Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Ca$h68 · Jul 17, 2002, 01:15 PM

Hey guess what, the neon has more power and weighs less!

Woo woo!

- Ca$h

ringo · Jul 17, 2002, 01:31 PM

Ah, **** it. I'm yelling at the tide again.
Woo Woo!

[ 07-17-2002, 01:38 PM: Message edited by: ringo ]

M�lum · Jul 17, 2002, 01:38 PM

Ca$h , your NEON's interest us as much as your d!cksize.

(And the similarities don't stop there.)

iBook · Jul 17, 2002, 03:38 PM

Actually, The Mini has more HP (163) and more torque (162lb/ft) than the Neon R/T 150HP and 135lb/ft of torue. So lets talk weight. The Neon R/T weighs in at 2585lbs and the Mini at 2513lbs and the Neon base model doesn't even come close to the Mini in HP or Torque since the base Neon only has 132HP and 130lb/ft of torque. If you want to compare 0-60 times, don't bother! The Mini comes in at 6.9 second 0-60MPH, and the Neon R/T 8.5 seconds 0-60. So if a Mini base model can beat an R/T in HP and weight, then the Turbocharged Mini they will be making next year will surely beat the Turbocharged Neon SRT-4. The Neon is a little bit cheaper than the Mini, but the Mini comes with a long list of standard features that by the time you get a Neon with all those options you will be paying close to what you would for a Mini S!

So take that Ca$h! Hey, you're the one who started the topic.

[ 07-17-2002, 03:57 PM: Message edited by: iBook ]

kidtexas · Jul 17, 2002, 03:47 PM

hate to break it to you ibook, but (not that i know a lot about the numbers) the base Mini Cooper is 115 bhp, the Cooper S is the one with bhp in the 160's. and it is heavier than the base model. By the way the S is already supercharged - I don't know a lot about cars, but can you turbocharge an engine that is supercharged?

[edit - spelling]

[ 07-17-2002, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: kidtexas ]

RGB · Jul 17, 2002, 03:52 PM

It is the MINI Cooper S he was referring to, not the base MINI, but there is no stock Neon in production that will make it to 60 faster than the MINI Cooper S, and no Neon that will outhandle one either. I know the Neon handles well, but it doesn't beat the Ferarri's and BMWs like the MINI does.

kidtexas · Jul 17, 2002, 03:57 PM

hehee. you don't have to convince me. I think the neon is a nice car if you can't afford a nicer one - it seems like it is a good deal for the price range.

however, i am looking for a car, and i am not looking at a neon

the mini is in the running tho...

iBook · Jul 17, 2002, 04:11 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kidtexas:
hate to break it to you ibook, but (not that i know a lot about the numbers) the base Mini Cooper is 115 bhp, the Cooper S is the one with bhp in the 160's. and it is heavier than the base model. By the way the S is already supercharged - I don't know a lot about cars, but can you turbocharge an engine that is supercharged?

[edit - spelling]<hr /></blockquote>It was the Mini Cooper S I was referring to. The Mini Cooper base does have 115HP, and 110lb/ft of torque, but it is only 2315lbs instead of 2513lb that the S model weighs. But I should also not that the neon base model does weigh 200lbs more than the Mini base model, and the 0-60 of both the Neon base and the Mini base are set at 8.5 seconds. Also, what I meant by the 2003 Supercharged, not that they don't already make one, but I heard it should be pushing out 198hp for the 2003 model year.

Not that we (or Ca$h) should be comparing a Neon and a Mini in the first place as they are in 2 different classes, and I don't think in any situation would one be looking for a Mini and buy a Neon instead, or vice versa, and even if they did their decision would not be based on power or weight, they would be buying the Mini simply because it is unique, cool looking and a truly fun ride.

