I hope there is no limit to dumb questions, because I'm sure I'll ask quite a few!!!
Please do not think that I have not done my research on the subject. I know the 2.8 was only rated 1 HP more but also 20+FT LBS Torque higher... I did get to test drive a 2.8 but have not driven the 2.5. The 2.8 Was pretty impressive for such a low HP rating. I am used to american V8's and turbo V6's (Buick GN, Turbo TA's) and still found the 2.8 to be quick. Probably a 14 second car....
How big of a difference do you all see in the two engines, from having driven both? Is it really that signifigant?? Would you avoid the 2.5L ? (1994 model year I am looking at)
Thanks!
Bob
Please do not think that I have not done my research on the subject. I know the 2.8 was only rated 1 HP more but also 20+FT LBS Torque higher... I did get to test drive a 2.8 but have not driven the 2.5. The 2.8 Was pretty impressive for such a low HP rating. I am used to american V8's and turbo V6's (Buick GN, Turbo TA's) and still found the 2.8 to be quick. Probably a 14 second car....
How big of a difference do you all see in the two engines, from having driven both? Is it really that signifigant?? Would you avoid the 2.5L ? (1994 model year I am looking at)
Thanks!
Bob