how does the FC handles comparing to recent sports cars?
10-27-04, 11:21 AM
#51
couple of points:
1) a newer car cannot be upgraded by the same margin as an older car. in other words, the new car's suspension is already better, so you cant help it as much.
2) an fc already has 50/50 weight dist. well actually 49.8, 50.2, but thats what 20 lbs?
3) for 15k, you can have an fc that will beat basically any stock new sports car. it would also be even with most new sports cars with 5k worth of suspension mods.
4) as someone said before, handling is subjective. different people like different things, and one dirver may be faster in one car than another for that reason. after all, some people would call a cadillac the best handling car.
bottom line is, if you have unlimited funds, a newer car can be made to handle better than the 7. However, if youre on a budget, then an fc is a great choice, because for 1/3 the price, it can be competitive with even modded new cars. is it the best car ever built? who cares! its still a nice car, and i like mine not only because its fast and cheap, but just because i like it.
1) a newer car cannot be upgraded by the same margin as an older car. in other words, the new car's suspension is already better, so you cant help it as much.
2) an fc already has 50/50 weight dist. well actually 49.8, 50.2, but thats what 20 lbs?
3) for 15k, you can have an fc that will beat basically any stock new sports car. it would also be even with most new sports cars with 5k worth of suspension mods.
4) as someone said before, handling is subjective. different people like different things, and one dirver may be faster in one car than another for that reason. after all, some people would call a cadillac the best handling car.
bottom line is, if you have unlimited funds, a newer car can be made to handle better than the 7. However, if youre on a budget, then an fc is a great choice, because for 1/3 the price, it can be competitive with even modded new cars. is it the best car ever built? who cares! its still a nice car, and i like mine not only because its fast and cheap, but just because i like it.
10-27-04, 11:24 AM
#52
a modded fc will compare to a vette. and liek i said before, a vette has no room for improvement. its already close to state of the art suspension, so what are you gonna 'fix'?
case in point: a friend of mine holds a track record at daytona in a vette, and has raced lots of vettes. he bought my old fc to make into an autox car.
pat
case in point: a friend of mine holds a track record at daytona in a vette, and has raced lots of vettes. he bought my old fc to make into an autox car.
pat
10-27-04, 11:26 AM
#53
stop stealing my avatar
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Canton MI
Posts: 825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes the FC can be made to handle well. I belive mine handles very nicely..tein HR, DTTS elim bushings, s5t2 rims, 225/50/16 yoko es100's. However the problem with the fc chassis is it won't accept large tires up front. FD guys can run 255's all the way around..whine we are stuck w/235's in the stock front fenders. Yes you could widebody it..but 9/10 people arn't going to go that far w/their cars.
also, if you want *hard numbers* start going to autocrosses. the t2 can do wel in it's class, however it can't compete with the FD, Z06, and lotus elise. na's have a very hard time beating miatas and crx's.
also, if you want *hard numbers* start going to autocrosses. the t2 can do wel in it's class, however it can't compete with the FD, Z06, and lotus elise. na's have a very hard time beating miatas and crx's.
10-27-04, 11:50 AM
#54
Eat, sleep, work, mod.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It sounds like you guys put way too much faith in numbers. They don't tell the story of how a car actually feels to the driver. What handles "better" is a relative term since many drivers want a different feel from their cars. I'd wager that 95% of you have NEVER been on a road course and have NEVER been to a racing school. And I don't wanna hear about autocrossing as an example because, while it's fun, it's not a race track and one should never be used as the basis for one in an argument.
I'm also not sure what "modernizing" a suspension means. For most sports cars, a spring/strut/shock combo with anti-roll bars, rubber bushings and aluminum/steel subframes/control arms. For a car to corner at it's best, it needs a fairly wide range of adjustment and lots of time with trial and error as well as data comparison (lap times, tire temps, tire wear etc...).
Another thing that many people just faily to realize is the importance of TIRES. In a way, they are the most critical component of car because everything you want your car to do MUST transmit through the tires. Tire choice (model/size) can effect literally everything the car does that is important on a track: acceleration, braking, cornering. Any suspension setup can literally be transformed with tire choice, it makes all the difference.