Retrograde · Jul 17, 2002, 04:35 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kidtexas:
 can you turbocharge an engine that is supercharged? <hr /></blockquote>I'm pretty sure you can although it is rare. I remember (I think!!) that Toyota made an MR2 in the late 80's or maybe early 90's that had both. I think it was called "twincharged". Although I'm not sure how successfully they worked together...

iBook · Jul 17, 2002, 04:41 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Retrograde:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kidtexas:
 can you turbocharge an engine that is supercharged? <hr /></blockquote>I'm pretty sure you can although it is rare. I remember (I think!!) that Toyota made an MR2 in the late 80's or maybe early 90's that had both. I think it was called "twincharged". Although I'm not sure how successfully they worked together...<hr /></blockquote>Actually it was a Twin Turbo. It has two Turbo chargers that work together I beleive at different power bands, I think you would have your primary and secondary turbo. one would kick in at say 1,000 to 3,000 rpm and the other between 3,000 and 7,000. I am not entirely sure but that is my understanding. I guess one advantage was to keep the powerband flat like say putting out 150HP at all rpm ranges or damn close. I think however that Porche originally came out with the Twin Turbo idea.

cenutrio · Jul 17, 2002, 06:43 PM

Who cares,
A mini is something special (even the new one) and I do not have any doubt that in very curvy roads both, Cooper and Cooper S, will beat the neon easy. It is a pity that Wisconsin�s roads are too flat and straight, Cash would know a little more about cars

korn · Jul 17, 2002, 06:46 PM

all peanuts compared to this baby � <img src="http://www.fellions.com/images/charger600-323.jpg" alt=" - " />

iBook · Jul 17, 2002, 07:01 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by korn:
all peanuts compared to this baby � <img src="http://www.fellions.com/images/charger600-323.jpg" alt=" - " /><hr /></blockquote>Yeah Baby! How about the Fast and the Furious Charger. Oh yeah!

Parvulesco · Jul 17, 2002, 07:02 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
Hey guess what, the neon has more power and weighs less!

Woo woo!

- Ca$h<hr /></blockquote>Hey guess what, the neon is an ugly, soulless piece of **** , and the Mini Cooper S is a stylish, faster car with a fine history!

Woo woo!

- Parvule$co

sek929 · Jul 17, 2002, 07:13 PM

The year is 2050,

Number of Neons in junkyards: 2 million
Number of New Mini Coopers: None

Mini Cooper = Instant Classic (old ones are classics already)
Neon = Dime a dozen econo-blah-sedan.

timster · Jul 17, 2002, 07:16 PM

Twin turbochargers came to be when car producers were trying to solve a long running problem with turbos:

1) You can have a big one that gives you a lot of oomph, but takes forever to spin up. (Where the term turbo lag comes from). You mash the gas, nothing happens for a second or two, then the car takes off like a skinned cat.

2) A smaller one would spin up faster, reducing turbo lag, but ultimately provide less punch.

So what they did was "inline" the turbos, one little, and one big. Stomp on the gas and the little turbo spins up quickly and starts feeding more air to the engine, then by the time the little turbo tops out, the big one is all ready to go and takes the fun up a few more notches.

I've personally never heard of a turbocharged-supercharged engine. Both methods, turbo and super-charging have the same end result.. forcing more air into the cylinders for more power.

But to force air into the engine, it needs to get initial power from somewhere, namely, from the engine itself. I believe turbos work off the airflow from the exhaust wastegates, while the superchargers derive power directly from the engine, perhaps the crankshaft. I'm not an expert in this area. But anyway, it wouldnt make much sense to hvae a turbo,supercharged engine. One or the other.

jholmes · Jul 17, 2002, 07:40 PM

Of course there's also that elusive kewl factor.

Mini Cooper - coolest car to hit the States this year, British "Yeah! Baby!" fun with BMW performance.

Neon - Well, at least it was cute.

Sorry Ca$h, you're still swimming upstream on this.

iBook · Jul 17, 2002, 08:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by timster:
Twin turbochargers came to be when car producers were trying to solve a long running problem with turbos:

1) You can have a big one that gives you a lot of oomph, but takes forever to spin up. (Where the term turbo lag comes from). You mash the gas, nothing happens for a second or two, then the car takes off like a skinned cat.

2) A smaller one would spin up faster, reducing turbo lag, but ultimately provide less punch.

