I understand, but you kind of went off into different things on the subject. I was talking about the ENGINE not the overall performance which you seem to be talking about(comments on transmissions, slow drivers). Anyway, I just wanted to try to make it as clear as possible what the D engine is compared to others out on the road(not overall performance). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Rooney" <dmcvegas@xxxx> To: <dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 9:08 PM Subject: [DML] Re: comparison > Not getting too personal here, but you seem to be missing the point. > Yes the DeLorean could use more power, but it is by no > means "underpowered" for it's use: daily driving. When you compare it > to a car such as the Corvette or Mustang, yes the amount of power > these cars put out, and the accelleration times are better, but > that's what these car's were designed to do. Yes the DeLorean could > use more power, many people including myself agree. Even the original > DeLorean Motor Company agreed as well, proof of that is with vin 502. > But still, the DeLorean does very well for itself. The D was intended > to be a car that had luxury, performance, and economy all > complementing one another. It just wasn't intended to be a "Bad-Ass" > muscle car for tearing up the track. Like I had said before too, > hills are no match for the DeLorean. My '97 Hyundai Accent has 92 hp > and does pretty good on flat surfaces. But when it hits a hill you > can feel a tremendous power loss. And when it comes to Hondas that > have V-TEC engines, they're just about useless in the sense that you > have to come within 1100 RPM's of red-lining the motor in order for > the V-TEC feature to kick in. Sure they have good results on paper > and the track, but this extra performance is just not there in > regular communiting situations. And yes cars such as the Pontiac > Grand Am use V-6 engines that put out 170 hp, but there always > mounted up to automatic transmissions. In traffic for quick > accelleration, manual downshifing in a DeLorean can produce much > quicker results. Yes the Grand Am is fast, but by the time it has > kicked down gears and starts to go to try and get ahead of me, I've > already changed lanes in my DeLorean. Next is the final factor: A > car's performance is 40% car and 60% driver. If you have a more > powerful car, but are either afriad to use the extra power, don't > know how to, or just plain choose not to, then what good is it? A > chain is only as good as it's weakest link, and the weakest part of > most cars on the road today is not the powertrain, the suspension, or > even the safety features, it's the drivers. If you put a naturally > slow driver behind the wheel of a Corvette, all you end up with is a > slow Corvette! So in the type of enviornment that my DeLorean is put > into with slower cars AND drivers, she performs great! If I do run up > against a car that is faster then me, I no longer compare our car by > speed, but rather looks. "A Camaro? So what, look there's a > DeLorean!" If I can't outrun some one, I can sure beat them with > looks alone! With this mindset I have a win/win situation for my car. > Either way, I can't be beat! While the main factor in judging the D > (or any car for that matter) is based upon individual perception, we > must take in other considerations such as environment and being > realistic about everything as well. > > -Robert > vin 6585 > > Note: I really don't have anything against Camaros, Corvetts, > Mustangs, or otherwise. I just use them as examples. Although I do > admit I am a bit biased in this posting, I just judged my car > positivly in the same way that others have judged it negatively. > > > > --- In dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxx, "Gabe W." <thecreech@xxxx> wrote: > > (The author appears to be compairing the DeLorean with automotive > technology that has been advaced 20 years beyond the it. Consider > this when making a comparison...Moderator.) > > > > > > I don't agree with you on your comparison. Import, muscle and > exoctic cars > > are not the only cars that perform better than it. Many Sedans can > easily > > equal it or do better. Basically any other v6 I've seen performs > better than > > it. And 4s aren't far behind. For instance, the "cheapest car in > america", > > the Kia Rio has 90 hp while the delorean has 130hp. Thats a > difference of 40 > > hp. That can't be considered a big difference considering other v6s > (like a > > typical pontiac grand am) run at 170 hp. Also using that grand am > again, the > > 2.4 liter 4 cylinder engine on the grand am gets 150 hp, 20 more > than the > > delorean. This is why car magazines called the car underpowered(and > still > > do). The reason that 4s today can outpower the Deloreans 6, is > simply > > because the Ds 6 isn't updated to the standards the new 4 is, the > engine is > > 20 years old. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge delorean fan, but I > don't like > > the car for its performance. After all, every car has its ups and > downs. > > Besides, you can upgrade your engine(or get a new one) > > > > Before posting messages or replies, see the posting policy rules at: > www.dmcnews.com/Admin/rules.html > > To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address: > moderator@xxxx >