MR2 Turbo VS Honda Integra Type R???

[luthor1]

...and we don't understand why you HAVE to have everyone else agree that there are better cars out there to drive than an MR2 Mk2 Turbo?

We either do or do not agree with you, and you're not happy with us not agreeing? That's not really fair is it?

EarL has an experience, he likes his DC2 and has spoken of his experiences with it. I also have experience in a DC2 and have driven a stock one, and one that's been spoon modified, and my MR2, and Gersens' old MR2 Turbo were both faster, in a straight line, and round track. It's our experience of it! From rest to 100mph there were 10's of yards of difference. Under braking the DC2 was better by less than half a car, at apex speed they were *IDENTICAL*, on exit they were identical apart from the slow corners where the RWD was faster.

If you don't enjoy driving them, fine, but don't say a slower car is better, because it's not comparable, and we don't agree! WE DONT AGREE!!

We could have another A.I.D.Y moment, EarL, fancy a drive-out??

[Tiamat]

no more than you

I just don't understand the issue with accepting that there are better drivers cars out there than the mk2 turbo.

But conversly, won't some people consider the MK2 MR2 to be a better drivers car? Not everyone wants the same thing from their car, not everyone drives the same. Its just a matter of opinion.

[Lauren]

But conversly, won't some people consider the MK2 MR2 to be a better drivers car? Not everyone wants the same thing from their car, not everyone drives the same. Its just a matter of opinion.

I can see i'm wasting my time commenting here.

[Tiamat]

But conversly, won't some people consider the MK2 MR2 to be a better drivers car? Not everyone wants the same thing from their car, not everyone drives the same. Its just a matter of opinion.

I can see i'm wasting my time commenting here.

Why are you wasting your time?
What you consider to be a driver's car may not be the same as everyone elses. Thats the sole point.
Do you not agree?
If not then its very arrogant to assume that because you consider it to be a better driver's car then everyone else should.

[Lauren]

Why are you wasting your time?
What you consider to be a driver's car may not be the same as everyone elses. Thats the sole point.
Do you not agree?
If not then its very arrogant to assume that because you consider it to be a better driver's car then everyone else should.

Yes I understand that. But i have driven a fair few different cars adn therein lies the rub. Its when you drive other cars that you realise how other cars are flawed.

Malcolm, please do not make the mistake of thinking I 'assume'.

[luthor1]

Maybe we've all driven other cars and we still have the same opinion?

[Tiamat]

Why are you wasting your time?
What you consider to be a driver's car may not be the same as everyone elses. Thats the sole point.
Do you not agree?
If not then its very arrogant to assume that because you consider it to be a better driver's car then everyone else should.

Yes I understand that. But i have driven a fair few different cars adn therein lies the rub. Its when you drive other cars that you realise how other cars are flawed.

Malcolm, please do not make the mistake of thinking I 'assume'.

If you understand that, then why put the earlier post of "I can see i'm wasting my time commenting here." when clearly you could see the point I was making?

I happen to agree, there are better cars out there. Are they affordable? Are they practical to use everyday?

You correctly highlighted that some people have a problem accepting there are better driver's cars out there than the MK2 MR2, yet you don't appear to accept that to some people, the MK2 MR2 might be a better drivers car in their opinion.

Its all about personal experience, taste and wants.

[EarL]

...EarL, fancy a drive-out??

If I'm down that way bud, I'd be happy to. Thanks for the invite.

[Azzazzel]

Hello everyone hope your all well... I'm relatively new here

and ummmm I drive an erm 2 series volvo(just so embarassed to admit I drive a mk2 rev3 turbo). Oh bu88er I done it now, i guess i should get it over with and say "my car is rubbish "

here goes ...... my car is rubbish

[EarL]

Hello everyone hope your all well... I'm relatively new here

and ummmm I drive an erm 2 series volvo(just so embarassed to admit I drive a mk2 rev3 turbo). Oh bu88er I done it now, i guess i should get it over with and say "my car is rubbish "

here goes ...... my car is rubbish

...random or what?