And why do I keep hearing about how great the WRX handles...sure, they feel great and surefooted on the street but the WRX is not well suited for a road course. They feel heavy, dull and are just plain slow. Rallying and street duty are a great match for the WRX.
As for the FC, it's blessed with a fantastic chassis that is rigid, forgiving and easy to work with. Of course it's not the best thing since sliced bread as many may think, but they can be extremely competitive and often dominate SCCA ITS competition. Season after season the NA FC's are among the front runners and out own shops E30 BMW has to fight it out with them
http://www.flatout-motorsports.com/results.php
I'm also not sure what "modernizing" a suspension means. For most sports cars, a spring/strut/shock combo with anti-roll bars, rubber bushings and aluminum/steel subframes/control arms. For a car to corner at it's best, it needs a fairly wide range of adjustment and lots of time with trial and error as well as data comparison (lap times, tire temps, tire wear etc...).
Another thing that many people just faily to realize is the importance of TIRES. In a way, they are the most critical component of car because everything you want your car to do MUST transmit through the tires. Tire choice (model/size) can effect literally everything the car does that is important on a track: acceleration, braking, cornering. Any suspension setup can literally be transformed with tire choice, it makes all the difference.
And why do I keep hearing about how great the WRX handles...sure, they feel great and surefooted on the street but the WRX is not well suited for a road course. They feel heavy, dull and are just plain slow. Rallying and street duty are a great match for the WRX.
As for the FC, it's blessed with a fantastic chassis that is rigid, forgiving and easy to work with. Of course it's not the best thing since sliced bread as many may think, but they can be extremely competitive and often dominate SCCA ITS competition. Season after season the NA FC's are among the front runners and out own shops E30 BMW has to fight it out with them
http://www.flatout-motorsports.com/results.php
10-27-04, 12:16 PM
#55
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by digitalsolo
They asked how it handled compared to a current sports car... C5 is a current sports car...
It's not comparable because it's a different caliber of car. It wouldn't be appropriate to compare the FC to a Yugo either.
10-27-04, 12:46 PM
#56
Full Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Panama City, Panama
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actually it really depends on the driver...if you really don't know how to drive an fc say without power steering you would of course automatically go for an rx-8 which has power steering and allows easier manuverability. my verdict: get some actual professionals to try this out.
p.s. 2nd gen = FC 3rd gen = FD RX-8 = FE? lol
p.s. 2nd gen = FC 3rd gen = FD RX-8 = FE? lol
10-27-04, 02:37 PM
#59
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California, Bay Area
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bukwild
are you talking the suspension on a t2 or a NA. I think a t2 suspension is way better than a NA. Its actually a low buck upgrade for all you NA low ballers.
10-27-04, 02:47 PM
#60
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California, Bay Area
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by YearsOfDecay
I think this guy was originally talking about STOCK cars.....
Also... Handling should not be confused with POWER... a car that does not handle quite as well, but make huge power numbers can easily beat a better handling but underpowered car. Lets take the 8 verses the 350Z The 8 gives up 50 HP to the Z.... but beats it on the track by a slim margin because it take the corners faster. But give the Z another 50 HP and it would be a blowout in favor of the Z, especially on a track with long straits.
an s4 TII handles good even by todays standards.... However, those damn 28 lb wheels really cut down on handling properties.
an s5 TII Handles a bit better due in part to lighter wheels.
An S5 GTU S handles better than the TII, if slightly, because of the lighter weight.
A stock third gen will kick all their asses.
A stock rx-8 will kill them all.
Also... Handling should not be confused with POWER... a car that does not handle quite as well, but make huge power numbers can easily beat a better handling but underpowered car. Lets take the 8 verses the 350Z The 8 gives up 50 HP to the Z.... but beats it on the track by a slim margin because it take the corners faster. But give the Z another 50 HP and it would be a blowout in favor of the Z, especially on a track with long straits.
an s4 TII handles good even by todays standards.... However, those damn 28 lb wheels really cut down on handling properties.
an s5 TII Handles a bit better due in part to lighter wheels.
An S5 GTU S handles better than the TII, if slightly, because of the lighter weight.
A stock third gen will kick all their asses.
