Lets slay some ricers! - Car Forums and Automotive Chat

BlkCamaroSS

11-17-2003, 11:00 PM

Jared_80

11-18-2003, 10:09 AM

Whoopidy doo Evo-boy. Keep quoting your C&D numbers to me, magazine racing is for children. When you learn to spell (distribution, straight, Mercedes, imports, handling, iron, furniture, stuff), which will add to your credibility, I'll care...

There are many mustangs and Camaros that are still owning the streets, regardless of how old they are. The ones being used as lawn furniture were not taken care of like a car should. Your arguement that since it's domestic, it's unreliable is unfounded. Lets see your Evo in anywhere from 10-35 years, and see what problems it's seen in that amount of time. Saying that it's reliable when it's been out only a short while is down right retarded.

BTW, I got my Camaro for 26k, and in the right hands, it'll own your Evo. I've done about 1k worth of mods to it, so I still got three to go to get to $30k. We'll see then how well 13.06 stands up considering my quarter mile time is a year and a half old. 13.06 was in the right hands with that Evo. The F-bodies in the right hands have run high 12's stock.

As for that Mercedes, of which no specific car was mentioned, for the price of that car I could probably have a Z06 and several gorgeous F-bodies from any of the 4 generations, not worth it.

And you're wrong. A 427 Yenko is what you could buy straight from Yenko Chevrolet, right off the showroom floor. Same with the Berger, Dickey, Baldwin Motion Camaros as well. They all have VIN's that identify them as such.

You really don't know much do you? The Lancer has been out for 11 years and the are holding up very well. If you paid attentin to what has been going on in the automotive world you would know that. Yes I do think that most American cars are unreliable just read JD Power and chack the mechanical reliability for yourself. Did you get your car used because I know that new Camaros cost over 30k (with a V8) if you did get a new one for that price you got one heck of a deal. By the way if you think that we Americans have built a better sports car for the money name me one that can beat the Evo in at leased half of the proformance catagories that I mentioned for under 30k. I bet that you cannot. Don't argue with me based on your ideas give me facts and numbers because thay are not subject to your bias oppion, that would make your argument creditable. Don't mind my spelling I write in a hurry because I have other things to do.

glenn82

11-18-2003, 11:16 AM

Besides the stock Toyota GT1 can go 200mph for 24 hours, and that is a REAL stock car the only mods that it had was its stickers!
You know, I have only once in my life seen a le mans prototype/GT1 beside the track, by chance it was a toyota GT1, it was in paris in the main dealership from toyota. As a show car. There are people that could buy one and call it a stock car if you would like, the way Joest bought porsche prototypes to race in le mans.
There is one in recent history however that could do what you claim, the Mclaren F1, but i doubt those where pure stock cars they used in le mans.
For that matter, in that level of competition there isn't a single car i would call a "stock" car.
The EVO they use in the WRC won't share that much parts with the showroom EVO, there wouldn't be much of a crisis here in the belgian rally championchip if that where true.

BlkCamaroSS

11-18-2003, 11:39 AM

I see, I'm biased because I drive an SS? Hmm, I think not. My first car was a 90 Integra GS, my brothers own a 99 Civic Si and a 98 Prelude SH, and my mom drives a G35 Sedan. You can't make a case that I don't know what I'm talking about...

Base Price for a Z28 in 2002: $22,830
Hp/weight ratio: 1hp to 11.09 lbs
310.0 bhp @ 5200 rpm
340.0 ft lbs @ 4000 rpm
EPA City/Hwy: 19/28 mpg
0-60 mph: 5.1 sec
0-100 mph: 11.8 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.5 sec @ 107 mph
Skidpad: .87g
Top Speed: 160 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 120 ft
Slalom Speed: 63.0 mph

With seven grand to spare, the choice is simple...

As for your child-like comments about me knowing nothing about the automotive world, thanks for quoting history to me. I didn't realize that since there was an Evo "VIII" that that would mean that there were seven others before it. The Evo VIII is what you spoke of in all of those categories, and no it hasn't been out for eleven years. It's not had any time to prove how reliable it is, especially when it's run hard.

Jared_80

11-18-2003, 04:35 PM

As for your child-like comments about me knowing nothing about the automotive world, thanks for quoting history to me. I didn't realize that since there was an Evo "VIII" that that would mean that there were seven others before it. The Evo VIII is what you spoke of in all of those categories, and no it hasn't been out for eleven years. It's not had any time to prove how reliable it is, especially when it's run hard.[/QUOTE]

The Evolution 8 has the same engine (the awsome 4g-63) and same driveline setup as it did in 1992, and it is very well proven. Just ask any street or rally racer who has been to Japan, or England. Unlike our circle track racing in rally racing they use the cars original platform (with safty mods) and they still have to be street legal, they even have to drive their race cars to the next event to qualify. The Lancer has won the WRC several times, how can you call that unproven? If your SS is that much better go race it in the WRC and see how well you do aginst the "ricers". Really try it, they hold WRC events in America now, I would bet anything that you could not beat any real cars no matter how many mods you put on your car. As far as those numbers you quoted on the Camaro those are not impressive at all! .87g the Ford Focus does that! That slolom speed is not even close to what a proformance car should do, I think that Mazdas new economy car can do that. Face it all that the Camaro can do right is drive in a stright line, and even then it loses to the Evo. I am not sure that you are right about the base price of the Z28 I think that you are quoting the 6 cylinders price because I priced one on the MSRP and a 2003 V8 was over 30k without options. Besides if the Camaro was such a great car why did they quit building it? Because they knew that they could not compete with the new cars coming from Japan.

Jared_80

11-18-2003, 04:47 PM

You know, I have only once in my life seen a le mans prototype/GT1 beside the track, by chance it was a toyota GT1, it was in paris in the main dealership from toyota. As a show car. There are people that could buy one and call it a stock car if you would like, the way Joest bought porsche prototypes to race in le mans.
There is one in recent history however that could do what you claim, the Mclaren F1, but i doubt those where pure stock cars they used in le mans.
For that matter, in that level of competition there isn't a single car i would call a "stock" car.
The EVO they use in the WRC won't share that much parts with the showroom EVO, there wouldn't be much of a crisis here in the belgian rally championchip if that where true.

The GT1 has the same wight same hp and same engine block same aerodynamics and the same frame as its racing brother. it is for all practical purposes the same car. (other than the tires) And yes the Evos that they race are much more stock than our "stock car racing" they have to be built on the same unibody and have to be street legal, emmissions, lights, noise levels, everything. The only reason that I brought up the GT1 is because the muscleheads were quoting numbers on factory modified cars saying that money was not an issue. So what is the problem with using a million dollar car for their compareison?

BlkCamaroSS

11-18-2003, 09:31 PM

You should stop quoting that 1/4 mile number as gospel for a Evo VIII. The average joe will not attain that number, just as I haven't attained a sub 12 second quarter mile with my car. All things considered, like I said previously, a high 12 quarter mile beats the number you quoted for the Evo, therefore it is not better in that category. Look here:

http://www.engine-power.com/mitsubishi/lancer_evolution_viii.html

Your numbers quoted for the quarter time are more than 4 tenths faster. The stats for a Z28 are equal to or better than the Evo VIII, and that doesn't include a fully optioned SS with the Bilstein suspension.

As for the comments about those daily-driven WRC cars, can you imagine how many times those engines have been rebuilt, and what the budgets of those teams are??? Certainly not anything close to a normal human being's budget. Hardly anything to be impressed about. The reason I couldn't beat the other drivers, regardless of manufacturer, is due to backing that they have, and I would not, not to the cars themselves.

When did I use the word ricer? There's huge differences between import enthusiasts and ricers. Using this word in any context generally denotes the trendiness of the times, and the age of the individual.

It's impossible for you to have priced a 2003 Camaro, since there are none that exist. Production finished August 29th, 2002, for all Camaros and Firebirds due to the fact that they did not meet 2004 crash safety standards. It had absolutely nothing to do with the cars coming from Japan. You've just demonstrated your lack of automotive knowledge.

Here's a page that gives a breakdown of the prices of the Camaro lineup:

http://www.123review.com/reviews/chevrolet/02_chevrolet_camaro_summary_specs.html

It shows the price of a base model Z28 Coupe, very close to the number I quoted you before. You can find one vastly under that now. Still the best overall performance buy you can get.

glenn82

11-19-2003, 12:53 AM

WRC cars have to be road legal for connection stages over public roads, if they are however te same car, lets see you make some jumps at race speed. And same noise level? There is someone around here driving an R22B, its loud, but not WRC loud.
American definition of "stock" car is just, hmm, lets call it weird, 2 years ago there was a championchip next to ETCC that i would consider stock car racing, the gearshift was louder then the engine :screwy:.
And for the GT1, if it ever was for sale (never knew that), its more the other way around, it's a race car without the stickers, it was developed for lemans (unlike the Mclaren F1).
Wasn't a yenko much more affordable then the GT1, Mclaren or any supercar of today?

