Reports! CR-Z 1.6 TURBO NEXT YEAR!
#42
12-06-2010, 06:39 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
How did you like the Evo X/9's? They come with a reverse rotation, divided 10cm2 housing TD05H turbine attached to a Ti 16G compressor wheel correct?
453AWTQ is pretty impressive from "only" a 16G! Was that on pump gas?
Gotta love AMS and the turnkey beasts they create, but if it weren't for their prices and waiting list I might not have learned to tune for myself
I've only driven an X once, and loved every minute but it was only a test drive. That 4B11T is looking just as potent as my beloved 4G6x's!
I think if I tire of the DSMs, as they are now two decades old and in all honesty require lots of love, in spite of being arguably the cheapest 10sec cars on the planet... I will be moving on up to an Evo8 (4G63) or the X!
So what made you decide on joining the Fit community?
Last edited by DiamondStarMonsters; 12-06-2010 at 06:50 PM.
#43
12-06-2010, 06:41 PM
Refreshing to see some reasonable, realistic, well informed viewpoints on these kinds of things. We probably won't see this car in the US, like most cars that have similar qualities. Too small anyways, and honestly, I'm not really finding the CR-Z to be that striking. I think they need to just basically offer it without the hybrid technology as a base model and just make it a cheaper car. Wouldn't it be faster and sportier than a Fit or current CR-Z without the extra weight, while retaining the six speed? How much does the hybrid system weigh? It's a tiny freaking car.
edit: c'mon Honda, at least bedazzle me with some crazy LEDs on the front or something. I saw one the other day that was dirty, and it looked downright cheap. The S2000 ap2 had an amazing presence with similar cues. What went wrong?? I blame pedestrian crash tests. The nose needs to come down to more of a point, like a lancia or something.
Then there's the high beltline, which without the side impact ratings, would be lower, as well as the whole profile of the car. One thing more people need to understand when looking at a car, is all the limitations, because those are what you are working within. The end result is basically the result of compliance through creative problem solving.
edit: c'mon Honda, at least bedazzle me with some crazy LEDs on the front or something. I saw one the other day that was dirty, and it looked downright cheap. The S2000 ap2 had an amazing presence with similar cues. What went wrong?? I blame pedestrian crash tests. The nose needs to come down to more of a point, like a lancia or something.
Then there's the high beltline, which without the side impact ratings, would be lower, as well as the whole profile of the car. One thing more people need to understand when looking at a car, is all the limitations, because those are what you are working within. The end result is basically the result of compliance through creative problem solving.The CRX, The Mustang 5.0, The AE86 and the 300zx back then. Now each one is bringing back the escense of what they actually offered back in the 80's, CRX is TRYING to bring back the pocket rocket fuel efficiency, but this time is not the CRX HF, it is now the Hybrid, then came the Si, seems like it is happening all over again, the AE86, practicality, 4 seats, good handling , small size strong and agile engine, the 5.0 offered big power on a budget.
If all this works out, I can see Mazda bringing back the RX7, for me there are two options to consider, Twenty five year-old Toyota AE86 Corolla and the Honda CRX are two radical examples of manufacturers meeting the needs of consumers, so I am deciding between the FT-86 and the CR-Z Turbo (Si?)
#44
12-06-2010, 06:48 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Yea the cage, it's cost and what it implies is usually seperates the serious mature guys from the 16 year olds who buy them, neglect them and then blow them up by turning up the boost on the stock computer without supplying enough fuel or overrun the MAS and go boom!
Which is why we get such a bad reputation, not to mention all the little pricks who saw Fast N Furious then ran out to buy a non-turbo 2G and rice it to hell and back...
#45
12-06-2010, 06:49 PM
If you think about it, it seems like it is back to the 80's again...
The CRX, The Mustang 5.0, The AE86 and the 300zx back then. Now each one is bringing back the escense of what they actually offered back in the 80's, CRX is TRYING to bring back the pocket rocket fuel efficiency, but this time is not the CRX HF, it is now the Hybrid, then came the Si, seems like it is happening all over again, the AE86, practicality, 4 seats, good handling , small size strong and agile engine, the 5.0 offered big power on a budget.
If all this works out, I can see Mazda bringing back the RX7, for me there are two options to consider, Twenty five year-old Toyota AE86 Corolla and the Honda CRX are two radical examples of manufacturers meeting the needs of consumers, so I am deciding between the FT-86 and the CR-Z Turbo (Si?)
The CRX, The Mustang 5.0, The AE86 and the 300zx back then. Now each one is bringing back the escense of what they actually offered back in the 80's, CRX is TRYING to bring back the pocket rocket fuel efficiency, but this time is not the CRX HF, it is now the Hybrid, then came the Si, seems like it is happening all over again, the AE86, practicality, 4 seats, good handling , small size strong and agile engine, the 5.0 offered big power on a budget.
