lookin, please review my follow-on post. I'm sure that will clarify that I am not saying that either VW or Mazda is better. How can anyone get that out of what I wrote? I didn't diss anything or anyone. I was pointing out, specifically, that a 2.3 liter engine is producing 263hp with turbocharging and direct fuel injection. That engine just happens to be in the Mazdaspeed3. So point out where I was dissing the Kizzie or saying the MazdaSpeed3 was better. For the sake of clear thought, imagine what sort of power a factory turbo 2.4 from Suzuki could make. It's been proven that with just 10 pounds of boost and a well-selected turbo kit that the Kizzie's N/A engine can produce 290hp. So who needs a V-6's added weight up front? As for RRM's 290hp, I don't think Suzuki would produce that much hp on it's own, due to warranty considerations. That's just my opinion based on my experience with factory turbocharged engines. So come on lookin. Please read what I wrote again. I'll tell you up front I think you took it all wrong if you thought I was dissin' or otherwise not being nice. That's too bad.
Flyby out
Drive that thing or pull over! (Either common sense ain't all that common, or it ain't what it's cracked up to be)
Flyby wrote:lookin, please review my follow-on post. I'm sure that will clarify that I am not saying that either VW or Mazda is better. How can anyone get that out of what I wrote? I didn't diss anything or anyone. I was pointing out, specifically, that a 2.3 liter engine is producing 263hp with turbocharging and direct fuel injection. That engine just happens to be in the Mazdaspeed3. So point out where I was dissing the Kizzie or saying the MazdaSpeed3 was better. For the sake of clear thought, imagine what sort of power a factory turbo 2.4 from Suzuki could make. It's been proven that with just 10 pounds of boost and a well-selected turbo kit that the Kizzie's N/A engine can produce 290hp. So who needs a V-6's added weight up front? As for RRM's 290hp, I don't think Suzuki would produce that much hp on it's own, due to warranty considerations. That's just my opinion based on my experience with factory turbocharged engines. So come on lookin. Please read what I wrote again. I'll tell you up front I think you took it all wrong if you thought I was dissin' or otherwise not being nice. That's too bad.
Flyby out
heyyyy i think you should read my post again i wasnt refering to you i was refering to wat gaww said ...PLEASE READ AGAIN...you is the one getting it all wrong...and i was just stating my point of view to wat gaww said and i was agreeing with you facts can be stated...
Flyby wrote:lookin, please review my follow-on post. I'm sure that will clarify that I am not saying that either VW or Mazda is better. How can anyone get that out of what I wrote? I didn't diss anything or anyone. I was pointing out, specifically, that a 2.3 liter engine is producing 263hp with turbocharging and direct fuel injection. That engine just happens to be in the Mazdaspeed3. So point out where I was dissing the Kizzie or saying the MazdaSpeed3 was better. For the sake of clear thought, imagine what sort of power a factory turbo 2.4 from Suzuki could make. It's been proven that with just 10 pounds of boost and a well-selected turbo kit that the Kizzie's N/A engine can produce 290hp. So who needs a V-6's added weight up front? As for RRM's 290hp, I don't think Suzuki would produce that much hp on it's own, due to warranty considerations. That's just my opinion based on my experience with factory turbocharged engines. So come on lookin. Please read what I wrote again. I'll tell you up front I think you took it all wrong if you thought I was dissin' or otherwise not being nice. That's too bad.
Flyby out
heyyyy i think you should read my post again i wasnt refering to you i was refering to wat gaww said ...PLEASE READ AGAIN...you is the one getting it all wrong...and i was just stating my point of view to wat gaww said and i was agreeing with you facts can be stated...
aww man!! I am too embarrassed! Just a minute...There. That's better. i just took my foot out of my mouth, and wiped the egg off my face. Obviously it's all gaww's fault! I fell for his prediction and became my own victim. So much for my intelligence! I'm sorry, lookin.
Flyby out
Drive that thing or pull over! (Either common sense ain't all that common, or it ain't what it's cracked up to be)
Flyby wrote:lookin, please review my follow-on post. I'm sure that will clarify that I am not saying that either VW or Mazda is better. How can anyone get that out of what I wrote? I didn't diss anything or anyone. I was pointing out, specifically, that a 2.3 liter engine is producing 263hp with turbocharging and direct fuel injection. That engine just happens to be in the Mazdaspeed3. So point out where I was dissing the Kizzie or saying the MazdaSpeed3 was better. For the sake of clear thought, imagine what sort of power a factory turbo 2.4 from Suzuki could make. It's been proven that with just 10 pounds of boost and a well-selected turbo kit that the Kizzie's N/A engine can produce 290hp. So who needs a V-6's added weight up front? As for RRM's 290hp, I don't think Suzuki would produce that much hp on it's own, due to warranty considerations. That's just my opinion based on my experience with factory turbocharged engines. So come on lookin. Please read what I wrote again. I'll tell you up front I think you took it all wrong if you thought I was dissin' or otherwise not being nice. That's too bad.