BlkCamaroSS

11-19-2003, 11:13 AM

Right now you could find one for about $35K in good condition. Back in the day, they sold for just under $4k. That was alot of money then, but for that, you got 11's from the factory. Look below...

http://www.fast-autos.net/chevrolet/chevroletyenkocamaro.html

MexSiR

11-19-2003, 05:38 PM

Just fights...
Everybody has their own opinion on different cars, if one type of car was the best one, everybody would have it, why are there so many different kinds of cars, because there are different types and likes....
American Cars have awesome models, just like japanese and european

mycivic

11-19-2003, 05:43 PM

:iagree:

Jared_80

11-20-2003, 12:41 PM

Your numbers quoted for the quarter time are more than 4 tenths faster. The stats for a Z28 are equal to or better than the Evo VIII, and that doesn't include a fully optioned SS with the Bilstein suspension.

As for the comments about those daily-driven WRC cars, can you imagine how many times those engines have been rebuilt, and what the budgets of those teams are???

When did I use the word ricer? There's huge differences between import enthusiasts and ricers. Using this word in any context generally denotes the trendiness of the times, and the age of the individual.

It's impossible for you to have priced a 2003 Camaro, since there are none that exist. Production finished August 29th, 2002, for all Camaros and Firebirds due to the fact that they did not meet 2004 crash safety standards. It had absolutely nothing to do with the cars coming from Japan. You've just demonstrated your lack of automotive knowledge.

First off there is a 2003 Camaro look it up yourself. (www.edmunds.com) They always build the next year model at the end of that year. Every real enthusiast knows that. Secondly you assumption that those WRC cars bolw alot of engines is wrong I have yet to see a single blow without an crash being involved. Don't beleve me look it up for yourself, before you assume anything. I will admit that I was wrong on one thing though I looked up the base price for the Z28 and it is in the high 22k range, but that does not include any go fast goodies like a limited slip or TCS, that is all extra. But you are right for the exrta 6 grand (not 7) that that you would save you could easly get a Camaro to completly smoke an American spec Lancer (Though the Jap-spec Evolution RS might still beat it) But you would still have to consider the loss of mechanical reliability that tuning an already somewhat unreliable car would bring about.

BlkCamaroSS

11-20-2003, 06:49 PM

RedLightning

11-20-2003, 10:25 PM

rav440

11-21-2003, 07:28 PM

Purpura Delujo

11-24-2003, 06:14 AM

Ok, my favourite 'sports' car is a 1970 Plymouth Superbird with a 426 Hemi, ideally in black on black.

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 01:28 PM

Bullshit, there is no 2003 Camaro or Firebird, write Chevrolet, ask any true car enthusiast. There is no 2003 Camaro on that link you posted. Again, I posted the date that the plant in Quebec closed. They were not made, period. What little respect I had for you just got annihilated. You just proved you know absolutely dick about american cars. Please leave this forum before you make yourself look even more stupid. I will not argue with you further about your precious Evo. You deserve no respect.

Look here stupid if there is not a 2003 Camaro then why does conversionxtras.com sell parts for them???? You really are an idiot if an import fan has to teach you about your own car. Try actualy reading about somthing before you go arguing about it on the web. You say that you have lost all respect for me. Good I would not want respect from you anyway. Who looks stupid now???

PS rav440 you are just as stupid as he is. No I take that back you are dumber because this had nothing to do with you.

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 01:43 PM

I know my original post got people mad and offended, so i changed it but you 2 just keep fighting, LEAVE JARED THIS IS A MUSCLE CAR THREAD!!!!!!! why would there be so many comaros and mustangs out there if they sucked? Plz, reread the new first post and if u have something good to say, say it. oh why is a rally car lover looking in the muscle car section when he hates them? to start a fight? my first post might have started some of this, im sorry, so i changed it, also why if u HATE this thread and it the "Worst thread evar..." why do u respond? just a question. sorry that u think that, but thanks for your pro muscle car comments, since this is a MUSCLE CAR section of af. thanks comaro for ending this because a moderator would have to close it, well that might not be a bad thing.

All I wanted was to give my oppion and Motor Trends latest numbers, then I was going to leave, but some idiot had to tell me that I did not know what I was talking about. I don't hate muscle cars I personaly like Camaros and Mustangs (though I think that the Evo is an overall better proformance car) but this no longer has anything to do with that, sombody called me out and I am going to destroy any reputation that he ever had as an automotive expert. I actualy came here initialy to learn some more about older proformance cars but all that I found was uneducated oppion and "ricer bashing" having owned two imports and owing my life to the good engineering of one of them (55mph head on collision, I walked out with one small scrach on my pinky) I was not going to let that nonsence go unchalanged. I hope that you can understand why I continue to respond, sorry if it messes up your thread.

-Josh-

11-24-2003, 01:56 PM

So the Evo will beat muscle cars before or after the tranny blows up in it??????? :loser:

p.s. There are no 2003 F bodies ..discontinued after 2Q 02

RedLightning

11-24-2003, 01:57 PM

Wow, sweet,it ended now, thanks both of u for saying that ull end it, sorry again if anyone was offended by me, (sorry for "yelling") wondering what is all of your defenitions of 'muscle car' could the new gto be one or do they have to be of a certain age? some say they have to be 60 to 70s models, or had a model bak then. could the infiniti m45 be a muscle car?
and also from somewhere else on these forums i found that some one(forgot name) says that IF IT LOOKS GOOD IT IS NOT RICE, thats kind of my def. about rice, i dont think that the evo is rice.

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 03:20 PM

BlkCamaroSS

11-24-2003, 04:04 PM

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 05:07 PM

You believe everything that you read then do you? Sounds like the people at conversionxtras.com are just as retarded as you, because there never was, there isn't, and there never will be a 2003 Camaro/Firebird. They may come back in the future, but absolutely no sooner than 2005. STFU n00b. Quit making yourself look stupid, don't make me post this thread elsewhere so that I make your stupidity more public than it already is...

That is really funny that they would get that mixed up. Guss what so did every Camaro parts site that I could find!! They all listed their Camaros all the way up to 2003, are all of them wrong?? If you don't beleve me look for yourself. They all list 2003!!! Oh yea and as far as that date that they quit production that does not mean anything, my car was made in Nov 1986 but it is a 1987 model car. Most cars are that way. Let me say this again WHO LOOKS STUPID NOW? Oh yea and those numbers that I posted on the Lancer come out of Motor Trend, not some retards web page. So 13.06 stands. But I did make one mistake it's 0-60 is 4.3 seconds not 4.5. That is faster than the Z06.

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 05:22 PM

August 28, 2002: 3:46 PM EDT By Meghan Collins, CNN/Money Staff Writer

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - If car lovers feel a tinge of nostalgia at the thought of the end of Chevy's Camaro line, not to worry -- it's not over quite yet.

Enthusiasts still have a chance to grab the last one off the line -- for a possibly hefty price -- during an auction by Kruse International, the eBay Inc. company that specializes in collector-car auctions, on Sunday, Sept. 1.

The car to be auctioned this weekend is a 2003 Camaro Z28 coupe with automatic transmission, 5.7 liter V8 engine and a full package of amenities including leather seats, a 12-disc CD changer, fog lamps, an alarm with shock sensor, and a Monsoon sound system. The base model has a starting price of $23,430.

But this car likely will go for between $40,000 and $50,000, and could pull in a hefty $100,000, depending on the devotion level of the bidders, according to Dean Kruse, director of global marketing for Kruse International and the Camaro's auctioneer.

I just thought that you would like to see for yourself :lol: :lol: :lol: I guess that the people at Chevy thought that there was a 2003 Camaro too!! (www.cnyfirebird.com/showNews.asp?ID=25) You really are stupid!

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 05:26 PM

:grinno: :evillol: :lol: :lol: :rofl: :lol2: :iceslolan :grinno: :evillol: :biggrin: :iceslolan :icon16: :nutkick: :evillol: :rofl: :grinyes: :lol: :biggrin2: Just wanted to let you know that the whole world is still laughing at your stupidity.
You too Josh and rav.

So what now are you going to argue with GM and CNN News. I bet you would.