So what they did was "inline" the turbos, one little, and one big. Stomp on the gas and the little turbo spins up quickly and starts feeding more air to the engine, then by the time the little turbo tops out, the big one is all ready to go and takes the fun up a few more notches.

I've personally never heard of a turbocharged-supercharged engine. Both methods, turbo and super-charging have the same end result.. forcing more air into the cylinders for more power.

But to force air into the engine, it needs to get initial power from somewhere, namely, from the engine itself. I believe turbos work off the airflow from the exhaust wastegates, while the superchargers derive power directly from the engine, perhaps the crankshaft. I'm not an expert in this area. But anyway, it wouldnt make much sense to hvae a turbo,supercharged engine. One or the other.<hr /></blockquote>Cool. Thanks for clearing that one up for me. Guess I was sorta right, close anyway. I dunno much about turbo, but I do know alot about supercharging.

seanyepez · Jul 18, 2002, 12:39 AM

I'm sure someone makes a turbo- and super-charging kit. I can't remember the name of the manufacturer at the moment, but it was for an Integra. It included a supercharger and a turbocharger. They can work together, but I imagine that a solution including a supercharger and a turbocharger would weigh a lot. The supercharger is for low-end RPM's, while the turbocharger provides better response at higher RPM's. I think it was HKS or GReddy that made the kit, but it's aftermarket.

Gee4orce · Jul 18, 2002, 03:09 AM

You Americans really need some good old-fashioned British-style roads in order to appreciate the Cooper S

I can't wait until I get mine, in September/October/November time

When I ordered mine - back in May, the BMW dealer told me he had 32 allocated for the year until April 2003. Mine was the 29th he'd sold. That says a lot. Yes - he sold his entire annual allocation in a month !

Now, do I go for Electic Blue, or Dark Silver ??!?! Ah - decisions, decisions....

korn · Jul 18, 2002, 03:53 AM

that new mini is for rich housewifes and shirtlifters who think they have an attitude � the neon is your grandparents car �

neill anblome · Jul 18, 2002, 05:11 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
Hey guess what, the neon has more power and weighs less!
<hr /></blockquote>hey guess what...a 5 cent hooker has more style and appeal than a neon, - duh

! you're such a f*a*g!

SimeyTheLimey · Jul 18, 2002, 07:17 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by neill anblome:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
Hey guess what, the neon has more power and weighs less!
<hr /></blockquote>hey guess what...a 5 cent hooker has more style and appeal than a neon, - duh

! you're such a f*a*g!<hr /></blockquote>Excuse me? A proper fag wouldn't be seen dead in anything so tacky as a Neon. <img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" />

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:21 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by iBook:
[QB]Actually, The Mini has more HP (163) and more torque (162lb/ft) than the Neon R/T 150HP and 135lb/ft of torue. So lets talk weight. The Neon R/T weighs in at 2585lbs and the Mini at 2513lbs and the Neon base model doesn't even come close to the Mini in HP or Torque since the base Neon only has 132HP and 130lb/ft of torque. If you want to compare 0-60 times, don't bother! The Mini comes in at 6.9 second 0-60MPH, and the Neon R/T 8.5 seconds 0-60. So if a Mini base model can beat an R/T in HP and weight, then the Turbocharged Mini they will be making next year will surely beat the Turbocharged Neon SRT-4. QB]<hr /></blockquote>WRONG-O!!!!!!!! The Mini has 119 Horsepower, you are referring to the cooper S. The Cooper S, however, is roughly 20,000 dollars. Guess what else you can get? And SRT-4, which will assrape the cooper S. A REGULAR mini is outpowered and out torqued by a BASE neon.

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:24 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by RGB:
It is the MINI Cooper S he was referring to, not the base MINI, but there is no stock Neon in production that will make it to 60 faster than the MINI Cooper S, and no Neon that will outhandle one either. I know the Neon handles well, but it doesn't beat the Ferarri's and BMWs like the MINI does.<hr /></blockquote>Wrong-o. The SRT 4 will easily beat the Cooper S in acceleration, top speed, price, and handling. Just wait.

