prelude vs a4
#41
RE: prelude vs a4
ORIGINAL: Jeff
do you know if he had anything done to it?
do you know if he had anything done to it?
ohhhhh wow, i was SOOOOOOOO close to buying an '03 Evo instead of my '01 A4 (and an STI), but insurance refused to cover me if I got the Evo cuz of my driving record, ha. But the one I drove a couple times had the boost raised 1lb, intake, and 3" turbo back and that thing was pretty much rediculous. It was definately a 12 second car and I honestly didnt even think a car was supposed to handle that good....soooooooo amazing, soo responsive...
Oh, and by the way, the STI I drove was all stock, and the EVO would have pulled on the STI no doubt.
#43
RE: prelude vs a4
Honda's are fun cars to drive. I do miss my CRX, I think that I will one day own another one. Handles well, reliable, responsive, 38mpg, and ran a best time of 14.82 in the 1/4.
I do like my A4 in the 2 weeks that I have had it. I probably will like it little more after I get my timing belt done and do some mods. They are different cars; it's like comparing apples and oranges.
Good win, but sounds like the kid did not know how to drive.
Vtec = Honda/Acura
Vtech= Cordless phones
I do like my A4 in the 2 weeks that I have had it. I probably will like it little more after I get my timing belt done and do some mods. They are different cars; it's like comparing apples and oranges.
Good win, but sounds like the kid did not know how to drive.
Vtec = Honda/Acura
Vtech= Cordless phones
#44
RE: prelude vs a4
personally i hate hondas. i just dont like the feel of driving one. my audi is fun and enjoyable to drive whereas the honda just feels weak. now im not knockin all hondas but 99% of them suck *****. An Evo, thats a whole nother story. I would take one in a heartbeat. those things are no joke. but i would still take a b5 s4 over any evo any day. and it took the evo 8 generations just to top the Audi Quattro(the car not the system) in the track.
#45
RE: prelude vs a4
ORIGINAL: chaos92287
now im not knockin all hondas but 99% of them suck *****.
now im not knockin all hondas but 99% of them suck *****.
"
"I'm not trying to say your ugly, but have you talked to any plastic surgeons about your face??"
#46
RE: prelude vs a4
lol exactly.
i dunno maybe its cuz my first car had over 350 ft/lbs of torque, but hondas just never did anything for me. muscle cars have the torque, european cars have the handling and luxury, so wut do japanese cars have? i guess its that they're so cheap, but thats jus not appealing to me...
i dunno maybe its cuz my first car had over 350 ft/lbs of torque, but hondas just never did anything for me. muscle cars have the torque, european cars have the handling and luxury, so wut do japanese cars have? i guess its that they're so cheap, but thats jus not appealing to me...
#48
RE: prelude vs a4
ORIGINAL: acetrebo
Im not anti Japan, after all, I am quite fond of my 90 300zx even though its a non-turbo.
Its a nice drive, and it looks hot even stock.
Love the Audi too.
Im not anti Japan, after all, I am quite fond of my 90 300zx even though its a non-turbo.
Its a nice drive, and it looks hot even stock.
Love the Audi too.
#49
RE: prelude vs a4
ORIGINAL: trv06kviper
Preludes have the 222hp engine however, the horsepower to weight ratio is a bit off. Also if his exhaust was extremely loud he may not have paid attention to knowing NA's need a little backpressure to create torque.
Preludes have the 222hp engine however, the horsepower to weight ratio is a bit off. Also if his exhaust was extremely loud he may not have paid attention to knowing NA's need a little backpressure to create torque.
#50
RE: prelude vs a4
ORIGINAL: Jeff
well ill give you that audis are 100000000000000x better on the out side. they are lacking on the motor power department. what do you mean they drive so much better?
well ill give you that audis are 100000000000000x better on the out side. they are lacking on the motor power department. what do you mean they drive so much better?