[adman77]

Originally Posted by viper

Guys,

I think its best you leave modded cars out of this discussion as no 2 cars are modded the same. Most of the cars that finished on the podium were running stroker kits besides all the other regular mods for a drag. No one knows what the engine capacity was changed to. So if you say for eg. Mclaren's car was fastest or Mihir's car was fastest they were not actually in the prostock category. Maybe from the rules point of view they were. If you want to compare then do it with two identically modded cars 1 baleno and 1 OHC or Vtec modded by the same tuner then that would be a fair comparison.

Viper

Oh my god!!! Jiggy, what did you do??? There goes the secret. God bless all of us now.

[Shan2nu]

So if you say for eg. Mclaren's car was fastest or Mihir's car was fastest they were not actually in the prostock category. Maybe from the rules point of view they were.

Didn't get what you're trying to say. Wasn't your car in the same category as well? That was pro stock wasn't it? Or is there a dark secret to the performance of those cars!!!

Shan2nu

[viper]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Didn't get what you're trying to say. Wasn't your car in the same category as well? That was pro stock wasn't it? Or is there a dark secret to the performance of those cars!!!

Shan2nu

Hi,

What I meant was all these cars including mine are entered in the pro stock category. Now some of them are running Stroker Kits which make the engine capacity for eg A Baleno from 1600cc to god know whats (1650,1700,1800 etc) similar in case of a Honda or for eg the 1.0l Zens running faster times than the Vtecs or Baleno in the similar category.

Like you said there is a dark secret to most of the podium cars and before a controversy starts am quoting my original statement below.

"they were not actually in the prostock category. Maybe from the rules point of view they were." which means that I am not sure whether the mods carried out were within the rules or not? I dont think they were legal as then in case of a Baleno you no longer fall in the upto 1600CC category

Viper

[narayan]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

Yes, that would be good to know, given the hype around the 'vtec' - I am sure narayan would agree. And if the figures are available, for the OHC1.3 also. BTW, what is the max power for the 1.3 and 1.5 versions of the OHC ?

finally some one talks about the 1.5 in this world crazee about that VTEC head !!cheers:

[narayan]

Originally Posted by akshay1234

ohc 1.3 was definitely 92 or 93 bhp. the 1.5 was over a hundred i think.

no 1.3 was at 90bhp and 1.5 at 100bhp

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by kpzen

17 CARS - ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE TEST

Anyone knows why the Ikon inspite of being described as a very fun-to-drive and fast car (on the forum and even in this thread) is ranked 15th in this list of 17 cars ? It was just about able to outrun the Accent and the Astra, which I don't think is a big deal anyway.

Also, I see that this article is dated Sep2001. I am not very sure but I guess the Palio1.6 was very much around then. But I do not see it in the list of cars evaluated inspite of hearing a lot on the forum about how fast it is etc etc. Anyone has an idea why it did not figure in the list ? Was it not around when the test was done ? Or did it not make the cut ?

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

I confess i have not read the entire 5 pages in this thread, but isn't the MPFI esteem faster than both these like-fat(Fatso) cars ?

I think the 17-car evaluation clearly shows were the slim Esteem ranks when it comes to the fatsos.

P.S. : I know that this thread is about the OHC and the Baleno, but these 3 cars were brought into the discussion earlier on in this thread. Hence my queries.

Originally Posted by viper

I think its best you leave modded cars out of this discussion as no 2 cars are modded the same.

Very true. Once you start modding, there is no way you can realistically compare one car to another. Let us keep this discussion to stock cars.

Originally Posted by narayan

finally some one talks about the 1.5 in this world crazee about that VTEC head !!

What if the 1.5 does not have the Vtec advantage ? It still is a headturner and with 100 horses, it is not that behind performance-wise also. Loved your car on the Yelagiri drive.

[Shan2nu]

Also, I see that this article is dated Sep2001. I am not very sure but I guess the Palio1.6 was very much around then. But I do not see it in the list of cars evaluated inspite of hearing a lot on the forum about how fast it is etc etc. Anyone has an idea why it did not figure in the list ? Was it not around when the test was done ? Or did it not make the cut ?

I don't think it was launched when this test was done or else it would have definately been on the list.

I think the 17-car evaluation clearly shows were the slim Esteem ranks when it comes to the fatsos.

P.S. : I know that this thread is about the OHC and the Baleno, but these 3 cars were brought into the discussion earlier on in this thread. Hence my queries.

Yup the Esteem is quick to the 100 kmph mark but due to it's lack of engine capacity it really suffers beyond that. A 0-160kmph test would really bring out the potential of the heavy but powerful cars (especially the C+ segment and beyond).

