Its a retarded kill

**JHayesLS1** · 03-20-2007, 05:07 AM

Honda sells so well because they have a great history behind them, they build quality cars like them or not. I think the ricers buy them because you can abuse the hell out of those little engines and they keep going. Bro you just need to slap some Mugen stickers on there and get you like 50 more horsepower.

**jmhvenom** · 03-20-2007, 05:09 AM

Ricers but them because you can get them for cheap. That is why the ricer crowd is younger, most of the time when people have money they will buy the nicer cars etc.

**4tun8** · 03-20-2007, 06:40 AM

or faster ricers~

**Wesman** · 03-20-2007, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by preston1980

I have to say, Wesman, your posts are very Factual sounding, but they are only your opinion. You are wrong about 2 things: 1 is, what v6 GM motor is more fuel efficiant than a Honda engine in its same class??
2 is: the whole maxed power crap you were yapping about, People mod the hell out of all engines, you can mod a 2.5 v6 just like you can mod a 3.8 v6, wether they are from GM or Honda. So do me a favor and smack your self in the face 2 times, 1 for every stupid thing you said in that post!!!!!!!!

You want examples?? Right here:

Family Sedans:

2006 Honda Accord V6: 20/29
2006 Chevrolet Malibu V6: 22/32

And not only is the Malibu's engine .5 Liters larger, but it also has one less gear to work with.

Sports cars:

2006 Honda S2000 2.2 237HP 4 cylinder: 20/26
2006 Chevrolet Corvette 6.0 400HP: 18/28

So the Corvette somehow gets the same average fuel economy, with 3.8 Liters more displacement, 4 more cylinders, 263 more HP, and weighing 300 more lbs. Do you want more proof so I can own you again??

I suggest you do some research before you talk out of your ass and try to call me out. Looks like you are the one who needs to be smacked

**jmhvenom** · 03-20-2007, 10:14 AM

Because Chevrolet lies about most of the ratings haha, I know my Camaro doesnt get what was advertised. Wait, maybe that was just because its not cool to drive it slow haha

**Wesman** · 03-20-2007, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by jmhvenom

Because Chevrolet lies about most of the ratings haha, I know my Camaro doesnt get what was advertised. Wait, maybe that was just because its not cool to drive it slow haha

Or maybe the government does the tests, not GM, therefore its impossible to lie about them?? Hmm, yea, didn't think of that did ya...

**jmhvenom** · 03-20-2007, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by Wesman

Or maybe the government does the tests, not GM, therefore its impossible to lie about them?? Hmm, yea, didn't think of that did ya...

Just like the 454 Chevelle only had 450hp? uh huh... lol

**4tun8** · 03-20-2007, 10:25 AM

As long as it's DETROIT MUSCLE IM HAPPY!

**preston1980** · 03-20-2007, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Wesman

You want examples?? Right here:

Family Sedans:

2006 Honda Accord V6: 20/29
2006 Chevrolet Malibu V6: 22/32

And not only is the Malibu's engine .5 Liters larger, but it also has one less gear to work with.

Sports cars:

2006 Honda S2000 2.2 237HP 4 cylinder: 20/26
2006 Chevrolet Corvette 6.0 400HP: 18/28

So the Corvette somehow gets the same average fuel economy, with 3.8 Liters more displacement, 4 more cylinders, 263 more HP, and weighing 300 more lbs. Do you want more proof so I can own you again??

I suggest you do some research before you talk out of your ass and try to call me out. Looks like you are the one who needs to be smacked

Wesman, once again, you are manipulating numbers to look like you know what you are talking about, I said SAME class, the V6 Honda you are talking about is the sportier upgrade version with way more hgorsepower than the Malibu. And the Vette vs Honda 2000 is not even close to the same class. It makes a 4 cyl. work harder to move a car than a 8 cyl to move the same car, and remember the #'s on your 2nd comparison between those 2 are close to the same gas mileage.????? Not to mention, that those #;s are from the manufactuars, and only true if you dont push on the gas at all. So actual #'s are way differant.
OK one more time, 2 stupid things, thats 2 slaps in the face, so go ahead. Dont hold back either, hit yourself hard.

