Driver72 Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 [quote name='Beanboy']What's with the 7.6 second 5-60? As mentioned a WRX beats that time... -B[/quote] As mentioned....that's got to be a misprint. It most likely should of been 6.6 seconds. Anyone whose driven the WRX and the LGT knows the LGT has A LOT more power under 3000 rpm's (well more power everywhere). And, I'm sure C & D would of commented on how badly the LGT did on the street start and how much turbo lag there was that would of caused that really low time. In fact, they did the opposite and implied it's turbo lag was less than the Volvo's. That was obviously a typo or something. The LGT is a lot faster than the WRX down low, and that's where the 5-60 test really tests a car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throttlejockey Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 [quote name='gurpman']Personally, I was very impressed with the Volvo's numbers. Fastest 5-60, highest trap speed, best braking (by far). And best gas mileage!! Power/weight looks inferior to the legacy, but its 236 ft-lbs come on at 1500 rpm which has to be nice.[/quote] That Volvo has to have the ugliest interior ever put in a car. I would rate it last just becasue of the ugly interior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Jedimaster* Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 I'm no fan of Volvos except for one thing- they have carpeting (at least in the late 90's they did) that is kind of like indoor outdoor carpet- very easy to vacuum and keep clean- there's nothing there to trap dirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerdave Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 Subaru should've done like BMW and offered a "Sport Package," where it would've bought better tires and the JDM GT suspension. Are you listening Subaru? You still can do this... And the braking distance differences are *all* tires in this case. Did you see the numbers? The TSX, on its all-season Michelins, only stops 2 feet shorter than the GT. Yet the Audi and the Volvo, both on the same summer-biased tires, short the TSX and GT considerably. They should've tested gtguy's (Dunlop 8000) or nicd's car (azenis and spec-B suspension). :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUBE555 Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 Kevin has the 9000's. Test nicd's setup. :P But I think his suspension with 050's would garner the most potential results, I'd recon they'd be excellent. I thought the S60 I got in had a chincier sounding and looking interior by far over my GT. I might be a little biased, but it just felt like they were trying too hard and not accomplishing enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadboss101 Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 Off topic, I am watching 2 fast 2 furious. Yeah the Acura interiors are very nice, I almost bought it (TSX and TL were both an option). I want something that is not so popular, and tossible. TL doesn't seem to be that. The TSX with some aftermarket stuff should give it nice performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.