almightyfargoth
Well-Known Member
I read them and think... "damn, I'm 16 and I'm supposed to be the immature one but this guy takes the cake!"
yeah, wow...that's not really aiding your case
Top Speed and 0-60 1998 Accord V6
- Thread starter Celidor
- Start date
yeah, wow...that's not really aiding your case
CG6>YourCar
Well-Known Member
Please do elaborate.
n00b at work here.
n00b at work here.
ryan s
they dont think it
ugh, children on the internet.
CG6>YourCar
Well-Known Member
Russianred
Snail Spools You!
slowrider87
Well-Known Member
As for the bolded... it's the button next to the one that says "quote" that has """ and a "+" sign... that never clicked in your head as a possibility? God, I never thought i'd have to put a quotation mark in quotation marks... congrats kid you've taught me i need to lower my expectations of todays teens another notch.
As for you're argument on "Racing a 4 cylinder is pointless when you could be racing a 4 cylinder turbo". The operative statement there is the italicized and underlined words "when you could be". Your argument becomes null and void the second you are faced with the option of having the same two cars in front of you. One is N/A and the other Boosted, AND you have to choose the one that you think most likely to win a race. You have first pick, the other driver takes the other car. So go ahead genius, take your N/A 4 cyl, then race the other guy in the boosted one and tell me it's not pointless. Think about it kid.
On to my next point..
You are either extremely naive, or terribly misinformed. Or, come to think of it, both.
A: Noone is talking about a "cruise". You just pulled that out of your *** for the sake off adding another pointless word to the clusterf*ck of opinions you are claiming to be facts due to you're apparent lack of any relevant knowledge on this subject.
B: Back to the "two of the same cars side by side" scenario from the previous session of attempted mechanical enlightenment. Take two of the same cars, one auto, and one manual. You drive the auto, and the other drive the manual. assuming the driver of the manual has known how to drive manual for more than a week you are 98% likely to lose (percentage completely made up but those following me understand). It's more than a feeling, a manual trans DOES give the driver complete control over his/her full powerband because he/she makes the decision when to shift and how long to stay in it. in an auto you do not have that same control, hence, "automatic".
You wanna do some research? Sign off of here and get you and your friends together for a track day. Then take turns driving each others cars down the strip, and learn what each one is capable of doing instead of asking useless questions and blabbering on about driving unsafely down public highways.
Narftastic
Well-Known Member
ugggh wtf can this thread be closed already its going no where..............
almightyfargoth
Well-Known Member
meh, let them talk if they like. Not like anyone's losing sleep.
Narftastic
Well-Known Member
yea, you gotta point
RedRyder
Save the manuals
Slowrider, ease up man. When I joined this forum, I had no prior experience with forums so I did not know the idiosyncrasies of posting, quoting, etc. No need to rip the guy for it, we tell a lot of new members to use that function.
OP, in saying you don’t understand how the i4 could be faster than the V6, after it’s been explained a few times, and especially in saying you don’t think/want to believe that i/h/e bolt ons would make no difference after me telling you…saying the car is slow is all that can be said in an attempt to derail your notion that because it’s a V6 with a listed 200hp that it should automatically be faster than an i4. I appreciate your enthusiasm for this car, I love them as well, but you have to be open to the possibility that it’s not all you think it is and listen to reason. That is my interpretation based on what you’ve been saying, so take it for what you will. But if you’re tired of hearing it, then stop and listen to what we’ve been telling you since we’re all long time owners/modders, and just enjoy the Accord for what it is, a nice looking, somewhat fuel efficient, somewhat dependable, well built, cheap to own family car with sufficient power for daily needs.
As for what we’re comparing it to…this whole discussion has been comparing the V6 and i4 6GA Accords. And what’s faster? I’ll give the example of the crap Mercury Cougar of the same years, the 5spd V6 model would beat a 6GA. Yes, it pains me to say that because I would still take a 6GA over that car any day.
Your and my definitions of ‘racing’ are on completely different planes, so I’m just not going to go there. All I can say is, competitive driving between two parties is racing.
