 between them flashing past you in Jan, here's a belated
wave :-)

 

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:56:08 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
wrote:

>flobert wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:15:05 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Matt Ion wrote:
>>>
>>>>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In article <rc-dnTUEbNHSOQjZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>>>>> "Spaz" <yea@right.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>And here it is!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...er=upcomingMS3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>BYE BYE, HONDA FIT!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Let's see, they have exactly zero in common except the idea that
>>>>>they're both front wheel drive, 5 door Japanese cars.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why Mazdaspeed3 instead of WRX?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
>>>
>>>i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
>>>enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
>>>matters more.
>>
>>
>> They've come on a lot in 20+ years. Of course, i've neve seen a
>> regular saloon described as better handling than a race-oriented car.
>
>well here's the thing - the dealer let my buddy and i take the the car
>out on our own [as in, unsupervised!!!] so you can guess what happened.
> basically, we took it out on a canyon trail and redlined it for about
>30 minutes. power, yep. brakes, ok. handling, blah. better than a
>stock legacy, but still blah. hondas understeer at 9/10ths, but they
>still handle better if you know what you're doing because you can use it
>to gauge the degree of available traction.
>
>i wonder how many people get to do /real/ test drives like that? [tip:
>show up at about 5:30 on a sunday night when there's 5 other people in
>the showroom looking at minivans and the sales dude wants to go home.]

I did back in Jan, with a volvo v70r. turned up with a buddy 9a local
state patrol cop) and he got it on an unsupervised test. They're
actually looking into buying one or two for pursuit vehicles, so we
get on the interstate, with a pair of friends in marked cars, and
floor it - 135mph and the crown vics were tapped out - volvo was a
dream, and is limited to 155...(so if you saw 2 state trooppers, with
a black V70 between them flashing past you in Jan, here's a belated
wave :-)

 

Matt Ion wrote:

> >
> > Why Mazdaspeed3 instead of WRX?
>
> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day

Lets see, my laundry list for Impreza (including WRX):

1. shitty handling (can't feel where the car ends)
2. shitty 5sp transmission.
3. "hello retirement!" suspension (My Outback Sport rolls MORE with a
fat rear sway bar
than a Toyolet Malibu without, and mind you Malibu is not a sporting
car by any measure).
4. mediocre brakes

On Impreza without turbo:

5. shitty gear ratios

On the plus side there are gobs of traction anywhere. But Civic Si
should be no worse I
expect. And dispite the puny 139 ft.lbs of torque that beast does 0-60
in 6.5 sec
while my pigley that can theoretically crank out 166 ft.lbs does it in
8.4
See the part about shitty gearing above if you are still Imprezzed.

Granted, for WRX you probably would have so much power that you won't
care
how the car is geared. Properly or not you'd have plenty of power
anywhere
and can transport yourself pretty quickly. Having zero enjoyment in the
process.

So if a muscle car is in your future WRX fits the bill just fine. But
if you
have any brains left you may want to give a long and hard look to Civic
Si.

Dunno if the seats are bearable though. They were complete P.O.S. when
I test drove a civic 3 years ago and that was a dealbreaker.

 

Matt Ion wrote:

> >
> > Why Mazdaspeed3 instead of WRX?
>
> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day

Lets see, my laundry list for Impreza (including WRX):

1. shitty handling (can't feel where the car ends)
2. shitty 5sp transmission.
3. "hello retirement!" suspension (My Outback Sport rolls MORE with a
fat rear sway bar
than a Toyolet Malibu without, and mind you Malibu is not a sporting
car by any measure).
4. mediocre brakes

On Impreza without turbo:

5. shitty gear ratios

On the plus side there are gobs of traction anywhere. But Civic Si
should be no worse I
expect. And dispite the puny 139 ft.lbs of torque that beast does 0-60
in 6.5 sec
while my pigley that can theoretically crank out 166 ft.lbs does it in
8.4
See the part about shitty gearing above if you are still Imprezzed.

