Honda CR-Z

[Axel]

UGLY AS SIN

[OldSkoolToys]

Originally Posted by S2KtoFT86

You are obviously missing something here, quite possibly because you are new to this forum. I have compared my S to the FT on a few occasions and have been told, "you can't compare the two because the FT has not been out on a track with a company like Amuse, ASM, etc." However, you all are doing the exact same thing with the Type R CR-Z, without any technical data whatsoever. Pot meet kettle.

Alright alright, I'll stop bustin' your chops. It was part fun anyways.

Besides, I enjoy the fact that Honda, simultaneously, is coming out with a car inspired by the CR-X. Its obvious they wanna play with Toyota again.

The original CR-X and the AE86 were known competitors in the 1600cc classes (Japan at least) back then.

Edit: That is humorous though (with whats going on up there with the FD). I don't know if you realize, but RX-7's have been known for superb handling since they were first produced. Handling is kind of Mazda's cornerstone and can be seen with great balance with the Miata and the RX-8.

So your "straight-line" mentality towards an FD is kind of lolable.

[Lexicon101]

So... am I to understand that you wouldn't call that raging, S2K?
You don't have to use allcaps to be totally up-in-arms about something some losers on the internet said, and.. well, it appears that they've gotten you.

It's well-known that this car is a joke. I won't say anything about the Type-R version, because I don't know anything about it.. it's a rumor, and even if it were planned for production, we have NO data on it. Front-wheel-drive isn't as fun, sure.. but if you're not planning to do donuts in the parking lot or race some asshole on the touge, I don't see a problem with a WWD DD. I can agree with you about the RWD assholes on this forum... I'd prefer a RWD myself, but I'm quite partial to four wheels and an engine (or even two wheels and an engine).
All that aside, there are better DDs out there. Hell, if you're looking for fuel economy, get a geo metro XFI. We used to get about 50-53 MPG in one of those, back in the day. If you're looking for sporty, get a MS3. If you're looking for... well, whatever you're looking for.. there's probably something better than this.
I'm not saying it's horrible, because there's no way to know that.. but I am saying that there are better ways to go.

[S2KtoFT86]

Originally Posted by Lexicon101

So... am I to understand that you wouldn't call that raging, S2K?
You don't have to use allcaps to be totally up-in-arms about something some losers on the internet said, and.. well, it appears that they've gotten you.

It's well-known that this car is a joke. I won't say anything about the Type-R version, because I don't know anything about it.. it's a rumor, and even if it were planned for production, we have NO data on it. Front-wheel-drive isn't as fun, sure.. but if you're not planning to do donuts in the parking lot or race some asshole on the touge, I don't see a problem with a WWD DD. I can agree with you about the RWD assholes on this forum... I'd prefer a RWD myself, but I'm quite partial to four wheels and an engine (or even two wheels and an engine).
All that aside, there are better DDs out there. Hell, if you're looking for fuel economy, get a geo metro XFI. We used to get about 50-53 MPG in one of those, back in the day. If you're looking for sporty, get a MS3. If you're looking for... well, whatever you're looking for.. there's probably something better than this.
I'm not saying it's horrible, because there's no way to know that.. but I am saying that there are better ways to go.

Sigh, for the last time, read what the thread title says. There is a seperate thread regarding the stock CR-Z. This is about the Type R.

[Axel]

Someone who seriously attempts to defend any version of the CR-Z as worth the money for any purpose (looks, fun, handling, performance, mpg) deserves to be bitch slapped to wake up.

And anyone on here, including our resident , who attempts to talk a potential Type R CR-Z version up (as opposed to an FT-86) would have to be the bigggest a..hole to think they wouldn't raise the ire of 90% of the forum members.
So give it up. You just keep digging yourself a bigger hole.

(there... I've run out of emoticons..)

[S2KtoFT86]

Originally Posted by Axel

Someone who seriously attempts to defend any version of the CR-Z as worth the money for any purpose (looks, fun, handling, performance, mpg) deserves to be bitch slapped to wake up.

And anyone on here, including our resident , who attempts to talk a potential Type R CR-Z version up (as opposed to an FT-86) would have to be the bigggest a..hole to think they wouldn't raise the ire of 90% of the forum members.
So give it up. You just keep digging yourself a bigger hole.

(there... I've run out of emoticons..)