And yes. I do not ‘think’, but know that bolt ons like i/h/e will do little to nothing for these cars. The Accord was built for economy, any sort of racing pedigree just isn’t there. It’s a harsh reality that these cars require a lot of time and money to be fast. Bolt ons will make a nice sound, and maybe you’ll gain a a pony or two…but if you want a Honda that will respond to bolt ons, look for a 2003 Acura CL Type-S 6MT or 2004 and later Accord. If you don’t want to believe me, that’s fine. But spend some time searching the site and reading, and you’ll understand where I’m coming from.
As for racing with an auto, my opinion is the result of me being a purist. A manual gives you control over the car, and the power band. And this is what matters in racing, having readily available power on demand as a result of control of the torque curve. Autos are built for efficiency and comfort, unless you take a double clutch paddle shift transmission out of a Ferrari or the like, an auto will not let you rev as high. Or what about starting? Taking off from the line is the same every time in an auto, but with a manual you can choose to build up the revs then drop the clutch to launch, or you can choose to take off a different way depending on the vehicle’s setup. And most types of racing involve the use of manuals, F1, LeMans, Nascar, Dakar rally, etc etc etc. Objectively, I can’t really see how you can say “having manual control of the clutch doesn't make the difference between a race and a cruise”, but I guess you’re entitled to your opinion.
I think it’s sad that more cars are sold as autos than manuals these days in this country. I spent some time in Italy, and I walked down a street in Rome once and every car was a manual. The art of driving is far more alive in Europe, but that’s another point for another day.
OP, in saying you don’t understand how the i4 could be faster than the V6, after it’s been explained a few times, and especially in saying you don’t think/want to believe that i/h/e bolt ons would make no difference after me telling you…saying the car is slow is all that can be said in an attempt to derail your notion that because it’s a V6 with a listed 200hp that it should automatically be faster than an i4. I appreciate your enthusiasm for this car, I love them as well, but you have to be open to the possibility that it’s not all you think it is and listen to reason. That is my interpretation based on what you’ve been saying, so take it for what you will. But if you’re tired of hearing it, then stop and listen to what we’ve been telling you since we’re all long time owners/modders, and just enjoy the Accord for what it is, a nice looking, somewhat fuel efficient, somewhat dependable, well built, cheap to own family car with sufficient power for daily needs.
As for what we’re comparing it to…this whole discussion has been comparing the V6 and i4 6GA Accords. And what’s faster? I’ll give the example of the crap Mercury Cougar of the same years, the 5spd V6 model would beat a 6GA. Yes, it pains me to say that because I would still take a 6GA over that car any day.
Your and my definitions of ‘racing’ are on completely different planes, so I’m just not going to go there. All I can say is, competitive driving between two parties is racing.
And yes. I do not ‘think’, but know that bolt ons like i/h/e will do little to nothing for these cars. The Accord was built for economy, any sort of racing pedigree just isn’t there. It’s a harsh reality that these cars require a lot of time and money to be fast. Bolt ons will make a nice sound, and maybe you’ll gain a a pony or two…but if you want a Honda that will respond to bolt ons, look for a 2003 Acura CL Type-S 6MT or 2004 and later Accord. If you don’t want to believe me, that’s fine. But spend some time searching the site and reading, and you’ll understand where I’m coming from.
As for racing with an auto, my opinion is the result of me being a purist. A manual gives you control over the car, and the power band. And this is what matters in racing, having readily available power on demand as a result of control of the torque curve. Autos are built for efficiency and comfort, unless you take a double clutch paddle shift transmission out of a Ferrari or the like, an auto will not let you rev as high. Or what about starting? Taking off from the line is the same every time in an auto, but with a manual you can choose to build up the revs then drop the clutch to launch, or you can choose to take off a different way depending on the vehicle’s setup. And most types of racing involve the use of manuals, F1, LeMans, Nascar, Dakar rally, etc etc etc. Objectively, I can’t really see how you can say “having manual control of the clutch doesn't make the difference between a race and a cruise”, but I guess you’re entitled to your opinion.
I think it’s sad that more cars are sold as autos than manuals these days in this country. I spent some time in Italy, and I walked down a street in Rome once and every car was a manual. The art of driving is far more alive in Europe, but that’s another point for another day.
Last edited:
