deimos Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 yeah or pwn3d? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NonovUrbizniz Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Since you want to know, here it is. You are essentially a perfect case study in how to make yourself hated on the internet. You have accomplished this through what I have affectionately called The Douchebag Trifecta. What is that, you ask? It is three characteristics/personality flaws that, when combined in just the proper proportions, make everyone think that you are a total douche. Specifically: 1. You state your opinion or experience as if it was fact. Examples: "Rain-X ruins your wiper blades" "REAL SPORTS CARS... NEED a broad even torque curve (line)... not a turbo charged 4 cyl that only makes power up top." 2. You make broad generalizations that are factually incorrect (and don't admit you are wrong when it is so proven). Examples: "torque... it isn't derived from anything except a direct measurement... HORSEPOWER is derived from torqueXRPM/5252" "THERE IS NO WAY POSSIBLE THAT THE GT HAS MORE LOW END TORQUE THAN THE i" "if you are driving on the highway and you NEED to accelerate you NEED low end torque" 3. You have no sense of humor. Example: Everything you have posted on this forum to date. It doesn't help that you have an extremely belligerent tone about everything, either. The solution? My suggestion would be to change your username, change your attitude, and start all over again. Seriously. Just bail out and start over again with a clean slate. Then again, your posts have proved to be extremely funny and have kept me laughing for several days now. So on second thought maybe you should stick around, and keep up the good work. -Nick Alright. Point 1 accepted. although it was not my intention to blur the line between my opinions and facts... it IS a fact that a higher compression engine of the same displacement will have higher torque given the same head/cam design. it IS a fact that DOHC does not inherently create more torque... it IS a fact that if you are on the highway at low rpm (below 3k) and you NEED to accelerate it would be MUCH easier to do so w/o a downshift.. requiring SOLID low end torque. 2. Sort of Accepted... I'd say we're pretty much even on the proven wrong thing... I didn't here you accepting defeat regarding the condensation on the windows. 3. I have a great sense of humor... I just haven't shown it so far. I'm not changing my SN for anything... I'm certainly not going to run off with my tail between my legs because somebody has more time to pick apart posts that I made off the top of my head. Sometimes not spending enough time making sure what I INTEND to say is clearly stated. I have TONS of car experience and knowledge... You are certainly not going to make me feel any differently... I am a VERY valued contributing member of LOTS of forums. And don't plan on leaving them or this one till I feel like it. My tone and some of the mis-statements in my posts are a direct result of me being under lots of stress lately, which leaves me both aggitated and not always fully lucide. I officially apologize and will be more careful in my future posts to differentiate facts and opinion... I still think Rain-X sucks though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdanhires Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 You know if you actually cite a source for your facts, then maybe, just maybe people would believe you? Capitializing a word doesn't make it true. And you're wrong about compression and torque. If it makes you feel better, I never liked Rain-X either. :-) John Alright. Point 1 accepted. although it was not my intention to blur the line between my opinions and facts... it IS a fact that a higher compression engine of the same displacement will have higher torque given the same head/cam design. it IS a fact that DOHC does not inherently create more torque... it IS a fact that if you are on the highway at low rpm (below 3k) and you NEED to accelerate it would be MUCH easier to do so w/o a downshift.. requiring SOLID low end torque. 2. Sort of Accepted... I'd say we're pretty much even on the proven wrong thing... I didn't here you accepting defeat regarding the condensation on the windows. 3. I have a great sense of humor... I just haven't shown it so far. I'm not changing my SN for anything... I'm certainly not going to run off with my tail between my legs because somebody has more time to pick apart posts that I made off the top of my head. Sometimes not spending enough time making sure what I INTEND to say is clearly stated. I have TONS of car experience and knowledge... You are certainly not going to make me feel any differently... I am a VERY valued contributing member of LOTS of forums. And don't plan on leaving them or this one till I feel like it. My tone and some of the mis-statements in my posts are a direct result of me being under lots of stress lately, which leaves me both aggitated and not always fully lucide. I officially apologize and will be more careful in my future posts to differentiate facts and opinion... I still think Rain-X sucks though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JessterCPA Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 it IS a fact that if you are on the highway at low rpm (below 3k) and you NEED to accelerate it would be MUCH easier to do so w/o a downshift.. requiring SOLID low end torque. I am not trying to fan the flames here really. But I have one more question here before I can be comfortable with the whole low-end torque discussion. Lets say I have a 2.5i, and am in 5th gear cruising at 55mph or so. That should put my rpm's "down low". If not, lets pretend they do anyway. You get my drift. You are saying it is more practical to have more low end torque to pull you through that gear than it would be to downshift and bring the engine into a more powerful rev range. How about this for a thought; Isn't the time it takes to downshift & accellerate