Honda Prelude vs. Ford Probe GT
cr...@home.com
from someone who has driven both cars:
On Wed, 26 May 1999 15:05:01 -0400, Rafael Raban
<rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
>drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
>Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
>used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
does have a new VTEC SH. I find the car "tinny" - like it's made with
very thin sheetmetal. I wasn't a big fan of the interior (not as
"snug" or cockpit-like as my GTs) though it is screwed together well.
We've had a few impromptu "drags" and his 195HP motor doesn't seem
faster than my 170HP engine (164 + a couple of bolt-ons). Road & Track
(Road Test Summary, Apr/99) measures the 0-60 & 1/4-mile times of the
SH at 7.7 and 15.8 seconds respectively. A 1993 test (Dec/93 Motor
Trend PGT/GS-R shootout) of the 94PGT showed 7.5 and 15.3.
Interestingly, the 1994 Integra GS-R was 7.3 and 15.6 - faster than
the new Prelude.
The PGT outbrakes the Prelude at 117-feet 60-0 versus 134 for the
Prelude (though tires are probably the limiting factor for the
Honda....the SH has pretty nice looking rotors and calipers on it).
The SH scoots to 143 MPH versus the PGTs 133 effort. Not sure when
you'd be able to repeat that test though :)
There's no skidpad numbers in the R&T summary for the SH but the PGT
did 0.87 in 1993 and ran a 68.2MPH slalom while the SH did the slalom
at 60.6MPH. I'm not certain what R&Ts slalom is compared to Motor
Trend's: the 1994 GS-R did a 67.0MPH run through the cones so MTs test
may have been "easier" (the R&T summary shows the new GS-R doing a
62.8 slalom and turning 0.80 on the skidpad). Since the new GS-R beats
the new Prelude and the PGT beat the old GS-R, it's probably safe to
say the PGT beats the Prelude in the slalom (though maybe not in
suspension refinement).
Then there's price. My friend is in deep with his spanking new Prelude
for well into the $30Ks (CDN). And these cars really hold their value:
a 1998 SH with 33,000KM (21000 miles) showed up in the latest Auto
Trader for $CDN25500 (!). A good 95 or 96PGT can be had for less than
half of the new SH and easily $10000 less than the used one.
There are nearly as many aftermarket parts available for the PGT (in
terms of cold-air intakes, headers, exhausts, throttle bodies,
camshafts, springs, bushings, swaybars, strut braces, brakes etc) as
there are for the SH though the Honda (well, all Hondas) are
*exceptionally* well supported in the aftermarket.
For me, there's three bottom lines:
1) If I'm poor, I'm buying the PGT.
2) If I'm really rich, I buy both the PGT and the Prelude.
3) If I'm somewhere in between (i.e. can afford the Prelude new but
can't justify the cost), I buy the PGT (or an earlier Integra GS-R or
something) and slap a $3500 turbo or supercharger on it and still have
more than $10000 left over to invest in something to keep the wife
happy.
----
Mike
94PGT
www.golden.net\~trinity
To reply, please remove the at and
the dot where necessary.
--------
Updated! Honda Civic vs. Ford Mustang FAQ v1.3
UPDATED v1.3
Crush discussing the Honda Civic on Real Audio!
corrections
cm...@my-deja.com
minor add-ons. Intake and exahust. The Mazda MX-6 I mean
re-badged Ford Probe is a great car but, we both agree that
the Prelude handles better and when racing wins every time.
It is importaint to note that the Probe (MX-6) has very large
tires which when new and sticky can make any car handle better.
Just ask Road and Track when they do the anuall Ford Mustang GT vs.
Chevy z-28 (my other car). The heavy Z-28 wins every year and it's
because of those monstorus Z rated soft tires.
T
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Dave Feltenberger
<cr...@home.com> wrote in message
news:374e23be...@news.slnt1.on.wave.home.com...
> Here is a message from alt.cars.ford-probe that compares the two cars
> from someone who has driven both cars:
>
yes, from a ford probe newsgroup. i think the prelude is *much* more fun to
drive. a friend of mine owns a prelude and i've driven probes before...
the prelude is a *lot* more fun.....wait.. i just read further down....
the dude says he *didn't* drive them both. and you're just taking his word
for it?! give me a break!
>
> On Wed, 26 May 1999 15:05:01 -0400, Rafael Raban
> <rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> >In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
> >drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
> >Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
> >used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
yes, then compare the build quality and reliability.... THEN, compare the
handling...
>
> Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
> does have a new VTEC SH. I find the car "tinny" - like it's made with
> very thin sheetmetal. I wasn't a big fan of the interior (not as
> "snug" or cockpit-like as my GTs) though it is screwed together well.
the car is far from "tinny". slam the door with the windows down on a
prelude, then do the same on the probe. you'll find that the probe has a
more "tinny" sound by far. the interior there's no contest.. looks is one
thing (i agree.. the interior of the lude looks ugly), but quality is
another. the probe can't compare to the lude in quality.
> The PGT outbrakes the Prelude at 117-feet 60-0 versus 134 for the
> Prelude (though tires are probably the limiting factor for the
> Honda....the SH has pretty nice looking rotors and calipers on it).
>
> The SH scoots to 143 MPH versus the PGTs 133 effort. Not sure when
> you'd be able to repeat that test though :)
eh? the 10 extra mph is a HUGE difference in top end power. it wouldn't be
hard to test that at all... i'm sure if both cars were going 80 mph, and
you threw them both in 4th gear, the lude would smoke the probe. in fact,
i'm positive cause i've seen it!
this is getting too long... if i remember, i'll finish later
i gotta write a program!
Gregory P Nickliss
it is a huge piece of junk. let me just label a few of the defects about
the car: severely faded paint, one or two water leaks around the windows,
broken cup holder, broken ash tray, passenger side door is out of
alignment, & you have to push the window on the driver's door back under
the door frame (seal) when you close the door because it gets caught on
the outer edge. i've had an '84 accord w/ less problems, seriously. as
for the prelude being "tinny", NFW! it may appear so because it has such
flat, sharp lines, but it is far from it. besides, the reliability of the
prelude is among the car world's best, not just honda's. it is constantly
ranked in the top 5 most dependable cars if i'm not mistaken. oh yeah,
one thing i absolutely hate about the probe, that huge waste of space on
the dash due to the steep windshield; shit, i could put my luggage up
there. one other thing, it has among the cheapest feeling interiors i've
ever seen -- on par w/ a neon or escort (plasticity galour).
greg
headbone
Honestly, i used to love the probe, but its a shitty car especially
compared to my 97 prelude. The prelude will absoultely thrash the probe a
new asshole in every aspect of perfomance. The 7.7sec o-60 in that test was
from an suto. C&D has a new SH in their 30K wrap up clocked at 6.9 0-60.
Obviously the base will be a little faster, plus afterbreak-in....call it
6.7 sec 0-60. The probe sux.
please.
e
"cr...@home.com" wrote:
> Here is a message from alt.cars.ford-probe that compares the two cars
> from someone who has driven both cars:
>
> On Wed, 26 May 1999 15:05:01 -0400, Rafael Raban
> <rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> >In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
> >drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
> >Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
> >used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
>
> Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
> does have a new VTEC SH. I find the car "tinny" - like it's made with
> very thin sheetmetal. I wasn't a big fan of the interior (not as
> "snug" or cockpit-like as my GTs) though it is screwed together well.
>
> We've had a few impromptu "drags" and his 195HP motor doesn't seem
> faster than my 170HP engine (164 + a couple of bolt-ons). Road & Track
> (Road Test Summary, Apr/99) measures the 0-60 & 1/4-mile times of the
> SH at 7.7 and 15.8 seconds respectively. A 1993 test (Dec/93 Motor
> Trend PGT/GS-R shootout) of the 94PGT showed 7.5 and 15.3.
>
> Interestingly, the 1994 Integra GS-R was 7.3 and 15.6 - faster than
> the new Prelude.
>
> The PGT outbrakes the Prelude at 117-feet 60-0 versus 134 for the
> Prelude (though tires are probably the limiting factor for the
> Honda....the SH has pretty nice looking rotors and calipers on it).
>
> The SH scoots to 143 MPH versus the PGTs 133 effort. Not sure when
> you'd be able to repeat that test though :)
>
Steven McColl
: yes, from a ford probe newsgroup. i think the prelude is *much* more fun to
: drive. a friend of mine owns a prelude and i've driven probes before...
: the prelude is a *lot* more fun.....wait.. i just read further down....
: the dude says he *didn't* drive them both. and you're just taking his word
: for it?! give me a break!
When we say probe, we mean GT. When you say Probe, you mean the anemic
114 HP model.. Get it straight...
Steve
4Bangers
and air intake upgrade. His car is a manual, my is a SS 98 Prelude. We
always race! And I can tell you that he always win for the first 0-60,
but after that I always and I mean always come out the winner the end of
the run with atleast 1 car length ahead. Think about that for a second,
I have an AUTO! imagine a manual prelude. I've raced manual 5th gen
before, and it's not pretty, they always end up atleast 2 car lengths
ahead of me. What mod do I have? just a simple Type S intake and Spoon
air filter.
Now I began by saying he used to own a Probe GT. After I met him for a
month, and after he keep on losing to me, guess what he trade it in for?
An Acura 3.2! He finally realize how shitty Ford car are.
As for handling, heck I can put my money on the Prelude to out handle
any Ford car!
4Bangers
a Civic LX! And for the GT, I bet it can't even out run a Civic Si....so
my conclusion? Ford Probe should go play with Civic not Prelude. probe
or Probe they both suck! If you can't take on a Civic don't even bother
thinking about Prelude.
4Bangers
can't even beat an AUTO Prelude!
And you Ford lover, don't even bother bring out your other piece of shit
the Mustang, cause it's in a different league!
Lee Cao
"cr...@home.com" wrote:
>
> Here is a message from alt.cars.ford-probe that compares the two cars
> from someone who has driven both cars:
>
> On Wed, 26 May 1999 15:05:01 -0400, Rafael Raban
> <rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> >In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
> >drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
> >Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
> >used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
>
> Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
> does have a new VTEC SH.
WHOA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! from the very begining he proved that you are
lying Crush. you stated very clearly that it was from "someone who
has driven both cars". Yet Rafael here very clearly says that he
did not drive a Prelude, but only rode in one.
> We've had a few impromptu "drags" and his 195HP motor doesn't seem
> faster than my 170HP engine (164 + a couple of bolt-ons). Road & Track
> (Road Test Summary, Apr/99) measures the 0-60 & 1/4-mile times of the
> SH at 7.7 and 15.8 seconds respectively. A 1993 test (Dec/93 Motor
> Trend PGT/GS-R shootout) of the 94PGT showed 7.5 and 15.3.
>
> Interestingly, the 1994 Integra GS-R was 7.3 and 15.6 - faster than
> the new Prelude.
Those numbers are from a sports-shift Prelude. In other words,
it was not a 5-speed manual transmission. Other tests on 5
speed Preludes all have figures in the 6.9 second region for
0 to 60.
> The PGT outbrakes the Prelude at 117-feet 60-0 versus 134 for the
> Prelude (though tires are probably the limiting factor for the
> Honda....the SH has pretty nice looking rotors and calipers on it).
>
> The SH scoots to 143 MPH versus the PGTs 133 effort. Not sure when
> you'd be able to repeat that test though :)
>
> There's no skidpad numbers in the R&T summary for the SH but the PGT
> did 0.87 in 1993 and ran a 68.2MPH slalom while the SH did the slalom
> at 60.6MPH. I'm not certain what R&Ts slalom is compared to Motor
> Trend's: the 1994 GS-R did a 67.0MPH run through the cones so MTs test
> may have been "easier" (the R&T summary shows the new GS-R doing a
> 62.8 slalom and turning 0.80 on the skidpad). Since the new GS-R beats
> the new Prelude and the PGT beat the old GS-R, it's probably safe to
> say the PGT beats the Prelude in the slalom (though maybe not in
> suspension refinement).
Comparing slalom numbers from different magazines is very misleading.
There is no doubt that the Prelude is a great handling car. CD feels
that it's the best for under $30,000 and third place over all if
money was no object.
>
> Updated! Honda Civic vs. Ford Mustang FAQ v1.3
>
> UPDATED v1.3
> Crush discussing the Honda Civic on Real Audio!
