Originally Posted by Model Citizen (Post 1894644)

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....aybach-628.jpg

weight reduction is easy

Originally Posted by kcam86 (Post 1893430)

Its definitely fair to compare the two with in context, just how our cars are compared to many things that double and sometimes triple the cost of our car. I think the point everyone is arguing is the s2k is simply a better platform(double wishbone suspension front and back,50/50 weight dist, 40more hp, and forged internals but all this with inflation taken into effect makes it like a 43k car in todays dollar) but it came with higher price point. The thing people are missing is how much we get for a meagre 25k and thats the best part of our car.

Originally Posted by Jaden (Post 1894379)

You can be getting 300-400hp with a turbo kit and some TRD springs on an FRS and remove 200 more lbs with some deletes etc.. on the FRS... that's only putting you at a little over $30K...

The v6 mustang is gonna weigh at least 3400lbs(IF you can get rid of 200lbs)... you could reasonably get 420-500 hp with a S/C or turbo charger, that's gonna put you right at $30K

5K more in mods ain't gonna get the handling there and the 20-100 hp more wouldn't get it there even in a straight line.

If we up the budget to 40K or 50K you're looking at weight reduction down to 2300 lbs and coilovers, etc... on the frs...

Now when I look at this, I'm not talking about running 20 lbs of boost or 200 shots of nitrous.

I look at what can reasonably and safely be done on pump gas ALL the time.

that means, no electric S/C's, no nitrous, etc...

Given 40 or 50K budget, it's reasonable that a new short block with slightly lower compression and stronger internals could be used on the twin, safely allowing for 14-19 psi boost upping the HP into the high400's or even 5-600 hp range.

So I don't see how this is even a question. RWD with light weight, with low introduction price, makes the twins awesome goodness for tuners...

Jaden

Originally Posted by Dammod (Post 1895018)

With decent tires, differnt front pads and a good driver, this otherwise stock 86 lapped "The Ring" quicker then a Porsche 993 911 with a mediocre driver

Originally Posted by Dammod (Post 1895018)

Apologies if this was posted already but its worth a repost regardless.

With decent tires, differnt front pads and a good driver, this otherwise stock 86 lapped "The Ring" quicker then a Porsche 993 911.

:bow::bow::bow:

Originally Posted by kcam86 (Post 1895369)

So the general consensus is when comparing our car to cars a, b, and c that our is more aboutbthe driving experience and less about the numbers. With that being said comparing our car based on car magazines and car stats is like comparing our sex life to porn we jerked off to as teens.

Originally Posted by Model Citizen (Post 1895543)

As teens?

Like as in that stopped with the teen years?

Originally Posted by Sleepless (Post 1895269)

That is quite hard to believe as the 993 is beautifully balanced, has a huge grip out of corners advantage and a power advantage.

I was on the track with a 993 just the other day. It was on inferior tires to the 235 AD08's so the BRZ had more traction in the corners. He was a superb driver (watch his car control in the corners). Overall, my BRZ (stock except for pads and tires a the time) was faster, but in this case it wasn't a fair matchup due to the tires. But was fun!

http://youtu.be/OZhwBjPIpgY