FD v.s. honda S2000
09-11-06, 04:45 AM
#76
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well the way I see it the FD SHITTY low end torque...........it has none........and if you say the S2K is not as torquey as the FD then it doesn't say much about the S2K.......i know and admit when a car is fast..........the S2K is not fast......
09-11-06, 10:28 AM
#77
He who smokes bitches
Originally Posted by MaxBoost
i think the car in my sig is greater than all, best of both worlds
09-11-06, 01:05 PM
#81
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i was going to leave him alone with his daydreaming............if he thinks those cars are fast then let him........I know better. and if by well modified he means Turbo/SC then yes they are fast....otherwise no.
09-11-06, 01:38 PM
#82
He who smokes bitches
Originally Posted by Batmobile
Steve is that challenge? ehehehehhe
probably not for another year though, so i really shouldnt talk
. But my DD will stay rotary powered.
09-11-06, 10:32 PM
#95
Embassador to SOY
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA.
Posts: 4,194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Madrx7racer
i was going to leave him alone with his daydreaming............if he thinks those cars are fast then let him........I know better. and if by well modified he means Turbo/SC then yes they are fast....otherwise no.
LOFL! I'd like to see an N/A FD beat an N/A S2K. Stock for stock = Neck and neck. FD without turbo = teh humungously ghey
09-12-06, 01:09 AM
#97
Originally Posted by SERIES7
LOFL! I'd like to see an N/A FD beat an N/A S2K. Stock for stock = Neck and neck. FD without turbo = teh humungously ghey