Re: why are European cars better than everyone else's???

Discussion in '2003 BMW Z4 3.0i' started by tiger005, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. they don't and BMW's are the worst.<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. read my post on the first page.

     
  3. why are European cars better than everyone else's???

    Personally, I think European sports cars are overrated. Japan dosen't even make sports cars (until you poor a ton of money into them). What makes European cars so great? A study done by the Wall street journal showed that the average European car's reliablility is just above the US's........but not much. I wish I had the article, but it was counting the number of returns for warranty work that dealerships had. Japanese cars, of course, were the most reliable. Anyway, trends over the last 20 years show that the margin of breakdowns is closing between European and American cars, and that in about 3 years, if trends continue, they will be the same (and American and Europeans are closing on Jap cars as well). Anyway, where I started to go with this was that European cars aren't all that great. They don't get that great gas mileage, they tend to be slow until you get over the $100,000 mark, and, with the exception of the Italian cars, the styling tends to be boring!! Tell me a car that is comparable in price that will match the base Vette?? Even better, tell me a car comparable in price that will match the Trans Am, Camaro SS, or Mustang Cobra in performance?? How bout the Viper?

    OK, the first car someone is going to mention is the M3, but before you do make sure you look at the stats because I already have. Next thing you're going to say is that European cars handle so much better on the track. I don't know......maybe they do. I do know that there's a certain point when you're coming out of a corner where you're going to need low end torque and hp and without that you're not going to win a race no matter how welll you negotiate corners. Not only that but what happens in the straight away or more importanat in the US......from light to light?? Hats off to the Europeans for their interior, though I'm really not much for creature comforts. I just don't see the value so somebody please explain why I should buy everyone saying European cars are the best.

    This car looks alot like a S2000. I don't think BMW copied them, but BMW could've done MUCH better. BMW built this car for professional men who are too busy to worry about performance and are going through their second childhood.
     
  4. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from SuprJames</i>
    <b>Personally, I think European sports cars are overrated. Japan dosen't even make sports cars (until you poor a ton of money into them).</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Sorry for being so picky, but there's just one thing that boggles me about your argument:

    What does that sentence about Japan have to do with the rest of it? (Just that sentence, though... where you compared them it's fine.)<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Gimme Fuel</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from SuprJames</i>
    <b>Personally, I think European sports cars are overrated. Japan dosen't even make sports cars (until you poor a ton of money into them).</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Sorry for being so picky, but there's just one thing that boggles me about your argument:

    What does that sentence about Japan have to do with the rest of it? (Just that sentence, though... where you compared them it's fine.)</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    the three leading car producers are the USA, Japan, and European companies so naturaully if you comparing European cars to every other major car producer you HAVE TO include Japan
     
  6. I am terribly bias towards European cars. I hate japanese cars with the exception of a very small few which are over priced anyway (the evo VII, NSX and GT-r)

    The Europeans design cars better than any other producers. The physical appearence is always better that the Japs and Americans, and the engine technology is years ahead of the rest. The Japanese do make some excellent internal components and gadgets but the are produced mostly by companies like Sony, or Panasonic, rather than Honda, Mitsubishi or Toyota.

    Who can compete with the decades apon decades of motoring experience from European companies such as Mercedes-Benz and BMW and who can compete with the Itallians for motorcar design. Nobody.
     
  7. I'd say that its american cars which are overated, everyone loves all these big square V8 powered cars but they all look the same, sound shit, look shit and drive shit.

    I'd say that european cars are the best allround cars you can get, British Cars have style and luxury, French cars are small and nippy, German cars are well built, Italian cars are generally high performance cars.

    Japanese have some fast cars, but most are very basic, cheaply built cars, however they are usually very reliable.<!-- Signature -->
     
  8. I guess everyone has there own opinions about styling. I think most European cars, again with teh exceptions of the exotics, look rather boring and plane. I'll admit that most of our "regular cars" are pretty boring, but I think we have some pretty sweet looking sports cars (and muscle cars if you dont' consider them sports cars). I serioiusly don't think that US engines are behind in techonology. I follow, especially GM engines closely, and I can tell you there are some great things out there. GM has a V12 that was put in to the Cien Concept that creates 750 hp and 450 ft. lb. of torque and gets 18-25 mpg. with the power on demand system (half the cylinders shut off when not needed). The LS6, with 405 hp and torque to match, gets 19-28 mpg!! That's better gas mileage than the V6 M3 with 333 hp. I think Europeans have the US beat in their Transmissions and some of their drivetrain componets. I think the US and Europe is about equal in frame and suspension design. I think the US's biggest problem is that we only implement our good ideas on a few select cars (Vettes, a few Caddys, some Lincolns, and a few other cars).
     