And a mini's suspension is strikingly like a neon, so I don't see why all the magazines are acting like its some new amazing idea. :| And where did you see a Mini beating a ferrari? Considering an R/T with some special sway bushings and nice tires can keep up with M3s in the twisties, I'm doubting the mini is better than the neon's handling.

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:30 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by iBook:
It was the Mini Cooper S I was referring to. The Mini Cooper base does have 115HP, and 110lb/ft of torque, but it is only 2315lbs instead of 2513lb that the S model weighs. But I should also not that the neon base model does weigh 200lbs more than the Mini base model, and the 0-60 of both the Neon base and the Mini base are set at 8.5 seconds. Also, what I meant by the 2003 Supercharged, not that they don't already make one, but I heard it should be pushing out 198hp for the 2003 model year. .<hr /></blockquote>Wrong. In grassroots the did a review of the mini. The base mini weighs 2500-2600 lbs. Neons weigh 2400 for base, 2500 for R/T. And yeah, I'm SURE it was the cooper S you were referring to. Nice backpedaling. HAhA. You're pathetic. Obviously I know my **** , and I set this trap especially for an idiot like yourself. I did my homework, and posted "Neons have more power and weigh less than a mini", which is TRUE. And you completley fell for it, giving out the Cooper S's specs and whatnot. You are such an idiot. AHHAahahahAHaa. And turbocharged really means supercharged? HAhAhAHhaHAhAhAhaha

QUOTE]Originally posted by iBook:
Not that we (or Ca$h) should be comparing a Neon and a Mini in the first place as they are in 2 different classes[/QUOTE]

Untrue. They're both in the same class. And keep in mind the SRT is right where the CooperS's price range is, so its decision time. Performance or 'being cool and trendy'?

Hrm. I'd go underdog, though I do admit the Mini is a good car, just pointing out that the lowly neon kicks its ass in the power dept.

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:33 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cenutrio:
Who cares,
A mini is something special (even the new one) and I do not have any doubt that in very curvy roads both, Cooper and Cooper S, will beat the neon easy. It is a pity that Wisconsin’s roads are too flat and straight, Cash would know a little more about cars<hr /></blockquote>What don't you get? Base model neon has MORE power and weighs LESS than a regular mini. More power + less weight= better performance. The cooperS? Compare it with the SRT4. More power, lower price. Hrm. If you don't understand that you're a dumbass. And there are some great roads in WI, I don't know what you're talking about. Been up near Devil's lake lately? Those are FUN!

- Ca$h

neill anblome · Jul 18, 2002, 10:36 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
And SRT-4, which will assrape the cooper S.<hr /></blockquote><img src="http://robotbuttons.com/images/neon-srt4.jpg" alt=" - " />

<img src="http://www.euroautofestival.com/Mini-Cooper-S.jpg" alt=" - " />

which one was the *white trash* loser cruiser again?

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:38 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by iBook:
Yeah Baby! How about the Fast and the Furious Charger. Oh yeah!<hr /></blockquote>Oh man iBook, you're showing your true colors. Instead of mentioning so many classics with Chargers in them (Bullit, Crazy Mary Dirty Larry, etc) you mention the F&F.

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:40 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Parvulesco:
Hey guess what, the neon is an ugly, soulless piece of **** , and the Mini Cooper S is a stylish, faster car with a fine history!<hr /></blockquote>Couple things:

1. Neon is faster than the Mini.
2. How does the Mini have more soul? Please explain.

- Ca$h

neill anblome · Jul 18, 2002, 10:42 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by korn:
all peanuts compared to this baby � <img src="http://www.fellions.com/images/charger600-323.jpg" alt=" - " /><hr /></blockquote>the coolest car ever, - i agree!

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:51 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by jholmes:
Of course there's also that elusive kewl factor.

Mini Cooper - coolest car to hit the States this year, British "Yeah! Baby!" fun with BMW performance.

Neon - Well, at least it was cute.

Sorry Ca$h, you're still swimming upstream on this.<hr /></blockquote>Not really man. I didn't mention the coolness factor, I admit Mini's are pretty cool, and I KNEW that all of you ikea loving mac bitches would be all about the style of the mini over the neon (understandable) but what some of you DIDNT know and still won't admit is that the neon has more power and weighs less and costs less. So in the performance dept neon>mini. BTW, I hardly consider 119 bmw performance....

