Drove a modified WRX-STi this afternoon

[TerryMathews]

Just want to point out that good condition early C4s (84-90) have dipped into the sub $10k range on the used market. I just paid $12.7k for a great condition used 1991 'vert. 13.8 in the 1/4, bone stock. A couple mods you can do yourself for free or close to it will put that down more into the 13.5 range.

Doesn't really have much to do with Subarus or Porsches, but it's a damn good bargain none-the-less.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: TerryMathews
Just want to point out that good condition early C4s (84-90) have dipped into the sub $10k range on the used market. I just paid $12.7k for a great condition used 1991 'vert. 13.8 in the 1/4, bone stock. A couple mods you can do yourself for free or close to it will put that down more into the 13.5 range.

Doesn't really have much to do with Subarus or Porsches, but it's a damn good bargain none-the-less.

84-90 C4? WTF is a C4? A Vette? Those were some of the worst vettes ever made (well, except for the late 70s early 80s models-those are probably worse). Yeah, maybe it would have done 13.8 stock but a 14 year old Vette will not do 13.8 in the 1/4. Not gonna happen. Not without a lot of work. Even the early 90s Vettes were horrible. Show me a stock early 90s Vette with 80k miles and I'll show you a rattling bucket of bolts that probably needs thousands of dollars of repairs. Hmm, yeah...that's a good investment. :roll:

 

[TerryMathews]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus84-90 C4? WTF is a C4? A Vette? Those were some of the worst vettes ever made (well, except for the late 70s early 80s models-those are probably worse). Yeah, maybe it would have done 13.8 stock but a 14 year old Vette will not do 13.8 in the 1/4. Not gonna happen. Not without a lot of work. Even the early 90s Vettes were horrible. Show me a stock early 90s Vette with 80k miles and I'll show you a rattling bucket of bolts that probably needs thousands of dollars of repairs. Hmm, yeah...that's a good investment. :roll:

BS. I've got one out in the driveway that says you're wrong. Properly maintained, they're great cars. Proper maintenance meaning regular oil changes, spark plugs replaced at proper intervals, filters replaced, etc.

It's pretty hard to spend "thousands of dollars" on the engine and transmission of a Vette. The 350 smallblock and 4L60E (auto) or ZF6 (manual) have been around for a very long time, are very standard when it comes to GM parts, and incredibly easy to both find parts for and fix.

You could, of course, spend tens of thousands of dollars on the interior of a Vette. Or, you could be smart and buy a Vette with a nice interior to start with. There are NCRS award-winning Vettes being sold under or around $10k. NCRS, I'm sure you don't know, stands for National Corvette Restoration Society. They grade 'Vettes on a much more stringent set of criteria than I'm sure you would use when buying a car.

Finally, my Vette at $12.7k has nowhere to go but up. Your Subaru at $30k has nowhere to go but down. You're definately not in a position to be lecturing about "good investments".

Just to prove a point: This Vette is rough as can be (I'm looking for a better example). But it runs a 13.4 and he's asking $5000 for it.

 

[Apex]

Originally posted by: alkemyst
Well financing vs dropping cash on things makes a big difference.

The STi is about the limit most will ever use and more. The car is quick, a great bang for the buck and serves the need of 4 passengers. MR2 is a nice ride but small and 2 seats only.

I bought a 1998 240SX SE 2.4L DOHC, FR....near 50/50 weight balance once I relocate the battery. Adding a turbo and viola a nice streetable and reliable 250-350hp....13's to high 12's. I could go to 450hp but it'd cause headaches.

I think the 2 real advantages of the MR-S are the low weight, and great weight distribution. It is just 2195 lbs, which is about 600-1000lbs under many other vehicles in this sporty category. While the weight distribution (44% front, 56% rear) may not be as good as the outgoing MR2 (42% front, 58% rear), it's still better than front engined options. The 1zz may not be the best engine to mod, but there are other options, I guess.

 

[nitrousninja]

I got an '03 Cobra and I only make a little less than that with around the same expences. $1K un upgrades gave me 440 to the street.

