Looking at the first post the 04 is a hair quicker than 03. Point being the title of the thread is not accurate.

Who has a teapot for this tempest? LOL!

 

+1...neg. camber(tire wear), harsh ride, no cupholders in the door....COME ON!!

 

why lol its a sign really, BUY SOMETHING ELSE!!!!

 

Plus 3

 

Just for comparison, $30k in 1996 would equal $36.4K today. So, it seems like it was relatively cheaper.

 

but they have the same 1/4 mile time for each year. 0-60 is not the only measurement for car performance.

 

Actually, I think most magazine drivers put up some decent numbers. Not sure about all the publications, but I do know that car and driver will thrash the car and do whatever it takes to get the best times. That's something that the average driver that uses the car as a daily driver is just not willing to do.

 

You dont know me. BTW I think they are decent drivers at best, good drivers can cut tenths off of magazine times stock. Car and Driver and especially Road & Track are horrible with times. Motor Trend seem to have the best test drivers, they run decent 1/4 times.

 

I don't think magazines power shift, so I guess that gives you your few tenths.

I've seen a few of your vids and you put up some nice numbers, but do you really powershift and launch on daily basis? In my other post, I was just saying that most people will not drop clutch, power shift, or slip their clutches from high RPMs on a regular basis. It won't give you fast times, but who needs to race from light to light.

 

Thats very true magazines dont powershift, or lower tire pressure, plus they arent always in the greatest environment or elevation for that matter. The times will always be different but its good to average it out because they test all the vehicles the same way.

 

I have a 03 Enthusiast. It weighs 3197. That's not heavy, and it's not light. It's fast enough for me without a turbo.

 

+1000000000000

 

It can't lose enough weight, so it can only get better in bed.