:iagree:
Let me say this this one last time WHO LOOKS STUPID NOW?!?!

He who laughs last laughs best. :evillol:

BlkCamaroSS

11-24-2003, 06:21 PM

Look at the top of your link retard. What does it say??? 1967 to 2002. What else do you need to prove it to you that the last production year was a 2002?

BlkCamaroSS

11-24-2003, 06:23 PM

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 06:53 PM

Since you are that dumb I figure that the only way that you will ever accept that there is a 2003 Camaro is if you buy one. (www.rampchevy.com/deal-camaro.htm) No that is not a miss print, order it yourself. Look at the VIN and that will be your proof. :screwy:

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 07:01 PM

:grinno: :iceslolan :rofl: :lol: :evillol: :iceslolan :grinno: :biggrin: :lol2: :rofl: :lol: :cwm27: :icon16: We are still laughing at your stupidity.

:swear: =you (potty mouth)

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 07:11 PM

Oh and you never answerd my question if there are no 2003s then why do ALL of the online parts stores sell parts for them????? :loser: If you would at leased come up with some theory to explein that than I might not see you as such an idiot. :evillol:

Jared_80

11-24-2003, 07:28 PM

If you read the entire link, you'd also see that they refer to the car again as a 2002 Z28, hence what you're referring to is a typo. I say again, shut the fuck up. You know nothing of cars, quit quoting bullshit off of the internet that's untrue...

OK Mr know it all do you really think that I know nothing of cars?? I may not have as much collage as you, but I know more about automotive design (suspention, aerodynamics, drivetrain, fuel injection/mixtures, alternative fuels, detonation resistence, chasse rigidity, advanced materials) than anyone that i have ever met including engineers. So don't tell me that I don't know anything about cars! :nono:

RedLightning

11-24-2003, 08:26 PM

http://www.pontiac.com/firebird/gallery_popup.jsp?brand=firebird&pagename=heritage_cars&imageNumber=7

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/dayfire/index.html

read, them.

Since u guys are going all out in this argument i have an idea, why dont u write to chevy or pontiac and ask them, i would do it but im to lazy.

BlkCamaroSS

11-24-2003, 08:50 PM

If you could spell suspension, I'd believe you about your car knowledge.

I burned your link at the top of this page in my PM to you, I'll repost it here if needed. Learn to add.

Thank you for the links Namless Dork, saves me from finding more of them. In the first link right above this post, it specifically states " the final 2002 Collector's Edition ", if that doesn't give a hint, I don't know what does.

In the second link, I again see "Exclusive: 2002 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am Pacing the 2002 Daytona 500 with Jay Leno". Again, no mention of a 2003. I know Scott Settlemire from SLP's former board, the former Camaro Brand manager. His boardname was Fbodfather. He's the one that told the SLP faithful of the date the last F-bodies would roll off the line, a red Camaro and a red Firebird. He, as well as anyone else worth a damn, knows that 2002 was the last year for the Camaro. Besides, the next model's year's cars aren't generally for sale until about September of the prior year, meaning August 28th came about in 2002, there were no 2003's. If you need me to break down the VIN #'s for you, I'll do that too...

As for your comment about every site, no they don't. Every site that is worth a damn knows that the cars they're selling for were stop being built in 2002. If they're parts that were manufactured in 2003, and they're being sold as such, fine, but they're not going on a 2003 car. If they gave a damn about anything other than making money, maybe they'd have it right too. You've yet to show me a plausible link that I haven't burned. Next...

Show me a picture of this famed 2003 Camaro...

BlkCamaroSS

11-24-2003, 08:52 PM

As for evidence that further proves my point, go to tirerack.com. Under Shop for tires, enter Chevrolet and 2003. Then, on the next page, show me under that list where a Camaro is, cause I can't seem to find it.

Still waiting for these fabled pages showing 2003 parts and Camaros. Let's go technically-minded auto-enthusiast Jared...

BlkCamaroSS

11-24-2003, 08:59 PM

http://clubs.hemmings.com/clubsites/chevylist/tech/vin/decode_modern_vin.htm

If you can read through that and under stand it, prove to me that a car came off the line with a "3" in the 10th digit...

Edit: Here's a sample VIN with some of the Camaro information already spelled out for you:http://www.autohopper.com/resources/articles/vehicle_identification_numbers.asp

Now show me that "3"...

RedLightning

11-24-2003, 09:18 PM

Here check this once in a while. http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=157016

No answers yet.

-Josh-

11-24-2003, 11:10 PM

That is really funny that they would get that mixed up. Guss what so did every Camaro parts site that I could find!! They all listed their Camaros all the way up to 2003, are all of them wrong?? If you don't beleve me look for yourself. They all list 2003!!! Oh yea and as far as that date that they quit production that does not mean anything, my car was made in Nov 1986 but it is a 1987 model car. Most cars are that way. Let me say this again WHO LOOKS STUPID NOW? Oh yea and those numbers that I posted on the Lancer come out of Motor Trend, not some retards web page. So 13.06 stands. But I did make one mistake it's 0-60 is 4.3 seconds not 4.5. That is faster than the Z06.

Listen dumbass, you think i dont know..i work at a pontiac dealership...i did detail cars last year, now i work in service. All F body cars were discontinued in the 2nd Quarter of 2002(that's spring) Go to a Chevy dealership and ask before you make a complete ass of yourself. The T56 is one of the toughest tranny's you can get on a stock LS1 so go fuck yourself.. Problems arise on those P.O.S Evo's when they get brought into a Mitsu dealership with 500 miles and the Clutch disk and pressure plate are shattered on them..That's horrible, the only time i've EVER seen a Trans Am or a Camaro in the shop is for basic maintenance

Jared_80

11-25-2003, 10:54 AM

I am tired of playing website tag with you the FACT still remains that the Evo smokes any SS ever made and no misprint, or playing with words can change that fact. And since the Camaro is DEAD (unfortunetly) that will never change. Is there a 2003 Camaro I don't really care if not great, if so the Evo will still leave it in the dust on ever track in every test, do I think that the Camaro was a great car for the money? Yes. Do I think that it could ever match the Evo in head to head racing or street proformance? Not a chance. Prove me wrong. Just go ahead and try. You are fighting a war with no ammo, you have nothing on the Evo not skidpad not 1/4 mile not slolom not brakeing not even close, not even with the SS which costs more than the Evo. Go ahead try playing website tag with that, I will just keep quoting the real sources, like Motor Trend, and Road and Track. Don't cry for an extra aprox 18,000 dollars you can get a z06, it is a fair match for the Evo (faster in the 1/4 but slower in the slolom and 0-60), but you loose the back seat. So go ahead and argue with me some more I love making you look stupid. (it is not hard) Even if America made a buget supercar today they still could not compare to the Jap-spec Lancer RS which is cheaper, lighter (by aprox 400lbs), and more powerful than the US Lancer. Yea you keep trying to bash imports in your little world, but I live in the real world.

BlkCamaroSS

11-25-2003, 11:02 AM

Hooray for Japan.

Point still remains that there is no 2003 Camaro, you're just not admitting that publically. Even if there was a Camaro marketed as a 2003 in other countries, I guarantee you it still has an 02 Vin number.

As for your numbers on the Evo, I still challenge those numbers, because all you've done is pull numbers from your ass, and I've quoted numbers off the internet, since we're magazine/internet racers. Stock an Evo will not pull 13.0's, and I know that an 02 SS can, cause I've seen them at Heartland Park in Topeka, KS, as well as heard of many others on the SLP board.

Your world is not real, it's a petty made up place in the void between your ears. Come race me anytime, I'll bring my friends too. We'll make an evening of it. I'm gonna rev on any Evo I see in the future, just to prove you wrong. I'll let you know the results...

Jared_80

11-25-2003, 12:39 PM

Keep crying your 02 SS did 13.5 in the 1/4 acording to Motor Trend, and even if there was any driver error involved it would not make up for a whole half second. Where is your creditable source?? You don't have one do you. As far as my sources go they are the most well respected in the automotive world, they did not come out of my ass. I have never seen a stock SS do a 12 second 1/4 or even a 13 flat. (maby on aftermarket tires but not stock) Keep quoting your oppinion and I will keep quoting fact. Face it you loose in every catagory. If I were you I would wait untill Detroit built something better before I would argue for American Muscle over Japanese technology. Oh and as far as my spelling goes, give it up. You would not spell so great either if you were raised in a country where people did not even speak English.
PS they are saying that the new STI is going to be even faster than the Lancer. If so than it will be the worlds first true 4 cylinder corvette killer.

