I Test Drive The Xr5 Turbo Today.

[mad082]

it takes bigger balls and more skill to drive a fwd car hard. nothing like having to fight the steering wheel in a straight line as well as round corners.

[West]

What like a gti golf?

Id prob go the new volvo over the XR5 tho. Just a little bit more different, little more sleeper appeal.

I'd compare it to something like an EVO VI with full exhaust, its very very close to the EVO VI in term of response.

i rather a TypeR civic though handling wise.

Its has masive brake and handle alright too, though the TYPE R cost much more isn't it?

[mad082]

way to over priced....all of that market is....spend a bit more an get an evo/sti

xr5 = $37,000

evo = $57,000

sti = $57,000

i class 20k as a bit more than just 'a bit more'

[Nismo_God]

u sure the $37k is brand new....also u can get evo/sti for less then 57k

[mad082]

those prices were just off carsales. they don't include dealer charges etc. they are just rrp of the vehicle

[Nismo_God]

my bad....looked it up and they are rrp 57k & 37k

but buy one a year or two old and save heaps.....

[ctjet]

used cars are cheaper?!?!? NO WAI!!1ty

... what a scoop

Edited August 16, 2007 by ctjet

[Nismo_God]

save more with 2nd hand evo/sti.....xr5 wont drop as much.....

[mad082]

that's cause evey man and his dog with an evo or wrx will rape it for a year or 2 then sell it before something breaks, like the gearbox, which they seem to be really good at breaking. i know a wrx that is on it's 3rd box.

wrx's and xr6t's are 2 cars i wouldn't own second hand, unless the first owner was an old fart.

[nismo_GTST]

Id rather have the HSV Astra VXR. I took one for a spin not too long ago. The thing is frkn awesome. Its a bit of a handful off the line when boost comes in though.

[Lil_Lucky]

i actually prefer the mazda mps, i think the prices are fairly similar too.

[mad082]

yeah i would take the mazda or ford over the astra. i don't like the styling. but both the ford and the holden have the issue of the wiper and indicator stalks being on the opposite sides, which pisses me off no end.

[nismo_GTST]

yeah i would take the mazda or ford over the astra. i don't like the styling. but both the ford and the holden have the issue of the wiper and indicator stalks being on the opposite sides, which pisses me off no end.

Yeah they are nice, but after sitting in both the MPS and the XR5, they left me feeling abit cold, especially the MPS. There wasnt really that much that made it look different to the normal Mazda 3. At least the XR5 has real nice recaro seats in it. But I guess its personal preference.

[ctjet]

yeah i would take the mazda or ford over the astra. i don't like the styling. but both the ford and the holden have the issue of the wiper and indicator stalks being on the opposite sides, which pisses me off no end.

so you basing a good portion of your decision on the placement of the steering column configuration?

... i like it

[mad082]

you ever driven a focus? i have. you come up to a corner, go to indicate and next thing you know you have turned the wipers on

[ctjet]

hahaha

... standing on the street next to you would have been a LOL moment

[Gazzilla]

Their not to bad looking actually.. But then I never want to have a Fwd car ever again!.. Understeer is a nightmare in those things.

[Smurf]

I'd compare it to something like an EVO VI with full exhaust, its very very close to the EVO VI in term of response.

Its has masive brake and handle alright too, though the TYPE R cost much more isn't it?

In relation to the first point, I'm guessing you have driven both to be able to make this statement. It seems unlikely to me though. The Ford as tested by Motor did a 7.4 secs to 100km/h and 15.2 over the quarter. These don't even come close to that of an Evo. I understand that the evo is 4wd which helps with the launch though not that much.

The new Civic Type R is $39,990 before on road costs.

All these new turbo hot hatches feel fast to those who have a skyline where the real power kicks in high up in the rev range. They come across as being responsive and quite punchy. For instance the Ford's peak turbo kicks in at 1,600 revs and is a not to be sneezed at 320nm. Compare that to the stock R33 GTST which had around 270nm (or 290nm depending on where you look) at 4,800 rpm from memory.

I drove the Mazda 3 MPS and was very impressed by the acceleration. I certainly didn't walk away wanting one though. Firstly the styling is a bit bland inside and out. Secondly there was no sense of occasion. The car didn't seem pure or have spirit.

No doubt these cars are pretty quick and would probably beat my R33 turbo around a track though I will save my money for something else.

Edited August 16, 2007 by Smurf

[scathing]

it takes bigger balls and more skill to drive a fwd car hard. nothing like having to fight the steering wheel in a straight line as well as round corners.

You think so? I find it the opposite. I haven't driven a super high powered FWD yet and had to deal with major torque steer in a straight line, but then a high powered RWD will start stepping the tail out if you put too much power down and it starts to spin.

A FWD car is generally predictable. It will almost always understeer. And that's always easier to drive around, because all you have to do is modify your pedal inputs instead of having to steering and throttle modulation....and if you exceed the grip limits (no matter for what reason) the car will do the same thing.

[West]

In relation to the first point, I'm guessing you have driven both to be able to make this statement. It seems unlikely to me though. The Ford as tested by Motor did a 7.4 secs to 100km/h and 15.2 over the quarter. These don't even come close to that of an Evo. I understand that the evo is 4wd which helps with the launch though not that much.

The new Civic Type R is $39,990 before on road costs.

All these new turbo hot hatches feel fast to those who have a skyline where the real power kicks in high up in the rev range. They come across as being responsive and quite punchy. For instance the Ford's peak turbo kicks in at 1,600 revs and is a not to be sneezed at 320nm. Compare that to the stock R33 GTST which had around 270nm (or 290nm depending on where you look) at 4,800 rpm from memory.

I drove the Mazda 3 MPS and was very impressed by the acceleration. I certainly didn't walk away wanting one though. Firstly the styling is a bit bland inside and out. Secondly there was no sense of occasion. The car didn't seem pure or have spirit.

No doubt these cars are pretty quick and would probably beat my R33 turbo around a track though I will save my money for something else.

Kind of make sense mate BUT,

Evo VI regardless still a secondhand car, if not has been trashed badly from Japan so the condition will never be the same where the XR5's test is latest and realistic. Offcourse Evo will be faster but i said the responsive almost felt the same.

I've never actually get to driven the MPS but Mazda has good reputation too so i won't doubt that it won't be good either.

As for skylines, i think i know them pretty well, in fact i LOVE it , i had a 13s R33gtst for over 3years, then an 11sec R32 gtr for 3 years as well and both time are on street tires too. Nothing beat a straight SIX in top end.

For some reason, i still don't believe that the XR5 clock a 15.2 over the quater because my little Starlet Gt hit a 15.8 with just cat back zorst and the XR5 definately felt much faster than my Starlet, just a thought though.