saxo 1.1
Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
-
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 6:50 pm
- Location: Ipswich, Suffolk
Re: saxo 1.1
A standard VTS has 107/ft-lbf and Mr2 (rev3 +) about 220ish
-
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 6:50 pm
- Location: Ipswich, Suffolk
Re: saxo 1.1
anywhere between 5.2 - 5.7s for a standard rev3
-
- IMOC Organiser
- Posts: 1414
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:03 pm
- Location: lincolnshire
- Contact:
Re: saxo 1.1
oh i agree in gear speed and masses of torque make it so much better, but going by figures and facts i have,
no my vts wasnt cammed (i dont think)
full breathing mods and every scrap of weight i didnt need removed.
people really dont appricate how much difference weight makes, how ever losing weight did have a negetive reaction at high speed as it didnt feel planted and solid.
as for the power to weight ratio mine based on 215bhp as its 20 years old so its bound to have lost a little over the years and miles.
i matched that to my 0-60 time and it worked out @166.76bhp/tonne thats a standard car thou, as you say once you start modify thats when they get interesting
i know comparing a standard car against modified car is hardley fair but thats what info i have avalible at the moment,
mr2 turbo is whole different lot of car and can quite happily cruise at speeds way beyond double the speed limit for mile after mile, where as the french xxxx has bits dropping of it and fear of death
no my vts wasnt cammed (i dont think)
full breathing mods and every scrap of weight i didnt need removed.
people really dont appricate how much difference weight makes, how ever losing weight did have a negetive reaction at high speed as it didnt feel planted and solid.
as for the power to weight ratio mine based on 215bhp as its 20 years old so its bound to have lost a little over the years and miles.
i matched that to my 0-60 time and it worked out @166.76bhp/tonne thats a standard car thou, as you say once you start modify thats when they get interesting
i know comparing a standard car against modified car is hardley fair but thats what info i have avalible at the moment,
mr2 turbo is whole different lot of car and can quite happily cruise at speeds way beyond double the speed limit for mile after mile, where as the french xxxx has bits dropping of it and fear of death
Re: saxo 1.1
Thats what I was getting at though, that some of the little hot hatch fanboys (wasnt saying you were one) dont get. They are quick, no doubt, but the Tubby and pretty much any other car like it is in a whole different league of fast.
God I miss the power of my tubby
God I miss the power of my tubby
Re: saxo 1.1
un1eash wrote:It still puzzles me why people in clearly slower cars try and race. I just dont see the point anymore in trying and let them get on with it most of the time.
Had a 2002 Corsa 1.2 have a go at some lights the other night after football. I just thought why even try as i pulled away with them in my rear view mirror.
No point in competing if you know you're going to win, always got to be some element of doubt or be the underdog. Makes it more interesting. If you know you can beat them, why bother? You wasting petrol, if you might lose and there's the driver's skill involved then why not go for it?
I am going to live forever, or die trying!
Re: saxo 1.1
Tiamat wrote:un1eash wrote:It still puzzles me why people in clearly slower cars try and race. I just dont see the point anymore in trying and let them get on with it most of the time.
Had a 2002 Corsa 1.2 have a go at some lights the other night after football. I just thought why even try as i pulled away with them in my rear view mirror.
No point in competing if you know you're going to win, always got to be some element of doubt or be the underdog. Makes it more interesting. If you know you can beat them, why bother? You wasting petrol, if you might lose and there's the driver's skill involved then why not go for it?
On the other hand, why go for something you know 10000000% that you wont get near?
If I was in the tubby and fancied picking on some one it would be a Scooby, Evo, may be an older 911.
I wouldnt be picking a fight with an SLR, Carerra GT or Mercielago though
Re: saxo 1.1
Tiamat wrote:or be the underdog.
Thats what made my 200hp/tonne Charade Turbo so much fun.
I could go chasing "giants" and get the satisfaction of them looking in their rear view mirror puzzled, trying to work out what this tiny little black non descript hatchback hanging off their tail was as they tried in vain to disapear into the sunset.
Most larger cars with less than 300hp couldnt shake me.
Best was chasing a brand new(back in 2006) Carrera 4. He just couldnt put any meaningful distance between us. Eventually we both pulled over for a chat and he couldnt believe I only had 993cc under the bonnet
Miss that car alot
Re: saxo 1.1
When you say couldnt shake you, what sort of speeds do you mean?
I find these sorts of nippy cars fade out at the higher ends of the scale.
I find these sorts of nippy cars fade out at the higher ends of the scale.
-
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 6:50 pm
- Location: Ipswich, Suffolk
Re: saxo 1.1
matt_mr2t wrote:When you say couldnt shake you, what sort of speeds do you mean?
I find these sorts of nippy cars fade out at the higher ends of the scale.
LOL - tbh even on the off change of a 400bhp saxo turbo, being quicker than my car, wouldn't bother me in the slightest, end of the day whos got a french saxo and who has a genuine semi super car well known mr2 turbo
Re: saxo 1.1
matt_mr2t wrote:When you say couldnt shake you, what sort of speeds do you mean?
I find these sorts of nippy cars fade out at the higher ends of the scale.
With the Carrera there was nothing in it from 10mph to 80mph or so. After that he would start to pull away.
We had a play over about 15 miles of mixed dual carriageways and b-roads. Through the B-Roads I was able to stay closer than on the dual carriageways.
On the DC we kept swapping front to back and going again. Even had a side by side launch which he edged by about a car length initially, then again past 80 started to pull away noticeably.
Re: saxo 1.1
willfinch36 wrote:a genuine semi super car well known mr2 turbo
PMSL
I'm assuming you missed the out of that sentence...
-
- Posts: 2645
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:23 pm
- Location: thornton cleveleys, blackpool
- Contact:
Re: saxo 1.1
RedMR² wrote:240bhp not much faster than a 60bhp saxo 1.1!? hmmmm
thats a bad tubby running ill or it has square wheels and is dragging an anchor behind it
1993 GT TURBO
Re: saxo 1.1
ekona wrote:willfinch36 wrote:a genuine semi super car well known mr2 turbo
PMSL
I'm assuming you missed the out of that sentence...
Alot of people think MR2's are supercars. For the record, I'm not one of them.
-
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 6:50 pm
- Location: Ipswich, Suffolk
Re: saxo 1.1
matt_mr2t wrote:ekona wrote:willfinch36 wrote:a genuine semi super car well known mr2 turbo
PMSL
I'm assuming you missed the out of that sentence...
Alot of people think MR2's are supercars. For the record, I'm not one of them.
SEMI
Re: saxo 1.1
Who's got a semi?
-
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 6:50 pm
- Location: Ipswich, Suffolk
Re: saxo 1.1
Marf wrote:Who's got a semi?
me, over a 1.1 saxo supercar
Re: saxo 1.1
You must be easily impressed?
I best not mention lexarse lights
I best not mention lexarse lights
-
- Posts: 2645
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:23 pm
- Location: thornton cleveleys, blackpool
- Contact:
Re: saxo 1.1
It would only look bad if they got them lined up. As it is it looks very bad.
-
- Posts: 2645
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:23 pm
- Location: thornton cleveleys, blackpool
- Contact: