MP3 vs ES.20

[twa]

http://www.autosite.com/new/grabbag/perform/2819.asp

Mp3=8.2
ES=8.9

Argument over.

Actually if you notice on this link the 2000 ES that they are testing is only a 1.8L and not the 2.0L model, so I don't think the "argument is over"....yet at least.

 

[PatProtegeGT]

You are all acting like child (my father is stronger then your .......)

on a 1/4 mile, the driver will make the difference between an MP3 and all other 2.0L (ES,LX, MP5)

But on track, forget it, the MP3 is just too strong.

END OF THE DISCUSSION

 

[twa]

Do you even understand the basis for this discussion? The point is trying to resolve which car is quicker and can only be done with hard data, not personal opinions.

 

[APEXistud]

Do you even understand the basis for this discussion? The point is trying to resolve which car is quicker and can only be done with hard data, not personal opinions.

Well if personal opinions are looked upon, then there should be no discussion as the hard data shows the MP3 being slighlty faster in every catagory. Personal opinion is how the discussion got so long. And with saying that....end of discussion. hehe

 

[twa]

Well if personal opinions are looked upon, then there should be no discussion as the hard data shows the MP3 being slighlty faster in every catagory. Personal opinion is how the discussion got so long. And with saying that....end of discussion. hehe

Ok then, where is the 0-60 or 1/4 mile times comparing the mp3 to the ES 2.0? Before the ES1.8 was compared as having a slower 0-60 time as noted by this:

Mp3=8.2
ES=8.9 (1.8L engine)

Anyone have the 0-60 for the 2.0L?

 

[cjstringer]

Ok, heres some times for ya:

MP3=8.2
ES=8.211 (2.0L)

Did that help? I just made it up anyway, so probably not. Oh well. I'm gonna go race some Mclarens. I've seen about 4 tonight. I think I can take 'em.

 

[erictho]

Damn azkisser, you are just completely stupid and brain dead. If you that we are all brainwashed ricers, you are more than welcome to not visit this site anymore. Until then,...SHUT THE **** UP! No one here ever said that the P5 wasn't a very good looking car, I think it looks awesome. I think my MP3 looks better though. I'd expect any P5 owner to say their P5 looks better than the MP3. Because thats what they have and they are attached to it. But the STOCK P5 will NEVER be faster than the STOCK MP3. End of discussion!

Yes, you are right, I am completely stupid and brain dead. Or else I must be to allow myself to be sucked into replying to your post.

You don't want me here, fine, get the mods to ban me. You want me to shut up? Post something intelligent to retort my comments.

If you can understand that P5 owners have a natural inclination to prefer the looks of their car over an MP3, why can't you turn that logic around? You're like an idiot-savant... you'll say something intelligent, then ruin it all with your next sentence.

My experience has shown me that the MP3 is more about handling upgrades and aesthetics than power upgrades. In fact, my experience has shown me that the MP3 is a little bit slower than the P5 and the ProES in a straight line.

If your testing refutes this, I would be happy to know it, since it is another datapoint. Otherwise, get your zealous MP3 attitutde checked. The MP3 is a cool car, but it has weaknesses, just like any other car. Learn to get over it, else go to school, get a job and start saving up for a Ferrari.

 

[APEXistud]

Damn, I wish I was a moderator in this forum so I could lock this thread.

 

[erictho]

Damn, I wish I was a moderator in this forum so I could lock this thread.

Hehe, we're all friends here, A'PEXistud. Anonymous debate is difficult to keep from spinning into a flame-war.

That being said, this thread is going nowhere fast...

 

[tritonheat1]

The only Es Protege that i can think of that can take the MP3 in a straight line performance and be a close match, is the 1997 Protege ES. curb weight 2489. Which equals 236 lbs pounds lighter than the MP3 at 2725.

1997 Protege ES.
Horsepower: 122bhp
torque: 117lbs fts
curb weight: 2489
0-60mph: near 8.4sec
1/4mile: N/A
Topspeed: 125mph

2001 Mazda MP3.
Horsepower: 140bhp
Torque: 142lbs fts
curb weight: 2725
0-60mph: 8.3sec
1/4mile: 16.5sec
Topspeed: 120mph-125mph

 

[big_ben]

Ok azzkisser, here you go.

Protege5 - 2,716 lbs - 130hp - 135 ft/lb torque

MP3 - 2725 lbs - 140hp - 142 ft/lb torque

In case you can't subtract, The Pro5 is 9 lbs lighter than the MP3. I stand corrected about the weight. But 10 hp and 7ft/lb of torque does more than make up for that 9 lbs. I'm so sorry to dissappoint you, but this argument is now over.