**pilot_bandit** · 03-20-2007, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by jmhvenom

Because Chevrolet lies about most of the ratings haha, I know my Camaro doesnt get what was advertised. Wait, maybe that was just because its not cool to drive it slow haha

All I know is Ive got some minor upper end work done on my TA and with the M6 I AVERAGE 22MPG. I get, on the highway, 26 to 27 MPG and in town anywhere from 12 to 14. Its all about the driver. If youre one of these people that HAS to be first out of every redlight, yea your gas mileage is gonna SUCK. But you drive like you got some since and save the race'n for the 1/4mile....youll see those numbers get alot closer to the rated MPG. I also have an 01 Grand AM GT1 thats had MAJOR engine work done...lots of mods...I get Highway 32MPG all day. In town...23. My Silverado, 02 5.3, 24 Highway, 18 City. Its all about the driver.

**pilot_bandit** · 03-20-2007, 11:03 AM

And as far as GM lying about the numbers...the only number Ive ever seen them lie about when it came to engine ratings was horsepower....GM loves to understate their horsepower. My WS6 is rated at 326. Dynoed and fully stock with no mods and 93 Octane, 325.8 and 344.4 tq at the wheels. On an M6, you do the figure'n what it is at the crank. The new Vette with the LS7 rated at 505 HP. Dyno 518.2 and 541.0 tq at the wheels... BONE STOCK. Ford overrates and I dunno about Chrysler and as far as foreign....no clue. I just know what Ive witnessed.

**preston1980** · 03-20-2007, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by Wesman

Wow, you are off the wall, none of that post even makes sense.

The V6 Malibu and V6 Accord are in the same class whether you like it or not. The Malibu has a bigger engine, with less gear ratios to work with, yet still gets better fuel economy. YOU ARE WRONG, deal with it.

And then you have the stupidity to say that the S2000 vs. Vette isn't a fair comparison?? Its not a fair comparison for the CORVETTE, the S2000 is BELOW the Corvette's class, yet the Corvette STILL gets better fuel economy.

And whats your bullshit excuse?? It only has 4 cylinders so it needs to use more fuel?? GTFO of here with that crap, you are digging yourself into a deeper hole with every post you make. The stupidity and ignorance is overwhelming in your posts

You are a funny guy, You only have love for an American car I love any good car. Life is full of variety, enjoy it all my friend. And this time I will let the slaps in the face slide. But only this once.

**Hot Black Trans-Am** · 03-20-2007, 01:12 PM

Wouldn't the S2000 compare better to the Solstice GXP? I don't think the Vette is much of a comparison.

**Wesman** · 03-20-2007, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by Hot Black Trans-Am

Wouldn't the S2000 compare better to the Solstice GXP? I don't think the Vette is much of a comparison.

That was the point. The Corvette is more of Sports car than Honda could ever dream of making. Its has double the cylinders, over double the displacement, a heavier curb weight, and almost double the WHP, yet it gets the same fuel economy.

I think that proved my point pretty well

**Hot Black Trans-Am** · 03-20-2007, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by Wesman

That was the point. The Corvette is more of Sports car than Honda could ever dream of making. Its has double the cylinders, over double the displacement, a heavier curb weight, and almost double the WHP, yet it gets the same fuel economy.

I think that proved my point pretty well

That's no brainer. Any one should know that Honda can't touch a Vette witha car, but It's not much of a comparison really. It's like taking a CBR and putting it against the Vette. I guess I'd rather see more of a direct comparison.

**Too Fast** · 03-20-2007, 03:45 PM

WOW I can feel the love here!

**Wesman** · 03-20-2007, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Hot Black Trans-Am

That's no brainer. Any one should know that Honda can't touch a Vette witha car, but It's not much of a comparison really. It's like taking a CBR and putting it against the Vette. I guess I'd rather see more of a direct comparison.

You're still missing it.

I wasn't comparing them in terms of performance. I was comparing them in terms of fuel efficiency.

The general consensus is that the Honda should get better fuel economy than the Corvette, with its lighter chassis, small displacement, lower power, and shorter gearing. Yet it only manages to average the same as the Corvette, which proves my point that Honda's super-high-tech little powerplants have no benefit over anything else. Only disadvantages. If you're going to get the same fuel economy regardless, why would you want to go with a small, gutless, buzzy engine over a larger, torquey, more powerful, better sounding engine?? Thats my point.

**Wesman** · 03-20-2007, 04:41 PM