If U r to physically measure both, the LMST is slightly lighter. Vr talking bout power/weight ratio.

Could be due to "less meat" meat. What I can think abt now are the door boards, dashboard, and rear wiper.

No good meh? Despite lighter but not significant weight reduced, very minimal.

Question is in terms of vat sense? Driveability? Stability? Is the inertia of the vehicle a concern? I guess it's up to Ur personal preferance, I dare not give any comment here, otherwise I'll kena "sniped".

But personally, I think it's good when Ur talking bout power over weight ratio.

Agree on the FC.

But may I know y did U say might not be a good thing on safety?

Lighter weights would generally means lower inertia.

Lower inertia would reflects the performance of a vehicle eg. accereration and decereration.

The lower the inertia, the less effort the brake system has to work to stop the vehicle. No good meh?

As for the "kena accident" thing, I believe U were refering to the ability of a structure to absorb impact instead of inertia right?

---

Added on July 28, 2010, 5:16 pmAs this it would be up to Ur personal preference whether U corcern bout fuel consumption, back pressure of the exhaust gas or the enviroment.

This post has been edited by J1@l_ l_l l\l: Jul 28 2010, 05:16 PM

Just need to remind U bout chassis and structural geometry kindda things perhaps would makes U think of something.

As for "large" exhaust, I'm not sure how large is consider large, I'm using stock, nvr tried any oversize exhaust piping, so cannot simply give U comment too to prevent myself frm being tembak.

But heard many aftermarket exhaust piping users experience, the result on the fc is NEGATIVE, how bad, guar ta rak tau.

Donoe.

I have gotten the 2nd batch model which is the one having normal muffler at the back and was selling at MYR27,999.

I actually wanted the one with a bigger rear muffler model, but was told by the moron salesmonkey tht LMST has discontinued using tht muffler, so, vat to do, complaint also doesn't make sense ma since they think Ur buying a RM27,999's car and doesn't deserve a good customer service.

But I didn't care too since the car is meant mainly for my job, so be it.

As everybody has known, this auto maker has been having problems with their parts reliability issue regarless of which model eversince the 1st product came out. U should have known it too I guess.

So mine too, having the same common problem and the most common being the power window switches which has already been suggested above.

This post has been edited by J1@l_ l_l l\l: Jul 28 2010, 11:32 PM

I don't know for MYR50 U were refering to how much $/Litre.

If it was refered to V-Power, then it's a good figure.

Fuel consumption is only effected by the engine? So, the mass and the Cd of the car don't effecting the fc?

Can U share with us how many kM/L U were refering to?

Oh, ini macam miar ah? Gua butoi butoi ta rak tau oh.

U have suggested "the larger muffler OEM gave sure increase FC a bit coz not suitable with engine power ", what did U mean by this "not suitable with engine power"?

Sorry for for the noob question due to I'm a nood in automotive industry.

Then y is the dimension of the exhaust hose of AP1 and AP2 are bigger than SV4 2.2?

Strong exhaust flow, what is the unit being used to describe exhaust flow how "strong" or not "strong"?

Saga LMST "strong" ke or not "strong"?

Y not small capacity engines using extreamly big muffler since it has suggested tht small muffler power being restricted?

AP1 = S2000 2.0, AP2 = S2000 2.2

My mistake put in the AP2 due to the AP2 is having the same engine capacity as the SV4 2.2.

V r talking bout the meant value of a, area of the cross section of the exhaust piping.

I was asking question for post #51 which has not been answered yet and answering the question on post #53.

So, have U came up the answer for my question on post #52?