[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Honda V6
On Wed, 15 Mar 1995, Barton P. Chambers wrote:
> Why not consider the Porsche 944 turbo (AKA, 951)? While it is only *rear*
> driven, prices are very low compared to value, build quality is very high,
> and you get a full complement of curses/delights that one assocuates ownership
> of any high end German product...
i don't like the *idea* of any 4 cylinder engine bigger than 2.0 liters. it
may work well with balance shafts but it's just not appealing to me. also
porsche's turbo installations are no comparison to the lag free,
flat-as-a-bowling-green-torque-curve audi ones. lastly, if i opened up my
choices to rwd cars, i would also look at the m3 or m5.. but i live in
seattle and rear drive cars are certainly meek in the rain. i like to have
all available performance all year round, that's why anything with 2 driven
wheels don't cut it for serious performance.
i don't think that a 944 has much to offer over my corrado g60.. i have so
far only pumped it up with a stage 1 chip and i hear that a smaller
supercharger pulley would really make it fly. oh, and corrado g60 ownership
has been nothing but joy. yes, you can have your cake and eat it too.
> They always leave out one essential difference.
> The 944 uses the very effective (Mitsubishi-patented) dual balance shafts to
> dampen out the second order harmonic buzz that *will*, in time, make life
> miserable with any 4-cyl lacking a similar system.
yes, the balance shafts were another paper attraction of the GSX.. i have
to say that i was also disappointed by the way the engine sounded. no effort
was made to try to harmonize the various camshaft activity, combustion and
turbo plumbing. the only token gesture was a resonant exhaust, which if you
think about it is so superficial. that was the thing that bugged me about
the entire car.. it had glossy makeup and good numbers to prop up a
humdrum appliance. beauty was only skin deep.
audi's turbo 5 is less smooth than the mitsu turbo, but boy the sounds it
makes are spine tingling.. and if you've watched some racing videos you start
to think you are walter rohrl or hans stuck... i know that the URQ is a pain
to upkeep and the example that i test drove was quite slow, but i have not
driven anything that pumped more adrenalin... just my personal experience.
maybe it was just the thought that this was *the* car that started it all..
> The VR6 is better...
don't get me started!
> But I'm suggesting you look at the 951, a whole nother kettle of fish, as it
i'd like to try a carrera 4 first... but right now i've not hit my mid
life crisis yet! :)
- Re: Honda V6
- From: "Barton P. Chambers" <firstname.lastname@example.org>