16v v's japs

Retroholic Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 3315

soz huw no offence intended mate

just loads of cupra R's round ere not saying their bad, its just that 'wtf' look you get off the seat pilot lol

Site Subscriber Joined: 10 Jun 2004 Posts: 2317

bbracer16valver wrote:

soz huw no offence intended mate

just loads of cupra R's round ere not saying their bad, its just that 'wtf' look you get off the seat pilot lol

None taken, Smile

I was just jesting Wink

Site Subscriber Joined: 26 Nov 2005 Posts: 591

[quote="Neal"]I couldn't really care less how fast my 19 is compared to other cars to be quite honest.[/quote]

couldnt agree more

Site Subscriber Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 1139

BB a tuned 5 can b a fast car and under 5k can get u 2 140mph!!!!

Retroholic Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 3315

yea i no that but not a 125 brake standard 1 against a 200+bhp mr2

Site Subscriber Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 1139

nope that u r write mr2 all the way.

mabe the OTHER mr2 had pedals Rolling Eyes

Retroholic Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 3315

or sails

Site Subscriber Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 1139

lol

Site Subscriber Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 3547

in my 172 i havent lost any races so far, i.e ive been slowley leaving a BM 330ci, Vauxhall vectra 2.5 V6 was leaving him at 130mph(private track!) Rover tomcat, r5 gtt, and kept with a bmw m3 cabby(to about 110 then he started pulling on me).

Retroholic Joined: 12 Feb 2004 Posts: 5685

And you say your 19 is faster still?

FFS i give up on this place, i may as well just use RSC and save myself the expence of keeping this place here

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

A14LN C wrote:

BB a tuned 5 can b a fast car and under 5k can get u 2 140mph!!!!

so can a standard 19 16V!

As for the faster 172 thing, when they first came out I went up against one in my old one, I pulled ahead. Then saw the CS rr day and tales of 125bhp 172's etc burst that bubble a bit.

They pull away nicely 60 - 110 after that the 19 will match then if only due to aerodynamics.

Level 8 User Joined: 14 Apr 2004 Posts: 278

Chet T16 wrote:

And you say your 19 is faster still?

FFS i give up on this place, i may as well just use RSC and save myself the expence of keeping this place here

LOL!

Just my tuppence on R5 Vs MR2 Turbo:

MR2 will eat it alive on the straights.
Dry - MR2 will go around corners faster
Wet - R5 will go around corners faster

The MR2 is very unforgiving at its limits, especially the 220bhp model (Rev 1& 2).
The driver will not risk pushing it for the sake of a high cornering speed, especially when he knows that the straights are coming.

Level 9 User Joined: 07 Dec 2005 Posts: 373

ive had a shot of an mr2 2litre 16v non turbo and i wasnt impressed.i thought
the non turbo would be faster than the 19 but no chance

Level 8 User Joined: 14 Apr 2004 Posts: 278

If it was a Rev 1 or 2 then it would be equal with the 19 as they have 140 ish bhp. The Rev 3 has 173, Rev 4 & 5 has 168 and there is a special jap import with a VVT-i BEAMS engine which kicks out ~198 bhp.

Normally there wouldn't be a massive difference, except if it is the Turbo (220-245bhp) or the BEAMS.

I expect any MR2 to have it in the corners though (as long as it is dry), after all, it is mid engined.

Oh and MR2s haven't got a name for being light either.

Level 9 User Joined: 07 Dec 2005 Posts: 373

ill get a pic of it 2morrow and u can say what model it is.think its around an r or sumthing.the only good thing i could say about it is it has better low down torque than the 19.which isnt hard to beat

Level 8 User Joined: 14 Apr 2004 Posts: 278

These engines have a Toyota Variable Intake System (TVIS), which "at low RPMs the ECU closes half the runners from the plenum to the head causing higher gas speed and consequently better fuel atomisation and increased low end torque".

The first Rev 3s are on an M plate, if that helps.
There are cosmetic changes, so it should be possible to tell the difference.

Site Subscriber Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 3547

Chris H wrote:

A14LN C wrote:

BB a tuned 5 can b a fast car and under 5k can get u 2 140mph!!!!

so can a standard 19 16V!

As for the faster 172 thing, when they first came out I went up against one in my old one, I pulled ahead. Then saw the CS rr day and tales of 125bhp 172's etc burst that bubble a bit.

They pull away nicely 60 - 110 after that the 19 will match then if only due to aerodynamics.

On the vids ivbe posted its fast to 120 ish then takes ages!!!

Site Subscriber Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 3547

Chris H wrote:

A14LN C wrote:

BB a tuned 5 can b a fast car and under 5k can get u 2 140mph!!!!

so can a standard 19 16V!

As for the faster 172 thing, when they first came out I went up against one in my old one, I pulled ahead. Then saw the CS rr day and tales of 125bhp 172's etc burst that bubble a bit.

They pull away nicely 60 - 110 after that the 19 will match then if only due to aerodynamics.

On the vids ivbe posted its fast to 120 ish then takes ages!!!

Site Subscriber Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 1141

Neal wrote:

My hatch used to get utterly roasted by my mate Simon's Rover 220GSi turbo when we tried, other than that I've not raced anyone Confused

No, but I had to rag the arse off my Cordoba to catch you when you came to collect that exhaust off me and flew passed me in the layby!

I can't help thinking that from a standanding start a valver is quite slow, not as much low down grunt as the VAG 2.0 16v ABF lump.

Would like to drive a 2.0 conversion to make a comparison.

Forum Moderator Joined: 18 Feb 2004 Posts: 7432

That was in the chamade too Addie, my hatch was a bit faster than my chamade is Surprised

Site Subscriber Joined: 10 Jun 2004 Posts: 2317

Quote:

No, but I had to rag the arse off my Cordoba.

Your not supposed to say things like that where I can see them Wink