BTW non-turbo Porches are like V6 Mutangs: why?

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: TerryMathews
Just want to point out that good condition early C4s (84-90) have dipped into the sub $10k range on the used market. I just paid $12.7k for a great condition used 1991 'vert. 13.8 in the 1/4, bone stock. A couple mods you can do yourself for free or close to it will put that down more into the 13.5 range.

Doesn't really have much to do with Subarus or Porsches, but it's a damn good bargain none-the-less.

84-90 C4? WTF is a C4? A Vette? Those were some of the worst vettes ever made (well, except for the late 70s early 80s models-those are probably worse). Yeah, maybe it would have done 13.8 stock but a 14 year old Vette will not do 13.8 in the 1/4. Not gonna happen. Not without a lot of work. Even the early 90s Vettes were horrible. Show me a stock early 90s Vette with 80k miles and I'll show you a rattling bucket of bolts that probably needs thousands of dollars of repairs. Hmm, yeah...that's a good investment. :roll:

Hmmm you must be a REAL AUTHORITY on vettes if you have no clue on a C4 series and what that means....how does time affect a 1/4 mile, but anyway....

a 1991 vette, non-convert, manual had a 1/4 mile of 13.9 stock and that was ideal. A convertible could turn a 13.8 but chances are something is not stock about it.

As far as corvettes and their future value....I don't know about where you guys are from but here in S. Florida they are everywhere and viewed as non-spectactular even Z06's as no one knows they are any different.

It's hard to get even black book on your used vette here and many are sold through lease programs esp the 90's ones...they lease them 2-3 years, take them back and lease them again. I think around $200 a month....I know it's about the same price as the base level car 'buys' they advertise in the paper. Only instead of a civic you are getting a vette

The deal killer for many is you need the full comp/coll insurance which is higher than average in florida. When I got quoted for a ZR1 in around 1997 my insurance would have been $6000 per year at 26 years old and 2 tickets at the time, for a 'normal' vette around $4000.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Apex

I think the 2 real advantages of the MR-S are the low weight, and great weight distribution. It is just 2195 lbs, which is about 600-1000lbs under many other vehicles in this sporty category. While the weight distribution (44% front, 56% rear) may not be as good as the outgoing MR2 (42% front, 58% rear), it's still better than front engined options. The 1zz may not be the best engine to mod, but there are other options, I guess.

From a totally performance standpoint the MR2 and even the newest ones (which I though were closer to 2500 lbs rather than 2000...my old saturn also (2450lbs) which people did not understand how 150 or so horsepower made it pretty close to the 225hp mustang gt's performance but in a much better handling and braking package) are going to be best esp autocross as my car at closer to 3000lbs isn't as nimble.

I can't get into all the reasons I ended up chosing what I did, but the big limiting factor on the toyota was 2 seats, higher insurance (not a lot more, but a definite difference), expensive parts with JM getting his cut in all toyota stuff here, and lack of the trunk/passthough.

They are nice cars though....people really underestimate those as well.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: nitrousninja
I got an '03 Cobra and I only make a little less than that with around the same expences. $1K un upgrades gave me 440 to the street.

BTW non-turbo Porches are like V6 Mutangs: why?

You do realize most people buying even twin-turbo Porsches are not thinking 1/4 mile and redlight mullet domination ... you do know this right? I seriously hope you aren't one of those guys that embarrass themselves saying how a mid $20k domestic coupe is FAR better than anything out of germany and italy because you can turn a 12 sec 1/4 mile and they are all in the 13's or something

Your cobra should have had 390HP stock...making 440 (50hp more) at $1k is not even worth mentioning. You should have had a low 12 1/4 mile stock (assuming you can drive it well enough, most are turning high 12's due to just sucking )...what is your new 1/4 mile with that $1k under the hood? You could have probably strapped 10 $100 bills to the hood and be at the same mark

 

[TerryMathews]

Originally posted by: alkemysta 1991 vette, non-convert, manual had a 1/4 mile of 13.9 stock and that was ideal. A convertible could turn a 13.8 but chances are something is not stock about it.