[Munnsy]

hahahahahahahahhahahaha

talk about
Well atleast you admitted it bud, takes BALLS
Fair play and oh welcome to the club

And as for this topic, well what can you say??

[Si_Crewe]

Must admit, I'm not a fan of the whole V-Tec thing in general. TBH, I don't even like the TVIS on my n/a.
I don't like engines that you have to rev the nuts off of to get the best out of. It means you have to drive more aggresively and give the transmission a harder time to get the best out of it.

Most people seem to think the best thing about turbo's is the outright power but that doesn't appeal to me.
The best thing about a turbo car, IMO, is the ability to (for example) drive around a sweeping corner in 4th then drop down into 3rd, come on boost and ride the power out of the corner.

In a V-Tec car you need to be doing stupid RPM in a lower gear to stay in the power and that means it's easier to break grip and it increases the chances of a fluffed gear change upsetting the balance of the car, breaking the grip or (at worst) damaging the engine.

You can afford to be more relaxed in a turbo car and still go fast, IMO.

[Lauren]

The trouble is though, if you don't have to work a bit to get the most out of something there is less satisfaction in it. Therein lies the difference I think.

[luthor1]

Unfortunately, you are both wrong on this occassion. The best engine is the GT3RS engine. Don't get excited Lauren! I'm not the biggest fan, but the engine is sweet as a nut. Power everywhere, and loads of it. No lag, no thrashing required.

[Si_Crewe]

The trouble is though, if you don't have to work a bit to get the most out of something there is less satisfaction in it. Therein lies the difference I think.

The difference in what? Opinion?

The disadvantages of a high revving engine such as the increased potential for breaking traction or unbalancing the car aren't really opinion. They're factual.
If they weren't, F1 cars would still have manual gearboxes.

[Lauren]

The trouble is though, if you don't have to work a bit to get the most out of something there is less satisfaction in it. Therein lies the difference I think.

The difference in what? Opinion?

The disadvantages of a high revving engine such as the increased potential for breaking traction or unbalancing the car aren't really opinion. They're factual.
If they weren't, F1 cars would still have manual gearboxes.

I think you are missing the point.

No, the difference is that its more involving and more satifying when you have to work an engine to get the best out of it. Throttle response is also vitally important. There is no point bringing F1 cars into the equation.

Actually a turbo car with its inherent dollop of torque is in many ways more likely to break traction as the power delivery is not as linear as an NA.

[splashnatz]

No, the difference is that its more involving and more satifying when you have to work an engine to get the best out of it. Throttle response is also vitally important.

but that is just your opinion. YOU find it more rewarding and satisfying to have to work the engine to get the best out of it. YOU find throttle response to be vitally important.

You always try and put your opinion over as if it is the word of god. it isn't , its just your opinion. (not saying you shouldn't post your opinion up, just that you always try and rubbish people whose opinions differ)

[Azzazzel]

...random or what?

scratch away.... scratch away

some people might say that its a more balanced view of the mk2 tubby... after all there are better cars out there...

[Lauren]

but that is just your opinion. YOU find it more rewarding and satisfying to have to work the engine to get the best out of it. YOU find throttle response to be vitally important.

You always try and put your opinion over as if it is the word of god. it isn't , its just your opinion. (not saying you shouldn't post your opinion up, just that you always try and rubbish people whose opinions differ)

Please do not take my point of view as a direct criticism of yours. I merely put my point of view across to add balance to the discussion. I illustrate pretty clearly why i don't agree with a given person's viewpoint. I can do no more than try to present a well thought out counter-viewpoint.

[stiggy]

The MkII MR2 is flawed by a lack of overall feedback, and inherrant understeer.

Feedback is a fair cop, easily solved though by removing the power steering.

But "inherrant understeer".... what? Mine'll only do that if I take a xxxx line through a bend, which is a driver fault more than the car.