  9. Oh, and by the way I actually like BMW and Porsche (my two fav. European companies). I'm not saying European cars aren't quality because they really are. Just don't see the value in them unless luxury is that important. Having sat in a BMW (a 328i....nothing special) and a 98' Vette I don't FEEL the difference. Admittedly the interior looks nicer in the BMW. Then again I'm only 5'8" and someone fatter and taller might be uncomfortable in the Vette. Still don't like the Z4. I've ridden in a few Porsches also but too old to really compare.
     
  10. Its a lot of personal preferance. Exterior styling, interior quality, raw acceleration, handling.

    I like european cars because i think they look way better then american cars on the exterior, are undoubtedly nicer on the interior, they've got great acceleration compared to most american cars with the exception with a very select few (vette, viper (which is made by dodge...owned by DaimlerChrysler which is in Germany), and some mustangs) and german cars for the most part have better handling.

    Also with the more expensive european cars they are a lot more rare then even the american exotics like the viper. And WAY ...WAY more rare then the corvette which you see on like every street corner.

    American cars are great performance for the money, a lot of the development of those cars go into improving their numbers instead of their technology and handling. They also don't have to deal with import fees and tarrifs.

    As for Japanese cars, i love em, because they are pretty much dirt cheap to begin with. Then if your the kinda person who wants that kinda power you can pretty much build up the car you want it to be built. You can customize the suspension, the engine, the interior for not that much money. Not to mention stock japanese cars will run pretty much forever. Even the NSX will run up into the high 100k+ miles without many problems.

    If your looking for raw eye popping straight away power, and you don't have a Mr T style budget a corvette will give you the best bang for your buck of almost any car in production.

    If your looking for style, luxury, and great performance and you have a few briefcases full of spare change then a european car would be great.

    and if you like ricers, and want to do your own thing, then get a japanese car and do pretty much whatever the hell you can afford with it.
     
  11. LOL, love the "Mr. T" style budget. That's great. Anyway, I agree except that Benz does not own Chrysler. It was a merger. Neither purchased the other. They work together now as one company. The Viper was around WAY before Chrysler became DaimlerChrysler.
     
  12. I can't believe someone had the nerve to compare a mustang, a trans am, and a camaro to european sports cars. The original author wasn't sure if european cars handled better in corners... THEY DO. Almost without exception, there are a few cases where an american car handles well, like the z06 for instance, but wtf. A highly unbalanced camaro ss with a heavy ineffiecient v8 will not even compete on a track with any bmw, merc, or audi.. if any european car is within 75 hp of any american muscle car, it will outrace it on a track guarenteed. And no, NASCAR isn't racing.<!-- Signature -->
     
  13. Ouch, I'm going to have to agree here. European cars, are all around brute monsters. I hate to say it, but Euro cars are designed for VERSATILITY. The roads in Europe are small, curvy things hence, car makers must design cars that handle. In Europe, the speed limits are considerably higher (Autobahn esp) and cars must have the top end speed from small engines to keep from being a hazard. Acceleration is a given with top speed arguement because merging on those retardedly fast highways without pickup is just ignorant. And finally, European cars must have descent gas milage because gas prices in Europe are outrageous. Yes, $3.00/L for fuel in a good amount of places. Again, the European versitility is shown.

    Now, with that said, compare situations in the other major car producing regions. In America, muscle cars are designed to be fun and fast on primarily straight roads. Also, drag racing is a major part of American culture, and of course, car companies are going to react with monster V8s and big block engines. But where is the European handling? Not there (of course, with some exceptions). In Japan, cars are not made to be high performance racing cars. Cars are designed to get from point A to point B in relatively safe manner. And cheap construction is a must so that the market can expand into "poor" areas. With that in mind, I must reiterate that Japanese cars are NOT designed to be racecars (of course, with some exceptions).