If all this works out, I can see Mazda bringing back the RX7, for me there are two options to consider, Twenty five year-old Toyota AE86 Corolla and the Honda CRX are two radical examples of manufacturers meeting the needs of consumers, so I am deciding between the FT-86 and the CR-Z Turbo (Si?)
Last edited by hayden; 12-06-2010 at 06:50 PM. Reason: added quote
#46
12-06-2010, 06:51 PM
Very nice!
How did you like the Evo X/9's? They come with a reverse rotation, divided 10cm2 housing TD05H turbine attached to a 16G compressor wheel correct?
453AWTQ is pretty impressive from "only" a 16G! Was that on pump gas?
I've only driven an X once, and loved every minute but it was only a test drive. That 4B11T is looking just as potent as my beloved 4G6x's!
I think if I tire of the DSMs, as they are now two decades old and in all honesty require lots of love, in spite of being arguably the cheapest 10sec cars on the planet... I will be moving on up to an Evo8 (4G63) or the X!
So what made you decide on joining the Fit community?
How did you like the Evo X/9's? They come with a reverse rotation, divided 10cm2 housing TD05H turbine attached to a 16G compressor wheel correct?
453AWTQ is pretty impressive from "only" a 16G! Was that on pump gas?
I've only driven an X once, and loved every minute but it was only a test drive. That 4B11T is looking just as potent as my beloved 4G6x's!
I think if I tire of the DSMs, as they are now two decades old and in all honesty require lots of love, in spite of being arguably the cheapest 10sec cars on the planet... I will be moving on up to an Evo8 (4G63) or the X!
So what made you decide on joining the Fit community?
The X, is too much of a good thing, it has all the things you would expect from more expensive cars, but not neccesarily good things to have on a true entry level club racer, a very intrusive traction control, aluminum semi open deck block, a hard to work on ECU (too smart for my taste LOL), heavier than what a 2.0 engine should be.
DSMs time (IMHO) passed.
I bought the Fit, because I like small courses road racing, and it is a car easy to mantain, with a underdog appeal, LOL!
Edit: the 400+ whp on the blue X was on pump and alky, yes the X contrary to all other previous USDM EVOs has a normal rotation turbo. My blue X turbo was a 20g wheel on a OEM turbo by a local turbo shop called Yiyito Turbo.
Last edited by fargasj; 12-06-2010 at 06:59 PM.
#47
12-06-2010, 06:53 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
All very true! I heard something about the ever elusive "new rx-7" the other day from a relative. Looks like it's on Mazda's radar again. Saw a Supra Turbo convertible right before the dsm today actually, and that brings up another point about that generation of cars. FT-86 won't cut it, doesn't sound like. Going after Hyundai with that one, I think.
#48
12-06-2010, 06:53 PM
Actually, it had full intake and exhaust, lowered with dampers, tasteful 17s. Stock tails. hahaha It was a fun little car. Sounded great with the header and a Brullen stuck on the end of the whole deal. Was a good deal lighter too, being that it was an RS, but I added the turbo wing and side skirts. Sorry dude!
I think I got rid of that car for the TDI right when that movie came out, or thereabouts.
#49
12-06-2010, 06:55 PM
Certified car nut by birth.
#50
12-06-2010, 07:00 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
I am sure that the best EVO is the 9, light enough, Mivec, hard as nails engine, easy maintenance, IMHO, the last TRUE Evo...
The X, is too much of a good thing, it has all the things you would expect from more expensive cars, but not neccesarily good things to have on a true entry level club racer, a very intrusive traction control, aluminum semi open deck block, a hard to work on ECU (too smart for my taste LOL), heavier than what a 2.0 engine should be.
DSMs time (IMHO) passed.
I bought the Fit, because I like small courses road racing, and it is a car easy to mantain, with a underdog appeal, LOL!
The X, is too much of a good thing, it has all the things you would expect from more expensive cars, but not neccesarily good things to have on a true entry level club racer, a very intrusive traction control, aluminum semi open deck block, a hard to work on ECU (too smart for my taste LOL), heavier than what a 2.0 engine should be.
DSMs time (IMHO) passed.
I bought the Fit, because I like small courses road racing, and it is a car easy to mantain, with a underdog appeal, LOL!
I would agree, DSMs will eventually (if they haven't already) become a thing of the past
I have been looking into using a MIVEC head on a 6-bolt, it can be done and has before, but by those with more time and bigger wallets than I, it looks like it may be too expensive for my tastes.But I still get that chill when I see a clean built 1G!
I guess I will have to start reading up and looking for used/abused 9s.
What do you use to tune your X? Did you have to fork over for an AEM?
#51
12-06-2010, 07:03 PM
I had several RX7s, very nice car, no torque, but if kept on their very long sweet spot (6,500rpm+), UFFFF. The only down point I see is emmisions nowadays, but I would buy a TRUE RX7 if they ever decide to make one again.