in that lower gear is more than offset by the additional time it takes you to accelerate (it still is a 2.5 4 cyl after all) in that top gear. If this is the case, then all torque benefits of the 2.5i go out the window. If this is an ignorant comment, I apologize. I still think we need to see those dyno charts before the "butt-dynamometer" takes top priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I am not trying to fan the flames here really. But I have one more question here before I can be comfortable with the whole low-end torque discussion. Lets say I have a 2.5i, and am in 5th gear cruising at 55mph or so. That should put my rpm's "down low". If not, lets pretend they do anyway. You get my drift. You are saying it is more practical to have more low end torque to pull you through that gear than it would be to downshift and bring the engine into a more powerful rev range. How about this for a thought; Isn't the time it takes to downshift & accellerate in that lower gear is more than offset by the additional time it takes you to accelerate (it still is a 2.5 4 cyl after all) in that top gear. If this is the case, then all torque benefits of the 2.5i go out the window. If this is an ignorant comment, I apologize. I still think we need to see those dyno charts before the "butt-dynamometer" takes top priority. No, you are absolutely right. Despite protestations to the contrary, apparently trifecta point #2 is still going strong. -Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWortham Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I am not trying to fan the flames here really. But I have one more question here before I can be comfortable with the whole low-end torque discussion. Lets say I have a 2.5i, and am in 5th gear cruising at 55mph or so. That should put my rpm's "down low". If not, lets pretend they do anyway. You get my drift. You are saying it is more practical to have more low end torque to pull you through that gear than it would be to downshift and bring the engine into a more powerful rev range. How about this for a thought; Isn't the time it takes to downshift & accellerate in that lower gear is more than offset by the additional time it takes you to accelerate (it still is a 2.5 4 cyl after all) in that top gear. If this is the case, then all torque benefits of the 2.5i go out the window. If this is an ignorant comment, I apologize. I still think we need to see those dyno charts before the "butt-dynamometer" takes top priority. You're right but you're talking in terms of performance driving. I think the counterpoint is that it all depends on the laziness-factor in your driving at the time. Sometimes I want to push the gas just enough to pass somebody on the highway, and I don't want to downshift if I don't have to. In times like that it's nice to have some excess low-end torque at my disposal. The kind of low-end torque you'll get from a V8 is certainly nice to have but no car is perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JessterCPA Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 You're right but you're talking in terms of performance driving. I think the counterpoint is that it all depends on the laziness-factor in your driving at the time. Sometimes I want to push the gas just enough to pass somebody on the highway, and I don't want to downshift if I don't have to. In times like that it's nice to have some excess low-end torque at my disposal. The kind of low-end torque you'll get from a V8 is certainly nice to have but no car is perfect. I understand what you are saying. Yes I was talking pure performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deimos Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Capitializing a word doesn't make it true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NonovUrbizniz Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I am not trying to fan the flames here really. But I have one more question here before I can be comfortable with the whole low-end torque discussion. Lets say I have a 2.5i, and am in 5th gear cruising at 55mph or so. That should put my rpm's "down low". If not, lets pretend they do anyway. You get my drift. You are saying it is more practical to have more low end torque to pull you through that gear than it would be to downshift and bring the engine into a more powerful rev range. How about this for a thought; Isn't the time it takes to downshift & accellerate in that lower gear is more than offset by the additional time it takes you to accelerate (it still is a 2.5 4 cyl after all) in that top gear. If this is the case, then all torque benefits of the 2.5i go out the window. If this is an ignorant comment, I apologize. I still think we need to see those dyno charts before the "butt-dynamometer" takes top priority. That is a fair comment and possibly correct. I think that would have to do with how much power you make at lower RPM in the higher gear compared to what power you make at the higher RPM in the lower gear... For example if you have a pretty serious overdrive gear for 5th then a downshift would almost definately be needed... where as if the gear isn't too tall then the car could pull well enough in 5th gear at low rpm to get you out of the way etc. For example I had a sentra that would not pull for it's life in 5th gear no matter what rpm you were at. It NEEDED to be downshifted for any power on the highway... Where as my civic pulls sufficiently enough not to require a downshift... If I did it would pull much harder... but 5th has enough grunt not to need a downshift. Frankly I wouldn't even venture to guess which would result in a faster exit... probobly downshifting first... but if staying in the gear is enough... I'd prefer to skip the downshift... However I've been in PLENTY of cars that just don't need to be downshifted to get out of the way... at any rpm range in any gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIJibz Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Holy macaroni this thread got out of control......................... thats exactly what i said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGT Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 This is an impossible discussion. Before ANYONE makes a comparison with dyno charts, it's also important to know if the gearsets between a 2.5i and 2.5 GT are identical. I suspect they are not, given the very different characters of the motors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avishar Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 http://www.brawl-hall.com/gallery/data88/media/5/f_arguing.