| Cal3000 |
09-12-2017 11:46 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSunrise
(Post 2977361)
You realize you went from arguing that:
(1) the FR-S has the "same" passing power as an econobox (which the 60-80 mph and 60-100 mph numbers show is wrong)
to
(2) the FR-S doesn't have enough power to put multiple carlengths on an econobox from 60-80 mph.
|
When i said "same", I meant they are in the same tier. I mentioned that a few posts back.
And the definition of passing power is 50-70 or 60 to 80 mph. ;)
Those times that were provided proves there is minute differences. 4.8 seconds to 5.6 seconds delta does nothing for you. Both my statements are true. ;)
If you think I'm BSing, go out and evaluate it yourself. ;)
The people arguing and saying that this has better passing power probably never pay attention or come across those that try to challenge you. ;)
And it's basic physics. The car has no torque. If the car had a decent torque curve, with the initial heavy throttle, you would feel a heavy tug and are able to cover more ground in a shorter distance and time span. That's what acceleration is. Hence why 50-70 and 60-80 is important. ;)
I already explained drive ratios between cars. The FRS has a better 60-100 time because eco cars literally go into overdrive around 80mph in general. The frs still has the powerband and gearing advantage; that why you see a 5 second difference between them. ;)
That's why I keep on saying you will reach over 100 mph before you can cut them safely. ;)
My boosted frs has a better power weight than my evo by a lot, yet the evo can sling shot itself past any car with ease since it has a lot of available torque down low.
The stock frs has the passing power of an eco box.
|