Yeah, my bad for stating my opinion because it differs from yours. Seriously, this forum is just becoming a fanboi site in the worst way.

I don't know where I was talking the CR-Z up as opposed to an FT. Again, if you bother to read what I posted, you would see that I stated time and time again that I have my S2000 to satisfy my RWD sports car needs. That is in opposition to the FT. Not the CR-Z. The CR-Z would again, as stated previously, be a nice DD as I've got a RWD car already. Again, kthxbai.

Furthermore, I am fully prepared to defend my opinion against all comers. I won't simply state my opinion and run away. This is the internet after-all, and I have to keep the Computer Warriors at bay.

[Axel]

Originally Posted by S2KtoFT86

the CR-Z would again, as stated previously, be a nice DD as I've got a RWD car already. Again, kthxbai.

and what you can't seem to get is that we have stated previously, time and time again, is that if you have the mentality to consider choosing the CR-Z (in any guise) over the FT-86 especially as a daily driver... well, forum decorum prevents my honest opinion of your sporting attributes.

and yes... you can have the last word... feel free... and FT-86 enthusiasts will hopefully ignore your gibberish for what it is... and we'll go back to exploring the joy we anticipate the FT-86 will be.

My hope is that you'll move over to a CR-Z forum and leave us alone.

Here's one for you... http://www.crzforum.com/

If you like I can pre-register you there... S2KtoCRZ... it's not taken. They'll love you over there... I guarantee it.

[fernan2]

Originally Posted by Axel

If you like I can pre-register you there... S2KtoCRZ... it's not taken. They'll love you over there... I guarantee it.

that's got to be the funniest thing i have read all week!

[vh_supra26]

Originally Posted by OldSkoolToys

Edit: That is humorous though (with whats going on up there with the FD). I don't know if you realize, but RX-7's have been known for superb handling since they were first produced. Handling is kind of Mazda's cornerstone and can be seen with great balance with the Miata and the RX-8.

So your "straight-line" mentality towards an FD is kind of lolable.

[vh_supra26]

I don't see why this car needs to be affordable. Thats what the FT-86 is for.

I'm hoping this hybrid sport car will be more like a MR2 or Supra (FTHS) replacement.

[Midship Runabout]

Originally Posted by S2KtoFT86

I stated time and time again that I have my S2000 to satisfy my RWD sports car needs.

not to be a douche, but why are you here then?

[S2KtoFT86]

Originally Posted by Dixie Normous

not to be a douche, but why are you here then?

I was here to discuss this potential car but I'm fine not being associated with this forum anymore. Most cannot seem to discuss cars in a meaningful way, especially with those who disagree with them (fanbois). It's just hilarious and sad in a way that people who disagree with the masses are treated this way but I guess that's the way it is on the internet. It'd be a boring place if we all agreed.

You guys stated your opinion that you thought the CR-Z would suck, I merely stated I could appreciate it in Type R trim with 200hp. I was challenged on my opinion and I defended myself for said opinion. Kind of lame that most can't accept someone's opinion and appreciate it. I continue to receive personal attacks given this (attention whore this, etc) yet I never attacked anyone personally.

You can hate Honda all you want, I could care less, that's your opinion, but to attack someone for having a different opinion shows an incredible lack of respect. I am more than happy to remove myself from this "club" if that's the way potential owners can act, so that you can have a club of clones that don't disagree on anything. Maybe that will be more comfortable for you all.

[fernan2]

i love hondas! specially the S2K.

2007 Honda S2000 Specifications
ChassisBrakes F/R:ABS, vented disc/discTires F-R:215/45 R17 - 245/40 R17Driveline:Rear Wheel DriveEngineType:Inline-4Displacement cu in (cc):131 (2157)Power bhp (kW) at RPM:237(177) / 7800Torque lb-ft (Nm) at RPM:162(220) / 6800Redline at RPM:8000ExteriorLength × Width × Height in:162.2 × 68.9 × 50.0Weight lb (kg):2855 (1296)PerformanceAcceleration 0-62 mph s:<6.0Top Speed mph (km/h):n.a.Fuel Economy EPA city/highway mpg (l/100 km):20/25 (n.a.)
Base Price: 2007 Honda S2000 - $34,250 (last update: 2/21/2007)

[vh_supra26]

we should lay off on S2KtoFT86 for a bit