Mallard

I thought they only used the Ecotec in the US, but used the K20 in Europe. When the first horseless carriages came out they were extremely expensive, especially when you already had a horse. With the Tesla you are paying for the vehicle, and A LOT of R&D that went into low volume production. In the future, manufacturing, material, etc. will be more more geared for this type of vehicle and the cost structure will be different. Prices will come down, but the first one's will be more expensive.

I believe the Tesla is rated at 220 miles per charge. That is more than enough for most driving people do. It's not a track day special, so a comparison to a 500HP Atom is not really fair (or logical). It's all about efficiency, being fun to drive, and looking good doing it. It's about changing peoples stereotypes about electric cars being glorified golf carts. Yes, I would drive it in the rain. I would drive it everywhere I could because filling my tank for $50-100 per week just to get to work (and sit in traffic) is pointless. The Tesla is awesome.

Tesla in the rain > Atom. The Tesla is my pick. I would love to buy one, if it were more affordable.

Hope you got in on that IPO...although it sounds like it may be going for more than they originally stated. I heard they may be upping the price to $45, but I guess we'll find out tonight.

Any pics of the turbine side?

Exactly. Like I said, those headlights ARE NOT PRODUCTION. All GM prototypes use the small projector beams you see until later build vehicles. Secondly, the orange peel is because this is not a production car. It wasn't sprayed perfectly because it doesn't matter. (They usually leave the camo on test vehicles even after they're released because they're afraid of the public seeing them unfinished.) Thirdly, I'm not sure about a test trailor, but you can bet there would be a fifth wheel attached to that hitch. If you guys only saw what some vehicles look like during development, you'd never buy anything. Quit bitching, it looks like the Transformers car.

GM has stated on multiple occasions that the headlights you see on the test vehicles are not production. All of their prototypes use those projector beams in a surround that's the shape of the production lamp.

That's because the Columbus Auto Show is basically put on by dealers. It's not on the main show circut. The concepts that are there are a few years old.

It's a 4.0L V6 with SRT-like wheels/tires, body kit, and SRT brakes. It was made as a concept for SEMA 07 and is now making its rounds at auto shows. It's not production, and it isn't planned to be.

That's the same BumbleBee model they had at Woodward and Detroit. Both times they said the same thing. It's probably one of many different models they had. The minivan doesn't have a Hemi.

Looking good. I loved my time on FSAE...I just wish I would have done it earlier.

Sometimes the arms don't go low enough to get under cars that low. (Referenceing the first pic in this thread) Just a guess, but maybe they needed a really low racing jack to get under the car, and what's the difference between a jackstand and the lift? Both will be loading the body the same way. As long as they use the jack stands properly the car should be at risk of falling off them.

Yea. K-Series would be the newer 4 cyl from an Acura TSX, RSX, and probably others (Accord?). Welcome.

I test with outriggers! One of the few pics I found in a 5 min search on Google to explain outriggers: http://images.usatoday.com/money/_photos/2004/02/05/rollover.jpg I have seen several vehicles that actually rolled over though, and it's not pretty (in some cases). But the results will vary from vehicle to vehicle. The NHTSA roll over testing is a very extreme maneuver, and you will probably see no results of that posted. It's a simple pass or fail. Two wheel lift is a fail, and you can't sell a vehicle that fails. They also rate rollover risk, but that's a simple mathmatical calcultation based on CG height, not actual testing, AFAIK. Let's just say there's a good reason certain vehicles come with anti-rollover systems, and there's a very good reason most don't have a full off switch. I think R-componds should be outlawed in stock autox classes.

You'd be surprised how easy it is to roll a vehicle. I've been running NHTSA fishhook maneuvers for a while now and some vehicles go really easy, others would need help (this is on street tires). I've seen some vehicles that will lift both inside wheels off the ground in a lane change maneuver (on street tires).

Yeah, no kidding. I know how it works, my point was it would be a dog to drive on the street. A flat torque curve rules all. Would make a sick drag car though, if that's what you wanted an S2000 to be.

it doesn't spool until almost 6000 rpm's!?

R-compounds, stock suspension, and quick changes in direction don't mix. I too have seen the vid of Alex Schipkov's (sp?) BMW pretty high on 2 wheels. He's lucky he didn't go over.

Safety equipment shouldn't bump you up a class. But building an 8000 rpm motor with a different turbo will. I agree with the rest. Start off slow, keep your car stock. If you're concerned about safety I would start with a 4-point cage since they're cheap. Even WRC or Rally America cars don't turn 8000 rpm's (due to the restrictor size). And if you're planning on running rally (like Rally America), they don't let people start out in AWD turbo cars. It's VERY hard to get a waiver to move up a class when you're just starting out.

469 HP

Any reasons why you think so? There are a lot of people and magazines that would disagree with you. The Mazda 6 is one of the best handling sedans on the market. It continuously gets praised in the mags for its ride and handling, comfort, NVH, etc. You add the AWD and DI turbo 2.3L and it's even better. I was not impressed with the Legacy GT I drove. Then again, I hated the salesman and he didn't even bother to pull trash out of the interior or clean the bird shit off the widshield when he gave me the keys. I thought there was a lot of turbo lag and the transmission was slow to react (auto tranny...it was going to be a car for my mom). The ride wasn't as nice as I expected and there was more road noise than I would have liked (possibly the tire choice). Maybe I would have been more impressed with the manual.

There's a fair amount you can do to boost the power on those. There are quite a few on teh Mazda Forum that are putting down decent power. It also helps that the MS3 shares the engine. There are turbo upgrades out there for them and it seems that they have some piggyback tuning (and possibly one company with re-flash capability).

werd. Rochester Mills FTW.

haha, too bad my work hours vary too much to ever car pool with anyone.

They have said they will, in a year. All the same stuff come in the HHR SS too, which is out now.