RedLightning

11-25-2003, 01:49 PM

well the STI is already faster than the evo(has 300hp compared to 271 (i think) hp of the evo) we keep changing topics, i thought we were on is there a 2003 firebird/comaro, are we on who will smoke who? ok ok evo has 4 wheal drive, but the comaro got alot of hp i think it would be a tie, hahah tip:always take the middle way. I love most cars, but just love the sound of v-8 no matter waht country it comes from.now for whos whoopen who here are some cars that can whoop butt.

evo:271hp?
strenghts:awd 5 speed
weaknesses:turbo lag(c/d) 5 speed

comaro:325hp?
strenghts:alot of hp.6 speed manual.
weaknesses:not as pretty as the firebird.(in my humble oppinion that no one cares about.)

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=19&article_id=4186&page_number=2

MITSUBISHI LANCER EVOLUTION
Vehicle type: front-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
Estimated base price: $29,500
Engine type: turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 4-in-line, iron block and aluminum head, Mitsubishi engine-control system with port fuel injection
Displacement: 122 cu in, 1997cc
Power (SAE net): 271 bhp @ 6500 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 273 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Wheelbase: 103.3 in
Length: 178.5 in
Width: 69.7 in
Height: 57.1 in
Curb weight 3250 lb
C/D-estimated performance:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.4 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.2 sec @ 98 mph
Top speed (redline limited): 155 mph
Projected fuel economy:
EPA city driving 18 mpg
EPA highway driving 26 mpg

What's new? Nothing. Familiar shape, familiar concept -- potent V-8 up front, live axle at the rear -- and after 35 years, it should be familiar.

Like the Mustang, the Camaro is the antithesis of the kind of finesse represented by the Eclipse, except more so. There's nothing subtle here: Stab the throttle and hang on. Our Z28 was far and away the fleetest of these fair-weather specialists, hitting 60 mph in a brisk 5.2 seconds and 100 mph in 12.3, and covering the quarter-mile in 13.8 seconds at 104 mph. Top speed was 158 mph.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=3480&page_number=5

Pontiac GTO
1 2 3 4

(continued)

C/D TEST RESULTS

ACCELERATION (Seconds)
Zero to 30 mph: 2.0
40 mph: 2.8
50 mph: 4.2
60 mph: 5.3
70 mph: 7.1
80 mph: 8.8
90 mph: 10.8
100 mph: 13.4
110 mph: 16.0
120 mph: 19.1
130 mph: 23.4
140 mph: 28.9
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.8
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 10.2
50-70 mph: 10.4
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.0 sec @ 102 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 158 mph

BRAKING
70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 185 ft

HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive

ESTIMATED FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 16 mpg
EPA highway driving: 28 mpg
C/D-observed: 22 mpg

INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 54 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 79 dBA
70-mph cruising: 71 dBA

STI

With a curb weight identical to the Mitsubishi's (3260 pounds), an axle ratio only slightly less aggressive, and a positive-shifting six-speed manual transmission, the Subaru's extra juice makes it the drag-strip king. One word of warning to those who might try to duplicate our acceleration numbers: Don't. These are not drag racers, and what a stopwatch considers a good start a dealership service department considers a lucrative one. But there it is: a sprint of 4.6 to 60 mph, 0.4-second faster than the Mitsubishi and a figure that's going to be hard to achieve in any car near the STi's $31,520 base price. Our 5-to-60-mph street-start sprint of 5.8 is a more realistic, less-abusive gauge of real-world acceleration. It's all accompanied by a tough-sounding midrange trill of an exhaust note.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=6640&page_number=2

Mustang cobra

COUNTERPOINT

I adore Ford's SOHC and DOHC modular V-8s—velvety idle, quick to rev, as useful in Uncle Vern's Crown Vic as in a Mustang Cobra. This blown twin-cam variant builds revs so explosively in first and second gears that you have to estimate when to shift. Still, vehicular violence doesn't wow me anymore, which makes we wish Ford had opted for the 415-hp naturally aspirated V-8 fitted to the Mustang FR500 (C/D, February 2000). That V-8 was even more tractable, with subtler throttle tip-in. Plus, it didn't whine and rattle like my Remington electric chain saw. What's more, the FR500's five-inch wheelbase extension delivered a better ride, better weight distribution, and surer tracking. I want my FR500.
—John Phillips
John Coletti stands to be keelhauled by the 300 Cobra R owners he bamboozled out of $55,675 last year. Even as they drove off in the only Mustangs then capable of reeling in a Corvette, a new Cobra was on the drawing board that supplies sub-13-second quarter-miles to every flapping jaw and for 20 grand less. Like the Cobra R, this new Cobra has a dull interior that looks as though it had been dipped in body primer, and it feels a generation behind its time with every pa-whunk! the body makes over a freeze joint. But Coletti has an out: The Cobra R's 5.4-liter V-8 roared like Parnelli's '65 Galaxie, while this new supercharged V-8 sounds like a floor polisher. No question that's worth some bucks.
—Aaron Robinson

The obvious point here is the engine, and blender whine aside, it's a gem. But the chassis was what really blew me away. Considering the age of this Fox platform, the SVT bunch did an incredible job. Every Mustang I've ever driven plows like a John Deere, but this one feels more inclined to do a four-wheel drift. I usually do four test laps on the skidpad. In this car I did 12; I couldn't help it. It'll turn tail-out, tail-in, or anything in between. You ever watch those lurid car slides in the movie Ronin? Here's your car to practice in. And don't be afraid it'll beat you up on the highway—it won't. If Ford ever gives these guys a modern platform, watch out.
—Larry Webster

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=39&article_id=1881&page_number=3

The Verdict

Highs: Instant throttle response, tons of torque, well-sorted handling.

Lows: Supercharger whine, usual Mustang ergonomics, fuel consumption.

The Verdict: A ton of fun, and the best Mustang Cobra ever.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=4346&page_number=1 2 Japanese and 1 American car(s)

RedLightning

11-25-2003, 01:57 PM

Jared_80

11-25-2003, 03:23 PM

I think that the test driver for car and driver does not know what he is doing. The Camaro does much better than 13.8 in the 1/4 in the right hands, and the Lancer does MUCH better than 14.4. and that 5.4 0-60 that is nonsence how come the Motor Trend guy did it over a second faster? a third of a second difference I can understant, different grades of pavement could make that difference, but 1.1 seconds! That is just an stupid driver. (or maby he just weighs 500lbs) They aparently dont know how to powershift. Well I guess that I cannot expect too much from them, they are more of a luxury car magazine insted of a proformance magazine.

BlkCamaroSS

11-25-2003, 03:38 PM

Would be interesting to know when and where they did their testing. That'll make a huge difference.

Jared_80

11-25-2003, 03:47 PM

Great news guys the Evo RS is coming to America! The American Version is said to be about 200lbs lighter, and with front LSD. Just imagin what kind of launch that will have. It is said to cost about 2k less than the normal Evo. It gets even better, they are planing on releasing a 330hp version. SWEET. The stock Evo is a BAD car already just imagin how fast the new versions are going to be. Lets see how the new GTO Judge stacks up. (if they really build it)

BlkCamaroSS

11-25-2003, 08:21 PM

I bet it'll run 10's...

RedLightning

11-25-2003, 10:52 PM

the lancer was estimated performance they did not do real testing for it. they tested it twice, this one was from thier first meeting with it on a track in Japan.(C/D-estimated performance:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.4 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.2 sec @ 98 mph) not given time to do testing i believe.

(What's new? Nothing. Familiar shape, familiar concept -- potent V-8 up front, live axle at the rear -- and after 35 years, it should be familiar.

Like the Mustang, the Camaro is the antithesis of the kind of finesse represented by the Eclipse, except more so. There's nothing subtle here: Stab the throttle and hang on. Our Z28 was far and away the fleetest of these fair-weather specialists, hitting 60 mph in a brisk 5.2 seconds and 100 mph in 12.3, and covering the quarter-mile in 13.8 seconds at 104 mph. Top speed was 158 mph.)

I dont think they did real testing for this eather. It was a compraro with other cars, i think c/d deletes their info on discontinued cars,cause this is all i can find in their website about it, they probibly did real testing just deleted it when chevy stoped making them.

Purpura Delujo

11-26-2003, 01:14 AM

Not anotehr one of these stupid Japanese versus American car arguments. Why cant the mod get in here and close this stupid thread.
You like a fucking evo? Go to the evo forums, not bitch and whine about one in here, yes. The F bodys ended last year, muscle cars didn't die in 1975, if they did everyone in the whole world would be driving a piece of shit hybrid car, with no HP. Musclecars are really dead now are they? Try saying that to the millions of die hard musclecar fans out there that still restore cars that are 40 years old, so that future generations of kids can appreciate the cars that started the big horsepower crazes today.