> corrections
>
> http://members.home.net/crush
--
Lee Cao - www.leecao.com
NewHorizonz Web Development
J. R. Baker
>
> go buy aprobe then.
>
> Honestly, i used to love the probe, but its a shitty car especially
> compared to my 97 prelude. The prelude will absoultely thrash the probe a
> new asshole in every aspect of perfomance. The 7.7sec o-60 in that test was
> from an suto. C&D has a new SH in their 30K wrap up clocked at 6.9 0-60.
Really. I can't believe that guy would bother to compare
a new Prelude to a Probe. Who is he kidding ? Besides
himself I mean.
jb
Steven McColl
anyway. On one hand you've got boy-ricer and on the other you've got
sophisticated v6 driver... Not sure why anyone wants to compare them
anyway...
Steve
In alt.cars.Ford-Probe 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM>
wrote:
: Doesn't matter, either model is pathetic! I bet that 114hp can't out run
Steven McColl
: can't even beat an AUTO Prelude!
Ah, yes... An AUTO Prelude that cost more than my Cobra Conv. vs. a
Probe GT at 1/2 the price... Interesting... I'm sorry, but if you look
at evenly priced machines, Ford's got you beat hands down in acceleration.
: And you Ford lover, don't even bother bring out your other piece of shit
: the Mustang, cause it's in a different league!
You're right... It's in a much higher league than your ricemobile that
your mother bought for you...
Steve
Lee Cao
Steven McColl wrote:
>
> In alt.cars.Ford-Probe 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote:
> : Think how crappy a Ford Probe is...even the highest model GT V6 24valves
> : can't even beat an AUTO Prelude!
>
> Ah, yes... An AUTO Prelude that cost more than my Cobra Conv. vs. a
> Probe GT at 1/2 the price... Interesting... I'm sorry, but if you look
> at evenly priced machines, Ford's got you beat hands down in acceleration.
Wow, why is everyone comparing a new car price to used price for a
discontinued car? Looking at evenly priced machines huh? How much
did the Probe GT cost when new? A Base model Prelude VTEC is around
$22,000 to $23,000, I think... A base Prelude VTEC will handily
out handle and out-accelerate any Ford Probe GT.
> : And you Ford lover, don't even bother bring out your other piece of shit
> : the Mustang, cause it's in a different league!
>
> You're right... It's in a much higher league than your ricemobile that
> your mother bought for you...
I think this is an all-time low for the pro-Mustang people...
>
> Steve
Lee Cao
Steven McColl wrote:
>
> I didn't realize that the Prelude was in the same class as the GT
> anyway. On one hand you've got boy-ricer and on the other you've got
> sophisticated v6 driver... Not sure why anyone wants to compare them
> anyway...
>
Probe GT? Sophisticated V6 driver? LOL!!!!!
A friend of mine had a '96 Probe GT. He drives a '98 4Runner SR5
now. While he had that car, he had the dash replaced twice,
his driver side door lock replaced once, driver side front tie
rod broke once and at 75,000 miles, he had to replace the shocks
in his car. Since he had to do that anyway, he went with an Eibach
and Tokico kit and slamed his car 1.5" inches. He then went with
some low prifile 16" wheel/tire combo, and installed a Reamus
exhaust kit. I think he eventually put in a K&N filtercharger.
He traded it in for $8000 a year ago. Said he was sick of fixing
it.
4Bangers
>
> Steven McColl wrote:
> >
> > In alt.cars.Ford-Probe 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote:
> > : Think how crappy a Ford Probe is...even the highest model GT V6 24valves
> > : can't even beat an AUTO Prelude!
> >
> > Ah, yes... An AUTO Prelude that cost more than my Cobra Conv. vs. a
> > Probe GT at 1/2 the price... Interesting... I'm sorry, but if you look
> > at evenly priced machines, Ford's got you beat hands down in acceleration.
>
> Wow, why is everyone comparing a new car price to used price for a
> discontinued car? Looking at evenly priced machines huh? How much
> did the Probe GT cost when new? A Base model Prelude VTEC is around
> $22,000 to $23,000, I think... A base Prelude VTEC will handily
> out handle and out-accelerate any Ford Probe GT.
>
Agreed! You have to be an idiot to take price into consideration if
you are comparing a used car to a new car.
> > : And you Ford lover, don't even bother bring out your other piece of shit
> > : the Mustang, cause it's in a different league!
> >
> > You're right... It's in a much higher league than your ricemobile that
> > your mother bought for you...
>
Why do you idiots all assume that great car are bought by mom? Did you
come out of the wrong hole?
4Bangers
>
> I didn't realize that the Prelude was in the same class as the GT
> anyway. On one hand you've got boy-ricer and on the other you've got
> sophisticated v6 driver... Not sure why anyone wants to compare them
> anyway...
>
LOL! "sophisticated V6"???? ahhaahahahha a Ford made car?
"sophisticated"??? LOL!!!!
a Ford Probe GT V6 "sophisticated V6" ??? ahhahaa
It's even more pathetic to know that Ford has to borrow engine from
Mazda for their Probe. Thank god that the engine was made by Mazda, if
it was made by Ford, we would have a Ford Probe GT vs Civic LX
discussion.
I must admit that's funny --- "sophisticated V6" descriping the Ford
Probe...good one.
MegaHertz
car. What the hell does he do to it to have it in that shape. faded
paint? wtf! What does he compound it down to the metal or something?
My 94PGT Shines like the day it came off the lot cause I take care of
my things...
NICE LIFE...
On Thu, 27 May 1999 09:15:57 -0400, Gregory P Nickliss
<pau...@pitt.edu> wrote:
>just to add fuel to the fire, i have a friend who has a probe GT ('94) and
>it is a huge piece of junk. let me just label a few of the defects about
>the car: severely faded paint, one or two water leaks around the windows,
>broken cup holder, broken ash tray, passenger side door is out of
>alignment, & you have to push the window on the driver's door back under
>the door frame (seal) when you close the door because it gets caught on
>the outer edge. i've had an '84 accord w/ less problems, seriously. as
>for the prelude being "tinny", NFW! it may appear so because it has such
>flat, sharp lines, but it is far from it. besides, the reliability of the
>prelude is among the car world's best, not just honda's. it is constantly
>ranked in the top 5 most dependable cars if i'm not mistaken. oh yeah,
>one thing i absolutely hate about the probe, that huge waste of space on
>the dash due to the steep windshield; shit, i could put my luggage up
>there. one other thing, it has among the cheapest feeling interiors i've
>ever seen -- on par w/ a neon or escort (plasticity galour).
>
>greg
>
>
>
>On Thu, 27 May 1999, Dave Feltenberger wrote:
>
>>
>> <cr...@home.com> wrote in message
>> news:374e23be...@news.slnt1.on.wave.home.com...
>> > Here is a message from alt.cars.ford-probe that compares the two cars
>> > from someone who has driven both cars:
>> >
>>
>> yes, from a ford probe newsgroup. i think the prelude is *much* more fun to
>> drive. a friend of mine owns a prelude and i've driven probes before...
>> the prelude is a *lot* more fun.....wait.. i just read further down....
>> the dude says he *didn't* drive them both. and you're just taking his word
>> for it?! give me a break!
>>
>> >
>> > On Wed, 26 May 1999 15:05:01 -0400, Rafael Raban
>> > <rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > >In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
>> > >drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
>> > >Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
>> > >used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
>>
>> yes, then compare the build quality and reliability.... THEN, compare the
>> handling...
>>
>> >
>> > Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
>> > does have a new VTEC SH. I find the car "tinny" - like it's made with
>> > very thin sheetmetal. I wasn't a big fan of the interior (not as
>> > "snug" or cockpit-like as my GTs) though it is screwed together well.
>>
>> the car is far from "tinny". slam the door with the windows down on a
>> prelude, then do the same on the probe. you'll find that the probe has a
>> more "tinny" sound by far. the interior there's no contest.. looks is one
>> thing (i agree.. the interior of the lude looks ugly), but quality is
>> another. the probe can't compare to the lude in quality.
>>
>> > The PGT outbrakes the Prelude at 117-feet 60-0 versus 134 for the
>> > Prelude (though tires are probably the limiting factor for the
>> > Honda....the SH has pretty nice looking rotors and calipers on it).
>> >
>> > The SH scoots to 143 MPH versus the PGTs 133 effort. Not sure when
>> > you'd be able to repeat that test though :)
>>
>> eh? the 10 extra mph is a HUGE difference in top end power. it wouldn't be
>> hard to test that at all... i'm sure if both cars were going 80 mph, and
>> you threw them both in 4th gear, the lude would smoke the probe. in fact,
>> i'm positive cause i've seen it!
>>
>> this is getting too long... if i remember, i'll finish later
>> i gotta write a program!
>>
>>
>>
>>
Thank you,
Please email me any replies at Mega...@Audiophile.com
Brian G. Mueller
4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
>>
>
> Agreed! You have to be an idiot to take price into consideration if
>you are comparing a used car to a new car.
>
So your reasoning is that I can compare a BMW z3 to your Prelude, regardless
of price class? What about the new Audi TT? Wait, wait, I think a Porsche
would be a great comparison with your Prelude. Price is no object, right?
You are comparing a Prelude ($22,000 new) to a Probe GT ($14,000 new)? Do
you feel so threatened by a less expensive vehicle that you have to make up
arbitrary guidelines to justify your purchase?
I can buy a 1996 Ford Probe GT for less than half of what a new Prelude
costs and get nearly the same performance... Hmmm, let me think, which car
should I buy?
Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability, everything
mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
Brian G. Mueller
4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
>come out of the wrong hole?
We assume that your car was bought by your mother because your level of
intelligence shown here indicates that you can't possibly have the
intelligence to hold a job.
Steven McColl
: come out of the wrong hole?
Hmm... Your lack of vocabulary tipped me off that you're around 16 years
of age... The fact that you make snap judgements without research led me
to belive you're an idiot. 16 year old idiots don't have jobs that pay
well enough to get $25-$28K cars...
M...@here.com
>"sophisticated"??? LOL!!!!
>a Ford Probe GT V6 "sophisticated V6" ??? ahhahaa
>It's even more pathetic to know that Ford has to borrow engine from
>Mazda for their Probe. Thank god that the engine was made by Mazda, if
>it was made by Ford, we would have a Ford Probe GT vs Civic LX
>discussion.
>
>I must admit that's funny --- "sophisticated V6" descriping the Ford
>Probe...good one.
Hrmm.. One of Wards 10 best engines.. then again they probably don't
know what they're talking about either 'eh?
Anyways, I don't think "borrowed" from Mazda would be the correct
term. Remember, Ford owns 1/3+ of Mazda. Maybe you'll start bitching
about the Lincoln/Jag engine "borrowing" as well.
I know it doesn't have fancy V-TEC or anything, but from my Prelude SH
driving experience I would take the V6 anyday over what I consider to
be an anemic 4-banger.
Why are we comparing a car out of production to one that is anyways?
Why not compare them through the same years?
Prelude
Brian G. Mueller <choi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lvq33.1716$gZ4....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
>
> 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
> >come out of the wrong hole?
>
> intelligence shown here indicates that you can't possibly have the
> intelligence to hold a job.
LOL!!!
Dave Feltenberger
>
> 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
> >>
> >
> >you are comparing a used car to a new car.
> >
>
> So your reasoning is that I can compare a BMW z3 to your Prelude,
regardless
> of price class? What about the new Audi TT? Wait, wait, I think a
Porsche
> would be a great comparison with your Prelude. Price is no object, right?
that's obviously not what he meant. think about it this way.... you're
(maybe not you, personally....but the originator of the thread did)
comparing a BRAND NEW car to a used, discontinued car. you can't honestly
expect the prelude to be close in price, can you?
>
> You are comparing a Prelude ($22,000 new) to a Probe GT ($14,000 new)? Do
> you feel so threatened by a less expensive vehicle that you have to make
up
> arbitrary guidelines to justify your purchase?
wrong.... new it was $16,365... about the same price as a new prelude in
'94.