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:54 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by neill anblome:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
And SRT-4, which will assrape the cooper S.<hr /></blockquote><img src="http://robotbuttons.com/images/neon-srt4.jpg" alt=" - " />

<img src="http://www.euroautofestival.com/Mini-Cooper-S.jpg" alt=" - " />

which one was the *white trash* loser cruiser again?

<hr /></blockquote>Which one was for the turtlenecked latte drinking ikea consumers again?

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 10:55 AM

68's are cooler than 69's.

<img src="http://members.aol.com/cash68/red1.jpg" alt=" - " />

- Ca$h

PS: I miss her. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />

kidtexas · Jul 18, 2002, 10:59 AM

i agree that the neon is a better price - probably the neon base model has better performance. It doesn't really matter that much to me though. I'm looking for a car right now - one of my options is a 2001 camaro z28, 1k miles on, NEVER BEEN IN THE RAIN, with a 315 bhp engine - close to a $30k, but I could get it for less than $20k. However, even though this would cost less than the Mini, and definitely have better performance, I am still looking at the mini. Not all car choices are made strictly on the most performance for the least money...

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 11:05 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kidtexas:
Not all car choices are made strictly on the most performance for the least money...<hr /></blockquote>Agreed, but I was just pointing out that the neon DOES perform better than the Mini, much to the dismay of the ikea crowd. I'd go with the mini man, or the SRT4. They'll both be fun to drive, be different, get respect, and be cheaper in insurance and gas stops than the Z28.

- Ca$h

cenutrio · Jul 18, 2002, 11:53 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by RGB:
It is the MINI Cooper S he was referring to, not the base MINI, but there is no stock Neon in production that will make it to 60 faster than the MINI Cooper S, and no Neon that will outhandle one either. I know the Neon handles well, but it doesn't beat the Ferarri's and BMWs like the MINI does.<hr /></blockquote>Wrong-o. The SRT 4 will easily beat the Cooper S in acceleration, top speed, price, and handling. Just wait.

And a mini's suspension is strikingly like a neon, so I don't see why all the magazines are acting like its some new amazing idea. :| And where did you see a Mini beating a ferrari? Considering an R/T with some special sway bushings and nice tires can keep up with M3s in the twisties, I'm doubting the mini is better than the neon's handling.

- Ca$h<hr /></blockquote>I've seen Minis beating Porches and Saabs (OK I wasn't born yet) , but still counts

1963 1
2
3 Erik Carlsson/Palm (Saab 96)
Paul Toivonen/Anssi Jarvi (Citroen DS19)
Rauno Aaltonen/Tony Ambrose (Mini Cooper)
1964 1
2
3 Paddy Hopkirk/Henry Liddon (Mini Cooper S)
Bo Ljungfeldt/Sager (Ford Falcon)
Erik Carlsson/Palm (Saab 96)
1965 1
2
3 Timo Makinen/Paul Easter (Mini Cooper S)
Eugen Bohringer/W?therich (Porsche 904)
Pat Moss/Liz Nystrom (Saab 96)
1966 1=
1=
2
3 Timo Makinen/Paul Easter (Mini Cooper S) (disq.)
Pauli Toivonen/Ensio Mikander (Citroen ID19)
Rene Trautmann/Hanrioud (Lancia Flavia)
Ove Andersson/Dahlgren (Lancia Flavia)
1967 1
2
3 Rauno Aaltonen/Henry Liddon (Mini Cooper S)
Ove Andersson/John Davenport (Lancia Fulvia HF)
Vic Elford/David Stone (Porsche 911)
1968 1
2
3 Vic Elford/David Stone (Porsche 911T)
Pauli Toivonen/Martti Tiukkanen (Porsche 911T)
Rauno Aaltonen/Henry Liddon (Mini Cooper S)
<a href="http://www.worldrallynews.info/events/mc_00/history.html" target="_blank">Mini results in Monte Carlo Rally</a> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

SimeyTheLimey · Jul 18, 2002, 12:03 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cenutrio:

I've seen Minis beating Porches and Saabs (OK I wasn't born yet) , but still counts<hr /></blockquote>Somebody is going to point out in about .8 of a second that the old Mini and the new one have no real lineage in common.