Flyby out
heyyyy i think you should read my post again i wasnt refering to you i was refering to wat gaww said ...PLEASE READ AGAIN...you is the one getting it all wrong...and i was just stating my point of view to wat gaww said and i was agreeing with you facts can be stated...
aww man!! I am too embarrassed! Just a minute...There. That's better. i just took my foot out of my mouth, and wiped the egg off my face. Obviously it's all gaww's fault! I fell for his prediction and became my own victim. So much for my intelligence! I'm sorry, lookin.
Flyby out
Flyby wrote:Its probable that the current CVT AWD (probably)won't take a turbo that's producing 290 hp. So I say beef up the AWD and put a turbo on the 2.4. That way you get a bit more torque off the larger 4 as opposed to the VW turbo2.0, imo. Also, better weight savings over a V6 (who wants extra understeer? Anyone? Not me! ). And don't forget the 6-speed manual, beefing up the tranny as well. With respect to Road Race Motorsports, no piggyback signal interceptors. Please. If Suzuki is going to work with RRMS then share the ECU coding and use larger fuel injectors, and maybe VW's direct injection fuel technology as in the MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp and over 270lb/ft of torque). Oh, don't forget the limited-slip diffs, a brake upgrade to help it stop, and larger anti-roll bars to help keep it planted (without making the ride harsher) and the warranty. That's the ticket!
Flyby out
Ha ha - be carefully making positive remarks about another make " MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp" - some posters (mostly on another forum) will tell you to take a hike and only post on that forum.
Most however will appreciate some intelligent discussion like yours and get some good insights from it. I was thinking about getting the ECU - but not any more. 180 - 185hp is not impressive. Was looking at RRM gear to try at least get it over 200, but will hold off until documented aftermarket upgrades are available.
sounds like dat poster is the intelligent one you shouldnt come into a forum for a specific model dissing that model for another model obviously we are here cause we love the kizashi ...facts can be stated of course but u should be wary of how its said i think would be a common sense approach i wouldnt go into a camry forum saying kizashi is better its just not nice
I often encounter a number of "English comprehension challenged" individuals in these forums, so I will dumb this down for you.
Exactly where in my post did I "diss" the Kazashi for another model ??? I think you are maybe confused about what the "ECU' is.
And if you can't handle the statement that 180-185 hp is not impressive - take that up with the professional reviewers (as in they know what they are talking about) have said in their reviews of the Kizashi in the Automotive press.
it may not be impressive to you or some reviewers but they are reviewers who also feels its perfectly fine for everyday driving i certainly feels its fine obviously suzuki did ..even though they may address the need for v6 ...but not everyone is speed demons i dont need turbo i dont need v6...i love my car the way it is and i dont care to hear about how much more power another car has especially in the forum here to celebrate the kizashi.....so im simply saying if you hate the kizashi so much dont buy.its like if i dont agree with your statements im comprehension challenged how so you dont know me so why the insults ...i said yes facts can be stated in comparisons as with all cars but as i saw someone said to you in another forum you shouldnt be dissing a car in its forum ..every car has pros and cons everybody knows that but its how you say things that matter especially in a forum specifically for a certain model...its a matter of respect
I didn't diss anything or anyone. I was pointing out, specifically, that a 2.3 liter engine is producing 263hp with turbocharging and direct fuel injection. That engine just happens to be in the Mazdaspeed3. So point out where I was dissing the Kizzie or saying the MazdaSpeed3 was better. For the sake of clear thought, imagine what sort of power a factory turbo 2.4 from Suzuki could make. It's been proven that with just 10 pounds of boost and a well-selected turbo kit that the Kizzie's N/A engine can produce 290hp. So who needs a V-6's added weight up front? As for RRM's 290hp, I don't think Suzuki would produce that much hp on it's own, due to warranty considerations. That's just my opinion based on my experience with factory turbocharged engines. So come on lookin. Please read what I wrote again. I'll tell you up front I think you took it all wrong if you thought I was dissin' or otherwise not being nice. That's too bad.
I fell for his prediction and became my own victim. So much for my intelligence! I'm sorry, lookin. 
). And don't forget the 6-speed manual, beefing up the tranny as well. With respect to Road Race Motorsports, no piggyback signal interceptors. Please. If Suzuki is going to work with RRMS then share the ECU coding and use larger fuel injectors, and maybe VW's direct injection fuel technology as in the MazdaSpeed3' direct injection2.3 (265hp and over 270lb/ft of torque). Oh, don't forget the limited-slip diffs, a brake upgrade to help it stop, and larger anti-roll bars to help keep it planted (without making the ride harsher) and the warranty. 
That's the ticket!