    Here is the simple breakdown of my arguement for those people who do not want to read my WHOLE posting:

    1. American cars are designed for a.)fun, b.)straight racing (drags) c.)culture
    2. Japanese cars are designed for a.)economy b.)simplicity(economy again)
    3. European cars are designed for a.)curvy roads (handling), b.)fast highways (top speed and acceleration), c.)fuel efficieny

    Of course, there are exceptions (and I can not say that enough). There are all luxury, sport and economy car types in major car producing operation. The above listed is the gist of the reasons why cars developed the way they did in each country and why European cars are overall better than any other type of car. I'm sorry muscle car freaks and ricers.

    PS: Euro cars are more efficient than American or Japanese cars.. check European hp/L vs American and Japanese... a trend will develop.<!-- Signature -->
     
  14. "Tell me a car that is comparable in price that will match the base Vette?? Even better, tell me a car comparable in price that will match the Trans Am, Camaro SS, or Mustang Cobra in performance?? How bout the Viper?"

    Okay...here I go:
    1) Renault Sport V6 Clio (V6 [230-240 horse], mid engined hatchback that is insane fun...and insane itself..course...we don't get it)
    2) Caterham Superlight series (Take an old Lotus Super 7, and rebuilt with modern technology. Weight is typically around 1500 pounds and less, typically using 100-220 horse power engines. The Superlight 3) R500 does 0-60 in 3.2-3.3 seconds)
    3) Ariel Atom (Another flyweight like the Caterham, same horsepower range, and about the same weight. Very different look)
    4) TVR Tamora (I believe fits into the cost margin for Camaro/Firebird...and DEFFINATELY into the price margin of the Vette/Viper catagory.)
    5) Lotus Elise 111S

    Oh....and the first three there aren't comparable in price really...feh, far from it: They underscore the Camaro/Firebird/Vette/Viper line up so bad, it hurts to admit it.
    Oh, and don't simply convert british pounds to american dollars, that is B.S. Hell, look at the fact that the price difference between cars in the U.S. and in Canada is about 1000-5000 differance in most cases.
    But...admittedly, the Caterham, and Ariel are limited production cars, produced by hand.
    §cotty
     
  15. the reason why the corvette is so cheap is the following reasons.

    it is a pushrod engine. that technology is super old. to conserve weight it uses a plastic/resin body. have you seen the inside? tat's why. its a good car, but its not as refined as its european counterparts.

    in addition i question that very wall street journal statistics' survey. do you know how they did the sruvey? after all american car companies actually lose money on their cars and only generate profit from the suv and truck sales. due to obvious reasons suv and trucks are more easily built to reliable standards. the camaro ss is being pulled out of the market becaues it did not sell well and it was not reliable as was the entire f-body series of cars. and of course the term reliability itself is subject to controversy because reliability of what? engine? parts? i mean some consumers get overly picky about things, i know because my father is this way. also what about abuse? european cars are geneerally faster and perhaps people push them harder? has that not factored in. i warn against statistics as they generalize too much.

    my reply to hte m3 is that the m3 actually matches the speed of hte standard v8 corvette (check your stats) and although the advertised price in a magazine for a z06 vette if you look around in dealerships you will not find a z06 vette for 46k, but it will instead be around 50-60k.

    in addition, high end power in a road racing course is by far more beneficial than low end torque. i will guarantee you this becuase most road racing cars are geared specially to take advantage of higher rpms thereby you have quicker throttle response and more power. low end less power. high end more power. its as simple as that.

     
  16. in addition, i forgot to post this, if you've ever seen the streets of europe you'll realize that the vast majority of hte cars there are sub-compacts. fiats and what the like. so you see that little bit of statsitical information is really quite useless.
     
  17. the common perception is they are better, but it's not an actual fact. yes, in some catagories, the euro cars accel. however they are not the best at everything when it comes to cars.<!-- Signature -->
     
  18. Alright, let's compare the Camaro SS to the BMW E46 M3. I don't know the price or what the E46 designation is but I see that it's hp is about 10 hp more than the standard M3's. All these stats are off this sight so correct anything that I'm wrong about. (by the way, not a big Camaro fan, but have a point to prove)

    Alright, we'll start with the engine. So far the arguments in favor of European cars have been because they produce great hp and good gas mileage.

    BMW M3 Camaro SS

    343 hp 325 hp
    16-33.6 mpg 19-28 mpg

    Not bad for either car. Keep in mind that the Z06 gets the same mileage with 405 hp out of the same 350 block. Alright, another argument is that US cars are heavy.

    BMW M3 Camaro SS

    3,461 lb. 3,439 lb.