A stock rx-8 will kill them all.
btw, in solo2 the rx8 is in B stock with the t2, whereas the 3rd gen is in SS, two classes above it
10-27-04, 03:09 PM
#61
Eat, sleep, work, mod.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by drago86
A stock rx8 is no where near the level of a third gen, its way to mushy stock. On the Best motoring track test the rx8 was passed by every car (rsx, skyline (new one, g35c here), 350z, bmw 3 seiers, s2k, and a wrx) but the miata,.... granted some of that was power but the drivers commented on how the rx8 was slightly slower in the corners than the much heavier skyline. It did score high in fun to drive, but got owned on the autocross course aswell. Fun to drive is what your comparing not overall potential, the 3rd gen has double wishbones front and rear which is still the best set up to date, they will hang with and car in the handling department and because of there light weight will best cars with much more HP then they have.
btw, in solo2 the rx8 is in B stock with the t2, whereas the 3rd gen is in SS, two classes above it
btw, in solo2 the rx8 is in B stock with the t2, whereas the 3rd gen is in SS, two classes above it
10-27-04, 03:10 PM
#62
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California, Bay Area
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, lest look at this from a technical aspect of the fc3s suspension,..
Front suspension : macphersen strut with a lower L arm
Ok, its not the best set up around but its decent, it will never have as precise control over the wheel as a double wishbone though.
http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_s...nsion2.htm#Mac
^link about mcpherson strut if you dont know how they work/ there handling properties.
Rear suspension: semi trailing arms
Crap,... old *** technology,.. mazda did a pretty good job of covering this up with the DTSS system but that has its limits. semi trailing arms have very poor toe control, they like to toe out when cornering hard which causes snap oversteer and reduced cornering force. the dtss system coveres this up nicly its 20 years old now and probably not working like it should.
http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_s...spension21.htm
^ look at the Weissach axle suspension, that is pretty much how our rear suspensions behave with the dtss system working properly, without it you have a regular semi trailing arm suspension with poor toe control.
so overall,.. the FC has a pretty aged suspension system with imprecice rear toe control, and imprecise front camber/ toe control,.... its semi light weight helps it though,.. and it can be made decent when you start upgrading it, but it can never compete with a doublewishbone or multi link suspension in a car of the same weight,.. the FC is a good handling car, dont get me wrong, but the shear potential is limited by its suspension design...
Front suspension : macphersen strut with a lower L arm
Ok, its not the best set up around but its decent, it will never have as precise control over the wheel as a double wishbone though.
http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_s...nsion2.htm#Mac
^link about mcpherson strut if you dont know how they work/ there handling properties.
Rear suspension: semi trailing arms
Crap,... old *** technology,.. mazda did a pretty good job of covering this up with the DTSS system but that has its limits. semi trailing arms have very poor toe control, they like to toe out when cornering hard which causes snap oversteer and reduced cornering force. the dtss system coveres this up nicly its 20 years old now and probably not working like it should.
http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_s...spension21.htm
^ look at the Weissach axle suspension, that is pretty much how our rear suspensions behave with the dtss system working properly, without it you have a regular semi trailing arm suspension with poor toe control.
so overall,.. the FC has a pretty aged suspension system with imprecice rear toe control, and imprecise front camber/ toe control,.... its semi light weight helps it though,.. and it can be made decent when you start upgrading it, but it can never compete with a doublewishbone or multi link suspension in a car of the same weight,.. the FC is a good handling car, dont get me wrong, but the shear potential is limited by its suspension design...
10-27-04, 03:17 PM
#63
Originally Posted by Snrub
The Mosler MT900S is also a current sports car. It's not comparable because it's a different caliber of car. It wouldn't be appropriate to compare the FC to a Yugo either.
It's not comparable because it's a different caliber of car. It wouldn't be appropriate to compare the FC to a Yugo either.It's to heavy: Someone proves it's lighter...
Weight balance is bad: Someone builds one 50:50
well... uh, we make more power per liter: Someone does a 2.3 Turbo swap
well... IT HAS NO SOUL NOW!!!!!
I'm certainly wrong sometimes, but at least I can admit it.
This argument is no different in spirit. If someone asks "can the FC be made to perform on par with current sports cars, in handling performance only" then certainly, the answer would be yes. They didn't ask that. If you notice, the cars I named earlier, none of them (except perhaps the Viper) is a supercar by any means. Most of them are budget cars for their sector, excluding maybe the Z06. Is an EVO or a WRX not a current incarnation of what the FC was intended to be?
