![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Mar 9, '05 From Charlotte Currently Offline Reputation: 0 (0%) ![]() |
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?se...4&page_number=1
For the stock RSX owners here, unless you plan on running around at 7,000rpm I wouldn't try running the new Cobalt SS. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() Enthusiast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Joined Dec 27, '03 From Nor Cal Currently Offline Reputation: 0 (0%) ![]() |
Gotta understand what horsepower is before you try to make an argument on torque. Torque does mean nothing when you're trying to build a fast car and it's in the wrong rpm range (ala Toyota 5SFE)...
As for the article... remember the RSX is a 4 year old car. The Chevy cobalt is brand spanking new and is built to out compete the RSX in terms of power. I say GM got lazy and threw in an econo motor with a supercharger on it (Toyota anyone?). I'm willing to bet the RSX will still win pretty easily on a road course. Also, driving a car with torque or no torque is a matter of taste. A big torque car won't neccesarily turn everyone's clock, on the other hand, driving a high rpm car might not generate enough neck jerking force for others. Sometimes people just prefer instant thrust when they smash the throttle, but that comes at the cost of top-end pull... while other folk prefer screaming top-end power and are willing to achieve this at the cost of low-end grunt. All a matter of taste... and one being faster than the other depends on greater variables than how much power such and such makes and how much torque such and such makes... -------------------- "It's ok to be naked girl... I'm an artist!"
1995 AT200 Celica ST: stocked out daily driver... 1984 AE86 Corolla GT-SR5: silvertop 20V 4AGE project car jacked up with goodies... 1991 SW2x MR2 n/a: bare bones hardtop model soon to be... |
![]() ![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: July 27th, 2025 - 10:21 AM |