Page 3 of 5
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:11 pm
by MH999
-Nighthawk- wrote:A few reasons why I didn't get a Supra:
- No tiptronic
- Looks hideous stock
- Engine ages
- Less reliable
- Interior is hideous also
- It's a Toyota
- Feels too fat not tuned up
A few reasons why I didn't get a Big Ugly Soap Box Racer:
- Also looks rubbish stock
- Interior isn't as nice also
- Hard to find decent bodykit parts
And that's pretty much the reason I'm sticking with the FTO for now, even if it does have it's flaws
You think a 2jz powered supra is less reliable than an fto?If you want to buy a car based on how it looks than you do that lol.Toyota makes some of the most durable engines in the world and the na 2jz motor can easily do 400 000kms if maintaned well.Mitsubishi engines are crap compared to toyota engines i wouldnt recomend a mitsi to anyone (except an fto)so just because you think a fto looks better than a supra doesnt mean its more reliable.Sorry if my reply was harsh but dont say a toyota is more reliable than a mitsubishi.
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:19 pm
by MH999
MH999 wrote:-Nighthawk- wrote:A few reasons why I didn't get a Supra:
- No tiptronic
- Looks hideous stock
- Engine ages
- Less reliable
- Interior is hideous also
- It's a Toyota
- Feels too fat not tuned up
A few reasons why I didn't get a Big Ugly Soap Box Racer:
- Also looks rubbish stock
- Interior isn't as nice also
- Hard to find decent bodykit parts
And that's pretty much the reason I'm sticking with the FTO for now, even if it does have it's flaws
You think a 2jz powered supra is less reliable than an fto?If you want to buy a car based on how it looks than you do that lol.Toyota makes some of the most durable engines in the world and the na 2jz motor can easily do 400 000kms if maintaned well.Mitsubishi engines are crap compared to toyota engines i wouldnt recomend a mitsi to anyone (except an fto)so just because you think a fto looks better than a supra doesnt mean its more reliable.Sorry if my reply was harsh but dont say a MITSUBISHI is more reliable than a TOYOTAi.
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:21 pm
by zuihoujueding
MH999 wrote:MH999 wrote:-Nighthawk- wrote:A few reasons why I didn't get a Supra:
- No tiptronic
- Looks hideous stock
- Engine ages
- Less reliable
- Interior is hideous also
- It's a Toyota
- Feels too fat not tuned up
A few reasons why I didn't get a Big Ugly Soap Box Racer:
- Also looks rubbish stock
- Interior isn't as nice also
- Hard to find decent bodykit parts
And that's pretty much the reason I'm sticking with the FTO for now, even if it does have it's flaws
You think a 2jz powered supra is less reliable than an fto?If you want to buy a car based on how it looks than you do that lol.Toyota makes some of the most durable engines in the world and the na 2jz motor can easily do 400 000kms if maintaned well.Mitsubishi engines are crap compared to toyota engines i wouldnt recomend a mitsi to anyone (except an fto)so just because you think a fto looks better than a supra doesnt mean its more reliable.Sorry if my reply was harsh but dont say a MITSUBISHI is more reliable than a TOYOTAi.
In general terms, you are absolutely right.
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:25 pm
by MH999
I couldnt afford a supra so i just bought an fto and i love it.
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:33 pm
by Dan25
How many people have actually driven a supra? Or do you all just base your opinions on what you hear? Perhaps the older members here have, but what about all you p-platers?
I've driven a supra and loved it. If I could drive turbo, I'd be in a Supra.
In saying that, I do still love my fto and definitely prefer it's looks.
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:35 pm
by KJ_bob
^have you driven a non-turbo? I don't think they would be that good... i'd take a turbo'd one though
Does anyone consider a wrx (turbo) to be a good car?
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:39 pm
by Dan25
Yea my mate is an idiot and bought an NA Supra. I told him to get an FTO... Now he has to live with it for another 2 years hahaha.
But lack of power aside (compared to TT - still as fast as mine in a straight line almost), it's a great car with a strong drivetrain. Transmission was 10 times better than mine (both manual). Couldn't get over it lol.
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:52 pm
by zuihoujueding
KJ_bob wrote:^have you driven a non-turbo? I don't think they would be that good... i'd take a turbo'd one though
Does anyone consider a wrx (turbo) to be a good car?
YES. huge success on various motorsports. However, the drivetrain is the weakest link. I would buy one and own it for awhile.
And the styling is done by some art and craft high school students. Notice the rear of Imprezas have never change until the recent one. This shows how lazy they are. BUT, I would buy one and own it for awhile, just to get the feel of a 4wheel drive sports car.
Other cars which i want to own after FTO is the S2000 or 350Z, maybe ended up with an evo.