It's just retro styling and homage to Sir Alec's wonderful little car.

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 12:11 PM

Yep. Old mini's weighed NOTHING, had a great wheelbase for its size, so throw some sticky tires on and bam you can stick around the corners.

The new mini is BIG, like PT Cruiser/Neon big. Its heavy. Its underpowered.

blah.

- Ca$h

Sealobo · Jul 18, 2002, 12:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
Yep. Old mini's weighed NOTHING, had a great wheelbase for its size, so throw some sticky tires on and bam you can stick around the corners.

The new mini is BIG, like PT Cruiser/Neon big. Its heavy. Its underpowered.

blah.

- Ca$h<hr /></blockquote>Have you driven one?

cenutrio · Jul 18, 2002, 12:19 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cenutrio:
Who cares,
A mini is something special (even the new one) and I do not have any doubt that in very curvy roads both, Cooper and Cooper S, will beat the neon easy. It is a pity that Wisconsin’s roads are too flat and straight, Cash would know a little more about cars<hr /></blockquote>What don't you get? Base model neon has MORE power and weighs LESS than a regular mini. More power + less weight= better performance. The cooperS? Compare it with the SRT4. More power, lower price. Hrm. If you don't understand that you're a dumbass. And there are some great roads in WI, I don't know what you're talking about. Been up near Devil's lake lately? Those are FUN!

- Ca$h<hr /></blockquote>Yes, I know Devil's Lake surroundings (which by the way are very nice compared to the flat surface of Wisconsin). When you refer to that place as a fun place to drive you are discrediting yourself. There are no more than 5-10 miles total around there (what about speed limit 25 miles/hour?), and % is soft.
When I talk about good roads I�m referring to 30 or more mile roads that go as high as 12 % uphill in which you have to use 2 speed because the car can not go up in RPM when using third (I�m talking about good cars here). Of course, later you go downhill and good breaks and stability are essential (I�m sure the Chrysler doesn�t get close to the mini).
We sure have those in the Alps and Pyrenees.
You know who is becoming a master in these roads�Lance Anstrong who could use (even) the Chrysler today�the Tour of France arrives to the Tourmalet!!

14 miles uphill with 9 % average at 30? C. that�s a pain we could never handle. This is the terrain of the Spaniards!

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

cenutrio · Jul 18, 2002, 12:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cenutrio:

I've seen Minis beating Porches and Saabs (OK I wasn't born yet) , but still counts<hr /></blockquote>Somebody is going to point out in about .8 of a second that the old Mini and the new one have no real lineage in common.

It's just retro styling and homage to Sir Alec's wonderful little car.<hr /></blockquote>Of course you are right! I had a 1977 Mini Cooper 1300 British Green Racing color when I was 18 (made in Pamplona, Spain), which had a huge convertible roof. The nicest car I've ever owned and I'm 1,87 cm high.
I still did not drive the new one (my brother is planning to buy the Cooper S) but it is a great remake of the old one although not so revolucionary. Not underpowered! remeber the original Mini had a 850 cc engine! Just a little bigger (not even close to the PT which by the way has less style that Cas$ butt) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 12:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sealobo:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
Yep. Old mini's weighed NOTHING, had a great wheelbase for its size, so throw some sticky tires on and bam you can stick around the corners.

The new mini is BIG, like PT Cruiser/Neon big. Its heavy. Its underpowered.

blah.

- Ca$h<hr /></blockquote>Have you driven one?<hr /></blockquote>Does it matter? Seems like everyone here can talk about how slow and horrible neons are but I bet NONE of them have driven one....

But with 119 hp and 25-2600 lb curbweight, its underpowered compared to a NEON.

