is it just me who felt far happier in the dc2?
me too. felt a bit meh to me coming from the '2.
is it just me who felt far happier in the dc2?
I thought the DC5 had cable linkage, clearly not the best gearbox in unless that's all you've driven.
The solid linkage in the DC2 is amazeballs in comparison!
It might be a cable linkage but it's still a fantastic gearchange and the gear lever positioning simply could not be better IMO.
I've had two two ATR's, two EP3's, a DC2 and a DC5. The DC5 is the best overall, I really miss that car. I don't think I'd have one again though, as by the time it becomes a viable option they'll be pushing 10 years old for the last of the pre-facelift models which I prefer. It will dispatch most hot hatches with ease, even modern day ones. I used to laugh at Focus ST's and Astra VXR's understeering behind me trying to keep up. Loads of power low down in the range doesn't always suit FWD cars.
Surely a remapped ST or VXR would be quicker.?
An ST pushing nearly 300BHp wouldn't be faster than a DC5 even in a straight line?
Read my post again. As above, you can't exactly compare modded to standard. Not a go at you, but it really annoys me when people do this. 'Well just remap it and it'll be faster'. Really? It's pretty obvious, isn't it?
I don't really understand this BHP/lite thing. Sure it sounds impressive but what difference does it make?
The fact that most motorsport competitions put you in different classes depending on engine capacity.
That is motorsport though?
It's a sign of good engineering. Getting the most power as possible from an engine without having to make it larger/heavier.
True but at the same time squeezing as much power out of a small engine can be counter productive.
1.4TSI engine for example. 180BHP, 128BHP per litre. Not a reliable engine.
Indeed, masters of engineering reliable, highly tuned N/A engines and have been for some time. Look at the EK9, 182 reliable ponies from a fargin N/A 1.6 back in '97. Still quite something to this day.