Re: FTO
Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 9:55 pm
by MH999
[quote="KJ_bob"]^have you driven a non-turbo? I don't think they would be that good... i'd take a turbo'd one though
Does anyone consider a wrx (turbo) to be a good car?
[/quot
Ive driven a na supra and they go hard especially in manual. They are heavy but accelaration wise they are far from slow.Wrx are nice but the gearboxes are sh*t and they are very difficult to work on,parts a really expensive too.
Re: FTO
Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 1:10 am
by mr-charisma
-Nighthawk- wrote:Pros:
Can be nice and zippy
Looks nice
Grabs attention from a lot of people
Rarer than other Japanese cars
Cons:
Quite a few cheap parts used in it
Small interior
Some angles it doesn't look nice
Overall a nice car, should substitute until I can drive an Evo
Evo:
Pro's:
Can be zippy
Rarer than Lancers
Quite a few cheap parts can be used in it
Cons:
Cannot be nice
Doesn't grab attention, except from homo holden drivers that want to race ya
Large interior
All angles it doesn't look nice
Overall a box on wheels, good substitute until you can drive an R35
Re: FTO
Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 1:16 am
by crimson236
mr-charisma wrote:-Nighthawk- wrote:Pros:
Can be nice and zippy
Looks nice
Grabs attention from a lot of people
Rarer than other Japanese cars
Cons:
Quite a few cheap parts used in it
Small interior
Some angles it doesn't look nice
Overall a nice car, should substitute until I can drive an Evo
Evo:
Pro's:
Can be zippy
Rarer than Lancers
Quite a few cheap parts can be used in it
Cons:
Cannot be nice
Doesn't grab attention, except from homo holden drivers that want to race ya
Large interior
All angles it doesn't look nice
Overall a box on wheels, good substitute until you can drive an R35
I don't why large interior can be a con. IMO the FTO is abit to small for my likings. But exterior wise, +1 to evo being a box on wheels.
Re: FTO
Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 1:30 am
by mr-charisma
only a Pro if you give a sh*t whether your fat ass friend can fit in the back seat or whether you can fit in a full grocery shop? ..
FTO's are for the driver & the chick in the passenger seat .. nothing more.
Re: FTO
Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 1:36 am
by mr-charisma
Dan25 wrote:How many people have actually driven a supra? Or do you all just base your opinions on what you hear? Perhaps the older members here have, but what about all you p-platers?
I've driven a supra and loved it. If I could drive turbo, I'd be in a Supra.
In saying that, I do still love my fto and definitely prefer it's looks.
I have, reminded me of being in an aeroplane cockpit .. always did want to be a pilot, the bitch just didn't break the sound barrier though
Re: FTO
Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 4:43 am
by brad_gpx
Dan25 wrote:How many people have actually driven a supra? Or do you all just base your opinions on what you hear? Perhaps the older members here have, but what about all you p-platers?
I've driven a supra and loved it. If I could drive turbo, I'd be in a Supra.
In saying that, I do still love my fto and definitely prefer it's looks.
cant stand them
havent driven a turbo one though
theres not another sports car in the price range of an fto that matches up to it that ive driven
Re: FTO
Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 12:26 pm
by vipfto
Have driven them all turbo and n/a supra's the n/a is still reasonably quick but its like a whale on the bends
WRX have driven many of these and worked on plenty short story dont get one
Re: FTO
Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 7:35 pm
by -Nighthawk-
mr-charisma wrote:
Evo:
Pro's:
Can be zippy
Rarer than Lancers
Quite a few cheap parts can be used in it
Cons:
Cannot be nice
Doesn't grab attention, except from homo holden drivers that want to race ya
Large interior
All angles it doesn't look nice
Overall a box on wheels, good substitute until you can drive an R35
Wow you really have no idea do you?
"Can" be zippy? big lol at that
Large interior is a con? Why on earth would a larger interior be a con? "Hey guys want to go for a drive to NSW?" "Oh sorry you're going to have to squeeze into my tiny 2 door coupe instead"
And why would you be comparing a $25,000 car to a $150,000 car? That's just retarded...
Re: FTO
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 1:45 am
by KJ_bob
vipfto wrote:Have driven them all turbo and n/a supra's the n/a is still reasonably quick but its like a whale on the bends
WRX have driven many of these and worked on plenty short story dont get one
Please elaborate
Re: FTO
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 1:54 am
by zuihoujueding
zippy is not the word to describe an evo man....lol
Re: FTO
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 1:58 am
by mr-charisma
LMAO ..
Re: FTO
Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 2:22 pm
by brent88
woa i thought u guys all stuck together, I guess Nighthawk and Mr Charisma proved that theory wrong.