>
> I can buy a 1996 Ford Probe GT for less than half of what a new Prelude
> costs and get nearly the same performance... Hmmm, let me think, which car
> should I buy?
like the previous posters suggested... you shouldn't compare price when
comparing a new car to a used car. after all, the prelude and the probe
were about the same price at the time. also.. the prelude is a lot faster
than the probe gt. here are the numbers straight from motor trend:
Ford Probe GT '94
Issue 8/94(c)
Reprint ID No. 7089
Price (Base/Tested) $16,015/$16,365
Powertrain Configuration 2.5 V-6/5M/fwd
Power (hp/rpm) 164/6000
Torque (lb-ft/rpm) 160/4800
0-60 (sec) 7.5
1/4 Mile 15.8/87.2
Braking 60-0 119
Lateral Accel. (g) 0.89
Slalom (mph) 67.2
City/Hwy. EPA 21/26
check this with what motortrend's online database has:
http://www.motortrend.com/bl/rtrsearch_f.html
>
> Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability,
everything
> mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
>
this is true... BUT, i have a friend that can't drive stick for sheeit (the
one who has a probe, crush......) and his clutch went out on it 13,000 miles
after he bought it! no matter HOW bad a driver you are, the car should
*still* last a lot longer than that!!!
Steven McColl
: > you feel so threatened by a less expensive vehicle that you have to make
: up
: > arbitrary guidelines to justify your purchase?
: wrong.... new it was $16,365... about the same price as a new prelude in
: '94.
Ok... So it's alright for them to compare th Probe GT ('94) to a '99
Prelude SH (210 HP, ~$28K) in terms of performance, just not price... I see
the mentality now...
Steve
Steven McColl
: Ok... So it's alright for them to compare th Probe GT ('94) to a '99
: the mentality now...
Oops... Sorry.. 200HP and $26K... Just took a look at kbb again...
Wow.. Can you say "NO TORQUE?"
sama...@my-deja.com
with this post, as many of you know from other posts, I was a
technician at ford for 2 years I did basically anything they would
dispatch me, light line, trim/electrical, gravy (regular service).
now, onto the show. I worked on my fair share of Probes, both GT and
regular, the prior model (90, 91) had a seatbelt recall, but we aren't
talking about those years, they were the biggest pieces of junk I have
ever worked on, the interiors were all brittle plastic and the engines
were shitty, the same engine that is in the 4 cyl. version of the newer
probe. Anyway, the newer model probes were a hassle, the plastic on the
interiors was just as brittle as the older version, we hated working on
them because you would always end up breaking some damn plastic piece
that was supposed to come out easily, but for some odd reason the
plastic would break and then you would have to fish around for 30
minutes to get the pieces out, then find a new retainer clip. engines
weren't much more fun. is anyone aware of the bullshit you have to go
through if you have a bad battery cable? The battery cable is in the
entire engines wiring harness, meaning if your battery cable is
coroding and you have to replace it, you have to drop $200 (more for
automatic) on a new harness. you have to spend an entire weekend with a
good factory shop manual to change it. Only if you are very
mechanically inclined will you be able to do the switch in the 6 hours
it would take a trained technician. besides the electrical
abnormalities, and cheap interior, the transmission feels loose and the
clutch does not give any confidence as to when you are shifting, I had
my bug at the time to compair it to, this is pathetic. one of the only
things on this car that I think is any good is the name, it fits the
shape of the car rather well. it is named probe and it sure looks like
a probe, an ass probe. (the last remark is totally based on my tastes).
anyway, I am not the only one that didn't like the probe or they would
have sold more and wouldn't have had to drop the line 2 years ago and
put the escort ZX-2 in it's place, which sells better than the probe
ever did, that is sad.
--
Sam
cr...@home.com wrote:
> Here is a message from alt.cars.ford-probe that compares the two cars
> from someone who has driven both cars:
>
> On Wed, 26 May 1999 15:05:01 -0400, Rafael Raban
> <rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> >In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
> >drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
> >Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on
a
> >used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
>
> Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
> does have a new VTEC SH. I find the car "tinny" - like it's made with
> very thin sheetmetal. I wasn't a big fan of the interior (not as
> "snug" or cockpit-like as my GTs) though it is screwed together well.
>
> We've had a few impromptu "drags" and his 195HP motor doesn't seem
> faster than my 170HP engine (164 + a couple of bolt-ons). Road & Track
> (Road Test Summary, Apr/99) measures the 0-60 & 1/4-mile times of the
> SH at 7.7 and 15.8 seconds respectively. A 1993 test (Dec/93 Motor
> Trend PGT/GS-R shootout) of the 94PGT showed 7.5 and 15.3.
>
> Interestingly, the 1994 Integra GS-R was 7.3 and 15.6 - faster than
> the new Prelude.
>
> The PGT outbrakes the Prelude at 117-feet 60-0 versus 134 for the
> Prelude (though tires are probably the limiting factor for the
> Honda....the SH has pretty nice looking rotors and calipers on it).
>
> The SH scoots to 143 MPH versus the PGTs 133 effort. Not sure when
> you'd be able to repeat that test though :)
>
> There's no skidpad numbers in the R&T summary for the SH but the PGT
> did 0.87 in 1993 and ran a 68.2MPH slalom while the SH did the slalom
> at 60.6MPH. I'm not certain what R&Ts slalom is compared to Motor
> Trend's: the 1994 GS-R did a 67.0MPH run through the cones so MTs test
> may have been "easier" (the R&T summary shows the new GS-R doing a
> 62.8 slalom and turning 0.80 on the skidpad). Since the new GS-R beats
> the new Prelude and the PGT beat the old GS-R, it's probably safe to
> say the PGT beats the Prelude in the slalom (though maybe not in
> suspension refinement).
>
> Updated! Honda Civic vs. Ford Mustang FAQ v1.3
>
> UPDATED v1.3
> Crush discussing the Honda Civic on Real Audio!
> corrections
>
> http://members.home.net/crush
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Dave Feltenberger
Steven McColl <smc...@umr.edu> wrote in message
news:374eb...@news.cc.umr.edu...
can you say "it still beats the hell out of the probe in any performance
category and has a lot higher build quality and better reliability than any
probe?"
Dave Feltenberger
> In alt.cars.Ford-Probe Dave Feltenberger <aex...@dave.com> wrote:
>
> Ok... So it's alright for them to compare th Probe GT ('94) to a '99
> Prelude SH (210 HP, ~$28K) in terms of performance, just not price... I
see
> the mentality now...
you really should go back and read the original post you know? the original
poster was comparing the two and said that the probe was faster and was more
"sophisticated" than the prelude. people in the honda newsgroup just
replied to such a stupid post. we didn't bring that up. crush did. i'm
sure you guys hate him just as much as we do! lol
Lee Cao
"Brian G. Mueller" wrote:
> Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability, everything
> mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
If that were true, Probes would be as reliable as the Prelude.
Yet it is not. Are you implying that some how the collective
Probe owners are not regularly maintaining their cars so as to
give it a sub-par reliability rating?
sama...@my-deja.com
"Brian G. Mueller" <choi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
> >>
> >
> > Agreed! You have to be an idiot to take price into consideration if
> >you are comparing a used car to a new car.
> >
>
> So your reasoning is that I can compare a BMW z3 to your Prelude,
regardless
> of price class? What about the new Audi TT? Wait, wait, I think a
Porsche
> would be a great comparison with your Prelude. Price is no object,
right?
>
> You are comparing a Prelude ($22,000 new) to a Probe GT ($14,000
new)? Do
> you feel so threatened by a less expensive vehicle that you have to
make up
> arbitrary guidelines to justify your purchase?
>
> I can buy a 1996 Ford Probe GT for less than half of what a new
Prelude
> costs and get nearly the same performance... Hmmm, let me think,
which car
> should I buy?
>
> Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability,
everything
> mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
>
>
haha, you can do all the preventive maint you want, but nothing can
stop a differential from exploding at 100+ mph, and putting a window in
the transmission, and no this is not a freak, one time occurance, a
girl I once knew blew hers up, and two probes I saw while I was working
at ford, not to mention a mazda version of this car with the same
problem. after this you might as well have the car hauled off for
scrap, considdering it is about $1k for a case, and then you have to
buy new clutch packs, bands and more than likely replace a few burned
up drums. You go out and buy that probe, I am more than happy that I
spent the extra money on my integra.
--
Sam
sama...@my-deja.com
"Dave Feltenberger" <aex...@dave.com> wrote:
>
> Brian G. Mueller <choi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:uDq33.1749$gZ4....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
> >
> > 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
> > >>
> > >
> > > Agreed! You have to be an idiot to take price into consideration
if
> > >you are comparing a used car to a new car.
> > >
> >
> > So your reasoning is that I can compare a BMW z3 to your Prelude,
> regardless
> > of price class? What about the new Audi TT? Wait, wait, I think a
> Porsche
> > would be a great comparison with your Prelude. Price is no object,
right?
>
> that's obviously not what he meant. think about it this way....
you're
> (maybe not you, personally....but the originator of the thread did)
> comparing a BRAND NEW car to a used, discontinued car. you can't
honestly
> expect the prelude to be close in price, can you?
>
> >
> > You are comparing a Prelude ($22,000 new) to a Probe GT ($14,000
new)? Do
> > you feel so threatened by a less expensive vehicle that you have to
make
> up
> > arbitrary guidelines to justify your purchase?
>
> wrong.... new it was $16,365... about the same price as a new
prelude in
> '94.
>
> >
> > I can buy a 1996 Ford Probe GT for less than half of what a new
Prelude
> > costs and get nearly the same performance... Hmmm, let me think,
which car
> > should I buy?
>
> like the previous posters suggested... you shouldn't compare price
when
> comparing a new car to a used car. after all, the prelude and the
probe
> were about the same price at the time. also.. the prelude is a lot
faster
> than the probe gt. here are the numbers straight from motor trend:
>
> Ford Probe GT '94
> Issue 8/94(c)
> Reprint ID No. 7089
> Price (Base/Tested) $16,015/$16,365
> Powertrain Configuration 2.5 V-6/5M/fwd
> Power (hp/rpm) 164/6000
> Torque (lb-ft/rpm) 160/4800
> 0-60 (sec) 7.5
> 1/4 Mile 15.8/87.2
> Braking 60-0 119
> Lateral Accel. (g) 0.89
> Slalom (mph) 67.2
> City/Hwy. EPA 21/26
>
> check this with what motortrend's online database has:
> http://www.motortrend.com/bl/rtrsearch_f.html
>
> >
> > Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability,
> everything
> > mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular
basis.
> >
>
> this is true... BUT, i have a friend that can't drive stick for
sheeit (the
> one who has a probe, crush......) and his clutch went out on it
13,000 miles
> after he bought it! no matter HOW bad a driver you are, the car
should
> *still* last a lot longer than that!!!
>
>
perhaps this is what we should be compairing the probe to...
Honda Civic del Sol VTEC '94
Issue 8/94(c)
Reprint ID No. 7089
Price (Base/Tested) $17,500/$17,850
Powertrain Configuration 1.6 I-4/5M/fwd
Power (hp/rpm) 160/7600
Torque (lb-ft/rpm) 111/7000
0-60 (sec) 7.4
1/4 Mile 15.8/89.1
Braking 60-0 126
Lateral Accel. (g) 0.87
Slalom (mph) 66.2
City/Hwy. EPA 26/30
I think that these two vehicles are excelent for compairing, look at
them, they are in the same price range, both have decent economy (the
honda might be a bit more decent). the probe might be a bit more
tourqy, but they both get to sixty in the same time frame, this says to
me that the probes tranny has taller gears that eats the tourqe. the
only real difference I see in the 2 models is the del sol is a two
seater with a removable top, while the probe has room for 4.
Lee Cao
Steven McColl wrote:
>
> In alt.cars.Ford-Probe Dave Feltenberger <aex...@dave.com> wrote:
> : > You are comparing a Prelude ($22,000 new) to a Probe GT ($14,000 new)? Do
> : > you feel so threatened by a less expensive vehicle that you have to make
> : up
> : > arbitrary guidelines to justify your purchase?
>
> : wrong.... new it was $16,365... about the same price as a new prelude in
> : '94.
>
> Ok... So it's alright for them to compare th Probe GT ('94) to a '99
> Prelude SH (210 HP, ~$28K) in terms of performance, just not price... I see
> the mentality now...
take it from the top Steve. At first was the discussion of
performance and performance alone. After it became apparent to
everyone at the table that the Prelude is simply superior, the
Pro-Probe people said "well, the probe is cheaper". And we
merely pointed out that since it's a used and discontinued car,
*of course* it is going to be cheaper than a new 1999 production
car.
