Off Topic Forum - Cars, Trucks, Buggies and more Get to know your fellow RCU member modelers in here and discuss off topic non-rc stuff. Only two topics OFF LIMITS are religion and politics. This forum for car & truck members. Plane & Heli members have their own in clubhouse section.

Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Reply
Old 08-28-2012, 11:16 AM
  #201
cumminspower5.9
Thread Starter
 
cumminspower5.9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: horseheads, NY
Posts: 2,643
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: rgburrill

It's amazing tis BS has moved all teh way up to the number 3 spot on the home page. []
I think last week it was first on the list
cumminspower5.9 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 11:52 AM
  #202
DieHarder
 
DieHarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Grand Haven, MI
Posts: 2,969
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

I got 81 here
DieHarder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 12:26 PM
  #203
toolmaker7341
 
toolmaker7341's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lockport, NY
Posts: 375
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Are you guy's kidding.worried about a couple of econo boxes.What would do with any real horsepower(600-800),probably hurt yourself.
toolmaker7341 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 12:33 PM
  #204
cumminspower5.9
Thread Starter
 
cumminspower5.9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: horseheads, NY
Posts: 2,643
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: toolmaker7341

Are you guy's kidding.worried about a couple of econo boxes.What would do with any real horsepower(600-800),probably hurt yourself.
Where in this thread does the mood come off as being "worried"? This would be the same type of conversation with higher HP cars. And I didn't know there was such thing as fake horsepower. Horsepower is horsepower. Some cars have higher than others.
cumminspower5.9 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 12:40 PM
  #205
Lunchboxer
 
Lunchboxer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Longmeadow, MA
Posts: 56,173
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

NOS!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Zx70741.jpg
Views:	17
Size:	32.9 KB
ID:	1796139  
Lunchboxer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:02 PM
  #206
Foxy
Moderator
 
Foxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kingston UK, but living in Athens, GREECE
Posts: 18,082
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Quote:
ORIGINAL: toolmaker7341

Are you guy's kidding.worried about a couple of econo boxes.What would do with any real horsepower(600-800),probably hurt yourself.
I used to drive a car that has literally killed hundreds of people, the (majority of) Americans who owned one of the originals, found it so hard to drive, the manufacturer had to make a different model of it for sale in America, I used to drive it on the edge too, it tried to kill me a few times but failed, car had to go when baby daughter came, I can handle my horses thanks.

What's your daily driver?
Foxy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:29 PM
  #207
HJJFFFAA
 
HJJFFFAA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 5,442
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

Quote:
ORIGINAL: toolmaker7341

Are you guy's kidding.worried about a couple of econo boxes.What would do with any real horsepower(600-800),probably hurt yourself.
I used to drive a car that has literally killed hundreds of people, the (majority of) Americans who owned one of the originals, found it so hard to drive, the manufacturer had to make a different model of it for sale in America, I used to drive it on the edge too, it tried to kill me a few times but failed, car had to go when baby daughter came, I can handle my horses thanks.

What's your daily driver?
I don't recall ever hearing that an S2000 was considered difficult to drive. Nor have I heard of any special NA model, beyond the larger 2.2L engine...
HJJFFFAA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:34 PM
  #208
The Hedgehog
 
The Hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: , CT
Posts: 9,999
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Foxy have you ever mentioned HP/Liter to anyone in conversation? I never met a s2000 owner that hasn't lol
The Hedgehog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:39 PM
  #209
Lunchboxer
 
Lunchboxer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Longmeadow, MA
Posts: 56,173
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

I think we all know the real reason why Foxy got rid of his S2000..