Come on guys, they asked vs. current sports cars... just because it's not better straight off doesn't make it a bad car. or does everyone here have such a small dick they need to use their car to compensate?
I swear, maybe I need to use smaller words around some of you guys.
10-27-04, 03:41 PM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: ...
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All I have to say is tires make the difference. Technology changes and things get more advanced. IF they had the same "tech" tires and suspension they would be more evenly matched. OBVIOUSLY not stock for a 15 year old car.
10-27-04, 03:46 PM
#65
dude, EVO or WRX do not handle better than a TII. nobody said anythign was wrong with v8 swaps. if you like it, go for it. I like rotary engines,and i like the way it handles, thats why i drive a 7, otherwise id get a supra or a vette. another thing, if the 7 has worse handling than an evo, why didnt you put the V8 in an evo? i mean other than the 13B and the good handling, what does a 7 have?
i never understood the whole car/dick comparison thing. wtf? what does a car have to do with your dick? and whos the one here blabbing off about how much better their car is than ours?
pat
i never understood the whole car/dick comparison thing. wtf? what does a car have to do with your dick? and whos the one here blabbing off about how much better their car is than ours?
pat
10-27-04, 04:03 PM
#66
Eat, sleep, work, mod.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by patman
dude, EVO or WRX do not handle better than a TII. nobody said anythign was wrong with v8 swaps. if you like it, go for it. I like rotary engines,and i like the way it handles, thats why i drive a 7, otherwise id get a supra or a vette. another thing, if the 7 has worse handling than an evo, why didnt you put the V8 in an evo? i mean other than the 13B and the good handling, what does a 7 have?
I still love the WRX though - we wouldn't work on the so frequently or specialize in them if we didn't heheThis thread is getting redundant...I'm done hehe
10-27-04, 04:41 PM
#67
Originally Posted by patman
dude, EVO or WRX do not handle better than a TII. nobody said anythign was wrong with v8 swaps. if you like it, go for it. I like rotary engines,and i like the way it handles, thats why i drive a 7, otherwise id get a supra or a vette. another thing, if the 7 has worse handling than an evo, why didnt you put the V8 in an evo? i mean other than the 13B and the good handling, what does a 7 have?
i never understood the whole car/dick comparison thing. wtf? what does a car have to do with your dick? and whos the one here blabbing off about how much better their car is than ours?
pat
i never understood the whole car/dick comparison thing. wtf? what does a car have to do with your dick? and whos the one here blabbing off about how much better their car is than ours?
pat
And who's bragging about having a better car? I have an '86 FC? Goober.
10-27-04, 04:45 PM
#68
well, granted i only drove the evo for 15 miles or so, but i didnt like it at all. wasnt near as tightas my TII. wrx , on the other hand, i have driven many times. feels a lot like a mustang: fat and slow. i know you have an fc, but whats all this stuff about how your v8 7 is better no matter how people try to say it isnt? and why the little retarded names on every post? didnt think they let you drive cars in the 3rd grade.
Anyhow, i put in my .02, and this thread is turning to crap anyway, so i'll leave you alone and let you argue on your own.
Anyhow, i put in my .02, and this thread is turning to crap anyway, so i'll leave you alone and let you argue on your own.
Last edited by patman; 10-27-04 at 04:47 PM.
![ShIvER[PT]'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%236b9379' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>S</text></svg>)
10-27-04, 08:27 PM
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/Stony Brook Univ.
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dDuB
But that's not a stock fc anymore is it? If we're talking stock vs. stock that's a whole nother ball game than what one COULD do.
Are you kidding, where the hell would we all get stock 16 year old tire technology? Besides I think you can consider tires like gas, just cause you can get higher octane fuel, doesn't make the car not stock. I think same can be said for brake pads or any other maintenance item (Coolant, Oil, etc).
10-27-04, 08:59 PM
#72
i am legendary
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kirkland, WA
Posts: 8,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by drft_180sx
Are you kidding, where the hell would we all get stock 16 year old tire technology? Besides I think you can consider tires like gas, just cause you can get higher octane fuel, doesn't make the car not stock. I think same can be said for brake pads or any other maintenance item (Coolant, Oil, etc).
