My friends got an sti and he always is like your cars not more sleek. i dont even know what to say in responce to something like that.....I just agree with him....and say yeah the 9 inch wing and bread box on the hood really blend in....

 

talking strictly about looks, the STi is fugly imo. It pretty much looks like an impreza w/ a body kit and a big a** fugly spoiler that has more displacement than the engine. It has about the same asthetic value as your moms '95 civic w/ a body kit. Just looks ricer.

Now talking about the rest of the car, the STi is impressive. But it will never look "sleeker" than a Z. Ever.

 

I like the looks of the STi/WRX in a way. Its tacky but it still looks cool somehow. Its kind of the newer japanese version of a trans-am with a screaming chicken on the hood.

 

I couldn't agree more. I was just saying that you can't look at horsepower all by itself, and not give any consideration for weight, especially when talking about an Elise. Obiously, yes, the HP:weight question is just a drop in the bucket when discussing how a car gets round a track.

Actually, they didn't average the lap times. They used the best lap time for each car.

 

Braking, suspension, tires, transmission - since when does the cobalt excel over the mx-5 in any of these categories?

 

Since GM put as much "SS" crap as they could muster into that little POS. Too bad its actually faster and drives better than an MX5. I'd take the MX5 if and only if there was a need to kick the tail out.

 

^ exactly.

I'm looking at a few #'s here for the cars. They are just about identical in the skidpad and slalom (MX-5 has a VERY slight edge). In the 1/4, its a much different story, 14.8@96.8 vs 15.4@88.7. So, it doesnt suprise me. They handle very similarly, and the SS totally out muscles it.

 

The Cobalt kicks the crap out of a lot of cars in Grand Am series racing. I remember watching one race where they said they kept de-tuning it because it kept winning.

Who woulda thunk it.

 

Good info, only thing I noticed (being an Evo owner) was they compared the fat slow pig evo to the 350z track edition, not very fair IMO, but still a good comparison, would have been intresting to see the Evo RS vs the 350z, being the 100pounds lighter that it is, cornering would have been greatly improved, it also does not have the useless vortex generator creating uneccesary drag at speed, they could have gotten 1-2mph more on the straightaway's, might have been all the evo need to edge the 350

 

good to see the numbers

 

Splitting hairs. The 350z would still pwn an evo. Get over it.

 

^^ i dunno...didn't the Z win by less than a second? I think it's close enough that results could vary with different drivers on a different course. Not that I WANT the evo to be faster, i just think these cars are essentially evenly matched when it comes to a track.

 

Way to bring this back from the dead.

It WAS a fair comparison. Slow Evo... LOL. It still traps higher than ANY stock 350Z. The thing that killed the Evo was 1) the new Track/GT models have wider tires than before (now they get 265's) which greatly improved it's handling and 2) the Evo was (for some strange reason) experiencing brake fade. Doesn't matter though... the Z won.
Please elaborate the meaning of "pwn"...

 

pwn (v); to obliterate, destroy, or otherwise brutally murder another in a contest of skill.

 

Wow, someone knows how to use the internet.

I know what the "word" pwn means, I was asking in the context of a 350Z pwning an Evo.

 

a Z will NOT pwn an evo....edge out maybe...I still think its a drivers race....

 

id love to find an MR for under 30k! lol. riiight.

 

The track is not under 30k either.

The only reason the Z won is because nissan secretly stuck a VQ35HR under the hood. This issue has been discussed many times. SEARCH.