Besides, the Prelude SH is $26K, not $28K, and we are not even
comparing the Prelude SH, we are looking at the base Prelude
VTEC, which is only $23.
You want to compare performance, that's fine. You want to
compare price between same year as-new-prices of Prelude to
Probe GT, that's fine too. But justifying Probe's inferior
performance by stating the obvious fact that a used Probe
cost less than a new Prelude is stupid.
> Steve
Lee Cao
Steven McColl wrote:
>
> In alt.cars.Ford-Probe Steven McColl <smc...@umr.edu> wrote:
> : Ok... So it's alright for them to compare th Probe GT ('94) to a '99
> : Prelude SH (210 HP, ~$28K) in terms of performance, just not price... I see
> : the mentality now...
>
> Oops... Sorry.. 200HP and $26K... Just took a look at kbb again...
> Wow.. Can you say "NO TORQUE?"
Can you say "FASTER THAN A PROBE GT"?
Lee Cao
Steven McColl wrote:
>
> In alt.cars.Ford-Probe 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote:
> : Why do you idiots all assume that great car are bought by mom? Did you
> : come out of the wrong hole?
>
> Hmm... Your lack of vocabulary tipped me off that you're around 16 years
> of age... The fact that you make snap judgements without research led me
> to belive you're an idiot. 16 year old idiots don't have jobs that pay
> well enough to get $25-$28K cars...
You are making a series of erroneous assumptions leading up to
an obviously falst conclusion.
Lee Cao
M...@here.com wrote:
>
> >LOL! "sophisticated V6"???? ahhaahahahha a Ford made car?
> >"sophisticated"??? LOL!!!!
> >a Ford Probe GT V6 "sophisticated V6" ??? ahhahaa
> >It's even more pathetic to know that Ford has to borrow engine from
> >Mazda for their Probe. Thank god that the engine was made by Mazda, if
> >it was made by Ford, we would have a Ford Probe GT vs Civic LX
> >discussion.
> >
> >I must admit that's funny --- "sophisticated V6" descriping the Ford
> >Probe...good one.
>
> Hrmm.. One of Wards 10 best engines.. then again they probably don't
> know what they're talking about either 'eh?
Who the heck is "Wards"? Give me their other "best of" choices
and I'll tell you if they are legit or full of shit and sponsoring
dollars.
> Anyways, I don't think "borrowed" from Mazda would be the correct
> term. Remember, Ford owns 1/3+ of Mazda. Maybe you'll start bitching
> about the Lincoln/Jag engine "borrowing" as well.
Hee hee... I think the Probe relationship existed before Mazda and
Ford officially became one.
> I know it doesn't have fancy V-TEC or anything, but from my Prelude SH
> driving experience I would take the V6 anyday over what I consider to
> be an anemic 4-banger.
If the Prelude 4-banger is anenic, the the V6 from the Probe GT is
a salted slug.
> Why are we comparing a car out of production to one that is anyways?
> Why not compare them through the same years?
Sure... that's fine.
Colin Chow
w/ another crazy thread. 70 new posts on 1 single thread in a day is too
much for me!
Anyway, you're comparing a discontinued Ford Probe to a new Prelude?
Since you appear so keen on blindly worshipping particular testimonials
that will satisfy your fantasies, take the time to read up on this link:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/5745/comparo.html
Just a summary from PROFESSIONAL drivers having done more than just
driving both cars.
: Trader for $CDN25500 (!). A good 95 or 96PGT can be had for less than
: half of the new SH and easily $10000 less than the used one.
Dave Feltenberger
Lee Cao <lig...@leecao.com> wrote in message
news:374ECC33...@leecao.com...
> > Why are we comparing a car out of production to one that is anyways?
> > Why not compare them through the same years?
>
> Sure... that's fine.
>
especially considering that the '96 VTEC prelude was the fastest of all the
preludes! the probe GT was around then, right? the prelude VTEC from '96
ran a 15.1 stock. pretty damn fast if you ask me..
Steven McColl
don't know anything about it. Drive something with more than 4 cyls. and
you'll understand why we think the GT is a better car.
Dave Feltenberger
Also, what does that have to do with what he was talking about? Your
response is a typical response from a bull-headed person who can't admit
when he's wrong. Good job.
Steven McColl <smc...@umr.edu> wrote in message
news:374ee...@news.cc.umr.edu...
DSM4DR
>you'll understand why we think the GT is a better car.
>
Huh? I'm lost on this one. I've driven Probe V6s many times. Not a bad car
at all. They handle very well from the factory as well. However, I have also
driven *many* 4 cylinders that would run circles around the Probe V6...let's
not get carried away.
Josh
#76 of 1000(13.0@102....$900 in mods...streets)
#341 of 2000(12.2@112 on street tires as well)
...both 2.0 16V 4 cylinders.
headbone
the 93 VTEC was the speedking.
e
headbone
still seem to have a hard time saying it.
The probe is NO match for a prelude. Sure the stang and lude may be in different
vehicle classes, but when it comes down to performance why does the lude STILL
do everything better than a mustang (pre 99)???? Granted acceleration is a toss
up, its always close. However when it comes to high speed...the lude thrashes he
stang everytime. The same skillz that enable me to say "NO TOURQUE"!!! also let
me say 200HP @7400 while making the frantic shriek unmistakably known as a lude
on VTEC (kinda likea squirrel on CRACK). Either way, the ludes high speed
dominance over the stang becomes downright embarrassing when you throw a turn or
two (or three) into the mix.
Fine the lude lacks big torque number, but It still whups a mustangs ass, while
offering style, luxury and reliability that even the proud ownder of the most
pleiomorphic genes at your local trailer park would think twice (just
that...twice) about getting rid of his stang. Alas, the stang costs less tho.
e
Dave Feltenberger wrote:
> Steven McColl <smc...@umr.edu> wrote in message
> news:374eb...@news.cc.umr.edu...
> > In alt.cars.Ford-Probe Steven McColl <smc...@umr.edu> wrote:
> > : Ok... So it's alright for them to compare th Probe GT ('94) to a '99
> > : Prelude SH (210 HP, ~$28K) in terms of performance, just not price... I
> see
> > : the mentality now...
> >
> > Oops... Sorry.. 200HP and $26K... Just took a look at kbb again...
> > Wow.. Can you say "NO TORQUE?"
>
Brian G. Mueller
Dave Feltenberger wrote in message <374e...@news.desupernet.net>...
>
>Brian G. Mueller <choi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:uDq33.1749$gZ4....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
>>
>> 4Bangers <4ban...@home.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
>> >>
>> >
>> > Agreed! You have to be an idiot to take price into consideration if
>> >you are comparing a used car to a new car.
>> >
>>
>> So your reasoning is that I can compare a BMW z3 to your Prelude,
>regardless
>> of price class? What about the new Audi TT? Wait, wait, I think a
>Porsche
>> would be a great comparison with your Prelude. Price is no object,
right?
>
>that's obviously not what he meant. think about it this way.... you're
>(maybe not you, personally....but the originator of the thread did)
Oh, yeah. You are correct. It was the origianl poster who compared the
two. Sorry.
>
>this is true... BUT, i have a friend that can't drive stick for sheeit
(the
>one who has a probe, crush......) and his clutch went out on it 13,000
miles
>after he bought it! no matter HOW bad a driver you are, the car should
>*still* last a lot longer than that!!!
All I can say is that he has a shitty Probe. I am not about to claim some
wild superiority over any car, I just happen to prefer Probes. I also
neglected to notice that these posts were crossposted in an obvious attempt,
IMO, to start some kind of flame war. Hey, you like your Prelude, good for
you! I'll keep saving up for my 96 probe GT, ok?
Brian G. Mueller
Lee Cao wrote in message <374E9DE4...@leecao.com>...
>
>
>"Brian G. Mueller" wrote:
>
>> Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability,
everything
>> mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
>
>Yet it is not. Are you implying that some how the collective
>Probe owners are not regularly maintaining their cars so as to
>give it a sub-par reliability rating?
>
What I am saying is that there are admittedly certain quality control issues
with the probe. I'm not some blind apologist. However, with proper
maintenance and a few small purchases, such as upgrading to after-market
spark plug wires, a Probe will last as long and run as reliably as a Prelude
or any other car. Let's face it, you beat the shit out of any car and you
get what you deserve!
Brian G. Mueller
But, seriously, I'm not buying a Probe to top 100+ mph. I like my money way
too much!
I've never heard of this happening, so thanks for the info. Have any
websites that back this up?
sama...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7imkn3$t0d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>
> "Brian G. Mueller" <choi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability,
>everything
>> mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
>>
>>
Brian G. Mueller
>spent the extra money on my integra.
>--
I will. Good for you.
Tom&Jen
and, if properly maintained, would kill even a NEW lude.
95ProbeSE
One thing I like to add, the Prelude doesnt even come close to looking
good as a Probe. Thats my 2 cents.
http://members.home.net:80/wennfred/Probe.html
Brian G. Mueller
95ProbeSE wrote in message <374F4AC3...@home.com>...
Dave Feltenberger
Brian G. Mueller <choi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:feE33.704$DM3....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
>
> All I can say is that he has a shitty Probe. I am not about to claim some
> wild superiority over any car, I just happen to prefer Probes. I also
> neglected to notice that these posts were crossposted in an obvious
attempt,
> IMO, to start some kind of flame war. Hey, you like your Prelude, good
for
> you! I'll keep saving up for my 96 probe GT, ok?
sounds good to me. but i'd rather have an accord than a prelude (that's why
i have one). this is probably a good way to end this stupid thread crush
started....
Paul
aspirated, FWD four-pot can get to 60mph in less than 7 seconds? I don't
care if it's got 200bhp and all the variable valve timing you can get, it's
still FWD and that's not the optimum set-up for neck-snapping acceleration.
I know I'm in Australia, but I don't think you lot in the US get any special
add-ons for a Prelude VTi-R to make it any quicker. 0-60 times for '99
Prelude are mid-sevens. Every road test I've ever read puts it somewhere
between 7.5s and 7.9s. Anyone who says it can get to 60 in less than 7
needs their Correvit checking.
And now I am going to back myself up. Here's a quick list of average-priced
four cylinder cars, both in and out of production, that will do 0-60 in
under 7 seconds
Subaru Impreza WRX 0-60 5.7s, 215bhp, AWD
Ford Escort RS Cosworth 0-60 5.7s, 227bhp, AWD
Ford Sierra RS Cosworth 0-60 6.4s, 206bhp, RWD
Nissan 200SX 0-60 6.4s, 250bhp, RWD
Lotus Elise 0-60 6.1s, 118bhp, RWD
Audi S3 0-60 6.8s, 210bhp, AWD
Ford RS200 Evolution 0-60 3.0s, 315bhp, AWD (not quite an everyday car, but
I always pull this baby out in and Ford vs. flame war!)
Now what do all the above have? Yup, OVER 200bhp, and either all-wheel or
real-wheel drive. New '99 Prelude VTi-R has 196bhp@7000rpm - the Elise
aside, it's got the least power. It's also FWD when the rest are RWD/AWD.
I've driven a Prelude and they are quite nice. I could never buy one, tho.
I could never bring myself to admit I own anything that ugly.
And, yeah, I own a Probe GT. Never had any problems with it and I love it.
I love the cockpit, I love the gear-change, I love the sound of the V6 when
I push it to 7,000, I love the toys, I love the way it pulls from way down
in the rev-range and most of all, I love the way it looks. And a Prelude
VTi-R is quicker. By a second. Can the flame war now end?
Cheers
Paul
headbone wrote in message <374D48FE...@ix.netcom.com>...
>go buy aprobe then.
>
>Honestly, i used to love the probe, but its a shitty car especially
>compared to my 97 prelude. The prelude will absoultely thrash the probe a
>new asshole in every aspect of perfomance. The 7.7sec o-60 in that test was
>from an suto. C&D has a new SH in their 30K wrap up clocked at 6.9 0-60.
>Obviously the base will be a little faster, plus afterbreak-in....call it
>6.7 sec 0-60. The probe sux.
>
>
>please.
>
>
>e
Dave Feltenberger
Paul <sie...@NOSPAMomen.net.au> wrote in message
news:7ip1f1$6ih$1...@demeter.omen.net.au...
