Quote:
Originally posted by Maputosimon
drums @ rear for a modern 'sports' car?? hmm.
Nothing more needs saying! 
Erm...guys...pls remind me what the guys on the Ford Probe Owner's Club call "ford"?@-
Tony.....you've opened a deeeeeeeeep can of worms! he he he
|
oh dear oh dear, i live you all you boys to play for a while and i come back to find 4 pages worth of discussion on this matter.
Sold my Seat GTI 3 2 weeks ago and picked up my RS on Tuesday!
well it is quicker than my Seat GTI and the Seat could keep up with Stueys MX6 so i think a standard RS would win easily!
By the way lads if you want to start quoting figures then do it properly, what they say on paper means nothing!
BHP means nothing if the car is heavy, it is the BHP/Tonne which really counts!
RS Turbo only wieghs 980KG (Series 2)
that is 133BHP Divided by 980KGX1000= 135BHP/Tonne
Mazda MX6 (quite a heavy car i believe) say around 1300KG
Works out as 126BHP/Tonne
Not much of a difference but enough to beat one of the lights!
also remember a chip, intercooler, exhaust and induction kit gives much bigger gains on a turbo aspirated car than a N/A car!
turbos are much cheaper and easier to tune than N/A, come on now we all know forced induction is much better! (apart rffmo lag of cours LOL!!)
So if you did the same mods to a Mazda MX6 as you would to a RS Turbo then the RS would win hands down, some figures for you guys (these are quoted of course in a perfect world!)
Mazda RS Turbo
Chip 15BHP 30bhp+
Intercooler N/A 15bhp
Exhaust 5BHP+ 10BHP+
Induction Kit 3BHP+ 7BHP+
Uprated Turbo N/A 40BHP+
Fair to say that the same upgrades on each car, pretty much proves that the RS wins out on standard form and also when modified!
Muhahahahaha
(Please this is not too be taken in offence, light hearted banter is all i mean by this, if anyone takes this seriously and goes off on one they need to get out more!!!)
Cheers
@-