As far as corvettes and their future value....I don't know about where you guys are from but here in S. Florida they are everywhere and viewed as non-spectactular even Z06's as no one knows they are any different.

"Tossing the frisbee" which involves removing a 10# weight from the A/C pulley and cutting the air filter lid whcih allows more air to flow into the intake (The L98 is oxygen-starved at high RPMs) is good for 10 to 20HP depending on who you talk to and translates into roughly a .1 to .2 decrease in your 1/4 mile times.

The biggest challenge to the 'vert's 1/4 mile time is the fact it's got a 2.59:1 final drive ratio. Not impossible, you just need to keep yourself in the low gears as long as possible.

As far as the value goes, you're kind of making my point. C4 values are near their rock bottom - people are buying them and running into the ground/destroying them. A great way to bring that ~380,000 production number down to something more reasonable. The same basic situation occured with the Stingrays back in the 80s. Now look at their value.

 

[LongAce]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Apex

I think the 2 real advantages of the MR-S are the low weight, and great weight distribution. It is just 2195 lbs, which is about 600-1000lbs under many other vehicles in this sporty category. While the weight distribution (44% front, 56% rear) may not be as good as the outgoing MR2 (42% front, 58% rear), it's still better than front engined options. The 1zz may not be the best engine to mod, but there are other options, I guess.

From a totally performance standpoint the MR2 and even the newest ones (which I though were closer to 2500 lbs rather than 2000...my old saturn also (2450lbs) which people did not understand how 150 or so horsepower made it pretty close to the 225hp mustang gt's performance but in a much better handling and braking package) are going to be best esp autocross as my car at closer to 3000lbs isn't as nimble.

I can't get into all the reasons I ended up chosing what I did, but the big limiting factor on the toyota was 2 seats, higher insurance (not a lot more, but a definite difference), expensive parts with JM getting his cut in all toyota stuff here, and lack of the trunk/passthough.

They are nice cars though....people really underestimate those as well.

I have the new MR2 and it's a great car. I love the cornering but I do admit, the 2 seating can be troublesome at time. It's good that I got this before I get married. I know I would not be able to get this when that time come.

 

[Apex]

Originally posted by: LongAce

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Apex

I think the 2 real advantages of the MR-S are the low weight, and great weight distribution. It is just 2195 lbs, which is about 600-1000lbs under many other vehicles in this sporty category. While the weight distribution (44% front, 56% rear) may not be as good as the outgoing MR2 (42% front, 58% rear), it's still better than front engined options. The 1zz may not be the best engine to mod, but there are other options, I guess.

From a totally performance standpoint the MR2 and even the newest ones (which I though were closer to 2500 lbs rather than 2000...my old saturn also (2450lbs) which people did not understand how 150 or so horsepower made it pretty close to the 225hp mustang gt's performance but in a much better handling and braking package) are going to be best esp autocross as my car at closer to 3000lbs isn't as nimble.

I can't get into all the reasons I ended up chosing what I did, but the big limiting factor on the toyota was 2 seats, higher insurance (not a lot more, but a definite difference), expensive parts with JM getting his cut in all toyota stuff here, and lack of the trunk/passthough.

They are nice cars though....people really underestimate those as well.

I have the new MR2 and it's a great car. I love the cornering but I do admit, the 2 seating can be troublesome at time. It's good that I got this before I get married. I know I would not be able to get this when that time come.

I agree with you guys, 2 seat vehicles are definitely not the way to go as a main vehicle. However, if you have a daily driver already and want a fun car, you get lots for your money with the Mr2. The Spyder is rated at 2195lbs for the manual, and a few more lbs for the auto (sequential, though it's still auto based). You can get it under the 2k mark, but it does cost some money to do that.

Once you learn how to drive em, it's very hard to beat the mid engine, rear drive feel. Heck, Ferrari kept pushing everything backwards until they got 46% front, 54% rear weight distribution on their front engine 612 Scaglietti. The gearbox and differential was eventually placed in the back.