Just messing around, man.. hee.. !
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Hf99099.jpg
Views:	940
Size:	229.4 KB
ID:	1796161  
Lunchboxer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 02:37 PM
  #210
Foxy
Moderator
 
Foxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kingston UK, but living in Athens, GREECE
Posts: 18,082
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Quote:
ORIGINAL: HJJFFFAA


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

Quote:
ORIGINAL: toolmaker7341

Are you guy's kidding.worried about a couple of econo boxes.What would do with any real horsepower(600-800),probably hurt yourself.
I used to drive a car that has literally killed hundreds of people, the (majority of) Americans who owned one of the originals, found it so hard to drive, the manufacturer had to make a different model of it for sale in America, I used to drive it on the edge too, it tried to kill me a few times but failed, car had to go when baby daughter came, I can handle my horses thanks.

What's your daily driver?
I don't recall ever hearing that an S2000 was considered difficult to drive. Nor have I heard of any special NA model, beyond the larger 2.2L engine...
The F22C was created because Americans couldn't get the hang of driving a car that revved over 5000, fully 1200revs were cut from the top end, castrating the car. Americans were taking the car back saying it was slower than their wives' Jeeps because they were shifting at 3k lol.
Quote:
Quote from wikipedia

The AP2 also included the introduction of a larger version of the F20C for the North American market. Designated F22C1, the engine's stroke was lengthened, increasing its displacement to 2,157 cc (132 cu in). At the same time, the redline was reduced from 8,800 rpm to 8,000 rpm with a cutout at 8,200 rpm, mandated by the longer travel of the pistons. Peak torque increased 6% to 162 lbf·ft (220 N·m) at 6,800 rpm while power output was reduced to 237 hp (177 kW) at a lower 7,800 rpm. In conjunction with its introduction of the F22C1, Honda also changed the transmission gear ratios by shortening the first four gears and lengthening the last two. Another change was the inclusion of a clutch release delay valve.[9]
Honda enthusiasts also purport that traction control was added because of young American kids killing themselves in the AP1, but this may or may not be hyperbole. I didn't make my point very clear anyway, which was...you can hurt yourself in the right car with a lot less than 600hp (please, don't come back with 'yeh you can hurt yourself ina 60hp car, if you crash into a wall, we all know what I'm saying here').

Hedgehog, make it honda enthusiasts in general, not just s2000 owners.

Still, I have a heavily biased view point on the muscle cars vs 4 bangers. I'm jealous, I pay 10 dollars a gallon for fuel.
Foxy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 03:21 PM
  #211
narwalrus
 
narwalrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Clemente, CA
Posts: 833
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

If that's your problem, convert it to this.. then you can say you drive a Spoon



narwalrus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 03:24 PM
  #212
Lunchboxer
 
Lunchboxer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Longmeadow, MA
Posts: 56,173
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Goofy looking top.. stock looks a lot better.. ha!
Lunchboxer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 03:49 PM
  #213
narwalrus
 
narwalrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Clemente, CA
Posts: 833
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Me gusta...

But in reality there is no Spoon.
narwalrus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 07:21 PM
  #214
Nitroaddicted
 
Nitroaddicted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: The Greatest Country is the
Posts: 151
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

A 2.0 NA ricer with induction kit, manifold, decat, 70mm system and a program (300whp NA at 8000rpm) would take the SS easily and be more reliable. What's more it would still do 25mpg, how's the camaro SS on fuel? I admit it wouldn't look as good (subjective, but the Camaro is a good looking car, no doubt) and it wouldn't make such a nice noise either, but 410hp (no doubt at the fly as well, probably only making 340rwhp) from a 6.2l is shameful. The only thing that saves it is that a brooklyn hobo can afford to own one. Muscle cars...great to look at, but what a waste of fuel.
The zl1 puts out 580 hp and 556 lb ft of torque. And you have your hp numbers messed up. The v6, models put out 323 hp. The ss model puts out 426 hp and. 420 lb ft of torque. And i can add modifications to the SS as well. So your argument is sort of one sided. And i dont really care about gas mileage.
Nitroaddicted is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 09:04 PM
  #215
FahrtAutoRC
 
FahrtAutoRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 2,604
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Yea....but Foxy BOUGHT his.....