> Oh, please, give me a break. Do you really expect me to believe a
normally
> aspirated, FWD four-pot can get to 60mph in less than 7 seconds? I don't
> care if it's got 200bhp and all the variable valve timing you can get,
it's
> still FWD and that's not the optimum set-up for neck-snapping
acceleration.
> I know I'm in Australia, but I don't think you lot in the US get any
special
> add-ons for a Prelude VTi-R to make it any quicker. 0-60 times for '99
> Prelude are mid-sevens. Every road test I've ever read puts it somewhere
> between 7.5s and 7.9s. Anyone who says it can get to 60 in less than 7
> needs their Correvit checking.
you obviously have no clue based on the paragraph above. check out motor
trend's online database, then come in here and tell us that a N/A 4 banger
can't get 0-60 in under 7 seconds. here's the address:
http://www.motortrend.com/bl/rtrsearch_f.html
Adam Smith
>
> now, onto the show. I worked on my fair share of Probes, both GT and
> regular, the prior model (90, 91) had a seatbelt recall, but we aren't
> talking about those years, they were the biggest pieces of junk I have
> ever worked on, the interiors were all brittle plastic and the engines
> were shitty, the same engine that is in the 4 cyl. version of the newer
> probe. Anyway, the newer model probes were a hassle, the plastic on the
One question, because I'm considering a Gen1 Probe LX. I've always heard
very good things about the reliability of the 3.0 Vulcan V6 in the
Taurus. Were there any problems with that engine in the Probe?
Thanks!
Paul
difference in the times I've seen for exactly the same car? Why is it that
cars with almost exactly the same power output (Mitsubishi Lancer GSR
Turbo, old model Nissan 200SX) are all mid-seven second cars?
And a quick quote from the Sydney Morning Herald (comparing the VTi-R to the
now superseded 200SX):
(about the VTEC engine)"...drives the VTi-R to a quick 0-100 km/h time in
the high-seven-second bracket - a few tenths shy of Nissan's class-leading
2.0-litre turbocharged 200SX."
If you still believe that a Prelude will pull mid-sixes, I have a bridge I'd
like to sell you.
Paul
Dave Feltenberger wrote in message ...
>
>Paul <sie...@NOSPAMomen.net.au> wrote in message
>news:7ip1f1$6ih$1...@demeter.omen.net.au...
>> Oh, please, give me a break. Do you really expect me to believe a
>normally
>> aspirated, FWD four-pot can get to 60mph in less than 7 seconds? I don't
>> care if it's got 200bhp and all the variable valve timing you can get,
>it's
>> still FWD and that's not the optimum set-up for neck-snapping
>acceleration.
>> I know I'm in Australia, but I don't think you lot in the US get any
>special
>> add-ons for a Prelude VTi-R to make it any quicker. 0-60 times for '99
>> Prelude are mid-sevens. Every road test I've ever read puts it somewhere
>> between 7.5s and 7.9s. Anyone who says it can get to 60 in less than 7
>> needs their Correvit checking.
>
Dave Feltenberger
> difference in the times I've seen for exactly the same car? Why is it
that
> cars with almost exactly the same power output (Mitsubishi Lancer GSR
> Turbo, old model Nissan 200SX) are all mid-seven second cars?
good for me? it's printed by a reputable magazine... and the 200 sx does
NOT and never has had 200 hp. how the HELL is this similar power?!
> If you still believe that a Prelude will pull mid-sixes, I have a bridge
I'd
> like to sell you.
like i said. check out the motortrend online database. car and driver got
6.9 in the zero to sixty sprint. what don't you see? why are you ignoring
the obvious FACTS?
>
> Paul
>
> Dave Feltenberger wrote in message ...
> >
> >Paul <sie...@NOSPAMomen.net.au> wrote in message
> >news:7ip1f1$6ih$1...@demeter.omen.net.au...
> >> Oh, please, give me a break. Do you really expect me to believe a
> >normally
> >> aspirated, FWD four-pot can get to 60mph in less than 7 seconds? I
don't
> >> care if it's got 200bhp and all the variable valve timing you can get,
> >it's
> >> still FWD and that's not the optimum set-up for neck-snapping
> >acceleration.
> >> I know I'm in Australia, but I don't think you lot in the US get any
> >special
> >> add-ons for a Prelude VTi-R to make it any quicker. 0-60 times for '99
> >> Prelude are mid-sevens. Every road test I've ever read puts it
somewhere
> >> between 7.5s and 7.9s. Anyone who says it can get to 60 in less than 7
> >> needs their Correvit checking.
> >
Rafael Raban
vs. Ford .. by Lee C...@leecao.com
> Probe GT? Sophisticated V6 driver? LOL!!!!!
>
> A friend of mine had a '96 Probe GT. He drives a '98 4Runner SR5
> now. While he had that car, he had the dash replaced twice,
> his driver side door lock replaced once, driver side front tie
> rod broke once and at 75,000 miles, he had to replace the shocks
> in his car. Since he had to do that anyway, he went with an Eibach
> and Tokico kit and slamed his car 1.5" inches. He then went with
> some low prifile 16" wheel/tire combo, and installed a Reamus
> exhaust kit. I think he eventually put in a K&N filtercharger.
>
> He traded it in for $8000 a year ago. Said he was sick of fixing
> it.
Another "my friend said [fill here]" story... You've oviously never
driven a well maintained GT so buzz off.
Replacing shocks at 75,000 is normal. The stock shocks on a PGT, by the
way, are the top-of-the-line gas-charged KYB struts/shocks. FYI, KYB is
a highly regarded manufacturer of suspension components, certainly as
good as anything in the Qualude. As for replacing a dash, having owned
a GT for the past 6 years, I can't imagine why anyone would need a new
dash!?
As for the statement, "He then went with a low profile 16" wheel/tire
combo," this shows how little you know about the GT. FYI, GT's come
with 225/50 Goodyear VR50's. Only a moron would put lower profile tires
on 16" wheels.
Also, I suspect your buddy with the 4Runner was never interested in
driving a sports car in the first place. BTW, on this newsgroup, "sport
utility vehicle" is a dirty word, so I suggest you refrain from using it.
Rafael Raban
Department of Materials Science & Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Microstructure and Processing of the Bicycle Spoke:
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/raban/microstructure.htm
Probe GT net:
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/raban/PGT/PGTNET.html
_______ ,__o
_______ _- \ <
_____ (*) / (*)
Rafael Raban
vs. Ford .. by Lee C...@leecao.com
> > <rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
> > >drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
> > >Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
> > >used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
> >
> > Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
> > does have a new VTEC SH.
>
> lying Crush. you stated very clearly that it was from "someone who
> has driven both cars". Yet Rafael here very clearly says that he
> did not drive a Prelude, but only rode in one.
>
I'm Rafael, when did I say I haven't driven a Prelude VTEC??? Read a
little more carefully. I have driven a Prelude VTEC on several
occasions. Is it a higher quality car that a Probe GT/MX-6, yes. Is it
more fun to drive, no. Does it have a better engine, no. Read the 1996
Probe GT/Eclipse GST/Integra VTEC comparo in Sport Compact Car. The PGT
was slowest in acceleration, but "easily outmuscled" the Integra VTEC on
the road course, where torque and a broad powerband are important. Keep
in mind, while the Prelude VTEC is more powerful than the Integra, its
also quite a bit heavier.
If your goal is just to drag race, for less than the Integra you can buy
a V8 musclecar that will blow the doors off your Qualude. I think the
GT and Qualude are very even in straight line acceleration. These
differences in straight line accleration have much more to do with
drivers than the intrinsic properties of the cars. Saying "I beat my
friend by two car lengths" is a meaningless statement.
I do like some things about the Prelude. Handling was very good and
well balanced but it lacked the ultimate grip of the PGT. That's a
fact. You can say that the GT has bigger wheels and wider/stickier
tires, but that does not address the fact -- based on published #'s, the
GT has faster slalom and higher skidpad. I could just as easily slap
wider/stickier rubber on my GT and pull something like .95+g's.
I personally do not like the VTEC engines. The Prelude VTEC is dead
below 5k rpm, then the power comes on pretty good to the 7500 redline.
On a drag strip this is good because you don't have enough torque to run
into serious traction problems on launch. But on a road course, this
sucks. Keep in mind, you only make 195hp at 7500 rpm. That's good for
top speed runs as well, but not very usefull on a road race course.
As for someone who mentioned they can beat a 5sp GT with an auto
Qualude, this is absolute nonsense. I drove an auto Prelude VTEC as
well. It is absolutely dead!!! It is mind boggling that someone would
spend $24k on a car with essentially no torque or low end power, and
then get it with a auto!!
If the Honda Accord Coupe V6 coupe were available with a 5-sp, I would
take it in a heartbeat over the Qualude. Both engines make roughly the
same power, but a V6 Accord coupe with a properly tuned suspension would
blow the doors off a Prelude in a road race encounter. Hence, this is
why the 5sp V6 Accord coupe will never be built -- it will mean the end
of the Prelude wennie 4-banger.
Lastly, I feel that the Prelude dash is good, but certainly nothing
special-- just typical Honda CIVIC. The Prelude seats suck compared to
the GT seats (although the Probe GT leather seats suck as well). The
Honda seats do not even have side bolster or lumbar adjustment. The GT
seats have excellent pneumatic side and lumbar pumps that really glue
you in the seats. As for the GT dash, I love it. It wraps around
nicely and everything is easy to reach. Oh, did I mention the
virsitility of the GT's huge hatchback. I fit a 27" TV box there!
Ciao,
Rafael Raban
>stop a differential from exploding at 100+ mph, and putting a window in
>the transmission, and no this is not a freak, one time occurance, a
>girl I once knew blew hers up, and two probes I saw while I was working
>at ford, not to mention a mazda version of this car with the same
>problem. after this you might as well have the car hauled off for
>scrap, considdering it is about $1k for a case, and then you have to
>buy new clutch packs, bands and more than likely replace a few burned
>spent the extra money on my integra.
>--
Your statistics are poor to say the least. Gee, I've heard of Integra
VTECs going through distributors, does that mean that the VTEC is
unreliable? As for exploding differentials, I've owned PGT's for 6+
years now. My father owned a 93 GT, I've owned a 94GT (totalled) and
currently own a 97GT (all 5speed). I take my GT hard on a regular
basis. I drive the a 600 mile route on the PA turnpike 6k miles a year
and hold 100 mph on a regular basis with many short runs to 130+. The
car is rock solid.
As for your credentials, the fact that you are/were a Ford Mechanic
speaks for itself...
Rafael Raban
Last year, after having my 94GT totaled when someone rear-ended me, I
was in the market for a new car. It basically came to this, a used PGT
vs. used Prelude. Here's a comparison from kbb for similarly equiped
'97 models with 20k miles:
1997 Honda Prelude Coupe 2D
Engine: 4-Cyl. 2.2L VTEC
Trans: 5 Speed Manual
Drive: Front Wheel Drive
Mileage: 20,000
Equipment
Air Conditioning
Power Steering
Power Windows
Power Door Locks
Tilt Wheel
Cruise Control
AM/FM Stereo
Compact Disc
Premium Sound
Dual Air Bags
ABS (4-Wheel)
Power Seat
Moon Roof
Alloy Wheels
Retail Value $21,510
1997 Ford Probe GT Hatchback 3D
Engine: V6 2.5 Liter
Trans: 5 Speed Manual
Drive: Front Wheel Drive
Mileage: 20,000
Equipment
Air Conditioning
Power Steering
Power Windows
Power Door Locks
Tilt Wheel
Cruise Control
AM/FM Stereo
Cassette
Compact Disc
Premium Sound
Dual Air Bags
ABS (4-Wheel)
Power Seat
Moon Roof
Alloy Wheels
Retail Value $15,725
PRICE DIFFERENCE = $5,775
As is, the cars are very evenly matched in terms of overall performance.
If I were concerned about long-term quality, I could purchase a 6 year
factory warrenty for $750 and I'd still be ahead 5 grand. A GT with 5
grand of the right mods will run circles around a Qualude.
Rafael Raban
realized you don't even own a Prelude, and have probably not driven
either the Prelude or the PGT. Your only experience with the GT is your
friends' dilapidated example. If you want, I could show you my
immaculate jewel of a Probe GT.
