You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Listen carefully....did you hear that? That was you missing my point.
No, i don't think i did... you were comparing the speed of HUMAN evolution to the speed of technological evolution... The fact that a human doesn't noticeably evolve over 100 years ("benching 500lbs 50 years ago and in 50 years still impressive") yet imagine where cars were 50 years ago...
wasn't the Cayman S the benchmark for the 86?
if it were me i'd go for 86 over Cayman when considering value
but if you got the cash I would think Cayman S is the better choice...only experienced them on streets not track tho
It really depends what you want. Do you really care about the Quantitative Stuff like 0-60 and 1/4miles? If you do, then the FRS/BRZ is not for you. No doubt, compared to modern cars, the FRS is slow. However, going fast in a straight line is not the point of the FRS/BRZ. It is the sensation and the experience that the car will give you when you go through back country roads etc etc. The best part is, you don't have to reach insane speeds to hit the limit of the car.
To me, it is more fun driving a slow car fast than a fast car slow.
It really depends what you want. Do you really care about the Quantitative Stuff like 0-60 and 1/4miles? If you do, then the FRS/BRZ is not for you. No doubt, compared to modern cars, the FRS is slow. However, going fast in a straight line is not the point of the FRS/BRZ. It is the sensation and the experience that the car will give you when you go through back country roads etc etc. The best part is, you don't have to reach insane speeds to hit the limit of the car.
To me, it is more fun driving a slow car fast than a fast car slow.
We're not comparing the FRS/BRZ to a muscle car though. We are comparing it to a Porsche.
__________________ '00 Honda Accord V6 [sold]
'95 BMW 325i Cabriolet [RIP]
'03 VW Jetta 1.8T [RIP]
'06 BMW 330i [RIP] '02 BMW M3 '99 Honda Civic SIR [sold] '19 Civic Type R[sold] '22 MINI Cooper SE My Photojournal: simplexcars
Willing to sell a family member for a few minutes on RS
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North vancouver
Posts: 12,777
Thanked 32,683 Times in 7,628 Posts
Failed 214 Times in 162 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by KayC
To me, it is more fun driving a slow car fast than a fast car slow.
While that may be true, the cayman isn't a fast car, nor is it incredibly unfriendly to a novice driver. We aren't comparing an FR-S to a 993 gt2 here.
__________________
98 technoviolet M3/2/5
Quote:
Originally Posted by boostfever
Westopher is correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fsy82
seems like you got a dick up your ass well..get that checked
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkwax
Well.. I’d hate to be the first to say it, but Westopher is correct.
Reading others' statements about how the FR-S is "underpowered" bewilders me.
Remember the DC2 Integra Type R? How about the RSX Type S? Remember how they felt? Well, their numbers are about 0.17 hp/kg and 0.16 hp/kg, respectively.
The FR-S has a nearly identical 0.16 hp/kg rating, and a greater lb/ft of torque per kg than both those cars. Oh, and that power comes at the same astronomical reading on the tachometer as the others.
I've driven all three cars on a number of occasions and can safely say that at least in terms seat-of-the-pants power, they are practically equal.
I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that the Type R and Type S are underpowered, and so wonder where you monkeys get the idea that the FR-S is underpowered. Unless your daily driver is an Italian exotic.
Its underpowered because the 86 chassis could take a more powerful engine without being overwhelm. Try putting a 300HP engine in a DC2 or DC5, they both will drive like shit without proper suspension and chassis tuning. But the 86 will still feel great with a better set of tires.
I've driven Stock, Turbo, and Supercharged 86, so far I feel that the bolt on supercharger ones (around 250HP) feels the best in terms of power and daily drivability.
For the comparison with Cayman and the 86, the Cayman is hands down a much better car than the 86. I originally was gonna get a 86 to replace my Cayman S as a daily driver. It felt like a big downgrade IMO. Despite the 86 being a great car to drive. the Cayman is still the greater car. The 86 is still just a Toyota, Porsche do not downgrade its build quality just because the Cayman is a cheaper porsche, the fit and finish is exact same as a 911. Also, I think its pretty good on gas for a car like this!
The FR-S looks awesome, the Cayman just looks like a baby Porsche that a rich asshole would buy for his 16 year old daughter
In the end, it's only a Cayman.
Maybe it's just me, but if I were to spend a lot of money on cars, I want to stand out. I know some of you like sleepers and whatnot, but to me, Cayman is nothing special. I see them on the road everyday. It's not a head turner.
Frankly, I think FRS and BRZ catch more eyes than Cayman.
Maybe it's just me, but if I were to spend a lot of money on cars, I want to stand out. I know some of you like sleepers and whatnot, but to me, Cayman is nothing special. I see them on the road everyday. It's not a head turner.
Frankly, I think FRS and BRZ catch more eyes than Cayman.
Maybe it's just me, but if I were to spend a lot of money on cars, I want to stand out. I know some of you like sleepers and whatnot, but to me, Cayman is nothing special. I see them on the road everyday. It's not a head turner.
Having driven some of the cars mentioned in this thread - Cayman S, S2000, 135i, and FR-S, on a pure smiles per dollar basis it's extremely hard to beat the FR-S. IMO, if it is a daiiy driven car, in Vancouver's crazy rainy climate and I'm spending my own money, I'd rank them:
FR-S
135i
S2000
Cayman
I guess I'm in the relative minority that found the Cayman relatively underwhelming. Perhaps in context to the 911 it is a more compelling driver's car, but dollar for dollar I expected more in light of the fact a Cayman S stickers for a base price north of $70k.
Yeah, I've search around and looked around and apparently I met a group of Lamborgini and Ferrari plus a few Aston Martin hang out few days ago. Just by eyes, toyota cars even G37 (sorry to owners of G37 here) looks unattractive. Well, I love G37 and wanted to have one before.
Seeing many people said that Porsche especially the cayman has a good reliability, I think I will search a good used one and hopefully get it. The reason I'm going a used Cayman compare to the brand new one is of course saving some money for future maintenance and mods *cough*. I definitely love the new model but the older model will also do.
The aspects that I consider when choosing this weekend car are handling, fun to drive and power. Power comes last because I feel 200 bhp is okay in here but handling is definitely a deal breaker. I drive 2.0L CRV (a freaking slow Snail Utility Vehicle) usually 120-140 kph on highway but that with slow acceleration of course, oh in AT too. That's why I wanna get a weekend car which I can just have fun.
Sorry I don't consider BMW because of the maintenance issue. Just can't handle it. My MB is still better on reliability but still not the best, but BMW is demanding more. Plus... they face lifted their cars so quickly that makes my brand new car looks old in 2-3 years. I feel Porsche is like Pierce Brosnan (I'm not gay), looks better when it's older (become classics). If I have more money, I would look for 1960-70 911, 991 or other porsche IF it's available here which might not.
Sorry I don't consider BMW because of the maintenance issue. Just can't handle it. My MB is still better on reliability but still not the best, but BMW is demanding more. Plus... they face lifted their cars so quickly that makes my brand new car looks old in 2-3 years. I feel Porsche is like Pierce Brosnan (I'm not gay), looks better when it's older (become classics). If I have more money, I would look for 1960-70 911, 991 or other porsche IF it's available here which might not.
If you have to tell people that, i have bad news for you.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
.
