much love to s2k's but...

WANGAN_X · Post by **WANGAN_X** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:33 pm

please to be filling in the blanks, i don't wanna strike out

Mr Kleen · Post by **Mr Kleen** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 10:31 pm

WANGAN_X wrote:please to be filling in the blanks, i don't wanna strike out

Typical Day at the Office: II

WANGAN_X · Post by **WANGAN_X** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:22 pm

Hi-C

but a sunfire only has two doors

onelove · Post by **onelove** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 12:36 pm

S2000s are slow.

They are nice cars but I have beaten them mercilessly, first in my Firebird and now with my STi.

All that purist crap is the same elitist nonsense you hear Boxster owners spouting when they get trounced by some kid in an SRT-4 or Fox body Mustang.

Purpose built, balanced, experienced driver, blah, blah......blah

Meh.

Buy a car with some balls and you won't have to write revisionist nonsense like this.

Mr Kleen · Post by **Mr Kleen** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 12:53 pm

it's a niche vehicle: it's very good at it's focused mission. no one auto is expert at everything. why do car owners want to get in a pissing contest over everything?

just get a car you like and drive it. who cares what anybody else thinks about it...

onelove · Post by **onelove** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:08 pm

The only cars that might be considered "good" at everything are BMW M series sedans. They are fast, comfortable, relatively practicle, handle well and are competitive in motorsports.

Unless of course it's raining....

But I digress.

I honestly question the motives of somebody who writes an article like that, out of the blue.

I mean, why denigrate Evos (or any other car) if you have an S2K?

I think this guy truly resents his purpose built sports car getting beat up on by econobox based cars, so he has to craft these specious arguments as to why his Honda is "superior."

It's truly laughable.

sirwilliam · Post by **sirwilliam** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:28 pm

onelove wrote:The only cars that might be considered "good" at everything are BMW M series sedans. They are fast, comfortable, relatively practicle, handle well and are competitive in motorsports.

Unless of course it's raining....

But I digress.

I honestly question the motives of somebody who writes an article like that, out of the blue.

I mean why denigrate Evos (or any other car) if you have an S2K?

I think this guy truly resents his purpose built sports care getting beat up on by econobox based cars, so he has to craft these specious arguments as to why his Honda is "superior."

It's truly laughable.

I like the whole "relatively practical" part. If you consider the M series, why not the AMG series and audi makes an "S" and "RS" series

onelove · Post by **onelove** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:41 pm

Yeah AMG and Quattro GMBh are also manufacturers of "do it all" cars.

I'd also add Subaru and Mitsubishi to the list of manufacturers who build practical street cars that are the basis of succesful race cars.

Mr Kleen · Post by **Mr Kleen** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:35 pm

the M car's can't do it all. because, for me, doing it "all" means being able to make the monthly payment. like I said, NO single car is good at everything. engineering an automobile is a series of trade-offs.

onelove · Post by **onelove** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:06 pm

Point Taken

sirwilliam · Post by **sirwilliam** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:54 pm

If only there was a lotus exige w/ AWD and comfy seats that you wouldn't lose your fillings in.

DCAWD.com

much love to s2k's but...

S2000s are slow

The only cars that might be considered "good" at

Re: The only cars that might be considered "good"

Yeah AMG and Quattro GMBh

Point Taken