My car so far

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 13:56

[TW]Fox;11289635 said:
Thought the official top speed was 142mph in a Type R?

The official 0-60 is 7.4 aswell but I have learnt a lesson from you on msn along time ago and thats not to believe everything you read on stat pages

[TW]Fox · 13 Mar 2008 at 13:59

Oh it says 6.7 seconds and 141mph here, but yea, I agree stats can be wrong. Suprised the Accord is so much faster than its publicised top speed though. Either way, suprised it needs the wing for that, which was my original point

Yurg · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:00

300nm vs 215nm of torque - would be v suprised if the 530 didn't top out higher than the ATR.

penski · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:01

[TW]Fox;11289680 said:
Oh it says 6.7 seconds and 141mph here, but yea, I agree stats can be wrong. Suprised the Accord is so much faster than its publicised top speed though. Either way, suprised it needs the wing for that, which was my original point

If anything, the wing would hinder top speed.

DRAAAAAAAAAAAG.

*n

DannyDan · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:03

Looks nice, think the pre-facelift ones look better though (especially the exhausts on the back).

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:04

[TW]Fox;11289680 said:
Oh it says 6.7 seconds and 141mph here, but yea, I agree stats can be wrong. Suprised the Accord is so much faster than its publicised top speed though. Either way, suprised it needs the wing for that, which was my original point

Your 5 is limited to xxx out of curiousity ?

0-60 tested by EVO was 6.1 but thats being friendly on the clutch so sub 6 is achievable and please read what Drexal has posted back on page 2

penski said:
If anything, the wing would hinder top speed.

DRAAAAAAAAAAAG.

*n

Yes but wouldnt like to think what the back end would be like without is

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:06

DannyDan said:
Looks nice, think the pre-facelift ones look better though (especially the exhausts on the back).

Totally agree the wife type R looks better with the rear splitter which is why I have said there is more to do on it and one is on order very soon to fit my post face lift , would have said earlier but got carried away with the rest of the comments , Once on the exhaust will fit into the genuine honda rear splitter with its 4inch cutouts

[TW]Fox · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:07

Skywalker said:
Your 5 is limited to xxx out of curiousity ?

155.

0-60 tested by EVO was 6.1 but thats being friendly on the clutch so sub 6 is achievable and please read what Drexal has posted back on page 2

Thats very impressive for 209bhp in an Accord, does it do 60 in 2nd?

penski · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:07

Skywalker said:
Your 5 is limited to xxx out of curiousity ?

0-60 tested by EVO was 6.1 but thats being friendly on the clutch so sub 6 is achievable and please read what Drexal has posted back on page 2

Use a manly PPP, please. We're still on page 1.

Yes but wouldnt like to think what the back end would be like without is

What? All that power-oversteer? :/

*n

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:15

[TW]Fox;11289730 said:
Thats very impressive for 209bhp in an Accord, does it do 60 in 2nd?

Rolling roaded at 218bhp standard and roughly 61-63 in second

penski said:
Use a manly PPP, please.

*n

Sorry what is this ?

penski · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:16

PPP = posts per page.

It's in the User CP.

*n

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:19

Thanks now changed to become a man like you

penski · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:21

Skywalker said:
Thanks now changed to become a man like you

Maybe one day you'll be half as great as I...

*n

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:24

penski said:
Maybe one day you'll be half as great as I...

*n

Fantastic I have a new dream to live upto now , forget work and the family I must start rubbing mustard on my face to become half the man you are

Unlight · 13 Mar 2008 at 14:29

Car looks good, although I dont really like the white wheels. Might look better with gun metal grey...

Jez · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:06

Am i the only one who doesnt believe that it'll do a sub 6.0 0-60, thats far too fast for a car like that with only 218bhp and FWD

Anyway re the actual car, looks nice externally - good job, looks cheap internally.

Ladforce · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:19

No way its under 6 secs. Tegs have much better power/weight ratio and still dont do sub 6.

penski · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:20

Jez said:
Am i the only one who doesnt believe that it'll do a sub 6.0 0-60, thats far too fast for a car like that with only 218bhp and FWD

Anyway re the actual car, looks nice externally - good job, looks cheap internally.

But it has a wing!

*n

Jez · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:21

penski said:
But it has a wing!

*n

And OMG VTEC :eek:

Muffin` · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:24

Sub 6 for 0-60?

Count to 10, go on. Do the alphabet song for extra Kudo's.