Bullseye, bro, don't hate on people who actually own Crossfires. I'll be sure to say what's up to you when I see you rolling in your 1990 Honda Civic.

 

I don't measure cars by the second like you do!

I paid $14,500 for my brand new Si and it was a driver and with 17" yokos it handle ok and got 30 mpg at 80 mph! QUIETLY and smoothly. It was the shifter that I liked and only had it 10k miles before I bought my 350Z pile of track crap.

After having the z for a week, I realized at 80 mph my Honda was more enjoyable to drive!

 

Japanese or German - I gave up my Star/quest for the Crossfire. The Starion / Conquest was a fun car so is the Crossfire. Which is better? They are peers - each has their strong points and weaknesses, I just enjoy the ride. Mitsubishi or Mercedes they are both fun to drive. Yes, the Crossfire has a faster top end than the Mitsubishi, but since I'm not willing to subsidize the local governments through which I drive, I DON'T CARE!
If you enjoy driving the car, that's all that matters. If you can look forward to your next road trip, the car is a WINNER.

 

Not hating just stating facts. Now that you speak of a 90 Civic, i wouldnt mind having a 90 hatch or even a CRX si. I could always use a 4th car.

 

I understand you are not the true sports car type of guy, thats why you bought the crossfire. We are on the same page.

 

Why hate Japanese? Anyone old enough to remember their treatment of american (or chinese or australian or anyone else not Japanese) POW's in WWII won't need to ask! If you don't know, read about the Rape of Nanking or the death march on Bataan. They are brutal people. And don't tell me that was 50 years ago. They have been that way for a thousand years. A leopard doesn't change his spots that quick. They just hide it a little more.

 

just one point, there really aren't japanese cars anymore, most are more american than any of the big 3. i know honda and toyota are making alot of their cars in the states, while ford and gm are making cars in canada and mexico. so the japanese companies are almost doing more to employ american workers than detroit is.

 

every nation has brutality in their past, america had slavery and indians, germany had the jewish, romans had the christians, england had anyone not english.

and every major corporation would sell your organs and leave you in an alley if it upped their profit by a few bucks....

 

Every society has had slavery at one time or another.

And they say history is the knowledge of past wars or something to that effect.

Doesn't hide the fact the 350z is one heck of a car. Would I buy one new? Nope, would I ever buy one? Yes, as long as I couldn't find another SRT-4 or 03-04 Cobra, STi, EVO, or Firehawk. I would consider it.

 

Yes the japanese hire americans for minimum wage to assemble the cars, but the engineering and design is done there. We lose our technical expertise when we buy their cars. The guy who is driving his toyota and complains that he can't find an office job anymore. Guess why? The japanese (yes I know it is derogatory) value the engines (mostly assembled in Japan) and design of the cars at a very high component of the cost of the car and therefore they pay no tax in the USA. People have to realize when we buy japanese cars we are exporting jobs. Jobs that used to pay taxes here. Don't b*tch about social security going broke and schools under funded when driving a japanese car. Balance of payments is our entire economic problem.

 

And by the way we can blame all the lawyers in congress for allowing the jobs to go overseas. we cow down to the World Organizations and allow them to tariff our products overseas yet won't allow us to do it to their imports. "dumping" is another word for exporting unemployment. Take an economics class!

 

I Can Always Find My Car In Any Parking Lot It Don't Look Like A 1000 Mustangs Zzzs Or Any Thing Else It A Crossfire That's The Rite Answer For Those Smart As* Kids Ain't It Nice To Brag About What You Got What You Had What Your Gonna Get No Body Really Knows What You Got.

 

Toyota announced the other day the reason they don't make sports cars was because it's not in the companies genes. That pretty much sums it all up. Leave the sports cars making to the Germans, Americans and Italians. Countries with a history of producing these types of autos.

And whoever it is that owns an SRT-4 I'll give you credit because you have *****. Admitting to owning one of those pieces of $hit is like bragging to your friends that you banged a 250 pound girl.

 

I will put that piece of $hit against your overpriced under performing crossfire. Auto X or straight line. Stick with the auto X were you may stand a chance.

Yes, the supra was not a sports car, lol. And the supra concept they are building is not a sports car either. Either was the Celica GT4, or MR2 Good point.

And don't leave out the British, they have lotus and TVR. To name a few.

 

Japanese, Germanese, I don't really care the 350z Track is crap!

 

lotus and tvr? sorry, they just can't stand up to mercedes, ferrari, bmw, chevy or ford when it comes to racing history.

 

I might agree that TVR doesn't have a glorious racing history, but Lotus??? I can't remember how many times Lotus won the F1 championship. They also won the Indianapolis 500 and many sports car races. Their racing activities went into a decline after Colin Chapman died, and I don't believe that there are any factory racers out there now. But the suggestion that BMW has a more significant racing history than Lotus simply displays a lack of knowledge.

 

i won't state that i am a racing expert, but the fact you placed bmw and lotus in the same statement makes me bring up this fact: didn't the bmw 2002 basically make the lightweight lotus's obsolete. i forget what racing series it was, but im pretty sure i read that article, im young, but im pretty sure i read that.

 

No, the 2002 did not make "the" lightweight Lotus obsolete. I certainly don't mean to demean the 2002 by that statement, but it was not a race car. It was a car designed for the street, not the track. It may have revolutionized the world of sport coupes, but it didn't directly compete with Lotus, at least not in F1 or most other venues. It's possible that it went head to head with Lotus Elans in SCCA events, and even possible that it won some races against the Elans, but by the time the 2002 came out, the Elan was a fairly old design so I'm not sure that the comparison is fair.

I haven't kept up with F1 racing since Lotus and Tyrrell dropped out, but I don't believe that BMW has ever won a Grand Prix race or the constructor's championship. I'm also pretty confident that they've never won at Indianapolis. The production of fast road cars does not give BMW a racing pedigree.

 

BTW, I don't mean to sound pretentious. I'm certainly not an expert on racing history and I'm confident that there are others in this forum who know more about racing than me. However, I was a big fan of Lotus in the late '60s and early '70s and I think that we tend to forget how influential Lotus was. Lotus either invented or significantly developed the monocoque chassis, mid-engine race car design, McPherson struts on the rear of cars (they should be called Chapman struts) and many other innovations. Almost every time that Lotus took the track against Ferrari or many of the other manufacturers of the time, it was a clear case of "David v. Goliath". And yet, Lotus won time and time again and, in the process, transformed open wheeled racing.

I also think that a "racing pedigree" is largely irrelevant in today's world. Jaguar, Bentley and Aston Martin all have incredible racing pedigrees, but it doesn't mean that the cars they manufacture today are ready to race, particularly in the case of Jaguar. Now that most cars are designed by committees and marketed by multinational corporations, it's increasingly unlikely that we'll ever see designs with the clarity of vision that epitomized some of the cars of the late 20th century. That's not entirely a bad thing because it means that we won't have to endure Edsels, Skodas, and Briklins.