'WHO LOOKS STUPID NOW?!?!' - You.

-Josh-

11-26-2003, 02:07 AM

dudes with mods both cars are gunna whoop @$$ they already do.

I agree whole heartedly...i like imports, i respect my friends heavily moded Integra GSR. I dont like jack ass deuche bags like Jared_80 though who pull numbers out of their ass and make shit up instead of admitting that they are wrong. And even if it does turn out to be faster the Camaro SS will be running circles around it while it's broken down on the side of the road, waiting to go to a shop to have it's transmission fixed(temporarily)

PWMAN

11-26-2003, 07:03 PM

I am no muscle car fanatic but I think that the muscle cars died after 1975, I think that that was the year they started enforcing the emmisions laws. Just look at how much power droped between 1972 and 1975. It reached it's low in 1982 (from what I have heard) the 1982 Mustang GT made only 128hp on the dyno.

I had a 77' Chrysler Newport. It's not considered a muscle car by most, but I did. It has layed the smackdown on many a ricer. The 440 in it was only rated at 195 HP, and weighed in at over 4K pounds-but it could stomp a 170+ mods HP integra weighing 2800 pounds. I believe all the cars in the ''smog'' era were just severely underrated. My dad said he had a 78 King Cobra, with the 302 rated at 139 HP and he raced a 71' Mustang with a 351 Cleveland 4 BBL (not the BOSS, 330 HP one) which was rated at like 280 HP I think, and beat him. The guy stopped him 1/2 mile later just to ask him what mods he had done to the car that he was so fast and when my dad said it was all stock he thought my dad was joking. But he wasn't.

On a different topic, who is this ''Jared 80'' that thinks the EVO will ''smoke any SS ever made''???
Why doesn't he try racing a 69' SS 427? LOL, dumbass.

YogsVR4

11-26-2003, 08:03 PM

Sorry I am coming to the conversation a bit late, but I just read mention of a 69' SS 427 :worshippy

That is one of the sweetest looking cars ever made - bar none. :bigthumb:

Purpura Delujo

11-27-2003, 05:07 AM

Sorry I am coming to the conversation a bit late, but I just read mention of a 69' SS 427 :worshippy

That is one of the sweetest looking cars ever made - bar none. :bigthumb:
:lol: HAHAHAHAHAHAH, W3rd!

PWMAN

11-27-2003, 08:34 AM

Sorry I am coming to the conversation a bit late, but I just read mention of a 69' SS 427 :worshippy

That is one of the sweetest looking cars ever made - bar none. :bigthumb:

:naughty:

BTW, an EVO will not beat an 02' SS in the 1/4 anyway-let alone the 69' SS427. Any big block Camaro in the 60's will make quick work of an EVO.

rav440

11-27-2003, 08:59 AM

:naughty:

BTW, an EVO will not beat an 02' SS in the 1/4 anyway-let alone the 69' SS427. Any big block Camaro in the 60's will make quick work of an EVO.

um ,,,,,,, ive been away from chevys for awhile now , but as far as i can remember there was never a SS 427 car made . unless your talking about the C.O.P.O. or YENKO , NICKEY or the one from the west coast . and the BALDWIN MOTION PERFORMANCE cars .

PWMAN

11-27-2003, 09:47 AM

um ,,,,,,, ive been away from chevys for awhile now , but as far as i can remember there was never a SS 427 car made . unless your talking about the C.O.P.O. or YENKO , NICKEY or the one from the west coast . and the BALDWIN MOTION PERFORMANCE cars .
I was pretty sure there was, but even if there wasn't an SS 396 would still destroy a EVO for sure.

BlkCamaroSS

11-27-2003, 02:31 PM

There were 427's in all of the cars mentioned above...

rav440

11-28-2003, 11:14 AM

There were 427's in all of the cars mentioned above...

in what cars ? the dealers that i mentioned ? as far as i know the only chevy that was avilible with a 427 from the FACTORY was the VETTE . all others were C.O.P.O. cars or special dealler installs .

quote: " SS 396 would still destroy a EVO for sure " your right on that PWMAN .

PWMAN

11-28-2003, 12:10 PM

Well a restoration company I know of makes emblems for the front fender-SS 427. Whether they are original or not I don't know.

BlkCamaroSS

11-28-2003, 06:44 PM

http://scnc.britton.k12.mi.us/~markh/cars/pages/69'%20Yenko%20Camaro.html

The dealer cars, Yenko, Baldwin, etc., most certainly had 427's...

rav440

11-28-2003, 07:02 PM

http://scnc.britton.k12.mi.us/~markh/cars/pages/69'%20Yenko%20Camaro.html

The dealer cars, Yenko, Baldwin, etc., most certainly had 427's...

:grinno: BlkCamaroSS , um we are on the same page right ? thats what i said in the first place . :biggrin:

but im going to say that i was wrong about chevey never having a factory 427 car other that the VETTE , i totaly for got about the 427 BISCAYNE and the 66-67 CHEVELLEs . but im stilll sticking to my guns that they NEVER put a 427 in a CAMARO . UNLESS it was a COPO or special dealer install . IE: YENKO , NICKEY ect .

BlkCamaroSS

11-28-2003, 09:56 PM

Ah, well, maybe, damn. LOL, I need some sleep, I can't wait to graduate and get the hell out of this town.

Sleep anyone???

Guyanson_Mendiola

11-29-2003, 07:15 PM

Slay some ricers? Yet you have an EVO listed in the poll... Not that an Evo is a ricer.. far from it. Just thought that was pretty odd.

And your list of 'sports' cars is pretty limited...hey! stop picking on the ricers. :icon16:

RedLightning

11-30-2003, 05:57 PM

hey! stop picking on the ricers. :icon16:

maybe it would be a good thing if u actually read it, and then maybe u would have noticed i changed it(it does not say that ricer thing anymore), and i later said(probibly on page 4, i dunno) if it looks good it aint rice, right now we are talking about muscle cars,i also dont know what u mean with the whole smiley face?

Jared_80

12-01-2003, 09:26 AM

:naughty:

BTW, an EVO will not beat an 02' SS in the 1/4 anyway-let alone the 69' SS427. Any big block Camaro in the 60's will make quick work of an EVO.

What are you talking about? The 60s muscle cars were very slow off the line in stock form. Not even the GT500 could smoke the US Evo much less the J-spec RS. Look it up for yourself, don't just jump into an argument without knowing what you are talking about. Quit quoting estamated proformance specs and look at the real numbers. The SS looses any way you look at it.

BlkCamaroSS

12-01-2003, 09:30 AM

Jared, you're allowed to have the last word, but everyone here knows that it's wrong.

Jared_80

12-01-2003, 09:35 AM

PWMAN

12-01-2003, 09:16 PM

BlkCamaroSS

12-01-2003, 09:45 PM

Tomsriv

12-01-2003, 09:47 PM

"Know" what you like but the truth is on my side and it is not subject to your oppion. Besides I looked up the "11 second" Yenko Camaro with a 427. Motor Trend said that it did the 1/4 mile in 13.8! On modern tires! So much for your 11 second car. Where do you get your numbers from?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I saw that article in Sport Compact Car where they tested the cars from the fast and the furious. The "Yenko" was a clone, not a real yenko and ran 13.7. It was the fastest of the group. The Evo ran a sorry 15.3. My 86 Turbo Volvo runs 15.6. So much for your supercar.

Now I will give the benefit of the doubt that the Evo was out of tune, but so was the Camaro. Besides the fact that the Camaro is 35 years old and running stock heads, etc. The production tolerances back then were terrible and the cars lost their tune quickly. You have to be really smart and persistant to tune a completely mechanical car. Modern parts are available so all you have to do is add a little technology and you gain back the efficiency that was missing from the factory.

The writers at SCC admitted that they loved the Camaro. They pointed out that it didn't corner or stop well but it was still a blast to drive, and as long as you have fun thats all that matters.

-Josh-

12-01-2003, 11:59 PM

prelude97

12-02-2003, 03:55 AM

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 09:27 AM

Let's see this link in Motor Trend, Jared. Oh wait, it's another mystic link that you can never prove. I can post links all day long verifying the authenticity of a 1st Gen Yenko doing 11's. If that mystic link has anything to do with the 2F2F Yenko, that everyone and their mother knows is a fake, I'm gonna laugh my ass off...

http://www.yenko.net/reunion/00race1.JPG

I did not get this off the net so I have no site to give you try reading the real magazine.
I have been looking all over the web for the fastest stock 1/4 mile out of a Yenko, and the fastest that I have seen so far is 12.80 which I admit is a 1/4 second faster than the Evo, but will it be faster then the forthcoming Evo RS I doubt it. Even though the Yenko is a touch faster I would not trade a 1/4 second for the handeling and breaking of the Evo, and only a drag fanatic would. (not that there is anything wrong with being a drag fanatic.)