"Newer technology better handling... stick the same shocks and tires on a FC and I think it would impress.."
I was more referring to that... Changing the shocks is definitely not stock. I wasn't necessarily referring to tire brand/quality, but tire SIZE. The stock FC does not come with 225's, that's an upgrade. But yes technically you can say tires is no big deal, even though wider tires can make a world of difference.
10-27-04, 09:33 PM
#73
Full Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: salisbury nc
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
first off, this 50/50 thing is way over rated. what happens when you step on the gas? or slam on the brakes? exactly. and for the handeling, all i know is that it kills my friends crx, anothers prelude, and a thirds v6 camaro. It slaughters the camaro hands down. Im talking like road courses, not off the line. I know an r7's place isnt on the drag, well na's anyway.
10-28-04, 11:12 AM
#74
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by digitalsolo
It cracks me up how you turdburglars on here will malalign the questions and the reasoning to make the FC the best... same holds true for the rotary vs. V8 arguments...
This argument is no different in spirit. If someone asks "can the FC be made to perform on par with current sports cars, in handling performance only" then certainly, the answer would be yes. They didn't ask that. If you notice, the cars I named earlier, none of them (except perhaps the Viper) is a supercar by any means. Most of them are budget cars for their sector, excluding maybe the Z06. Is an EVO or a WRX not a current incarnation of what the FC was intended to be?
Come on guys, they asked vs. current sports cars... just because it's not better straight off doesn't make it a bad car. or does everyone here have such a small dick they need to use their car to compensate? I swear, maybe I need to use smaller words around some of you guys.
This argument is no different in spirit. If someone asks "can the FC be made to perform on par with current sports cars, in handling performance only" then certainly, the answer would be yes. They didn't ask that. If you notice, the cars I named earlier, none of them (except perhaps the Viper) is a supercar by any means. Most of them are budget cars for their sector, excluding maybe the Z06. Is an EVO or a WRX not a current incarnation of what the FC was intended to be?
Come on guys, they asked vs. current sports cars... just because it's not better straight off doesn't make it a bad car. or does everyone here have such a small dick they need to use their car to compensate?
I swear, maybe I need to use smaller words around some of you guys.You've twisted things rather bizzarly, although once doing that I can see how you managed to bring the V8 arguement in. Let me say this, I will never critisize someone for dropping a LS1 in a FC, but I honestly don't think most people doing engine swaps are doing them for intelligent reasons. Dropping in an old V8 or turbo Ford 2.3L engine of similar or slightly higher HP than stock 13BT doesn't make sense given the effort, cost and disadvantages they bring.
10-28-04, 12:30 PM
#75
Originally Posted by Snrub
You've got a bit of a chip on your shoulders and you've blown a simple comment WAY out of perportion and you've posted in an insulting manner. First my earlier comments weren't directed soley at your comments. I've got no problem if you want to compare the FC to a Evo or WRX, infact I did earlier. A TII when it was new was probably worth ~$35k CDN in today's funds, whereas a Z06 is worth $80k CDN. A C5 Z06 isn't in the same ball park.
You've twisted things rather bizzarly, although once doing that I can see how you managed to bring the V8 arguement in. Let me say this, I will never critisize someone for dropping a LS1 in a FC, but I honestly don't think most people doing engine swaps are doing them for intelligent reasons. Dropping in an old V8 or turbo Ford 2.3L engine of similar or slightly higher HP than stock 13BT doesn't make sense given the effort, cost and disadvantages they bring.
You've twisted things rather bizzarly, although once doing that I can see how you managed to bring the V8 arguement in. Let me say this, I will never critisize someone for dropping a LS1 in a FC, but I honestly don't think most people doing engine swaps are doing them for intelligent reasons. Dropping in an old V8 or turbo Ford 2.3L engine of similar or slightly higher HP than stock 13BT doesn't make sense given the effort, cost and disadvantages they bring.
I'm not particularly different in opinion from yourself on the matter. My apologies if I came off impolitely.
I didn't bring in the piston argument just for the sake of it, but rather because it parallels some of the arguments and points I've seen in this thread. I suppose there are plenty of other discussions that do as well, that one was just fresh in my mind.