#52
12-06-2010, 07:06 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Well, for the record, I had my 2g non-turbo all tricked years before the movie came out.
Actually, it had full intake and exhaust, lowered with dampers, tasteful 17s. Stock tails. hahaha It was a fun little car. Sounded great with the header and a Brullen stuck on the end of the whole deal. Was a good deal lighter too, being that it was an RS, but I added the turbo wing and side skirts. Sorry dude!
I think I got rid of that car for the TDI right when that movie came out, or thereabouts.
Actually, it had full intake and exhaust, lowered with dampers, tasteful 17s. Stock tails. hahaha It was a fun little car. Sounded great with the header and a Brullen stuck on the end of the whole deal. Was a good deal lighter too, being that it was an RS, but I added the turbo wing and side skirts. Sorry dude!
I think I got rid of that car for the TDI right when that movie came out, or thereabouts.
Sorry. As you can tell I am a bit jaded there. There are all motor 2Gs in the 14s! Some have success circuit/AutoX racing as well!
I can always appreciate a well put together car. I think any real auto enthusiast can say the same. Even more respect for garage builds, you gotta start/learn somehow after all!
Too many times though have I been called a ricer or whatever and associated with that f%^&ing movie... till it comes time to put their money where there mouth is
I live on the North side of Chicago and have embarrassed many a rich douche in their GT2s/M5s/E55s, what have you.
Mustangs and Vettes don't even look at me, they hear the big cam lope and the whistle from the BorgWarner and creep away from red lights... it's like they've learned the hard way from someone else
#53
12-06-2010, 07:06 PM
hYdra when I used stand alones, and re-flash at the begining; I did 11.3 on pump gas on the EVO9 using hYdra EMS
#54
12-06-2010, 07:11 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Those rotaries spit out a lot of exhaust gases for their size, and on a fuel like E85/98 they can and do spool even monster GT42Rs with only 1.3L!
You're right about emissions though.. so maybe we should just buy the real deal since it is pre-OBD2 and exempt! (at least around here)
#55
12-06-2010, 07:14 PM
The Car that did it all well:
Records in Drag racing (first evo x to do 10), road racing (fastest street tire car at local track), auto shows and car magazines (Turbo Magazine and D Sport)
Records in Drag racing (first evo x to do 10), road racing (fastest street tire car at local track), auto shows and car magazines (Turbo Magazine and D Sport)
#56
12-06-2010, 07:15 PM
No sweat! I laugh at the thought of that ride all the time. I think also, when I had it, it was still a new car on the street, and certainly a looker. As time went on, it became more of a ricey car. I appreciated it's design so much at the time. Who couldn't? I eventually convinced my bro to get a GSX, and we enjoyed that one quite a bit. I had a dodge raider prior, and that was another dsm creation. I got the history with that whole collaboration now that I think about it huh?
#57
12-06-2010, 07:16 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
That is amazing for such a comparably heavy car!
My 2500lb Laser with full interior and only FWD components installed, ran a best 12.4xx @ 108mph on pump 93 using the 14B spiking to 21psi and holding 18.x psi to redline with 18* peak timing (logged with an AEM 5bar MAP sensor) AFR was 11.2:1 at the time (hot humid day, bad for power but great for traction!)
#58
12-06-2010, 07:17 PM
I guess that's why he has a diesel excursion now. Well, that and my old Mazdaspeed MX-5 with a few mods. I keep trying to get him to install the roll bar I never got around to doing. He doesn't want to add to the weight. He's 69! Go dad! Just not too fast!
#59
12-06-2010, 07:18 PM
Hydra saved the Mazdaspeed miatas ass in the tuning realm. I think those guys are doing around 285 reliably on stock internals last time I checked the board.
#60
12-06-2010, 07:20 PM
A fast car keeps you young, until you wrap it around a light pole! The FDs even look fast. I was surpised at how many people will throw out the wankel and drop a 383 V8 in there. Or MAPerformance who put a 850rwhp 4G63 in theirs and click of 8sec passes..
Agreed, like our fits they are anemic down low, maybe worse (its been a while since I've been in an FD3) I think with a twinscroll turbo, or properly matched compounds you might be able to take care of that.
Those rotaries spit out a lot of exhaust gases for their size, and on a fuel like E85/98 they can and do spool even monster GT42Rs with only 1.3L!
You're right about emissions though.. so maybe we should just buy the real deal since it is pre-OBD2 and exempt! (at least around here)
Agreed, like our fits they are anemic down low, maybe worse (its been a while since I've been in an FD3) I think with a twinscroll turbo, or properly matched compounds you might be able to take care of that.
Those rotaries spit out a lot of exhaust gases for their size, and on a fuel like E85/98 they can and do spool even monster GT42Rs with only 1.3L!
You're right about emissions though.. so maybe we should just buy the real deal since it is pre-OBD2 and exempt! (at least around here)
The good thing is that I would be able to buy one cheap and keep my FIT for daily usage, LMAO