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 09:46 AM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I saw that article in Sport Compact Car where they tested the cars from the fast and the furious. The "Yenko" was a clone, not a real yenko and ran 13.7. It was the fastest of the group. The Evo ran a sorry 15.3. My 86 Turbo Volvo runs 15.6. So much for your supercar. .

No I am not quoting that clone in SCC though I did see that article. The car that I am quoting was fetured in Motor Trend magazine not SCC, and it was not a clone, or at leased they did not mention that.

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 10:50 AM

I dont really care about the american vs Imports. but i got to tell u this as far as looks go the american cars got to go they are to round and to big. oh and about the technology in the new cars if they can get a 2.0L car to do high 13s, what the hell is up with the 7.0L running low 13s. if the imports came with the 7.0L size engine i wonder what they would do at 1/4 with all the technology.

So now we are comparing 60's technology to the 21st century? Give me a break :banghead:
Plus you are comparing N/A for FI. Try getting a 2.0L N/A in the 13's, it's quite a bit harder and a lot more expensive than getting the 60's technology 7L in the 13's, which it's already there. All you have to do is put headers and dual 3'' exhaust on the camaro, then add some sticky back tires and you should be into 11's territory.
The only reason it does 13's is because it has so much power you can't get traction off the line :rofl:

BlkCamaroSS

12-02-2003, 12:09 PM

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 04:54 PM

Posted this before, but here it is again. Took me two minutes to find versus looking all over the net. Simple searches on any search engine give fast results. An 11.94 example right there...

http://scnc.britton.k12.mi.us/~markh/cars/pages/69'%20Yenko%20Camaro.html

For some reason your link does not work. Are you sure that this is a stock Yenko or are they racing on street legal slicks with a locking diff?? I found low 12s but they were all modified. Check you source, I highly doubt that it is stock.

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 06:18 PM

http://scnc.britton.k12.mi.us/~markh/cars/pages/69'%20Yenko%20Camaro.html

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 06:28 PM

Oh sorry I thought that you had a real source. Get a lagit source for your data, not some po-dunk hey momme look I made a website crap. In case you did not notice they list modified cars on there too, not just stock cars. Get me a nationaly known source several of them were around in 1969.

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 06:34 PM

Here is another that backs up the exact same time:11.94

http://www.ebms.edu/fredjefinal/yenko.htm

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 06:37 PM

Oh and BTW you really need to stop skipping school so you can catch english class to learn how to spell :loser:

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 06:46 PM

A: your link does not work
B: I have never heard of them before, what makes them a lagit source??
C: Keep qouting crap and I will keep saying the same thing. GET A LAGIT SOURCE!
If you can find a real source that I have heard of than I will admit that I am wrong but untill then I will continue to dissagree with you.

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 06:49 PM

The link works fine for me.

What was your lagit source saying it was in the 13's again?

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 07:21 PM

The link works fine for me.

What was your lagit source saying it was in the 13's again?

For some reason your link does not work on this computer, not that I have ever heard of them anyway. My source was Motor Trend magazine, that is about as lagit as you can get, although I will admit that it is hard to test a 30+ year old car and expect it to be as good as it was new, but it was restored.

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 07:27 PM

OK I finaly got your link to work (it took a few tries) I hate to rain on your parade but they built so few of those things that I would hardly consider them a production car. Lets try to find a muscle car that is mass produced that can take an Evo or an STi. But I would still like to see a lagit source for the 11 second times, because that would be truly impressive.

prelude97

12-02-2003, 07:41 PM

Well what i dont get is all the muscle cars are V6,V8 and also rear wheel drive and all the little ricers are v4 and front wheel drive and they still keep up with ur v8 with the 7.0L. Oh and the 30,000 u would spend on a camaro i would put that money in to a f----- civic and it will smoke the shit out of ur camaro. OH the thing u were all talking about having these new cars running nos and turbos they have crx's running i belive low 10s all motor and its a front wheel drive.
Now the fast and the furious evo was built for a show car not a drag car.
It has a full sound system and all the little shit that u wouldnt need for a drag car. and it is not tuned for the 1/4.

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 07:52 PM

First thing get it right it is an inline 4 not a V4. Secondly rear wheel drive is much better than front wheel drive especaly for drag racing. For the same amount of money that you would put into that civic, you could push a Stang or a Camaro into to low 10s or the 9s. Don't beleve me ask those FWD racers which one is faster! Plus squeezing that much power out of that small of an engine kill the reliability even on a Honda. If you want to push a 4 banger into the 10s you better get somthing that was designed for high boost not a 16b or 18b. Try a 4g-63 or an SR20. The last thing that this world needs is another poser Civic, so if you do tune it please don't make a joke of the rest of us. Note: A body kit, rear spoiler, and crome rims don't help in the 1/4 mile. Only power and traction count there.

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 08:17 PM

LOL, Jared 80 you got to the V4/inline 4 before me! This Prelude 97 seems like a true ricer to me........NAWSSSSSS

And Prelude 97 by all-motor that means no nitrous either. And I would like to see proof of this CRX in the 10's. And even if it is true, it's probably bored and stroked for increased displacement. Plus the CRX is so stripped that it is not streetable at all. The Muscle cars all do these numbers in stock form street trim.

Tomsriv

12-02-2003, 08:23 PM

All of the top of the line 1970 A bodies ran mid 13's stock on crappy tires and through manifolds and smog tuned carbs. They were mass production but expensive for what they were just like the Evo and STI. I think its a little harder to wring more power out of an STI or Evo than it was to get it out of one of those muscle cars because the 4 cyl cars already have a lot of trick parts on them, while the stock muscle cars have a lot of room for improvement.

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 08:25 PM

He is the kind of "ricer" that makes me ashamed of the import scene.

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 08:27 PM

Tomsriv

12-02-2003, 08:28 PM

Also, Jared you can probably vouche for this, when you go to the run-what-you-brung races you often see mustangs and camaros and a whole plethora of imports. The times for the domestics ranges from about 13-16 while the times for the imports range from about 15-18. Their are fast cars on both sides, but the majority of the people there, the regular guys that can't afford $3000 blowers or risk running NOS and blowing the motor are running those numbers. Their are fast ones on both sides, but the fastest average goes to the mustangs and camaros because they were designed to be fast and inexpensive.

Tomsriv

12-02-2003, 08:31 PM

The Japs have tweeked the Evos block to over 700hp I call that room for improvment don't you?

I'm sure People have tuned the muscle V8's to 2000 hp. Full-Race blocks based on Chevy V8's put out 5000+. So my point is the same.

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 08:33 PM

He is the kind of "ricer" that makes me ashamed of the import scene.
Hmm, we finally agreed on something! Imagine that.
BTW, I am not an all-out V8 muscle car motor head. I own a 4 cylinder, and 2 V8 vehicle. I like the 4 banger just as much as the V8's. I really do believe in their potential, I'm just saying it's much harder and more expensive to get it there compared to a larger displacement engine. I mean, you can build a 500 HP small block chevy for under 4K including labor and everything. The turbo kit and engine management for those kind of HP levels on a 4 cylinder alone are going to cost you about 4K. Then all the internals will cost 2K, then all the labor and machine work probably another 3K. So it's atleast twice the price, plus it's never going to have the torque that the V8 will.

PWMAN

12-02-2003, 08:37 PM

I'm sure People have tuned the muscle V8's to 2000 hp. Full-Race blocks based on Chevy V8's put out 5000+. So my point is the same.
Top fuel dragsters have 6-7 thousand HP. See any 4 bangers with those kind of HP ratings lately?
The most powerful 4 banger I ever heard of was 4000 HP, and that was 4.5L-much more displacement than the average racer is going to have. And I'm sure the torque was no where near that of the top fuel dragsters.

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 08:55 PM

I'm sure People have tuned the muscle V8's to 2000 hp. Full-Race blocks based on Chevy V8's put out 5000+. So my point is the same.

No I mean 700hp in street trim driving on street tires. I have seen over 1200hp on the dragstrip on alcohol.