    Look at that, the Camaro is lighter. Alright, how bout performance. There's really, other than the quarter mile, only one way to compare performance since I don't have any comparable track numbers.

    BMW M3 Camaro SS
    0-60 mph in 5.1 0-60 in 5.5
    topspeed 155 mph. topspeed 155 mph.

    OK, that's one place the BMW wins hands down (acceleration). The Camaro SS's price is right around $35,000 and the M3's price, I'm pretty sure, is above $55,000. The Camaro is not even close to the US's best example of engineering. Probably why the F-body was dropped. I understand that European cars are much more comfortable, but there's $20,000 price difference. Also, you Euro lovers act like this car's never seen a track. There are several racing series that race Camaros, Trans Ams, and Mustangs on road courses. I don't really follow them, but I see them on Speedvision so I know they're out there (I think it's the Trans Am series or something maybe).

    I like the M3. It's luxurious, dependable, and has great performance. I'd buy one if I had alot of money and needed an everyday driver. I just think that it's overrated as are many European cars.
     
  19. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>the reason why the corvette is so cheap is the following reasons.

    it is a pushrod engine. that technology is super old. to conserve weight it uses a plastic/resin body. have you seen the inside? tat's why. its a good car, but its not as refined as its european counterparts.

    in addition i question that very wall street journal statistics' survey. do you know how they did the sruvey? after all american car companies actually lose money on their cars and only generate profit from the suv and truck sales. due to obvious reasons suv and trucks are more easily built to reliable standards. the camaro ss is being pulled out of the market becaues it did not sell well and it was not reliable as was the entire f-body series of cars. and of course the term reliability itself is subject to controversy because reliability of what? engine? parts? i mean some consumers get overly picky about things, i know because my father is this way. also what about abuse? european cars are geneerally faster and perhaps people push them harder? has that not factored in. i warn against statistics as they generalize too much.

    my reply to hte m3 is that the m3 actually matches the speed of hte standard v8 corvette (check your stats) and although the advertised price in a magazine for a z06 vette if you look around in dealerships you will not find a z06 vette for 46k, but it will instead be around 50-60k.

    in addition, high end power in a road racing course is by far more beneficial than low end torque. i will guarantee you this becuase most road racing cars are geared specially to take advantage of higher rpms thereby you have quicker throttle response and more power. low end less power. high end more power. its as simple as that.

    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    The Wall Street Journal Stats, as I mentioned, came from the number times customers returned their cars for repairs to the dealership. This was only for the US. I seriously doubt that a person buying a European car is going to abuse the car more than a person buying an American car. European cars are more expensive and therefore attract the type of clientelle that probably don't drive as if they've got nothing to lose. Also, Camaros actually have some of the most expensive insurance, because the type of people that buy them usually rag em out until they wrap it around a telephone pole (teenagers).

    The Z06 is just under 55 grand. I think that this car's stats, despite it's engine having "super old" techonology, speak for itself. Great efficiency coupled with amazing hp. As for the body, it's actually a complicated mixture of chemicals that cost much more to form than sheet metal. The interior is inferior to the M3's, but costs have to be cut somewhere I suppose. The 05' Vette is supposed to address this problem while keeping the price down.

    High end hp is great if you have a light car capable of keeping extremely high speeds around corners (you have racing slicks). Also depends alot on the track you're at. Your average street car would benefit much more from low end hp and torque unless the majority of your driving is on the highway.
     
  20. right exactly its from ooncusmer. how many consumers did they survey form what population sector what group of people. the list is quite endless in this silly pursuit of simple facts. also what about volvo, and other not so top of the line european products?

    as for the m3 demonstration you gave me. the m3 ties the stadard quarter mile with the chevy corvette. its obviously more luxurious because its really a sport sedan, and quite a fast one as i might add. the corvette is a full fledged sports car. i guarantee you that the engine plays a big factor in terms of price.

    all in all if you can afford a car in the 50k range, gasoline is not of extreme importance to you in the first place. engine efficiency occurs when maximum air flow and maximum gasoline mix for maximum combustion. a pushrod engine simply cannot withstand exceptionally high revs, so that is the reason why its power peak is lower in the range.

    besides you give only a few cars in your comparison. the camaro ss is already obsolete as is the entire f-series line. in terms of power the only cars i can really think of that is affordable on the american side are

    ford mustang
    camaro and other f-bodys (obsolte)
    corvette

    and another point in observation is that this is again only in america. a corvette would be almost unattainable in europe or japan. after all in british pounds there are quite a few cars that can compete with a corvette.