Granted, for WRX you probably would have so much power that you won't
care
how the car is geared. Properly or not you'd have plenty of power
anywhere
and can transport yourself pretty quickly. Having zero enjoyment in the
process.

So if a muscle car is in your future WRX fits the bill just fine. But
if you
have any brains left you may want to give a long and hard look to Civic
Si.

Dunno if the seats are bearable though. They were complete P.O.S. when
I test drove a civic 3 years ago and that was a dealbreaker.

 

Matt Ion wrote:

> >
> > Why Mazdaspeed3 instead of WRX?
>
> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day

Lets see, my laundry list for Impreza (including WRX):

1. shitty handling (can't feel where the car ends)
2. shitty 5sp transmission.
3. "hello retirement!" suspension (My Outback Sport rolls MORE with a
fat rear sway bar
than a Toyolet Malibu without, and mind you Malibu is not a sporting
car by any measure).
4. mediocre brakes

On Impreza without turbo:

5. shitty gear ratios

On the plus side there are gobs of traction anywhere. But Civic Si
should be no worse I
expect. And dispite the puny 139 ft.lbs of torque that beast does 0-60
in 6.5 sec
while my pigley that can theoretically crank out 166 ft.lbs does it in
8.4
See the part about shitty gearing above if you are still Imprezzed.

Granted, for WRX you probably would have so much power that you won't
care
how the car is geared. Properly or not you'd have plenty of power
anywhere
and can transport yourself pretty quickly. Having zero enjoyment in the
process.

So if a muscle car is in your future WRX fits the bill just fine. But
if you
have any brains left you may want to give a long and hard look to Civic
Si.

Dunno if the seats are bearable though. They were complete P.O.S. when
I test drove a civic 3 years ago and that was a dealbreaker.

 

jim beam wrote:

>> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
>
>
> i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
> enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
> matters more.

Perhaps. Depends on where and how you're driving. The thing I miss
most about my old GLC is the RWD for cornering on the dirt roads 'back
home' - you just can't power-slide in a FWD

 

jim beam wrote:

>> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
>
>
> i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
> enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
> matters more.

Perhaps. Depends on where and how you're driving. The thing I miss
most about my old GLC is the RWD for cornering on the dirt roads 'back
home' - you just can't power-slide in a FWD

 

jim beam wrote:

>> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
>
>
> i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
> enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
> matters more.

Perhaps. Depends on where and how you're driving. The thing I miss
most about my old GLC is the RWD for cornering on the dirt roads 'back
home' - you just can't power-slide in a FWD

 

Matt Ion wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>
> >> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
> >
> >
> > i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
> > enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
> > matters more.
>
> Perhaps. Depends on where and how you're driving. The thing I miss
> most about my old GLC is the RWD for cornering on the dirt roads 'back
> home' - you just can't power-slide in a FWD

Forgot to add, 4 wheel drifts in Impreza are controllable due to 50/50
torque split
between the axles. I guess I'll miss that if I get a Civic Si. You just
can't have it all...
Unless you get an Evo!!!

Controllable drifts? Check.
Razorblade steering precision? Check!
Decent shifter? Check.
Gobs of power? Check.
Affordability? Can't have it all after all.

 

Matt Ion wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>
> >> I love my Accord, but I'd take a WRX any day
> >
> >
> > i tested one of the early wrx's, and it didn't impress me. it's quick
> > enough, but doesn't corner like a honda. on balance, i think that
> > matters more.
>
> Perhaps. Depends on where and how you're driving. The thing I miss
> most about my old GLC is the RWD for cornering on the dirt roads 'back
> home' - you just can't power-slide in a FWD

Forgot to add, 4 wheel drifts in Impreza are controllable due to 50/50
torque split
between the axles. I guess I'll miss that if I get a Civic Si. You just
can't have it all...
Unless you get an Evo!!!

Controllable drifts? Check.
Razorblade steering precision? Check!
Decent shifter? Check.
Gobs of power? Check.
Affordability? Can't have it all after all.