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Nitroaddicted


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

A 2.0 NA ricer with induction kit, manifold, decat, 70mm system and a program (300whp NA at 8000rpm) would take the SS easily and be more reliable. What's more it would still do 25mpg, how's the camaro SS on fuel? I admit it wouldn't look as good (subjective, but the Camaro is a good looking car, no doubt) and it wouldn't make such a nice noise either, but 410hp (no doubt at the fly as well, probably only making 340rwhp) from a 6.2l is shameful. The only thing that saves it is that a brooklyn hobo can afford to own one. Muscle cars...great to look at, but what a waste of fuel.
The zl1 puts out 580 hp and 556 lb ft of torque. And you have your hp numbers messed up. The v6, models put out 323 hp. The ss model puts out 426 hp and. 420 lb ft of torque. And i can add modifications to the SS as well. So your argument is sort of one sided. And i dont really care about gas mileage.
FahrtAutoRC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 09:10 PM
  #216
Nitroaddicted
 
Nitroaddicted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: The Greatest Country is the
Posts: 151
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: FahrtAutoRC

Yea....but Foxy BOUGHT his.....

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Nitroaddicted


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

A 2.0 NA ricer with induction kit, manifold, decat, 70mm system and a program (300whp NA at 8000rpm) would take the SS easily and be more reliable. What's more it would still do 25mpg, how's the camaro SS on fuel? I admit it wouldn't look as good (subjective, but the Camaro is a good looking car, no doubt) and it wouldn't make such a nice noise either, but 410hp (no doubt at the fly as well, probably only making 340rwhp) from a 6.2l is shameful. The only thing that saves it is that a brooklyn hobo can afford to own one. Muscle cars...great to look at, but what a waste of fuel.
The zl1 puts out 580 hp and 556 lb ft of torque. And you have your hp numbers messed up. The v6, models put out 323 hp. The ss model puts out 426 hp and. 420 lb ft of torque. And i can add modifications to the SS as well. So your argument is sort of one sided. And i dont really care about gas mileage.
You really gonna go there?
Nitroaddicted is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 09:24 PM
  #217
FahrtAutoRC
 
FahrtAutoRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 2,604
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Pretty sure I just did hahahaha

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Nitroaddicted


Quote:
ORIGINAL: FahrtAutoRC

Yea....but Foxy BOUGHT his.....

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Nitroaddicted


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

A 2.0 NA ricer with induction kit, manifold, decat, 70mm system and a program (300whp NA at 8000rpm) would take the SS easily and be more reliable. What's more it would still do 25mpg, how's the camaro SS on fuel? I admit it wouldn't look as good (subjective, but the Camaro is a good looking car, no doubt) and it wouldn't make such a nice noise either, but 410hp (no doubt at the fly as well, probably only making 340rwhp) from a 6.2l is shameful. The only thing that saves it is that a brooklyn hobo can afford to own one. Muscle cars...great to look at, but what a waste of fuel.
The zl1 puts out 580 hp and 556 lb ft of torque. And you have your hp numbers messed up. The v6, models put out 323 hp. The ss model puts out 426 hp and. 420 lb ft of torque. And i can add modifications to the SS as well. So your argument is sort of one sided. And i dont really care about gas mileage.
You really gonna go there?
FahrtAutoRC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 10:24 PM
  #218
Nitroaddicted
 
Nitroaddicted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: The Greatest Country is the
Posts: 151
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: FahrtAutoRC

Pretty sure I just did hahahaha

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Nitroaddicted


Quote:
ORIGINAL: FahrtAutoRC

Yea....but Foxy BOUGHT his.....

