=Performance For Your $$$=

[rockport]

Call me sad, but last night I was thinking about how brilliant my valver is in comparison to performance for your money. I mean just think about it? I paid £4,000 for my phase 2 almost a year ago!! You can pick one up now for like £2,500!! Now think about it.. how many cars out there do you see that you think… my (parkers valued £2,500 clio16v could kick ass over that “££££££” BMW, or “£££££ what ever car”!! Very few times do I pull up next to a set of traffic lights, look over to my left and see a car that is capable of beating me 0-60 60-100. The Clio 16v is simply a legend!! Performance, looks, handling…. This is a car that was produced in the early 90’s for god sake.. and still it holds it own along side today’s modern hatches.. I’m not knocking the 172 or willy… however I’m talking about performance for your dollar..(the willy may as well be classed as a classic in its limited production numbers, and with the 172 be a car of today.. evidently these cars fetch for a bit more…



Before I get carried away, I’m not trying to say my Clio 16v is invincible, just a bloody fine package for its money..



Anyway, anyway.. moving on abit… I was thinking about what other performance bargains are out there that you can think off… Myself personally will be trading in my valver for a Teggy Type R as my next car… however as good a’car the integra is.. I wouldn’t consider it a bargain at 9k. in my search for a teggy I come across this!!!





http://users.breathemail.net/mensah/my95turbo_front_ps_angle.jpg



Following out my research I bring to you.. (drum roll please)…………



The….. (another drum roll please)…. MR2 GT TWIN TURBO!!!



0 – 60 = 5.7 seconds…… that’s quicker then any std cossie & m3!!!!

These things do 60mph in 2nd gear… i yet to dare and find out what the top speed is of these beasts!!



Pumps out 250bhp.. easy tuned to a safe……. 300BHP!! So im told!



2.0 turbo engine that has been advised can do…. Wait for it…. “200 thousand miles” yes 200k miles if correctly serviced… how the hell can a monster like this see out 200k miles!!! (you cant argue with the research BTW)



details can be found @ http://users.breathemail.net/mensah/performance.htmU face=Bookman Old Style http://users.breathemail.net/mensah/performance.htm/U



now for the price of these monsters… £5,500.. *GULP*



now that’s what I call a performance bargain.

 

[Tom]

ah the bangs for your buck debate

cosworth cars may feature in this discussion

 

[RobFenn]

MR2 Can be scary motors, wouldnt recommend big BHP, and its a 2 seater so some people cant compromise. Still i agree, good bang for your buck

 

[BenR]

its only a 4cly engine, you sure its a TWIN turbo, i thought they only had one....and they aint great handlers...the MK1 MR2 with the 4ag-ze engine (supercharged) is a far better handler and IMHO far better looking...but im fairly partial to MK1 anything LOL.

 

[rockport]

Only quotes from the MR2 owners web site Ben, so not 100% sure...

"The addition of a twin-entry turbo charger to the 3S-series engine boosts power output to levels pretty close to supercar performance (i.e. the low 5 seconds 0-60 region) giving excellent performance and throttle response that UK supplied MR2 drivers can only dream about"

 

[RobFenn]

dont mention handling though..

basically mate its mid engined, and not the most advanced chassis in the world, kind of asking for trouble isnt it?

 

[RobFenn]

When am i going to get to try out that 16v anyway

 

[Ben H]

I think the performance per pound debate would be a toss-up between the GT Turbo, 205 1.9 GTi and Clio 16v for me. No doubt in my mind that the 16v is the most handsome and comfortable car of these three. Its not the most easy to work on, costs a lot of money to maintain properly and often lives in the shadow of the Williams - but its still a hell of a lot more reliable than a GT Turbo and is in my eyes the first car to take the 205 GTi concept further.

 

[Glennclio16v]

Wondered how long it would be till someone mentioned the GTT!!

I love my valver!

 

[Glennclio16v]

Anyhoo hows about a celica GTfour? Twin Turbo, 4WD bout 250bhp easily tuned to more? Aight!

