Honda Motorcycles - FireBlades.org - Reply to Topic
Off-Topic Discussion of anything that doesn't fit anywhere else. If it's related to motorcycles in any way, DO NOT post it here. Post it in General Discussion or a more specific forum.

Thread: Mo's new baby. Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Honda Motorcycles - FireBlades.org forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
A valid e-mail address is REQUIRED. You will not have access to any site features until you activate your account using the activation e-mail that is sent to this address.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
12-07-2005 2:48 PM
Mo Noyz
Re: Mo's new baby.

If the 300C were priced the same as the Charger, I likely would have gotten it instead.

That front end is very cool.
12-07-2005 1:33 PM
phobiaphobe
Re: Mo's new baby.

Minor jacking: anyone see the OverHaulin' where they did the Magnum? They put the 300C front end on it and it looked damn good.
12-07-2005 1:18 PM
luvtolean
Re: Mo's new baby.

Great review, without being worshipful.



12-07-2005 1:14 PM
Mo Noyz
Re: Mo's new baby.

Well, I have 1500+ miles on the bad boy so far, so I am ready to give a more complete review.


Power - *****

It's a HEMI. stomp the skinny pedal to the floor and it will get up and run as fast as Frenchy runs from a bar of soap. No complaints in any way. It runs very smooth and very quiet. I do think that I'm starting to hear when displacement switches, but I hear lots of **** sometimes. My average MPG around town so far has been around 14.5, though I haven't exactly been conservative with the right foot.


Handling - ***1/2

For weighing in at 4400lbs this car doesn't feel or drive like a big car. Of course, the magic of horsepower has a lot to do with that. It handles the twisties at a fairly moderate pace, moreso than other large cars I've driven. And as I mentioned before, body roll is incredibly minimal, perhaps the biggest surprise. You can coax it into some oversteer, but I've never gotten any plowing from it in corners. The steering is as precise as I like it and you can't take your eyes off the road for very long, or you'll be off-roading.

Traction and stability controls work very well. And our first big snow is on the way, so I'll review those later.


Transmission - ***

If I were just rating the manual mode, it would get five stars. It's the only other "autostick" besides the erstwhile Prelude that actually shifts WHEN YOU TELL IT TO!!! Makes me wonder why most makers even bother putting them in their cars. The Maxima's, for example, would shift approximately 12 minutes after you actually told it to. Plus, it wouldn't let you take the car to redline in any gear. What kind of sense does that make. The Avalon had similar problems. But the Chargers manual mode works perfectly. If you take off in first, it will not shift to second until you tell it to. You could even cruise along at 20 mph just a dragging away, and it will not shift.



But the automatic version is where this puppy loses points. At times it's flawless. At others it has little to no clue what the hell it's doing. It can be very hesistant to kick down when you put the pedal down in traffic. There is also a delay sometimes when you put it into drive, as well as a delay shifting back into first when you come to a stop. It's irritating at times, but not as often as you'd think. But it is still a downfall for this car.


Brakes - *****

Anything that can woah this car down as quickly as these brakes do deserves five stars and more. Very linear feel, much unlike the brakes on my wifes Pilot which seem to be all or nothing, and I have noticed absolutely no fade whatsoever.


Interior - ***1/2

I love the way the interior looks, and is laid out. It's simple and clean without a bunch of **** cluttering it up. The heated seats are dreamy, the EVIC is like a revelation, and all the guages fit perfectly within the top curve of the steering wheel(something MANY makers get wrong)so that you don't have to move your hands or your head to be able to see ALL of the guages. The only downside of the interior is the quality of the materials. Not very high at all. Which is likely how Dodge was able to keep the price of this car where they did. Oh, and the Boston Acoustics stereo is a bit on the boomy side, but that's what happens when you have a six speaker system of which two are subs.


Overall - ****

The fit and finish of American cars hasn't gotten much better over the years. and having owned nothing but Japanese cars since 1992, it really stands out to me. Lines that don't match up, cheaper-than-normal plastics, etc.....Although it rides and drives like a very high quality car, it doesn't give you the same sensation from an aesthetic standpoint.

But those are actually very minor quibbles. The car rides and drives very smoothly, and has some outrageous power. I have really grown to love it, warts and all.

You can definitely get a better car for the money, but I was looking for something different with a lot of attitude, and the balls to back it up.

Sweetness!
11-16-2005 9:15 PM
ND4SPD
Re: Mo's new baby.