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Nitroaddicted


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

A 2.0 NA ricer with induction kit, manifold, decat, 70mm system and a program (300whp NA at 8000rpm) would take the SS easily and be more reliable. What's more it would still do 25mpg, how's the camaro SS on fuel? I admit it wouldn't look as good (subjective, but the Camaro is a good looking car, no doubt) and it wouldn't make such a nice noise either, but 410hp (no doubt at the fly as well, probably only making 340rwhp) from a 6.2l is shameful. The only thing that saves it is that a brooklyn hobo can afford to own one. Muscle cars...great to look at, but what a waste of fuel.
The zl1 puts out 580 hp and 556 lb ft of torque. And you have your hp numbers messed up. The v6, models put out 323 hp. The ss model puts out 426 hp and. 420 lb ft of torque. And i can add modifications to the SS as well. So your argument is sort of one sided. And i dont really care about gas mileage.
You really gonna go there?
Well Foxy's argument is biased, still.
Nitroaddicted is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 04:00 AM
  #219
HJJFFFAA
 
HJJFFFAA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 5,442
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

I'm pretty sure his viewpoint is mostly skewed by the tax on large displacements over there. I've consistently seen that engines that don't have stupidly high volumetric efficiencies get better mileage. For instance, 2009 Viper vs 2009 Honda S2000. EPA rates highway for the Viper at 22mpg and the 2000 at 25mpg where the Viper is making 600HP and the S2000 only ~240HP. There's also the same model year Corvette Z06 which is rated at 24mpg highway and has been reported by some to near 30MPG with a little effort.
HJJFFFAA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 04:03 AM
  #220
cumminspower5.9
Thread Starter
 
cumminspower5.9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: horseheads, NY
Posts: 2,643
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Nitroaddicted


Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy

A 2.0 NA ricer with induction kit, manifold, decat, 70mm system and a program (300whp NA at 8000rpm) would take the SS easily and be more reliable. What's more it would still do 25mpg, how's the camaro SS on fuel? I admit it wouldn't look as good (subjective, but the Camaro is a good looking car, no doubt) and it wouldn't make such a nice noise either, but 410hp (no doubt at the fly as well, probably only making 340rwhp) from a 6.2l is shameful. The only thing that saves it is that a brooklyn hobo can afford to own one. Muscle cars...great to look at, but what a waste of fuel.
The zl1 puts out 580 hp and 556 lb ft of torque. And you have your hp numbers messed up. The v6, models put out 323 hp. The ss model puts out 426 hp and. 420 lb ft of torque. And i can add modifications to the SS as well. So your argument is sort of one sided. And i dont really care about gas mileage.
I'd like to see it hang with the Accent.


Ready!.... Go!
cumminspower5.9 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 04:38 AM
  #221
Foxy
Moderator
 
Foxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kingston UK, but living in Athens, GREECE
Posts: 18,082
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230


Quote:
ORIGINAL: HJJFFFAA

I'm pretty sure his viewpoint is mostly skewed by the tax on large displacements over there. I've consistently seen that engines that don't have stupidly high volumetric efficiencies get better mileage. For instance, 2009 Viper vs 2009 Honda S2000. EPA rates highway for the Viper at 22mpg and the 2000 at 25mpg where the Viper is making 600HP and the S2000 only ~240HP. There's also the same model year Corvette Z06 which is rated at 24mpg highway and has been reported by some to near 30MPG with a little effort.
You're compltely right. I'm not objective, I admit it. 2.0 is considered large displacement here. I pay 900 bucks road tax for the privilege of driving a high powered 2.0. I then pay another 900bucks additional tax per year as 'luxury car tax' because anything oer 1.8 is considered a luxury car. It's completely ridiculous. then I hear you talking about 6l cars and I flip out. At least I'm honest.

But seriously, I hope you guys can get some more efficiency into your engines over the coming years, there is the environment to think about, honestly, I don't mean it in a bad way.
Foxy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 05:19 AM
  #222
HJJFFFAA
 
HJJFFFAA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 5,442
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy


Quote:
ORIGINAL: HJJFFFAA

I'm pretty sure his viewpoint is mostly skewed by the tax on large displacements over there. I've consistently seen that engines that don't have stupidly high volumetric efficiencies get better mileage. For instance, 2009 Viper vs 2009 Honda S2000. EPA rates highway for the Viper at 22mpg and the 2000 at 25mpg where the Viper is making 600HP and the S2000 only ~240HP. There's also the same model year Corvette Z06 which is rated at 24mpg highway and has been reported by some to near 30MPG with a little effort.
You're compltely right. I'm not objective, I admit it. 2.0 is considered large displacement here. I pay 900 bucks road tax for the privilege of driving a high powered 2.0. I then pay another 900bucks additional tax per year as 'luxury car tax' because anything oer 1.8 is considered a luxury car. It's completely ridiculous. then I hear you talking about 6l cars and I flip out. At least I'm honest.