 

[rockport]

maybe...



http://www.bestjapancar.com/TOYOTAS/185HFR5

 

[rockport]

opps, just add the *.jpg for the image

 

[JonC]

Fiat coupe 20V Turbo LE are pretty good for bang per buck. 220bhp, 227lb/ft, Cross drilled brembo brakes, 6 speed, sparco strut brace, Leather Recaro seats and trim, Air Con, can easily seat 4 adaults, large boot, passenger and driver airbags, 10 or 6 disk cd changer and Viscous front diff all as standard plus gorgeous Pinninfarina designed body.

0-60 - 6 secs, 0-100 - 14.5 secs, Top Speed 155mph, 30-70 - 5.3 secs.

These can be had for around £10k, although the standard Fiat Coupe 20V Turbo can be had for £7K.

 

[philglover]

GTiR? Theyve come down in price - lots of bang for buck!

 

[philglover]

ps I agree - valvers a fcukin fap-tastic car!

 

[RobFenn]

Jon -NOOOOO! Alfa GTV 3.0 much better

 

[rockport]

So we have :-

R5 Turbo

Pug 1.9

Clio 16v

MR2 GT 2.0 Turbo

GT 4 Celica 4wd Turbo

GTV 3.0

Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo (good find!!)

pulsar GTI-R

=======================================

Personally i think the GTI-R, MR2 Turbo, Celica Turbo come into the top 3... even tho they may not be the best at taking corners (not sure about the Celica, dont know much about them)



any more?

 

[rockport]

remember... its performance for 5$ loong time... does the alfa come cheap?

 

[JonC]

Quote: Originally posted by RobFenn on 07 January 2003

Jon -NOOOOO! Alfa GTV 3.0 much better

Nah, I test drove the Alfa before I bought the Fiat. Driving position is terrible. Basically yous have to have a gorilla-esk phisique, ie long arms and short legs to get comfortable. Still its a very good handling car, but I felt the Fiat was slightly better what with the front diff as well. You cant beat that turbo kick when it comes on song and I have beaten a few 3.0 V6 GTVs as well on all occasions. Oh and it has a usable boot and can seat 4 people as well.

 

[wongy008]

im llooking into the gt four too

there cheap now and well easy to insure

900 fully comp

600 for my vavler

if only i was not scared of the running cost and maintenance of thing thing

any one know more about this car

looks like ill be getting as ITR

wongy

 

[Eddd]

My mini. Paid IR£180 for it, drove it for 4 years. Felt like it was doing 100 all the time. Primitive form of ABS: you had to pump two or three times to wake up the brakes. Ahh the days before vehicle inspections! Not that long ago in Ireland!

 

[SteveJJH]

note on the mr2 turbo - its one turbo, but its twin entry.

Pulsar is alot of bang for your buck in my very biased opinion.

If youre not bothered about having a proper car then a westfield would be hard to beat, or a Fisher Fury.

What about a 2.8 litre Capri? as long as you can stand the embarrassment.

 

[RobFenn]

Quote: Originally posted by JonC on 07 January 2003

Quote: Originally posted by RobFenn on 07 January 2003

Jon -NOOOOO! Alfa GTV 3.0 much better

Nah, I test drove the Alfa before I bought the Fiat. Driving position is terrible. Basically yous have to have a gorilla-esk phisique, ie long arms and short legs to get comfortable. Still its a very good handling car, but I felt the Fiat was slightly better what with the front diff as well. You cant beat that turbo kick when it comes on song and I have beaten a few 3.0 V6 GTVs as well on all occasions. Oh and it has a usable boot and can seat 4 people as well.





Its not terrible, youre just not the right size! You dont buy an italian car to be comfortable or for practicality! The interior is so much more nice, in lusso trim anyway. The alfa is considerably better looking on the outside too! The earliest coupes were tolerable but the last of line ones with them bodykits..yuck. The fiat may have a 5cyl, which is good, but cant compete with the alfas shiny V6. Besides its got that italian neccessity, character. Not that im in anyway biast.

http://www.talus.co.uk/images/raero.jpg

http://www.gtvv6.com/gallery/kc_gtv2.jpg