Re: feature

this guy i know has his car featured in fast ford ( or something), this

> months cover car, RS Turbo with 2.1 zetec turbo lump, rolling roaded at > 268bhp and some 320 pounds feet of torque..... > > if rs turbo's are your bag then take a look, tis quite tidy (and fast !) >

I don't think many of the regs in here like RST's :) Its a Fiesta yea? I've seen it before on the FRST owners club website havn't i? Bet its rapid...

Still a fiesta tho....

Reply to
Dan405
Loading thread data ...

is it the black escort near the front? if you read the article, it mentions "sunny", the owner of the 178.9mph fiesta :)

Reply to
dojj

I like RST, perhaps I'm the only one :(

Ron

Reply to
Ron

Yes. The rest of us actually realise how shit they are :)

Reply to
Lordy

they aint that bad, I like standard looking ones that are exceptionaly clean...

and they make a nice gurgle.

Reply to
Theo

Yea, you're right actually. They're worse.

That is their *only* saving grace.

Reply to
Lordy

yup :) same one :) escort on the cover i mean :)

Reply to
dojj

we've had this conversation before, and we couldn't covnert you last time either :)

Reply to
dojj

The RS Turbo's problem starts at the stock engine, runs through exaggerated claims of excessive power, weaves its way through the handling and brakes, and ends up at the rusty dog end.

I've seen too many RST owners' egos deflated when they take their "200 brake monster" to a rolling road and it's putting out low 130s, then try to blame it on the heat / humidity / it needs a service / the wheels are too big, or whatever. Heh.

Reply to
DervMan

exaggerated

the days of bullshit power figures overinflated to that the company's providing them turned over good business have long since gone most places nowadays will build you a reliable 220 horse engine and then you still have the chance to go to a 1.9 tall block or even a 2.1 ZVH, good for a sustatinable 7K

Reply to
dojj

Well if driving the things first hand can't convert me, then telling me how great they are 3rd party sure ain't gonna :)

Reply to
Lordy

Aie, you're right, but there are *still* have people with a turbocharged 1.6 CVH clinging on to their rolling road figures from this time last year, that showed 197 PS, and refused to believe that it can be anything other than "at least 197 PS, may be a bit more now it's run in."

We've a 2.0 ZVH that's been designed for 240 PS in a Ka, and it has _always_ been significantly quicker than the 1.6 turbocharged Ka. . .

Reply to
DervMan

i could have easily said my car had huge amounts of power when it skipped on teh rollers and made 197 bhp a subsiquent rerun dropped it 20 brake and a run 6 months later (in the summer) lost another 7 brake just beacuse you get a result one day, dones't mean you'll get the same the next time no matter where you go then again, it's been know that some companys will over egg the figures just to show people they CAN produce the goods for the money they charge, so it matters not what some bit of paper says but how it goes in the real world :)

Reply to
dojj
1/4 Mile it is then ;-) Rich
Reply to
Richard Brant
1/4 Mile it is then ;-) Rich
Reply to
Richard Brant

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.