Jared_80

12-02-2003, 08:59 PM

Yea you are right it is alot easier to get alot of horses out of a big block than a 4 banger, but the 4 is a more driveable engine in high hp trim because of their (some of them) VVTi and the sort. Plus a turbod car can run a street cam and still get alot of power when spooled up.

Tomsriv

12-02-2003, 09:34 PM

Plus a turbod car can run a street cam and still get alot of power when spooled up.

VVTI is great, I wish they would put it on V8's, but their is no way for the manufactures to justify it on a street car. As far as the turbos I agree, but the same goes for a larger engine, 6, 8 whatever, with more power strokes it will have a better power band. Their are people with 800hp street trim V8's that are running automatic trannys!

RedLightning

12-03-2003, 04:59 PM

Howdy.

Quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Originally Posted by Jared_80
The Japs have tweeked the Evos block to over 700hp I call that room for improvment don't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How much money did they spend? 60's and 70's muscle cars most of the time dont have s/c or turbos so put one of those on and its makin even more horse power, if u have alot of $ u can do any thing, though i really dont think its as easy to get any of these cars to go 10 sec 1/4, as u guys seem to be saying, 500 horses gets a Ford GT to a 12.2 1/4 so u need mucho horse power to get 10s not at all saying its imposible though. how supposidly did did they get up to 1,000hp? the dude who said he'd rather have a fwd car than a rwd, whats up wit that?

PWMAN

12-03-2003, 05:40 PM

Well it's a matter of weight VS HP. That CRX in the 10's probably weighs less than 2000 pounds. And muscle cars weigh 3500 or so pounds. And going by the 10 HP per hundred pounds rule of thumb, the Muscle car needs 350 more HP than the CRX to get the same time. I know that there is a lot more factors like torque and all that, but I'm just being pretty general right now.
Most muscle cars weigh atleast a half ton more than civics.

Musclecarclub

12-04-2003, 02:43 AM

Weight is definitely the enemy of performance. Imports weigh less and thus need less power to achieve any given performance target. Of course, there are issues like weight transfer and torque that affect acceleration and tend to favor muscle cars.

Jared_80

12-04-2003, 10:04 AM

How much money did they spend? 60's and 70's muscle cars most of the time dont have s/c or turbos so put one of those on and its makin even more horse power, though i really dont think its as easy to get any of these cars to go 10 sec 1/4, as u guys seem to be saying, 500 horses gets a Ford GT to a 12.2 1/4 so u need mucho horse power to get 10s not at all saying its imposible though. how supposidly did did they get up to 1,000hp? the dude who said he'd rather have a fwd car than a rwd, whats up wit that?[/QUOTE/]

I think that all he did to that lancer was reduced compression ratio pistons, larger innnercooler, larger injectors and a T-88 turbo, but I'll try to find that article again and tell you for sure, but I don't think that it was as expensive as you think. As far as the 10 second 1/4 milething you are not even takinging traction into account when you quoted the GT. I would bet anything that it could get into the mid to low 11's if it had drag slicks, or AWD. There have been FWD dragsters not only get into the 10s but the 9s and one that I know of actualy the high 8s. They get this power the good old fashon way lots of killer boost, aprox 2.5 bar and raise the redline to 9000RPM! But for street cars if you gave an Evo RS aprox 550hp (and a HD cluch) it would hit the 10's with it's stock weight. (yes the drivetrain can handle it) That "ricer" that thought that FWD is better than RWD is just an ignorent Newbee wannabe tuner don't mind him, he does not represent us. Make no mistake the ONLY thing better than RWD is AWD, and even that depends on the situation.

Jared_80

12-04-2003, 10:27 AM

VVTI is great, I wish they would put it on V8's, but their is no way for the manufactures to justify it on a street car. As far as the turbos I agree, but the same goes for a larger engine, 6, 8 whatever, with more power strokes it will have a better power band. Their are people with 800hp street trim V8's that are running automatic trannys!

Here is a great newsflash for you the new Corvette ZO6 has Z-tech, which is Chevys equivlent to VVTi and V-tech. Unfortunetly they do not make the redline high enough (6500RPM I think) so it is a mere 405hp, which is nothing to be laughed at. But it still does not approch the spacific output of a Civic Si or an S2000. There are several problems with turbocharging V8s the first and most annoying is the crossflow issue which makes it hard to use a single turbo without extreamly expensive headers (the heat makes the bent downpipe expand and crack near the Y pipe). You could just install a twin turbo but then you have to deal with a whole new set of problems, especaly pipe work and the innercooler. The second issue that you face is that most V8s were not built for forced induction, hence their cooling suffers, and the blocks tend to blowout under the extreme high pressure and heat of high boost (except for speciality made blocks). This too can be fixed with water injection but since it is illigal in almost every form of racing (except drag racing) it is pure shooting in the dark to find a good system. These are the primary reasons that you don't see nearly as many turboed V8s as you see turbo 4 bangers. There are people who overcome all these chalanges and build very fast cars, but you can be assured that they know their stuff, even better than I do.

1979C10

12-04-2003, 10:45 AM

Jared_80

12-04-2003, 12:48 PM

Have you ever heard of Coates rotary valves?
Coates engineering makes heads for ford five ohs that will take the motor, stock bottom end mind you, from about 260 bhp to over 450 bhp just with their heads. You might want to check that out. They're expensive, but awesome.

Before you go pay thousands of dollars for a pair of Coates rotary heads, wait untill they are proven on the track. I read quite a bit about them when they were in the development stage and they had alot of problems with sealing the hot gasses on the powerstroke. (which they swear they fixed) I love the idea and all, and the exta power that you save in valvetrain friction alone is significant, but let professional racers try them first and if they hold up to that then I would make that investment. A good word of adveice "always let people with more money than you be the first to try the newest craze."

1979C10

12-04-2003, 01:51 PM

Last I read they were in production on their industrial diesels and motorcycle line that they're building. But I won't have the cash for those for quite some time, so we shall see how the cookie crumbles.

Boostjunky

12-05-2003, 08:17 AM

hehehehe, I blow past the rice with my old Cadillac, ahh wonders of good old American pushrod V8 torque =)

Boostjunky

12-05-2003, 08:42 AM

WRX's(227hp) are pretty quick for an everyday driver, pretty economical too, but it sure can't hold a candle to American V8's in terms of raw power, for example if you do the math and calculate the power to cubic inch ratio, and you turbo a Corvette LS6.....just like Lingenfelter does.....by the same ratio as the WRX has, the LS6 would make 633+ hp. and thats mild for what a LS6 can really do. The 750hp package Lingenfelter Corvette runs 9.50 in the 1/4(street tires!!) And it still has warrany and A/C!!

-Josh-

12-08-2003, 06:13 PM

dcatkin

12-09-2003, 02:53 PM

Wow congradulations they built a car 40 years newer that was faster! Hey let's start puttin those old cars on today's tires and see what they run for times. Or better yet let's see that lil Evo rock and roll agianst a 03 Cobra. I'm not defensive I think the evo is impressive but do you really think a 13.06 scares us?

I do believe this guy is a very wise man, he has studied the new muscle cars, and knows his stuff, and the rice against American muscle thing is way over done everywhere I do agree with this statment.

David C. Atkin
Editor
http://hp-car.com

dcatkin

12-09-2003, 03:03 PM

You must also realize that imports have been working with "4 bangers" a hell of a lot longer than domestics. And domestics have been working with V8 performance a hell of a lot longer than imports. Jared, you said earlier "what if the imports made V8's, how much horsepower could they get out of them." Well they might get them decent with their "DOHC techonolgy", but the truth of the matter is domestics have been tinkering with them a lot longer than the Japanese. Same thing with domestics, what if they put as much money into DOHC 4 cylinders- well Imports do that better. I guarantee you, if Domestic companies would have been making 4 cylinders for as long as imports have than they might be the ones putting "700-1200" street legal HP into their cars, it's the same thing with imports if they had been working with pushrod V8's. It's all about what they know..GM, Ford, Dodge- they know how to make torquey high octane V8's. Toyota, Honda, and Mitsu- they know how to make high HP quick revving 4 cylinders. And for the consumer, it all comes down to preference. There can't be to much wrong with pushrod technology, it is making a come back in the auto industry.
First let's get some facts straight, the push rod engine never went out, unless you mean in the foriegn market, but does that really matter. Enzo ferrari said before he died that the world's best designed engine was the small block chevy, and I do believe that it's a push rod engine, and we could talk about the LS1 corvette engine, whitch if I'm not mistaking is a DOHC small block chevy, and did pump out 400 HP on pump gas, some things will never go away, Chevy, Ford and Dodge still build the best engines on the planet and that will never change.