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 12:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cenutrio:
When I talk about good roads I’m referring to 30 or more mile roads that go as high as 12 % uphill in which you have to use 2 speed because the car can not go up in RPM when using third (I’m talking about good cars here). Of course, later you go downhill and good breaks and stability are essential (I’m sure the Chrysler doesn’t get close to the mini).
<hr /></blockquote>Its this type of biased **** that pisses me off to no end. OH its a chrysler which means even if on PAPER the neon has a more powerful engine, damn near hte same suspension, since it is a chrysler the suspension is automatically deemed inferior. You sir, are a god damn idiot. Neons have a very nice tight stiff suspension, and the BRAKES (not 'breaks') are just fine. 4 wheel disc on a 2400 lb car = stop very soon. But no no, it doesn't matter that I post this, because its a chrysler, so it sucks right? And the mini, even though its inferior, is somehow magically better due to an element you can't explain right?

what a effing moron.

- Ca$h

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 12:40 PM

[b]AHahAH here's a slap in the face for all of you!!!!!!!!!!!

GUESS WHAT ENGINE IS IN THE MINI!?!?!?!

A CHRYSLER ENGINE! AAHaHAHAHA AhAHahAHAh A NEON ENGINE! AHAhAHahAHAhahHahhaHAhAhaa

THE MINI IS POWERED BY AN EXPORT NEON ENGINE!

HAhaHAhAHhAhHAa

OH GEE IT MUST AUTOMATICALLY SUCK THEN EH!? CUZ ITS CHRYLSRE?!

F*CK ALL OF YOU! AHHAHAhAHaHhAhA

<a href="http://www.allpar.com/mopar/rover.html" target="_blank">http://www.allpar.com/mopar/rover.html</a>

- Ca$h

digimage · Jul 18, 2002, 12:40 PM

Dude! Who cares? This is MACNN, not NeonNN.

Why can't you just spew your lame-ass, riceboy drivel somewhere else? How many times do we we have to hear this $hit?

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 12:41 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by digimage:
Dude! Who cares? This is MACNN, not NeonNN.

Why can't you just spew your lame-ass, riceboy drivel somewhere else? How many times do we we have to hear this $hit?<hr /></blockquote>You don't have to hear it at all. I'm not forcing you to read this. Hit the back button, quit reading topics I make.

Idiot.

- Ca$h

SimeyTheLimey · Jul 18, 2002, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by cenutrio:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Of course you are right! I had a 1977 Mini Cooper 1300 British Green Racing color when I was 18 (made in Pamplona, Spain), which had a huge convertible roof. The nicest car I've ever owned and I'm 1,87 cm high.<hr /></blockquote>What a cool first car. Lucky you! My first car was a 1976 Saab 99. It was about 25% body filler, but I still loved it.

My mother had a Mini in the early 70s. It was probably a base model, but I remember quite clearly the time she took a hump backed bridge at 40mph with her driving instructor. The whole car left the ground!

I can't afford a new car right now. But a Cooper-S or even turbo sounds very tempting as a graduation present to myself in 3 years. It's just very "me."

digimage · Jul 18, 2002, 12:43 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ca$h68:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by digimage:
Dude! Who cares? This is MACNN, not NeonNN.

Why can't you just spew your lame-ass, riceboy drivel somewhere else? How many times do we we have to hear this $hit?<hr /></blockquote>You don't have to hear it at all. I'm not forcing you to read this. Hit the back button, quit reading topics I make.

Idiot.

- Ca$h<hr /></blockquote>Fu(k you you little dipshit. I'd love to see you run your mouth in front of me.

Idiot? No, I just hate white trash like you.

Ca$h68 · Jul 18, 2002, 12:53 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by digimage:
Fu(k you you little dipshit. I'd love to see you run your mouth in front of me.

Idiot? No, I just hate white trash like you.<hr /></blockquote>You're just pissed because I have a point. If you hate my posts so much, hit the back button, don't read them, and run along. Your white trash comment was really intelligent too, I mean...hrm.. I dont have a mullet... I don't live in at trailer... I have a mac... I like skiing... I live in a nice place... I have money... hrm.. yeah, I definitely sound like white trash.

You're a ****ing dumbass. Now quit replying.

- Ca$h