Excerpts from netnews.alt.cars.ford-probe: 27-May-99 Re: Honda Prelude
vs. Ford .. by Gregory P Nickliss@pitt.
> just to add fuel to the fire, i have a friend who has a probe GT ('94) and
> it is a huge piece of junk. let me just label a few of the defects about
> the car: severely faded paint, one or two water leaks around the windows,
> broken cup holder, broken ash tray, passenger side door is out of
> alignment, & you have to push the window on the driver's door back under
> the door frame (seal) when you close the door because it gets caught on
> the outer edge. i've had an '84 accord w/ less problems, seriously. as
These are all problems caused by owners who are morons. The paint has
severely faded because your buddy is a moron and does not take care of
the finish. A 4 year old Prelude with similar care-taking would look
equally shitty. As for the problems with the window, they all step from
door misalignment. Doors do not misalign without reason! Either the
shmuck has a car that been wrecked or he sat on the door or something.
Whatever the case may be, if he weren't a shmuck, he'd adjust the door
(its very easy to do) instead of allowing one problem to lead to
another.
The broken ashtray cover is also easy to explain. Given its position
between the seats, if the cover is left open any careless fat-ass will
sit on it and it will break, this has nothing to do with quality.
> for the prelude being "tinny", NFW! it may appear so because it has such
> flat, sharp lines, but it is far from it. besides, the reliability of the
> prelude is among the car world's best, not just honda's. it is constantly
> ranked in the top 5 most dependable cars if i'm not mistaken. oh yeah,
> one thing i absolutely hate about the probe, that huge waste of space on
> the dash due to the steep windshield; shit, i could put my luggage up
This is nonsense. If you are looking for an objective opinion on the GT
dash, read any mag, they all have good things to say about the design
and implementation.
> there. one other thing, it has among the cheapest feeling interiors i've
> ever seen -- on par w/ a neon or escort (plasticity galour).
And what is the Prelude dash made from if not plastic?? Gold?
Rafael Raban
vs. Ford .. by Lee C...@leecao.com
>
> > Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability, everything
> > mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
>
> Yet it is not. Are you implying that some how the collective
> Probe owners are not regularly maintaining their cars so as to
> give it a sub-par reliability rating?
>
Based on reliability the Prelude wins. But the 93+ is by no means an
unreliable car. Likewise, associating PGT quality with Ford is
misleading. The PGT is virtually 100% Mazda MX-6/626. Virtually every
part, engine/trans/suspension/exhaust/etc. is interchangable.
In the end, many factors make a great car and reliability is just one.
Take the 3rd gen Mazda RX7. If not properly maintained, RX7's will blow
apex seals and go through engines like I go through wiper blades! Yet,
properly maintained, its a reliable and absolutely incredible car.
There are many such examples...
Paul
Turbo'd and RWD, it's a sensational car to drive. New model is 250bhp + 6
speed box. Guess you won't be getting that, either. Nor the Lancer Evo VI
or Skyline GT-R.
Dave Feltenberger wrote in message ...
>> Good for you. I still don't believe it. Why is there is over a second
>> difference in the times I've seen for exactly the same car? Why is it
>that
>> cars with almost exactly the same power output (Mitsubishi Lancer GSR
>> Turbo, old model Nissan 200SX) are all mid-seven second cars?
>
>good for me? it's printed by a reputable magazine... and the 200 sx does
>NOT and never has had 200 hp. how the HELL is this similar power?!
>
>> If you still believe that a Prelude will pull mid-sixes, I have a bridge
>I'd
>> like to sell you.
>
>like i said. check out the motortrend online database. car and driver got
>6.9 in the zero to sixty sprint. what don't you see? why are you ignoring
>the obvious FACTS?
>
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Dave Feltenberger wrote in message ...
>> >
>> >Paul <sie...@NOSPAMomen.net.au> wrote in message
>> >news:7ip1f1$6ih$1...@demeter.omen.net.au...
>> >> Oh, please, give me a break. Do you really expect me to believe a
>> >normally
>> >> aspirated, FWD four-pot can get to 60mph in less than 7 seconds? I
>don't
>> >> care if it's got 200bhp and all the variable valve timing you can get,
>> >it's
>> >> still FWD and that's not the optimum set-up for neck-snapping
>> >acceleration.
>> >> I know I'm in Australia, but I don't think you lot in the US get any
>> >special
>> >> add-ons for a Prelude VTi-R to make it any quicker. 0-60 times for
'99
>> >> Prelude are mid-sevens. Every road test I've ever read puts it
>somewhere
>> >> between 7.5s and 7.9s. Anyone who says it can get to 60 in less than
7
>> >> needs their Correvit checking.
>> >
Dave Feltenberger
> Ahhh, that's right, you're in the USA. You don't get the real 200SX.
> Turbo'd and RWD, it's a sensational car to drive. New model is 250bhp + 6
> speed box. Guess you won't be getting that, either. Nor the Lancer Evo
VI
> or Skyline GT-R.
does that change the fact that you won't own any of them? also, does that
change the original topic we were talking about? the prelude DOES run the
zero to sixty sprint in under 7 seconds. got it?
David Wilkins
I went for a holiday test drive today. Here are my results. I am the proud
owner of a stock 97 PGT 5 speed. I wanted to see if there were any "Sports
cars" available that are any better. Conclusion: Under $32000 there aren't.
I drove the top of the line of all the following today.
1:Dodge Avenger
2:DSM Eclipse
3:Honda Prelude
4:Acura Integra
5:Mustang GT
6:Mustang Cobra
7:BMW M3
I was only impressed by the last two. I cannot believe that a
Prelude/Integra with 170+ HP is that much slower than the PGT. The Avenger
is horrible. I think it comes from only being available with an automatic
tranny. If it had a 5 speed it may be a distant second from the PGT. The
PGT truly outclass anything in a 5 speed model from Honda. I didn't try the
CL because the dealer said it had less HP and was slower than the Integra.
He said the 3.5 TL may be faster but it only comes in an auto and real men
don't drive cars with auto's.
The Eclipse was much more fun to drive than the previous models, and the
turbo made it really snappy, but not so much more than the PGT is stock. I
think it was a toss up between the two, but leaning in favor of the PGT for
response.
The Mustang GT was SLOW. I mean you would think that a V-8 would fly. But
not it. Now the Cobra on the other hand was really really really quick, but
the handling was off compared to the PGT and it was $12000 more than the
PGT. Not nearly as sexy looking either.
Finally the M3. How can I even compare it to the PGT. It was INCREDIBLE to
drive. Braking was PHENOMENAL!!! Handled like nothing I have ever driven.
The speed was comparable/maybe even better than the Cobra. Of course it
also cost $50000.
After a day of driving, I have decided there is nothing better than a well
equipped PGT. I will probably never trade this baby in. I have not seen
any thing better on the road for a price near what it cost me. Of course
when I need to start repairing it I may think differently. I had been
pricing Cat-Backs lately and not happy paying $500-$800 for a muffler and
pipe. Then when I was a Ford today I priced a stock replacement unit. $650
for the muffler, $250 for the resonator. Pipe extra. Jesus Christ that is
expensive. How can they charge $1000 for a muffler??? I may get a cat back
just to "save money"!!!
Any way, now I am saving my pennies so I can get a Turbo for my PGT and make
it the fastest car on the high way...Hands down...
Dave
cr...@home.com wrote in message
<374e23be...@news.slnt1.on.wave.home.com>...
>Here is a message from alt.cars.ford-probe that compares the two cars
>from someone who has driven both cars:
>
>
>On Wed, 26 May 1999 15:05:01 -0400, Rafael Raban
><rab...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
>>In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
>>drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
>>Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
>>used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
>
>Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
Dave Feltenberger
David Wilkins <dwil...@munge.ipass.net> wrote in message
news:6jC43.171$u3....@news.ipass.net...
> Time for me to throw in my 2ยข worth.
>
> I went for a holiday test drive today. Here are my results. I am the
proud
> owner of a stock 97 PGT 5 speed. I wanted to see if there were any
"Sports
> cars" available that are any better. Conclusion: Under $32000 there
aren't.
>
> I drove the top of the line of all the following today.
> 1:Dodge Avenger
> 2:DSM Eclipse
> 3:Honda Prelude
> 4:Acura Integra
> 5:Mustang GT
> 6:Mustang Cobra
> 7:BMW M3
>
> I was only impressed by the last two. I cannot believe that a
> Prelude/Integra with 170+ HP is that much slower than the PGT.
they're both noticeably faster than a probe gt. i don't know what cars you
were driving......
The Avenger
> is horrible. I think it comes from only being available with an automatic
> tranny. If it had a 5 speed it may be a distant second from the PGT.
i suppose you already know that the avenger is essentially the same car as
the eclipse, right?
The
> PGT truly outclass anything in a 5 speed model from Honda. I didn't try
the
> CL because the dealer said it had less HP and was slower than the Integra.
> He said the 3.5 TL may be faster but it only comes in an auto and real men
> don't drive cars with auto's.
the PGT has no chance to "outclass". refinement and classiness is what
honda does better than ANYTHING in it's class. the Probe is far from
refined or classy, which would make it hard to outclass "any 5 spd from
honda".
> The Eclipse was much more fun to drive than the previous models, and the
> turbo made it really snappy, but not so much more than the PGT is stock.
I
> think it was a toss up between the two, but leaning in favor of the PGT
for
> response.
previous MODELS? isn't the current eclipse, which has been pretty much
unchanged since '94 (maybe '95) only the 2nd generation? the eclipse has
210 lb/ft of torque. it has MUCH more "snap" than the PGT ever had "stock".
> The Mustang GT was SLOW. I mean you would think that a V-8 would fly.
But
> not it. Now the Cobra on the other hand was really really really quick,
but
> the handling was off compared to the PGT and it was $12000 more than the
> PGT. Not nearly as sexy looking either.
this paragraph just shoots your argument down... the mustang GT was slow,
eh? when in comparison to what? the probe!? i think this whole post is
just a troll to stir things up again....
> Any way, now I am saving my pennies so I can get a Turbo for my PGT and
make
> it the fastest car on the high way...Hands down...
the fastest car on the highway with only a turbo? get the hell out of this
honda NG buddy.... tell your probe buddies this stuff. you never went out
driving... if you did, i don't know how the HELL you came up with these
results........ <muttering to myself>....fastest car on the
highway....ha!.....</muttering to myself>
Colin Chow
AgREe~~"!! hehh.
BTW, thats a pretty impressive list of cars to have test driven in a
single day. Hope you did more than just sit in the cockpit shut your eyes
and humm .. =) Gotta make you wonder why Ford canned the PGT for a
vehicle thats excels the best in its class and for the money! Good luck
w/ the turbo charger, ciao~
David Wilkins (dwil...@munge.ipass.net) wrote:
: Time for me to throw in my 2ยข worth.
Lee Cao
"Brian G. Mueller" wrote:
>
> Lee Cao wrote in message <374E9DE4...@leecao.com>...
> >
> >
> >"Brian G. Mueller" wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, and as for all the horror stories about Probe unreliability,
> everything
> >> mentioned can be prevented by maintaining your car on a regular basis.
> >
> >If that were true, Probes would be as reliable as the Prelude.
> >Yet it is not. Are you implying that some how the collective
> >Probe owners are not regularly maintaining their cars so as to
> >give it a sub-par reliability rating?
> >
>
> What I am saying is that there are admittedly certain quality control issues
> with the probe. I'm not some blind apologist. However, with proper
> maintenance and a few small purchases, such as upgrading to after-market
> spark plug wires, a Probe will last as long and run as reliably as a Prelude
> or any other car. Let's face it, you beat the shit out of any car and you
> get what you deserve!
There is a difference between beating the shit out of a
car and not making "a few small purchases, such as upgrading
to after-market spark plug wires". Regardless, I don't think
the Probe's reliability issues is isolated to parts that could
be replaced by a few small purchases. General reliability of
the car in every catetory (according to the empirical data
supplied by consumer reports, which are taken according to
subscriber surveys) is inferior to the Prelude. There is an
obvious gap in their over all reliability ratings. The Prelude
has consistently been one of the top most reliable cars. The
Probe was never even mentioned in the same sentence with such
honors.
Lee Cao
Lee Cao
Steven McColl wrote:
>
> Ok... Take it from the top, Lee... You've never driven a Probe, you
> don't know anything about it.