    Lotus 340R
    TVR Griffith, Tuscan (ithink), and cerbera,
     
  21. right. so you seem to place an awful lot of restriction. did you read my forum post? in most OTHER countries meaing NOT united states the corvette costs WELL OVER 100k. now if the corvette cost 100k that really is piss poor. for the 50k you pay in the united states, that is pretty good, but you missed the point of that post.

    really last time i checked the ferrari 360 modena pulls 400 horsepower from a 3.6 L v-8. its 0-60 time is 3.9 and quarter mile 12.2. hardly slow by any means. on the track it is even toe to the porsche 911 turbo. a 456GT is more comparable to a mercedes benz and a 550 about the same. if you can afford one these cars tune ups shouldn't be a problem.

    i dont like lamborghini. i like the styling its a cool car but there are many other cars i'd take in its place. i will agree with you here that it is not one of the better exotics.

    correct if you read my other post you will see that i duly noted that old american cars are amongst the most reliable! does this mean that because of this we should simply stick to this old technology and never progress? seems that is what you're saying.

    in addition there seems to be a common misperception that larger displacment guarantees more fuel consumption. efficiency is meausured in a small range between optimal revs when cylinder head flow design allows maximum airflow and velocity matched with optimum fuel delivery for optimum combusion. in a car that revs high (as in a ferrari) if you will look at a dynojet, you will notice that this peak is rather high. therefore it is more efficient so to speak in high rpm range rather than low rpm range. this is not to say it is not efficient as low rpm, because it is when compared to other cars in the same range. therefore there is a buildup because the cylinder head design allows a great deal of air, therefore a proportionaitly greater deal of gas must be added to make optimum power. efficient does not correlate with FUEL efficiency which is simply mpg. efficiency simply means less energy is wasted. in addition an extremely fast 0-60 time is wholly unnnecessary in a road race. this explains why a honda s2000's mpg matches that of a corvette z06. a corvette has the potential with higher technology to make a great deal more horsepower without the use of its old technology and unrefined suspension. i am not saying that the corvette is a bad car i have driven one as well as a dodge viper, porsche targa T, and a few other high flying cars.

    in addition you forget many european cars are 1)limited in quantity 2)hand built 3)employ a lot of technology which is later stripped away for racing and pretty advanced 4)is made of extremely expensive materials. in addition for ferrari there is little chassis sharing and entire new engines, suspensions, and technologies are developed with new cars. not so with other car companies where chassis, and many off the shelf parts are modified or shrewn together.

    do you call the viper a good buy then? its only good for straight line acceleration. a stock viper can't even match a lotus elise on nurburging or even a stock r33 skyline. pathetic.

    i was just wondering what is the z06's nurburing time. this is not sarcastic. i was just really wondering if you knew.

    again read this entire post and see if it changes anything.
     
  22. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>right. so you seem to place an awful lot of restriction. did you read my forum post? in most OTHER countries meaing NOT united states the corvette costs WELL OVER 100k. now if the corvette cost 100k that really is piss poor. for the 50k you pay in the united states, that is pretty good, but you missed the point of that post.

    really last time i checked the ferrari 360 modena pulls 400 horsepower from a 3.6 L v-8. its 0-60 time is 3.9 and quarter mile 12.2. hardly slow by any means. on the track it is even toe to the porsche 911 turbo. a 456GT is more comparable to a mercedes benz and a 550 about the same. if you can afford one these cars tune ups shouldn't be a problem.

    i dont like lamborghini. i like the styling its a cool car but there are many other cars i'd take in its place. i will agree with you here that it is not one of the better exotics.

    correct if you read my other post you will see that i duly noted that old american cars are amongst the most reliable! does this mean that because of this we should simply stick to this old technology and never progress? seems that is what you're saying.

