Saxperience - Citroen Saxo Forum - View Single Post

maddison_vts · 19th August 2011, 15:59

another thread that has gone waaaaaaaay off the topic.

oh well, my 2p worth..

I quite often slate saxo's and tbh arguing that an mg zr (rover 200) is better than a saxo is like arguing that one form of cancer is better than another they're both shit to have!
however, in my experience of the cars i've owned (mainly jap and french with an embarrassing exception to some terrible rover 200 i had the displeasure of owning for a short amount of time) the best engine I have come across is the saxo vts engine. I doubled the standard power, track used it, abused it and it never once in 4 years let me down. May I add that no uprated/stronger parts were needed to be fitted to the engine to achieve this.

I HAVE owned a vts and I HAVE owned a rover 200 which is an mg zr without the bodykit and I can hand on my heart say if I had to have either again it would be the vts without a doubt.

19th August 2011, 15:59	#16
maddison_vts Established Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Torbay Posts: 1,565 Car(s): 2000 phase 2 Saxo VTS Turbo 2000 Nissan 200sx S14a	another thread that has gone waaaaaaaay off the topic. oh well, my 2p worth.. I quite often slate saxo's and tbh arguing that an mg zr (rover 200) is better than a saxo is like arguing that one form of cancer is better than another they're both shit to have! however, in my experience of the cars i've owned (mainly jap and french with an embarrassing exception to some terrible rover 200 i had the displeasure of owning for a short amount of time) the best engine I have come across is the saxo vts engine. I doubled the standard power, track used it, abused it and it never once in 4 years let me down. May I add that no uprated/stronger parts were needed to be fitted to the engine to achieve this. I HAVE owned a vts and I HAVE owned a rover 200 which is an mg zr without the bodykit and I can hand on my heart say if I had to have either again it would be the vts without a doubt.