Ahhhahahhahaaaahahahaaaaaaaaaa!
Like I said, a friend of mine *had* a '94 Probe GT V6 with
various modifications. I was *NOT* impressed. I've driven
it numerous times on trips ranging from a couple of miles
to as long as 30 miles when we went to his house to party.
> Drive something with more than 4 cyls. and
> you'll understand why we think the GT is a better car.
I drive an Accord EX V6 sedan capable of 7.6 second 0-60...
that's with an automatic transmission.
Lee Cao
YZFrider
my Sportbike buddies had a 94 GT stick before trading it in on a maxima.
Well anyways... there is absolutely no comparison between the two, and both
my friends would agree that the probe GT is a significant step below the
prelude in all aspects but a few. It just feels cheap compared the the
prelude. Like the Acura Integra GSR feels cheap compared to the prelude,
like the way a prelude feels cheap compared to a M3. Both of my friends
have had SIGNIFICANT problems with their probes. My friend with the auto
had to replace his tranny with 60,000 miles on it.... $2000. His repair
bills over ~4 years have hovered around $5000 for little odds and ends. My
other friend traded his in with a significant number of problems that were
more annoyance than costly. BOTH had their air sensors go out. BOTH had
something in their steering wheel assembly go out that killed their cruise.
One of my friend's ABS quit, so he just pulled the jumper and isn't planning
on fixing it due to the money already invested. The list goes on and on.
The probe has that cheap, plastic interior. That hard plastic that ruins
the probe and eclipse is not found on the prelude, maybe the soft
plastic/rubber found in the prelude added a bit of cash to the price, but it
was well worth it. The Prelude is built with a considerably stiffer chassis
that shrugs off bumps where the probe shudders over them. The ride is much
smoother than the probes with no handling loss due to a VERY well designed
chassis/suspension on the prelude. Handling is also a strong point in the
probe, but it comes in the form of stiff shocks/springs. It definitely can
"grip" with the prelude, and maybe out grip it, but the precision of the
prelude's near perfect suspension is no where to be found in the probe. It
almost has a mustang feel to it... even though the probe handles better than
a "stang". You either turn or you don't, letting the car go around a
corner, figuring out whats going on and then you correct it. The prelude
outshines it when it comes to steering feel, predictability before the
limit, at the limit, and after the limit. The probe fights you at the limit
with a very vague feeling coming through the steering wheel, twitching to
every little bump in the road.. The prelude just sort of sits there,
carving the road with razor precision. But in braking the probe kills the
prelude. The probe's brakes really bite. I don't know why Honda can't put
brakes on the car to match the probe's and the eclipse's brakes.
Acceleration is really no contest. Pulling away from the automatic is like
a z28 pulling away from a prelude... just a matter of 2- or 3 seconds and
the prelude is gone. The manual doesn't have much of a low-end advantage,
but there is a little. The power seems to come on in the midrange and it
can stay with the prelude up a little over 6000 rpms where it feels like it
dies around 6500, 500 rpms below its redline. During this time it can hang
with the prelude. Problem is the prelude revs hard to 8000 rpms... 600 rpms
PAST its redline and after second the manual probe is ALWAYS ~1 -2 car
length behind. Not a significant difference mind you, but everytime we've
raced, it's always come out the same way.... I don't know why everyone
ALWAYS quotes road and tracks prelude SH test, people act like it's the only
prelude test ever published. Why doesn't anyone ever bring up the other
tests with 15.2, 15.4, 6.7 ect.. ect... On the highway, there is no
comparison, the prelude just revs way too high. The probe fades back
consistently and quickly. I have seen people showing 150 mph on stock
prelude speedos. I have two different pics. Gunned, it probably comes up
~143 or so... the probe could never come close to that. There is a reason
that the prelude costs significantly more than a probe. Mostly in build
quality and technology, but if there is anyone out there that wants to buy
my friend's 93 probe GT let me know... he can't find a buyer at $4500.
>>>
>>>In the end, you will find the Probe GT 24V is infinitely more fun to
>>>drive than any Honda. It is comparable if not better than the new
>>>Prelude, and you can get them very cheap (Just compare the prices on a
>>>used Prelude VTEC vs a loaded Probe GT).
>>
>>Having not driven a Prelude I can't back this up directly but I friend
>>does have a new VTEC SH. I find the car "tinny" - like it's made with
>>very thin sheetmetal. I wasn't a big fan of the interior (not as
>>"snug" or cockpit-like as my GTs) though it is screwed together well.
Lee Cao
David Wilkins wrote:
> I drove the top of the line of all the following today.
> 1:Dodge Avenger
> 2:DSM Eclipse
> 3:Honda Prelude
> 4:Acura Integra
> 5:Mustang GT
> 6:Mustang Cobra
> 7:BMW M3
>
> I was only impressed by the last two. I cannot believe that a
> Prelude/Integra with 170+ HP is that much slower than the PGT.
Errrr... both the Prelude and Integra are faster than the
Probe GT in 0-60. You just don't know how to drive them.
> The Avenger
> is horrible. I think it comes from only being available with an automatic
> tranny. If it had a 5 speed it may be a distant second from the PGT.
Gotta love that nice, isolated suspension.
> The
> PGT truly outclass anything in a 5 speed model from Honda.
Whatever.
> I didn't try the
> CL because the dealer said it had less HP and was slower than the Integra.
It's slower yes. It's a entry level luxry car. But the 3.0CL has
more HP than the Integra GS-R
> He said the 3.5 TL may be faster but it only comes in an auto and real men
> don't drive cars with auto's.
There is no 3.5TL. There is a 3.2TL and a 3.5RL. Not sure about the
3.5RL, but the 3.2TL is definitely slower than a Prelude or Integra.
Not sure how it compares to the Probe GT. I think it's in the 7.7
second range from 0 to 60.
> The Eclipse was much more fun to drive than the previous models, and the
> turbo made it really snappy, but not so much more than the PGT is stock.
If I remember correctly, the turbo Elicpses have a very strong
clutch that handles dumping at high RPMs in 1st gear very well.
So you can let the turbo spool up... Powerful yes... very
quick car.
> I
> think it was a toss up between the two, but leaning in favor of the PGT for
> response.
Turbo lag?
> The Mustang GT was SLOW.
It's a lot faster than your Probe GT. Again, evidence that you
didn't know how to drive the cars in question.
> I mean you would think that a V-8 would fly. But
> not it. Now the Cobra on the other hand was really really really quick,
It's only a few tens quicker than the GT. It's main claim to
fame is in the new IRS.
> but
> the handling was off compared to the PGT and it was $12000 more than the
> PGT.
All these guys claiming that the Cobra can out-handle a Prelude,
I don't know where you got this notion that it doesn't handle
as well as the Probe...
> After a day of driving, I have decided there is nothing better than a well
> equipped PGT.
There are better cars than the Probe GT, they just cost more...
you get what you pay for...
> I will probably never trade this baby in.
Seeing how little the Probe is worth at trade-in, I don't blame
you.
> I have not seen
> any thing better on the road for a price near what it cost me. Of course
> when I need to start repairing it I may think differently. I had been
> pricing Cat-Backs lately and not happy paying $500-$800 for a muffler and
> pipe.
Keep in mind that it will not add anything to your car's
performance.
> Then when I was a Ford today I priced a stock replacement unit. $650
> for the muffler, $250 for the resonator. Pipe extra. Jesus Christ that is
> expensive. How can they charge $1000 for a muffler??? I may get a cat back
> just to "save money"!!!
Hee hee... I will be doing that for my '92 Accord EX. Factory
equipment is always expensive.
> Any way, now I am saving my pennies so I can get a Turbo for my PGT and make
> it the fastest car on the high way...Hands down...
That might be the only way to get the probe any faster than
stock. But by no means will it be the fastest car on the
highway.
>
> Dave
Lee Cao
Brian G. Mueller
Lee Cao wrote in message <3752244A...@leecao.com>...
>
>
>>
>> What I am saying is that there are admittedly certain quality control
issues
>> with the probe. I'm not some blind apologist. However, with proper
>> maintenance and a few small purchases, such as upgrading to after-market
>> spark plug wires, a Probe will last as long and run as reliably as a
Prelude
>> or any other car. Let's face it, you beat the shit out of any car and
you
>> get what you deserve!
>
>There is a difference between beating the shit out of a
>car and not making "a few small purchases, such as upgrading
>to after-market spark plug wires".
Yes there is, And nearly all of the problems I read about with Probes fall
into these two categories. Yes, there are exceptions.
>Regardless, I don't think
>the Probe's reliability issues is isolated to parts that could
>be replaced by a few small purchases.
Never said they were. But the majority are.
>General reliability of
>the car in every catetory (according to the empirical data
>supplied by consumer reports, which are taken according to
>subscriber surveys) is inferior to the Prelude. There is an
>obvious gap in their over all reliability ratings. The Prelude
>has consistently been one of the top most reliable cars. The
>Probe was never even mentioned in the same sentence with such
>honors.
>
>Lee Cao
That's great Lee. But I don't have the extra few thousand for a Prelude's
reliability. What I have is the money for a fast car with reasonable
reliability and excellent handling. Besides, I have never liked the
Prelude's styling. That's just my opinion. So, keep enjoying your Prelude,
or whatever Honda you drive, and I will keep dreaming about the Probe that
I'm saving for.
Many happy returns!
Paul
It's going to take more than a few rubbery figures from a web site to
convince me when all other evidence points to the contrary.
Dave Feltenberger wrote in message
<0gx43.103$hg....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net>...
sama...@my-deja.com
they are solid engines, just make sure that the seatbelt recall has
been performed before you buy it. if you need to get it done look
forward to it sitting in the ford dealership for about 2-3 months, they
won't release it again because of safety until after the recall has
been completed. good luck.
--
Sam
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Lee Cao
Paul wrote:
>
> Just mentioning it. And NO, the Prelude does not run to 60 in under 7.
> It's going to take more than a few rubbery figures from a web site to
> convince me when all other evidence points to the contrary.
Rubbery figures from a web site? C&D tested the Prelude going from
0 to 60 in 6.9 seconds. Are you claiming that C&D's numbers are
false?
And what are these other "evidence" that you speak of?
Ray Cheung
Geez Dave, other than the Avenger, every car you listed below is better
and faster than the Probe. Did you just drive all those car up to 3000rpm
and shift? Oh, btw, sorry for that $1000 muffler. I think Honda has
lifttime warrenty on theirs.
On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Lee Cao wrote:
>
>
> David Wilkins wrote:
>
> > I drove the top of the line of all the following today.
> > 1:Dodge Avenger
> > 2:DSM Eclipse
> > 3:Honda Prelude
> > 4:Acura Integra
> > 5:Mustang GT
> > 6:Mustang Cobra
> > 7:BMW M3
> >
> > I was only impressed by the last two. I cannot believe that a
> > Prelude/Integra with 170+ HP is that much slower than the PGT.
>
> Errrr... both the Prelude and Integra are faster than the
> Probe GT in 0-60. You just don't know how to drive them.
>
> > The Avenger
> > is horrible. I think it comes from only being available with an automatic
> > tranny. If it had a 5 speed it may be a distant second from the PGT.
>
> Gotta love that nice, isolated suspension.
>
> > The
> > PGT truly outclass anything in a 5 speed model from Honda.
>
> Whatever.
>
> > I didn't try the
> > CL because the dealer said it had less HP and was slower than the Integra.
>
> It's slower yes. It's a entry level luxry car. But the 3.0CL has
> more HP than the Integra GS-R
>
> > He said the 3.5 TL may be faster but it only comes in an auto and real men
> > don't drive cars with auto's.
>
> There is no 3.5TL. There is a 3.2TL and a 3.5RL. Not sure about the
> 3.5RL, but the 3.2TL is definitely slower than a Prelude or Integra.
> Not sure how it compares to the Probe GT. I think it's in the 7.7
> second range from 0 to 60.
>
> > The Eclipse was much more fun to drive than the previous models, and the
> > turbo made it really snappy, but not so much more than the PGT is stock.
>
> If I remember correctly, the turbo Elicpses have a very strong
> clutch that handles dumping at high RPMs in 1st gear very well.
> So you can let the turbo spool up... Powerful yes... very
> quick car.