Shan2nu

[suman]

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno

Anyone knows why the Ikon inspite of being described as a very fun-to-drive and fast car (on the forum and even in this thread) is ranked 15th in this list of 17 cars ? It was just about able to outrun the Accent and the Astra, which I don't think is a big deal anyway.

SB, the answer is simple - the Ikon has LOUSY brakes, that's why its at the bottom of that list. In case you hadn't read the fine print, it was a 0-100-0 test & didn't end with 0-100; nor did it take any FTD into account - as in high speed stability or handling

Originally Posted by BlackPearl

what you drive makes you happy and what I do makes me, but I dont like to consider the one parked in your garage as even close to mine

To each his own BP but there is a life beyond Balenos - though I've yet to see any post from you on any thread that acknowledges that there could be . Just out of curiosity, have you driven the Ikon 1.6?

[Shan2nu]

SB, the answer is simple - the Ikon has LOUSY brakes, that's why its at the bottom of that list. In case you hadn't read the fine print, it was a 0-100-0 test & didn't end with 0-100

Actually the Ikon is 15th if you go by it's 0-100 as well as it's 100-0 timings. So you can say that it's acc is only as good as it's braking.

Here's something interesting.
Vtec - 0-100-0 - 14.54secs
Ikon - 0-100 - 14.15secs

Shan2nu

[suman]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Actually the Ikon is 15th if you go by it's 0-100 as well as it's 100-0 timings. So you can say that it's acc is only as good as it's braking.

Here's something interesting.
Vtec - 0-100-0 - 14.54secs
Ikon - 0-100 - 14.15secs

Shan2nu

The 0-100 timings given for the cars are incomplete to say the least - the 0-100-0 is something that they have uniformly mentioned for all. So, I reserve my comments on whether the ikon is the 15th in the 0-100 or not.......having owned & driven one for more than 5 years, I do not believe the 14 second figure to get to a ton. I think the 2.2 litre Safari Dicor is claiming 15 seconds or something - almost as quick as the Ikon 1.6, isn't it

Anyway, going OT so I'm out of here!

[Shan2nu]

The 0-100 timings given for the cars are incomplete to say the least - the 0-100-0 is something that they have uniformly mentioned for all. So, I reserve my comments on whether the ikon is the 15th in the 0-100 or not

Well, actually it has been mentioned on this page - 17 CARS - ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE TEST

The only 2 cars slower than 14.15 are the Accent "14.98" and Astra "15.66". Only consolation would be that inspite of being 2nd last at 60kmph, it still managed to make up 1 place at the end of the test.

having owned & driven one for more than 5 years, I do not believe the 14 second figure to get to a ton.

I don't blame you since the car makes you feel you're acc quicker than you really are.

Shan2nu

[suman]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Well, actually it has been mentioned on this page - 17 CARS - ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE TEST

Ahhh, sorry, had missed that page, thanks! So these are accurate numbers I guess - I wonder what happened to the much-hyped "sub 10 sec" to the ton for the Vtec ?

Not to mention that quite a few of the 0-100 timings don't match those mentioned by ACI but that's nothing new is it!

[BlackPearl]

Originally Posted by suman

To each his own BP but there is a life beyond Balenos - though I've yet to see any post from you on any thread that acknowledges that there could be .

dont know what made you think like that... I am fond of anything on wheels and that includes bicycles. I am even very fond of speedboats and hovercrafts

Just out of curiosity, have you driven the Ikon 1.6?

no, I have not driven one and my comments on the car were only to pull 1100D's legs

[doomsday]

Originally Posted by suman

I do not believe the 14 second figure to get to a ton. I think the 2.2 litre Safari Dicor is claiming 15 seconds or something - almost as quick as the Ikon 1.6, isn't it

I've driven a 1.6 for quite a while and I must say the bottom end feel that it gives is well...unexpected. After driving it I used to wonder why this car is nowhere in competition to the OHC and the Baleno. Some research later (both theory and practicals) I found out that the super short gear ratios, coupled with a hugely over-reading speedo, give a sensation of speed which is nowhere close to how fast it is actually going. It runs out of poke later in the rev-range and also weighs more when compared to the competition, the cast iron block over the wheels not helping matters.

[Jeep]

Not really a great fan of IKON 1.6.. Other than the fun to drive factor, I think it is not that great.

Also note that the test used an Accent 1.5 since it was way back in 2001. I am sure that a 1.6 with ABS would have beaten IKON 1.6 in a 0-100-0 (though I am not denying the fact that on highways IKON has the upper hand with its driveability)