David C. Atkin
Editor
http://hp-car.com

Blue02R6

12-10-2003, 01:53 AM

and we could talk about the LS1 corvette engine, whitch if I'm not mistaking is a DOHC small block chevy, and did pump out 400 HP on pump gas, some things will never go away, Chevy, Ford and Dodge still build the best engines on the planet and that will never change.[/COLOR] [/FONT]

David C. Atkin
Editor
http://hp-car.com

Nope, the LS1 is a pushrod motor aswell.

My :2cents: on the best engine thing is that It all depends on the situation. (Personally, I think General Electric makes the best, they make turbines.) For cars, I say Pontaic made the best in the past. Now, I'd put my bets on BMW.

-Josh-

12-10-2003, 12:49 PM

First let's get some facts straight, the push rod engine never went out, unless you mean in the foriegn market, but does that really matter. Enzo ferrari said before he died that the world's best designed engine was the small block chevy, and I do believe that it's a push rod engine, and we could talk about the LS1 corvette engine, whitch if I'm not mistaking is a DOHC small block chevy, and did pump out 400 HP on pump gas, some things will never go away, Chevy, Ford and Dodge still build the best engines on the planet and that will never change.

David C. Atkin
Editor
http://hp-car.com

Jesus christ, that's not even close to what i meant. Whether you want to believe it or not, The big 3 were going to start marketing more DOHC engines for their cars. Take for instance the 3.4 lt. DOHC engine that was in the mid to late 90's Monte Carlo SS's(rated at 200 HP). And, you took me all wrong, i never said i didn't like pushrod engines..i personally never get tired of hearing the sound of a small block chevy revving up to 3500 rpm's on a warm summer evening. And the LS1 is not a DOHC engine, sounds like you need to get some facts straight before you question me. This wasn't even the subject i was trying to get at.

PWMAN

12-10-2003, 02:59 PM

3500 RPM's?

BlkCamaroSS

12-10-2003, 03:18 PM

You don't have to rev it to the redline for it to sound good, I think that's what he was getting at...

PWMAN

12-10-2003, 03:23 PM

You don't have to rev it to the redline for it to sound good, I think that's what he was getting at...

Ahh, it all makes sense now :smokin:

dcatkin

12-10-2003, 07:49 PM

dcatkin

12-10-2003, 08:02 PM

Jesus christ, that's not even close to what i meant. Whether you want to believe it or not, The big 3 were going to start marketing more DOHC engines for their cars. Take for instance the 3.4 lt. DOHC engine that was in the mid to late 90's Monte Carlo SS's(rated at 200 HP). And, you took me all wrong, i never said i didn't like pushrod engines..i personally never get tired of hearing the sound of a small block chevy revving up to 3500 rpm's on a warm summer evening. And the LS1 is not a DOHC engine, sounds like you need to get some facts straight before you question me. This wasn't even the subject i was trying to get at.

Sorry if I offended you, and yes I did get the facts a little screwed about the LS1 engine, I had a bit of confusion going, I just get a little fired about this subject, and Chevy had planed to build a Corvette with DOHC, but that's not to say one is better then the other.

Jared_80

12-11-2003, 09:45 AM

Not that I'm getting defncive, but look where you are, brainwashed enough to believe in American Muscle, just think before you speak, the ZL-1 Camaro 1969 Ran 11.50s in the quarter mile, and what about the Buick GSX stage 3 and it's 12.35 in the quarter mile, just think before you speak, I can always find American muscle that's faster. Just think were the japs the first to run a car in the quarter mile.

David C. Atkin

OK lets get one thing streight, you are comparing a purpose built dragster aginst a high proformance street car. Even at that for the price of a ZL-1 Camaro you could put a WRX or an Evo into the low 11s or high 10s on streetable tires. I am not a muscle car basher like some "ricers" but I do give credit where credit is due, the Evo rocks. And consider more than just the 1/4 mile look at breaking 60-0 in 106ft! That is faster than the 360 Modena! Cornering at .97G that is a match for most supercars! 600ft slolom at over 71.6mph, that is the fastest production car that the world has ever seen! 0-30mph in .7 seconds! I don't care how you look at it that is one amazing car and you will not find a musclecar that will match it in overall proformance except for maby the new Viper (only a few even consider that a musclecar) I am not dissing anybody but you would have to be blind not to call that impressive for the amount that it costs.

RedLightning

12-11-2003, 04:53 PM

dcatkin

12-11-2003, 06:34 PM

first off JARED the 3 MUSCLE cars you mentioned were not built for drag . they were built for road and circle track racing .
can the evo run a sustained speed of 200mph for 500 miles and stay on the track ?
no ? didnt think so ! the SUPERBIRD can !

if you want to talk factory built drag cars that laugh at the 13.06

YENKO camaro 427
330 426 MAX WEDGE
HEMI CUDA
WS 30 STAGE III 455 olds
just to name a few .

and second i live in AMERICA i belive in buying AMERICAN . and you cant beat AMERICAN IRON !!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's not forget the Calloway Corvette, Nicky Camaro, Penske Camaro, COPO Camaro, I could go on all night, but I think I'll stop now, you just can't compare that crap to good old American muscle.

David C. Atkin

Editor

http://hp-car.com

RedLightning

12-11-2003, 07:37 PM

Let's not forget the Calloway Corvette, Nicky Camaro, Penske Camaro, COPO Camaro, I could go on all night, but I think I'll stop now, you just can't compare that crap to good old American muscle.

David C. Atkin

Editor

http://hp-car.com

lets not, but lets also try to get bak on topic. I agree with u guys though.

Blue02R6

12-12-2003, 12:23 PM

I think we are kinda off the topic? (screw my first ?) i asked another one, but i cant find it, to many pages. It was about muscle car what is the translation now a days. I personaly think any car wiht 300 or more hp is a muscle car. what do u guys think?

I still hold ture to it's roots. A midsized car with a full sized car's engine. Trouble is they don't really make them now.

dcatkin

12-12-2003, 01:04 PM

I guss that all of the muscleheads are getting defensive after the Japs started to bring over their next genaration sports cars. The Evo rocks. 13.06 in the 1/4 faster than the GT500 faster than the superbird faster than the Boss 429, and it gets good fuel economy, and you can carry your friends along to watch you smoke those outdated lumps of iron. I guss that if I was brainwashed enough to believe in American iron I would be definsive too.

Not defencive, just truthfull

Allow me to introduce you to the ZL1 Camaro, it was built in 1969 and still to this day their hasen't been a more powerfull muscle car ever built. Not your EVO for certain, would you consider 2 seconds faster just a bit faster then your EVO turd, this is a Chevrolet Camaro, I do believe that is American muscle and not a jap beer can. And it puls the same on the skid pad and yet has more power, of course with the old type front suspension and steering it does understeer horriblby, but then most of the front wheel drive cars do too, so now it handels better and gets you there faster. Plus it beats you down by 2 secs in the quarter mile, it of course is not cheaper, but is 30 years old. You should do a comparison on that, how meny EVO's are sitting in a junk yard after 30 years as compared to ZL1's, whitch by the way only 50 were ever built. These were very special cars, and not everybody could afford one, but they mean much more to American history and most American car people then that damn EVO ever will. http://musclev8.freeservers.com/zl1.htm

dcatkin

12-12-2003, 01:19 PM

OK lets get one thing streight, you are comparing a purpose built dragster aginst a high proformance street car. Even at that for the price of a ZL-1 Camaro you could put a WRX or an Evo into the low 11s or high 10s on streetable tires. I am not a muscle car basher like some "ricers" but I do give credit where credit is due, the Evo rocks. And consider more than just the 1/4 mile look at breaking 60-0 in 106ft! That is faster than the 360 Modena! Cornering at .97G that is a match for most supercars! 600ft slolom at over 71.6mph, that is the fastest production car that the world has ever seen! 0-30mph in .7 seconds! I don't care how you look at it that is one amazing car and you will not find a musclecar that will match it in overall proformance except for maby the new Viper (only a few even consider that a musclecar) I am not dissing anybody but you would have to be blind not to call that impressive for the amount that it costs.

Just give it some thought, the Corvette Z06 out handels the Viper, it pulls a 1.2G rating on the skid pad or so says Road&Track

I can always find American cars to keep up with or beat the Jap stuff in every category, but what's the point, theirs no point to compare apples to oranges because you just can't get the results your looking for. As far as the slolom their is an American car that will beat those specs, but at this time I fail to remember what it's called, if I can get the name I will put it in here, but like I said it's pointless.

David C. Atkin

Editor

http://hp-car.com