>
> > I
> > think it was a toss up between the two, but leaning in favor of the PGT for
> > response.
>
> Turbo lag?
>
> > The Mustang GT was SLOW.
>
> It's a lot faster than your Probe GT. Again, evidence that you
> didn't know how to drive the cars in question.
>
> > I mean you would think that a V-8 would fly. But
> > not it. Now the Cobra on the other hand was really really really quick,
>
> It's only a few tens quicker than the GT. It's main claim to
> fame is in the new IRS.
>
> > but
> > the handling was off compared to the PGT and it was $12000 more than the
> > PGT.
>
> All these guys claiming that the Cobra can out-handle a Prelude,
> I don't know where you got this notion that it doesn't handle
> as well as the Probe...
>
> > After a day of driving, I have decided there is nothing better than a well
> > equipped PGT.
>
> There are better cars than the Probe GT, they just cost more...
> you get what you pay for...
>
> > I will probably never trade this baby in.
>
> Seeing how little the Probe is worth at trade-in, I don't blame
> you.
>
> > I have not seen
> > any thing better on the road for a price near what it cost me. Of course
> > when I need to start repairing it I may think differently. I had been
> > pricing Cat-Backs lately and not happy paying $500-$800 for a muffler and
> > pipe.
>
> Keep in mind that it will not add anything to your car's
> performance.
>
> > Then when I was a Ford today I priced a stock replacement unit. $650
> > for the muffler, $250 for the resonator. Pipe extra. Jesus Christ that is
> > expensive. How can they charge $1000 for a muffler??? I may get a cat back
> > just to "save money"!!!
>
> Hee hee... I will be doing that for my '92 Accord EX. Factory
> equipment is always expensive.
>
> > Any way, now I am saving my pennies so I can get a Turbo for my PGT and make
> > it the fastest car on the high way...Hands down...
>
> That might be the only way to get the probe any faster than
> stock. But by no means will it be the fastest car on the
> highway.
>
> >
> > Dave
>
> Lee Cao
>
>
>
>
Dave Feltenberger
> Just mentioning it. And NO, the Prelude does not run to 60 in under 7.
> It's going to take more than a few rubbery figures from a web site to
> convince me when all other evidence points to the contrary.
what other evidence?!!? you've proven NOTHING. others, on the other hand,
have shown you NUMEROUS internet sites (which are also printed in magazines)
that the prelude runs the 1/4 under 7 seconds. why don't you just give up?
you're wrong.
Dave Feltenberger
Ray Cheung <rch...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.3.96.99060...@ux5.cso.uiuc.edu...
>
> Geez Dave, other than the Avenger, every car you listed below is better
> and faster than the Probe. Did you just drive all those car up to 3000rpm
> and shift? Oh, btw, sorry for that $1000 muffler. I think Honda has
> lifttime warrenty on theirs.
12 month 12,000 mile warranty on honda mufflers. but, since they're made by
honda, they will last a lifetime. LOL (j/k of course).
Lee Cao
Dave Feltenberger wrote:
> 12 month 12,000 mile warranty on honda mufflers. but, since they're made by
> honda, they will last a lifetime. LOL (j/k of course).
hee hee... sigh... I wish... the muffler on my '92 Accord EX
is starting to rust through... that HKS is looking good ;)
YZFrider
If the prelude can't break 7 seconds to 60, then the probe can't break 8.
Dave Feltenberger
Lee Cao <lig...@leecao.com> wrote in message
news:37544482...@leecao.com...
>
>
> Dave Feltenberger wrote:
>
> > 12 month 12,000 mile warranty on honda mufflers. but, since they're
made by
> > honda, they will last a lifetime. LOL (j/k of course).
>
> hee hee... sigh... I wish... the muffler on my '92 Accord EX
> is starting to rust through... that HKS is looking good ;)
if you can live with the higher price tag, i think you'd like the GReddy
better. That's what I had on my '92 and it sounded damn good... I've heard
HKS's and they have a higher pitched sound to them. both are stainless i
believe ( i know the GReddy is). at any rate, they're both great exhausts.
95ProbeSE
intalled here in San Diego. check it out here, my page:
http://members.home.net:80/wennfred/Probe.html
95ProbeSE
Dave Feltenberger wrote:
>
> Paul <sie...@NOSPAMomen.net.au> wrote in message
Steve
why are people bashing probes ?? do probe owners bash hondas on their
group ??? just wondering
a proud Mazda owner
On Tue, 01 Jun 1999 20:07:19 GMT, "Dave Feltenberger"
<rond...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Ray Cheung <rch...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
>news:Pine.SOL.3.96.99060...@ux5.cso.uiuc.edu...
>>
>> Geez Dave, other than the Avenger, every car you listed below is better
>> and faster than the Probe. Did you just drive all those car up to 3000rpm
>> and shift? Oh, btw, sorry for that $1000 muffler. I think Honda has
>> lifttime warrenty on theirs.
>
Dave Feltenberger
almost ANY car honda has put out in the '90s!!!!
95ProbeSE <wenn...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3755C876...@home.com...
Mike Healy
>very good things about the reliability of the 3.0 Vulcan V6 in the
>Taurus. Were there any problems with that engine in the Probe?
Umm, I may be off base here, but weren't the only two engine choices in the
first generation Probe 4-cylinders? A wimpy one and a nice little turbo, I
think.
Mike
Dave Grebe
In a previous article, tek...@home.com (Steve) says:
>i thought this was a pgt news group ???
>
>why are people bashing probes ?? do probe owners bash hondas on their
>group ??? just wondering
>
>a proud Mazda owner
Somebody crossposted to the Honda newsgroup and started a small flame
war. Actually it's been fairly civilized for Usenet! My opinion of
both groups actually went up after this, only about 1% jerks in either
group. We have to be outnumbered though, they get a "rec" group and
we are stuck with "alt".
Dave Grebe
sama...@my-deja.com
that was for the first few years, I am not sure of when the turbo was
taken out of the probe, but the 3.0 V6 was entered either in 90 or 91.
I will make a wild assumption that the turbo was taken out and replaced
with the V6 at the same time.
Lee Cao
95ProbeSE wrote:
>
> I think what you saw was a Prelude with a NSX Engine it it.
Ask C&D how they got 6.9 seconds out of a Prelude.
95ProbeSE
Dave Feltenberger wrote:
>
> you drive a Probe SE? that explains it... those things are slower than
> almost ANY car honda has put out in the '90s!!!!
>
> 95ProbeSE <wenn...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3755C876...@home.com...
>
DSM4DR
who is .001 second faster 0-60. I mean, c'mon. I could see if this arguement
was over reliability issues or something, but which one is quicker!?!?
Sheesh...next it will be "What's quick?? Yugo vs. Hyundai". As far as a Probe
SE is concerned, I don't know of anyone that would consider it remotely quick.
In fact, I think the 1/4 mile time is slower than that of an '83 Rabbit GTI.
(no, I didn't look it up, and I don't really care).
Josh
#76 of 1000
#341 of 2000
Jason
There has been 3 levels of first gen probes.
I can't remember when they started or ended or exactly what engine was in each
but there were V6's.
GT-4 cyl Turbo.
LX-4 cyl.
GL-6 cyl.
I actually thought I saw once that the 91 had the 'taurus' V6 and it was the
worst year for reliabliltiy for the probe. The 1992 that went back to the
Mazda engine was much better.... ? I'm not sure, I think in 1990 they dropped
the GL and put the V6 in the LX.
The following web link says that the 1990-92 LX engines were from Ford.. so
maybe I'm wrong.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~bmjohns2/probe.htm
'Another thing that rarely goes noticed is that fact that the heart of the
Probe is actually a Mazda. The chassis, suspension, and
transmission are nearly identical to those used in the Mazda MX-6/626 of the
same years. Engines were also manufactured by
Mazda, except for the 3.0L engine in the 1990-92 Probe LX. '
My 2 cents.
Jason 89PGT
YZFrider
Lee Cao wrote in message <3756983A...@leecao.com>...
>
>
>95ProbeSE wrote:
>>
>> I think what you saw was a Prelude with a NSX Engine it it.
>
YZFrider
shit.
95ProbeSE wrote in message <3756F5BC...@home.com>...
>Slow? hahaha I dont think you seen one run yet.
>
>Dave Feltenberger wrote:
>>
>> you drive a Probe SE? that explains it... those things are slower than
>> almost ANY car honda has put out in the '90s!!!!
>>
>> 95ProbeSE <wenn...@home.com> wrote in message
>> news:3755C876...@home.com...
>>
Lee Cao
Dave Feltenberger wrote:
>
> Jason <jayg...@NoSpamtelusplanet.net> wrote in message
> news:37572C25...@NoSpamtelusplanet.net...
>
> > So I guess the First Gen Probe GT could beat the Prelude (and 2nd gen
> > PGT ?)
> > According to this page ( http://sigmaiv.ne.mediaone.net/probe/specs.htm
> > ) 6.7 0-60mph.
> > I guess if we put both cars at a higher altitude (say 2500-3000 feet
> > above sea level) then the Turbo would help out and were would the
> > Prelude be ?
>
> and we all know how reputable THAT source is.... for all we know, that
> could be your personal webpage. in fact, go to
> http://cs.millersv.edu/~dpfelten/accd.htm. that states that a '99 accord 5
> spd does 0-60 in 1 second, completely stock.
One interesting note about that web site with the Probe times...
0 to 30: 3.6 seconds
0 to 40: 3.6 seconds
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Lee Cao
Ray Cheung
> Ray Cheung <rch...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.SOL.3.96.99060...@ux5.cso.uiuc.edu...
> >
> > Geez Dave, other than the Avenger, every car you listed below is better
> > and faster than the Probe. Did you just drive all those car up to 3000rpm
> > and shift? Oh, btw, sorry for that $1000 muffler. I think Honda has
> > lifttime warrenty on theirs.
>
> 12 month 12,000 mile warranty on honda mufflers. but, since they're made by
> honda, they will last a lifetime. LOL (j/k of course).
>
Hey Dave, I am reading page 35 of my Integra warranties book. It says
The Acura automobile replacement muffler is warranted against defects in
material and workmanship for as long as that muffler's purchaser owns the
vehicle on which it is installed.
I remember reading similar stuff with my Civic warranties book.
I think it means lifetime warranty on replacement, not the one that
comes with the car, but the original still has 4 years/50000.
Anyway, I found Honda muffler last for about 80k to 90k which is still
pretty good.
Jason
PGT ?)
According to this page ( http://sigmaiv.ne.mediaone.net/probe/specs.htm
) 6.7 0-60mph.
I guess if we put both cars at a higher altitude (say 2500-3000 feet
above sea level) then the Turbo would help out and were would the
Prelude be ?
Just thought I would fuel the fire a bit.
Jason 89PGT
YZFrider wrote:
> or motortrend who got 6.7
> Lee Cao wrote in message <3756983A...@leecao.com>...
> >
> >
> >95ProbeSE wrote:
> >>
> >> I think what you saw was a Prelude with a NSX Engine it it.
> >
Dave Feltenberger
> Slow? hahaha I dont think you seen one run yet.
sure i have. i smoked one with a '92 accord! a 4 door family car! i know
my '99 could smoke it too...
Dave Feltenberger
Jason <jayg...@NoSpamtelusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:37572C25...@NoSpamtelusplanet.net...
> So I guess the First Gen Probe GT could beat the Prelude (and 2nd gen
> PGT ?)
> According to this page ( http://sigmaiv.ne.mediaone.net/probe/specs.htm
> ) 6.7 0-60mph.
> I guess if we put both cars at a higher altitude (say 2500-3000 feet
> above sea level) then the Turbo would help out and were would the
> Prelude be ?
and we all know how reputable THAT source is.... for all we know, that
Rhondda Homfeldt
Slow? hahaha I dont think you seen one run yet.
Dave Feltenberger wrote:
>
> you drive a Probe SE? that explains it... those things are slower
than
> almost ANY car honda has put out in the '90s!!!!
>
> 95ProbeSE <wenn...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3755C876...@home.com...
>
> > I think what you saw was a Prelude with a NSX Engine it it.
-----snip
sorry man mustangs are great but probes jeez they're slow really slow
they might be lucky to be in a class with a economy civic there's no way
they can hang with a prelude
-
J.R. HOMFELDT ZPM...@prodigy.com
86 Daytona TT