Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SilverTransAm
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PBodyGT87
So i voted for the fiero. Duh.
The MR2 beat the fiero in the quarter mile by about a second. So it's faster. (we have this on tape too if anyone wants to see this comparison.)
However if the fiero came with a turbo, it'd kill the MR2. The MR2 has help, and yes it's factory standard turbo, but if it didnt have that, it'd be a dog. Come on now, it's one second faster. BFD. Easy tweaking on the fiero could put it up to speed. You're comparing a turbo to a plain 2.8. That's just not fair. Pat, grow some balls and stick to domestics  . You'd go import for a car one second faster? Psh. And for calling it a crappy 2.8, you're not getting a ride in it now. Unless you need some serious convining that the fiero is much cooler. Go ask some tart for a ride in his MR2 instead.
:P :finger: |
a few things.
1. the 2.8 IS crappy. seriously.
2. you sound like all my ls1 friends... "but the cobra has a blower, put a blower on an ls1 and it'll kill a cobra"
3. you're still gonna give me a ride because i'm a major hottie
that is all |
1. that 2.8 is just fine in that car.
2. I like your friends.
3. No, absolutely not.
And another thing, the MR2 that came out in fiero years is ugly as sin. you have a new picture on there. they also didn't handle as well as the fiero. And pat, is IS a supercharger, not a turbo. At least the MR2's of the fiero generation are supercharged, that is.
Formula Fiero 1/4 mile is 15.7, MR2 with supercharger is 15.4. I have this on tape for proof. Motor Week test.