But seriously, I hope you guys can get some more efficiency into your engines over the coming years, there is the environment to think about, honestly, I don't mean it in a bad way.
But the big engines actually get pretty good mileage Come on 22MPG highway and 600HP, show me the Ferrari that does that.
HJJFFFAA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 05:36 AM
  #223
Lunchboxer
 
Lunchboxer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Longmeadow, MA
Posts: 56,173
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

To me, a better performance measure would probably be the HP / weight (and size) of the engine... !

But obviously there a lot more to it.. how reliable the engine is, etc.

And there's more to the enjoyment of driving than just performance.. to some, the sound is important.. so someone prefer a big V8, while someone prefer a high-revving smaller engine.. while turbo cars might make more power but the exhaust is very much muffled by the turbo, etc. So it really depends on what's important to you.. !
Lunchboxer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 05:38 AM
  #224
Foxy
Moderator
 
Foxy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kingston UK, but living in Athens, GREECE
Posts: 18,082
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Quote:
ORIGINAL: HJJFFFAA

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy


Quote:
ORIGINAL: HJJFFFAA

I'm pretty sure his viewpoint is mostly skewed by the tax on large displacements over there. I've consistently seen that engines that don't have stupidly high volumetric efficiencies get better mileage. For instance, 2009 Viper vs 2009 Honda S2000. EPA rates highway for the Viper at 22mpg and the 2000 at 25mpg where the Viper is making 600HP and the S2000 only ~240HP. There's also the same model year Corvette Z06 which is rated at 24mpg highway and has been reported by some to near 30MPG with a little effort.
You're compltely right. I'm not objective, I admit it. 2.0 is considered large displacement here. I pay 900 bucks road tax for the privilege of driving a high powered 2.0. I then pay another 900bucks additional tax per year as 'luxury car tax' because anything oer 1.8 is considered a luxury car. It's completely ridiculous. then I hear you talking about 6l cars and I flip out. At least I'm honest.

But seriously, I hope you guys can get some more efficiency into your engines over the coming years, there is the environment to think about, honestly, I don't mean it in a bad way.
But the big engines actually get pretty good mileage Come on 22MPG highway and 600HP, show me the Ferrari that does that.
And I could theoretically get 40mpg out of mine in stock form, will it ever happen? No, I drive my car how it was designed to be driven. Fast. Just like nobody who bought a camaro for the 'right' reasons will be so conservative as to get 22mpg. Sod the ferrari, that's an exotic, several steps of economy below even the muscle car, why don't we take the average fuel economy of a european car as a comparison instead? Would it shock you to hear that most people in Europe won't even look at a car that gets less than 55mpg? Smarts and Hyundai Atos and Kia Ceeds and Diesel Citroens are the order of the day here, and they can circumnavigate the world on a single tank almost.

However, there is a balance, an optimal, and if you ask me, it's between 2 and 3 liters with a turbo. Hell the Nissan GTR is a 3.8 making nearly 600hp with all the limiting turned off. Probably about the same on fuel as the camaro, but I'm just guessing.
Foxy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 05:45 AM
  #225
Lunchboxer
 
Lunchboxer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Longmeadow, MA
Posts: 56,173
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230

Foxy, do you like electric cars? Do you see that taking over in Europe since the fuel is more expensive?

A friend of mine has a Chevy Volts.. his said he got 1350 miles or so between the last 2 fuel stops (7.5 gallon).. obviously, it is mostly plugged in.. but do you see more people in Europe buying things like this?
Lunchboxer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:26 AM.