This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

Discussion in '2002 Caterham Seven Superlight R300' started by Natenator, Oct 12, 2002.

  1. The Tiger has better looks.Wadda you all think?
     
  2. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    doesn't the Tiger do 0-60 in about 2.5 sec ?
     
  3. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    What are you nuts?? Start a race from Dover and the Tiger would be in Liverpool by the time the R300 got to see London...lol!
     
  4. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    Easy: The Caterham.
    1) To me it looks better....considering it looks almost EXACTLY like the original Super-Sever (Caterham holds the rights to the Super Seven name, they bought the rights from Lotus when Lotus dropped the car)
    2) It has better build quality
    3) Much more reliable (2 high strung engines, and a reversed transfer case......riiight)
    4) It is much lighter and responsive. I will take handling over brute speed and accelleration any day, and that is what cars like this are MEANT to be about. Not going stupidly fast in a straight line.
     
  5. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    hey i would take the R500 - good quality as well the as nurburgring record for fastest lap in a production car. or have ne of u heard of the dax rush mc? 750hp/tonne from a turbocharged(with adjustable boost) 1.5L hayabusa engine and it weight 500kgs, pure madness.
     
  6. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    The R500 doesn't hold the record for Nurburgring. Both the GT2 and the Zonda are ahead of it.
     
  7. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    dunno what has the production car record. it'd have to b summet powerful cos of the long straights and thats what caterhams lack, and aero dynamics. anywayz the tiger vs the caterham. r500 and tiger would b better. the tiger would win on straight line speed cos it has 2 engines and over 300 bhp. tiff broke the 0-60 time record held by the ford rs200 of 3.1 seconds. he got 2.9, but went for the 100 mph record but the engine blew. shit
    anyone heard of the viking? saw it in a mag once, its (i think) an american caterham lookalike that weighs 800 kilos with 600bhp maxda rotory engine innit. it looked daft with a massive rear wing onit.
    aslo i luv that dax rush m/c. its proper bo i tell thee
     
  8. #8 Yorkshire born Yorkshire bred, Jul 9, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  9. #9 Yorkshire born Yorkshire bred, Jul 9, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    this is the viking srx-7. weighing 700kilos and having 600bhp it has power to weight ratio of 857bhp per tonne.
    <A HREF="http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/? http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=19717" TARGET="_new">http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/? <A HREF="http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=19717</A>" TARGET="_new">http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=19717</A></A>
     
  10. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    I'd take this. I think it's sexier.
     
  11. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    sexier?!? EWWW! i wouldn't jack off on a car...
    Anyway i'd take the Tiger Z100 Mk1, it rocks evrything in acceleration, G-force forever!
     
  12. Re: This vs 2001 Tiger z100 mk1

    Actually a special edition radical holds the record now <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>
     

Share This Page