Car Talk!

[SoloCamo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpyonMelee

http://motoring.reuters.co.uk/reuter...nk=101&id=1401

very cool.

I'd still take a mercedes AMG over a bmw M series though. Any model that is, if comparable in the same class.

Mercedes have better motors in my book

[EpyonMelee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoloCamo

I'd still take a mercedes AMG over a bmw M series though. Any model that is, if comparable in the same class.

Mercedes have better motors in my book

i wouldn't.

im a guy who likes tech in his motor.

not a 5-speed auto, 3-valve per cylinder with a big-ole supercharger.

[SoloCamo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpyonMelee

i wouldn't.

im a guy who likes tech in his motor.

not a 5-speed auto, 3-valve per cylinder with a big-ole supercharger.

so mercedes doens't have technology in their motors? bahahaha

The new engines aren't supercharged btw. Comeon epy, I expect better out of you.

[Whir]

I had a Mercedes once.

I wrecked it.

That last turn around the convenience store got me every time.

Stupid game.

[The Real Bingo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpyonMelee

im a guy who likes tech in his motor.

I'm not. Just more crap to go wrong and hell if you can work on it yourself. No, you need to pay up your anus to have the freakin computer reset or whatever. If it was up to me, cars would be built like they were in 1968.

I'm a simple guy with simple likes and simple needs. No need for variable valve timing or killing half the engine to save fuel or catalytic converters or EGRs or anything like that.

[EpyonMelee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoloCamo

so mercedes doens't have technology in their motors? bahahaha

The new engines aren't supercharged btw. Comeon epy, I expect better out of you.

the AMGs are, the the only "new" ones are the 3.5L V6, and the 6.3 coming out.

[EpyonMelee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Real Bingo

I'm not. Just more crap to go wrong and hell if you can work on it yourself. No, you need to pay up your anus to have the freakin computer reset or whatever. If it was up to me, cars would be built like they were in 1968.

I'm a simple guy with simple likes and simple needs. No need for variable valve timing or killing half the engine to save fuel or catalytic converters or EGRs or anything like that.

well, unlike the 68 cars which just dumped gas in lol...

[The Real Bingo]

Not nearly as many people drove back then. Even with the inefficiency, thousands of barrels less gas were consumed strictly when it came to cars. I don't have numbers to back it up, but it's common sense.

If you want to save gas, you make driving tests much tougher and raise the driving age to 21. By making people wait another five years to drive will save a crap load of gas, especially since new drivers are normally the crappiest and don't know their ass from their head when it comes to driving conservatively.

[RobRich]

Quote:

I had a Mercedes once.

I actually used to have a Mercedes, though a classic land yacht instead of a sleak modern eurosedan. It had great highway performance with a 4.5L v8, assuming you were driving in a straight line.

I liked my 1974 Mercedes 450, but I really preferred the performance and handling of my 1984 Audi Quattro, which I owned at the same time. Wish I still had the Audi. Despite its age, the Quattro (original 5 cylinder FWD, not the later four cylinder AWD) without a doubt handled and drove better than my current Talon (FWD).

[RobRich]

Quote:

well, unlike the 68 cars which just dumped gas in lol...

Over-engineering is not a requirement for performance. Drop by the track sometime. If comparing a similar class car, I will take a classic Chevy 350 small block over a comparable European or Japanese offering any day. The maintenance costs for the classic V8 are minimal, not to mention aftermarket parts and modifications are dirt cheap.