    in addition there seems to be a common misperception that larger displacment guarantees more fuel consumption. efficiency is meausured in a small range between optimal revs when cylinder head flow design allows maximum airflow and velocity matched with optimum fuel delivery for optimum combusion. in a car that revs high (as in a ferrari) if you will look at a dynojet, you will notice that this peak is rather high. therefore it is more efficient so to speak in high rpm range rather than low rpm range. this is not to say it is not efficient as low rpm, because it is when compared to other cars in the same range. therefore there is a buildup because the cylinder head design allows a great deal of air, therefore a proportionaitly greater deal of gas must be added to make optimum power. efficient does not correlate with FUEL efficiency which is simply mpg. efficiency simply means less energy is wasted. in addition an extremely fast 0-60 time is wholly unnnecessary in a road race. this explains why a honda s2000's mpg matches that of a corvette z06. a corvette has the potential with higher technology to make a great deal more horsepower without the use of its old technology and unrefined suspension. i am not saying that the corvette is a bad car i have driven one as well as a dodge viper, porsche targa T, and a few other high flying cars.

    in addition you forget many european cars are 1)limited in quantity 2)hand built 3)employ a lot of technology which is later stripped away for racing and pretty advanced 4)is made of extremely expensive materials. in addition for ferrari there is little chassis sharing and entire new engines, suspensions, and technologies are developed with new cars. not so with other car companies where chassis, and many off the shelf parts are modified or shrewn together.

    do you call the viper a good buy then? its only good for straight line acceleration. a stock viper can't even match a lotus elise on nurburging or even a stock r33 skyline. pathetic.

    i was just wondering what is the z06's nurburing time. this is not sarcastic. i was just really wondering if you knew.

    again read this entire post and see if it changes anything.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Trust me, I understand what makes an engine efficient. I've been spent a year trying to build the most efficient engine possible for my Vette with the money I have. Runner lengths, heads, cam lift and duration, fewer moving parts (could only curb this one by adding roller rockers and a roller lifter cam on my Chevy small block),injector size, fuel/air mixture, and the right size exhaust (contrary to popular belief, larger is not always better). I just don't see how you can see the Vette engine as inefficient. I know that fuel economy and low end hp and torque are not qualities of a great road race car. Those cars spend the majority of their time in triple digit speeds though. For somebody who isn't going to see a track, low end torque and hp is usually ideal for a regular car.

    I've only had the pleasure of riding in a Corvette (a C5, own an 82' Stingray), but I don't think anyone can say the Vette's suspension is unrefined. Compared to what? A Viper is a good example of unrefined suspension especially when coupled with the amount of engine under the hood.
     
  23. do you guys think you could put a little more into your posts? only 20-30 lines is a bit short winded, dont you think?<!-- Signature -->
     
  24. haha well it has been an interesting debate spectacle with mr.suprjames.

    the corvette is one of the best cars that america has to offer as an american car and i respect it a great deal. it is a rather good engine, but you can't possibly say that it is the most efficient engine out there. europeans in at least what they offer in the states (along the lines of bmw, benz, porsche, ferrari) represent a group of elitist car groups. it is not to say that other companies cannot compete, because they can, but there is a good deal reason why their products cost a lot.

    i was just wondering but i thought the c5 vette was expensive to modify. i saw like some exhaust systems for it for like 3000 bucks. i've driven a pre-gen z06 and it handled pretty well, i rather liked it. i liked the bit about the exhaust size as it is the sutpid perception that a 5 inch exhaust is the best thing out there.

    what do i own?
    a nissan 240sx with sr20de engine swap and t28/t3 turbocharger (main mods worth noting.)

    i plan on purchasing either a used audi TT quattro and modifying that or a toyota mr-s and trying to do a jgtc 300 makeover type thing.
     
  25. OK, I'm assuming, as anyone with reasonable intelligence would, that the number of returns came from each car manufacturer's own numbers. It wouldn't make sense to do a survey because finding a sample population big enough to represent all the new car purchases evenly from each country would be nearly impossible. After they got those figures they proportioned the number of returns to the amount of US automobile sales from American, European, and Japanesse car manufactuers. I'm sure Volvo was included as were alot of crappy American and Asian cars. What does it matter?? The stats said that European cars were better than American cars as far as the number of returns go (Japan was best). I just said that American cars have been gaining on European cars in reliability for the past 5 years.
    YOu're right, the Camaro is gone now. So let's compare the M3 to the 390 hp 03' SVT Cobra. You can look up the stats. US car manufactuers are in a state of change for the better. The Z06 is just a sampling of what the US can do with cars under $60,000. I just think that European cars (most exotics too) are overrated and that companies like GM and Ford are going to raise the bar for them in the near future (by 05'). Just my humble prediciton.
     

Share This Page