|
|
|
Go back and vote on this image.
Showing page: 1 of 2 [ 1 2 ]
|
#3 |
8-10-2005 @ 06:34:07 PM |
Posted By : ImRaptor |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#2, From what I read, it won because it was the best feel for driving for city terrains. Story wasn't about who was fastest, if it where just take the Subaru and be done with it. |
|
#5 |
8-10-2005 @ 06:39:03 PM |
Posted By : ImRaptor |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#4, Poor titles don't always reflect an articles intension. |
|
#6 |
8-10-2005 @ 06:42:12 PM |
Posted By : 427 Vette |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#5, I believe the intention should of been to find the fastest machine not the one who handles the best on city streets or have the best interior. |
|
#7 |
8-10-2005 @ 06:44:51 PM |
Posted By : 427 Vette |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Here are the autocross times not posted on the website:
SRT-4: 40.81
Saturn: 40.86
Cobalt: 40.96
WRX: 42.26
RSX: 42.77 |
|
#8 |
8-10-2005 @ 06:49:22 PM |
Posted By : ImRaptor |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#6, Well, I guess when you start working as a writer for C&D you can make the article how you intend it.
As a writer, you follow your own intentions, with in reason of the editor.
To me the artice was going for an all around car that meets a certain aspect of criteria (under $25000, over 200HP) and is the best all around.
Course, C&D isn't really know for its good writers. |
|
#9 |
8-10-2005 @ 06:54:56 PM |
Posted By : ImRaptor |
Reply | Edit | Del |
On a side note, I'd go for the WRX.
Fuck the FWD. |
|
#10 |
8-10-2005 @ 06:56:56 PM |
Posted By : 427 Vette |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#8, Just a difference of opinion, I believe the fastest car should of won. They even said it themselves:
"Here we go again. That same old comparo conundrum. Our underdog victor offers the worst 0-to-60 time (6.4 seconds), the slowest quarter-mile time (14.9 seconds), the skimpiest back seat, and the most lackluster autocross lap." |
|
#11 |
8-10-2005 @ 07:08:21 PM |
Posted By : ambientFLIER |
Reply | Edit | Del |
my top choice overall would be the wrx, but i can see why the acura won...going from a neon or chevy into one would surely change anybody's mind, even if it's not the quickest...the neon is nice too, though
the cobalt has the WORST wing of the bunch, it looks almost like the melty aftermarket ones, but at least you can get one wingless
oh and the acura WAS the slowest one, but then again, ptobably not by much...it was as much of cheap speed as any other car
[Edited by ambientFLIER on 8-10-2005 @ 07:10:19 PM] |
|
#13 |
8-10-2005 @ 07:18:42 PM |
Posted By : ambientFLIER |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#2, slow pos? come on now...it was probably only a few tenths behind everybody else...that's hardly slow |
|
#14 |
8-10-2005 @ 07:31:37 PM |
Posted By : ambientFLIER |
Reply | Edit | Del |
and the way i see it, "cheep speed" doesnt mean the fastest car of the bunch, but just an overall balanced car that is easy to drive , is high quality and still offers a good kick in the pants...voila...acura |
|
#15 |
8-10-2005 @ 07:32:07 PM |
Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#12, Damn that thrid place. :P
As for me:
No
Yes, even though it's pretty ugly
Yes, even though it's pretty ugly
Doubtful
Yes, even though it's highly strung |
|
#17 |
8-10-2005 @ 08:47:33 PM |
Posted By : Driven_out |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Bah, screw the fancy pants color... from the order of left to right...
yes, in black
yes, with wing delete and black
sure, black
yep, black with wing delete
maybe. in black |
|
#18 |
8-10-2005 @ 09:25:47 PM |
Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I wouldn't drive either GM product (don't much care for Saturns, don't like the Cobalt) but any of the others..yep. :) |
|
#19 |
8-10-2005 @ 09:54:12 PM |
Posted By : ambientFLIER |
Reply | Edit | Del |
i would drive all of them, but i would hate looking at the ion's instrument panel |
|
#20 |
8-10-2005 @ 10:11:45 PM |
Posted By : ImRaptor |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Cobalt and Ion are both out for me. Don't like either of them even a bit. |
Showing page: 1 of 2 [ 1 2 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|