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KTM 525 Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Thats bad .................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epitaph Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 You want torque?? "The powerful all-new 5.9-liter High Output Cummins Turbo Diesel delivers a monstrous 555 lb.-ft. of torque" Courtesy of: http://www.dodgeboy.net/news/ram3500/ The funniest part about that is that im stuck between choosing the 6.6 duramax turbo diesel (silverado tho) 2500 and the legacy gt... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05LegacyGT330Ci Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 The funniest part about that is that im stuck between choosing the 6.6 duramax turbo diesel (silverado tho) 2500 and the legacy gt... What a choice totally different ends of the spectrum. Get the wagon and call it a day. Song of Post- Steel Pulse- Babylon Makes the Rules '05 Black Legacy GT Wagon 5-spd '02 Topaz/Black 330Ci 5-spd Drift Ryder's School of Rally Arts, coming to an Australia near you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epitaph Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 What a choice totally different ends of the spectrum. Get the wagon and call it a day. Song of Post- Steel Pulse- Babylon Makes the Rules I know everyone i tell says that. My parents hate the idea of the truck and would love for me to get the subi. I drove it and an 05gt sedan last saturday, and i was pretty impressed with it, so now im at a crossroads (because i really love having a fast car, and im gonna miss it). and if the rims i have on my car now fit on the legacy... :sigh: goddamit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deimos Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 I know everyone i tell says that. My parents hate the idea of the truck and would love for me to get the subi. I drove it and an 05gt sedan last saturday, and i was pretty impressed with it, so now im at a crossroads (because i really love having a fast car, and im gonna miss it). and if the rims i have on my car now fit on the legacy... :sigh: goddamit. Hard life eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red beast Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 no "turbo" dip in power here. just press and it goes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarkus Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Gads ... After reading this entire thread ... I'm gonna need a shrink !!! (really, interesting stuff) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epitaph Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Hard life eh? I know right It is a really big decision though, for me my car is a big part of my life and what you drive reflects who you are... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunderkind Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 I know right It is a really big decision though, for me my car is a big part of my life and what you drive reflects who you are... Man... how sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epitaph Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 ?????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
problemcat13 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Back to the original discussion on the low end torque of the LGT. My question is, in an auto LGT, once you go stage II do you feel any significant improvement in the pull down low? I test drove an Outback XT last week (closest thing to the LGT the local dealer had) and I was disappointed! I didn't powerbrake any (salesman and wife in the car), so I was mostly punching it from a roll, and it just didn't seem to have anything under 3000 rmp! I am coming from a 5MT forester, so of course there's a difference from that to an auto......but I guess I had just built up the LGT in my mind so much I expected it to rocket......but I'm not stupid and I know that it ain't gonna rocket from a rolling launch. I probably just need a second test drive, just to let my expectations reset themselves. I remember when I test drove a WRX when they first came out, and thought it had horrible turbo lag compared to the Eclipse GS-T I used to own. A year ago though, when I test drove a used WRX, I got on it and purposefully kept it in the powerband for about 10 seconds and my wife said "you DON'T need one of these!" So, to all the tuners out there, especially 5EATs like WUKINDADA and MBLOCK66: does tuning help out the low end or should I just expect that anytime I'm caught at a rolling launch I'll be disappointed? P.S. I had previously talked myself into the 5EAT because that's what the wife wanted, but after that test drive I'm thinking I'd rather buy the wife a used Outback and go for the manual for myself. And pray we don't end up moving somewhere that has 90 minutes of stop-and-go traffic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KTM 525 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 With the correct mods the 5EAT is proving to be right there in the running with the manuals.From a roll the manual has an advantage as it has less driveline loss but it's not huge. You can make a 5 EAT plenty quick enough for ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim1969 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 You can make a 5 EAT plenty quick enough for ya. yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.