Mustang Vs Infiniti Vs Rx-8
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 22,465
From: California
Originally Posted by JerryLH3' date='May 27 2003, 05:50 AM
When I read this in the magazine, I had a hard time understanding the cars they chose. I can understand a comparison between the G35 and the RX-8, but why did they throw a Mustang in there? The backseat is nowhere close to usable, and it just isn't the same type of car. An SVT Cobra really isn't meant to be civil in any way, unlike the other two.
I think they should have used the G35, the RX-8, and find a 3 series BMW for kicks.
I think they should have used the G35, the RX-8, and find a 3 series BMW for kicks.
mike
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 4,775
From: Ames, IA
Originally Posted by 9BASE3' date='May 27 2003, 11:25 AM
And probably wouldn't have done too well if that was the determining factor. 
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 875
From: Canberra Australia
Originally Posted by UniqueTII' date='May 27 2003, 07:33 AM
The RX-8 didn't win the competition based on its engine.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 4,775
From: Ames, IA
It won because it's light and stiff.
When people say things like:
"so they thought to throw in a V8 just to show that a rotor is better and to show us that if you want a real car, to buy a rotary"
and
"see ******* Rotaries kick ******* *** **** that. No car can compare to the Renesis. What!! I love em "
it's completely pointless because the car would have done even better with some midrange torque, which you can't get from an N/A rotary.
When people say things like:
"so they thought to throw in a V8 just to show that a rotor is better and to show us that if you want a real car, to buy a rotary"
and
"see ******* Rotaries kick ******* *** **** that. No car can compare to the Renesis. What!! I love em "
it's completely pointless because the car would have done even better with some midrange torque, which you can't get from an N/A rotary.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 22,465
From: California
Originally Posted by UniqueTII' date='May 27 2003, 09:09 AM
It won because it's light and stiff.
When people say things like:
"so they thought to throw in a V8 just to show that a rotor is better and to show us that if you want a real car, to buy a rotary"
and
"see ******* Rotaries kick ******* *** **** that. No car can compare to the Renesis. What!! I love em "
it's completely pointless because the car would have done even better with some midrange torque, which you can't get from an N/A rotary.
When people say things like:
"so they thought to throw in a V8 just to show that a rotor is better and to show us that if you want a real car, to buy a rotary"
and
"see ******* Rotaries kick ******* *** **** that. No car can compare to the Renesis. What!! I love em "
it's completely pointless because the car would have done even better with some midrange torque, which you can't get from an N/A rotary.
mike
Super Moderator
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,288
From: Amityville, New York
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 22,465
From: California
Originally Posted by Rob x-7' date='May 27 2003, 05:20 PM
mike