My guess is they made the Mustangs heavier for the same reason that Honda has added weight to the new CBR....stability.
11-16-2005 9:07 PM
Mo Noyz
Re: Mo's new baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by luvtolean
SURELY you meant 68/69!!


78-79 were the most smog infested, ugly, overweight, flexy total POS years for cars Detroit ever built. Mullet-mobiles included.
Yeah, but you have to admit the 78/79 Mustangs rocked!!


Not..................
11-16-2005 9:05 PM
Mo Noyz
Re: Mo's new baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by luvtolean
The 302 is at least 50 pounds lighter than the 305 block. ONLY the block.

The new Mustangs are 4k! They have to have 300 hp just to be respectable anymore.

Rigid, nice driving cars, but IMO overpriced for the cheapness still in the interior.



I thought I saw their curb weight clocking in at 3400+?

I really don't like the new body style. Wish they would have gone with the concept that they were showing a few years back in Detroit.
11-16-2005 8:19 PM
CBR929RE
Re: Mo's new baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by luvtolean
SURELY you meant 68/69!!


78-79 were the most smog infested, ugly, overweight, flexy total POS years for cars Detroit ever built. Mullet-mobiles included.
well I'm definetly not saying the 78/79 is the best. I gotta agree that the 67-69 were the best.

But when I was a kid I had a hotwheels of a late 70s Z28 (still have it actually plus a few more) and have loved that thing since then. And when I said with the motor/tranny combo I want it wouldn't be one that came in the car. I think I'd do a 383 with a 6 speed (probably the T56 but a true 6 speed not a double overdrive like the T56 would be sweet)
11-16-2005 8:18 PM
Chain
Re: Mo's new baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ND4SPD
Yeah, but have you seen the size of his neck? It's gotta be like 22" in diameter to hold up that head of his
11-16-2005 8:08 PM
luvtolean
Re: Mo's new baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Noyz
that was the best part about the 80's GT/LX, it was super light.

Those turds are closing in on the 3500 lb mark these days.
The 302 is at least 50 pounds lighter than the 305 block. ONLY the block.

The new Mustangs are 4k! They have to have 300 hp just to be respectable anymore.

Rigid, nice driving cars, but IMO overpriced for the cheapness still in the interior.



11-16-2005 8:06 PM
luvtolean
Re: Mo's new baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBR929RE
give me a 78/79 Camaro Z28 any day and let me throw in whatever motor/tranny combo I want and I'll be happy.
SURELY you meant 68/69!!


78-79 were the most smog infested, ugly, overweight, flexy total POS years for cars Detroit ever built. Mullet-mobiles included.



11-16-2005 8:04 PM
Mo Noyz
Re: Mo's new baby.

I had a '77 Camaro LT with a 305.

Sweet car. Real muscular looking, with a beautiful exhaust note.
11-16-2005 8:02 PM
Mo Noyz
Re: Mo's new baby.

I always wondered why Ford started making them so big and heavy. That was the best part about the 80's GT/LX, it was super light.

Those turds are closing in on the 3500 lb mark these days.
11-16-2005 8:00 PM
CBR929RE
Re: Mo's new baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Noyz
The Z could beat the GT. But it's like saying a 1kRR could beat a 954. Well sure it can, but not by very much.

And when you're talking about a 350 vs. a 302, well................why couldn't they compete with the 305?
very true. its mostly personal preference.

well I'll put it this way, my 305HO (carb) was rated at 180 which I've read is 80% of what it really is. Thats only at the crank. The FI ones weren't all that much better. The 305 never was a very good performance motor from the factory. It could be done up decently but why bother when you can swap in a 350 in its place and have a ton more fun.



I wasn't a fan of the 90s Camaros (stylewise) but the motors are pretty sweet (never rode in an LT1/LS1 equipped one, just a V6 which of course is like why bother). I also didn't like the Mustangs either (escpecially the middle of the dash down the console, why the hell did they sink it in? That supercharged Cobra (ridden in an 03 to be specific) was pretty nice though.

give me a 78/79 Camaro Z28 any day and let me throw in whatever motor/tranny combo I want and I'll be happy.
11-16-2005 7:58 PM
luvtolean
Re: Mo's new baby.

Yep. They're just a better car all around. I happen to like the look better, but that's just subjective.

Mine's a police car (92, last year of the forged pistons in the 302), manual windows, locks, no cruise, bone stock it was less than 3000 pounds.



This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome