probing interest: your car sucks.


Pages : [1] 2

drftk1d
04-22-2005, 02:24 PM
i was thinking about something. like how everyone talks shit about somebody else's car and what not. maybe we can have a series of threads disproving all the bullshit you could hear about your car.

like for example:
dsm's are unreliable (crankwalk, etc)
rotary's are unreliable (blown motors at 60k miles, etc)
5.0's and other mustangs are slow
LS1's use outdated technology
all j-body's are rice
all hondas are slow and ricey.

what ya'll think?

i can definitely do the rotary one for ya.

Polygon
04-22-2005, 02:26 PM
The bullshit I hear about my car would make a book.

chexmixa
04-22-2005, 02:39 PM
Lol, you want bs? Lets talk Srt-4, i have never seen more bs about the Srt-4 then any other car. So many people spreading random things around about the Srt-4. Most common on wich doesn't bother me any is that its 230 to the crank putten it at just below 200 hp to the wheels. Its actually 225-230 to the wheels.

Next one is how people are claiming the Srt-4 to be faster then the LS1. NOT TRUE i got my ass handed to me by a lightly modded LS1.

3rd is that it walks EVO's. Again not true, i went dead even with an evo to 90.

4th is that they are unreliable. Not true, dodge has had some trouble in the past with thier cars but their latest batch of cars actually run quite strong. There are allready a couple Srt-4s approaching the 100,000 mile mark and still runnen strong.

A not so common one is that mistubishi built the Srt-4 engine. Again not true, the 2.4L turbo that is in the Srt-4 was taken from the chrystler Cirrus HO wich can only be found in mexico. The only thing mistsu made that is on the Srt-4 is the turbo. Its a 15g turbo, its a variant of the 16g but doesn't have the twin blades and is a bit smaller.

Last but not least is it handles like crap. Once again you guessed it not true. The Srt-4 has maniged to pull .88g on the skid pad in stock trim. Now there is a bit of bodyroll but you can still glide the thing around corners. The only trouble it has on the course is with S turns, because of bodyroll most people tend to have thier rear slip out from underthem on an S turn.

CivRacer95
04-22-2005, 02:39 PM
The bullshit I hear about my car would make a book.

:1:

Mr. Luos
04-22-2005, 02:59 PM
dsm's are unreliable (crankwalk, etc)
I love this pic...

http://m3.digital7.com/crankwalk2.jpg

Polygon
04-22-2005, 04:53 PM
You know, chexmixa, welcome to the club. Pretty much everything you posted is what people have been saying about the old TDs. It seems that Turbo Dodges are just bound to get shit on. Only difference is that I haven't seen any positive bullshit being spread about the earlier TDs.

And Mr. Luos, that is the funniest damn thing I've seen all day! I'm saving that one for later.

dampachi
04-22-2005, 05:24 PM
really the only 'bullshit' i hear about my car is it can't handle. and..well..it can't handle. dsms are fairly unreliable. they take alot of work to keep running when they're going 12s and faster. but, the truth is..same with pretty much any car going that fast. just dsms a bit more so. pushrods out dated? fucking right they are outdated. but that doesn't mean they arent an efficient means of making big horsepower numbers. hell..big displacement is outdated..but it makes things easier to use a big motor. and theres all kindsa hell to be said about SRT-4s. Good, bad, and plain ole crazy. It's a 'new' platform..it's respectable..but "it's a neon". So you're gonna get mixed feelings on just because it has things going for it and things against it. If you're gonna diss the SRT-4..atleast say 'yeah well it's FWD'. And I think turbo dodges get alot of bad raps because in the late 80s/early 90s when turbo'd dodges were out..they weren't exactly the epitome of reliability. All you need is a few well worded negative remarks about them and then all of a sudden they suck ass. I've heard one or two horror stories about those old turbo dodges. That's about it. But that's just me.

Polygon
04-22-2005, 05:50 PM
And I think turbo dodges get alot of bad raps because in the late 80s/early 90s when turbo'd dodges were out..they weren't exactly the epitome of reliability. All you need is a few well worded negative remarks about them and then all of a sudden they suck ass. I've heard one or two horror stories about those old turbo dodges. That's about it. But that's just me.

Exactly, that is just a small taste of the bullshit people spread about these cars.

chexmixa
04-22-2005, 06:03 PM
TD = WIN

I read this article on this old TD (omni GLH-S)that SCC took to mexico to rally with and i fell in love with the thing. Tiny lil 2-door hatch with a HUGE front mount. Only problem with the car was that the Engine started to heat soak and it was getten a lil sluggish by the end of the rally. Hey at least it finished.

Omni GLH-S is my Secound favorite car from the 80s (foxbody 5.0 being my fave). 175 (or is it 180?) hp car with an excelent suspention is a win win situation to me.

TheStang00
04-22-2005, 06:25 PM
i dont even know where id begin on my car... because people that dont know anything about mustangs think all v6's are the same... well the mid 90s v6 is much much slower than the 99-04 v6. people with 140hp 4 cyl claim to have beaten cars like mine all the time, and i mean ALL the time. when fact is that i own both... and its not possible, and then you have people like burntrice/detroitmuscle just making v6ers like me look really terrible... but the thing about old ladies driven a lot of them is deffinatly true. and handling... well my car actually handles better than my brothers avenger... and he admits it to.

-Jayson-
04-22-2005, 10:59 PM
lol all the shit i hear about jbodies. Ill admit most of that is cause of ricers. Ill also admit the base model is crap. BUt the Z24 is no where near the crappy basemodel. For starters it has the 2.4L Twin Cam engine (LD9). This was built on the GM Quad 4 engine they originally designed for there race car. The LD9 has been proven to handle over 1200 HP. Stock the engine allows the car to run mid 15. It is very possible to get the car into the 12-13 second range on stock internals/suspension. The Z24 also handles much better than the base model due to its added sway bars and stiffer suspension. Add the Supercharger package to a Z24 and it will run mid 14's with everything else stock. Up the boost with a smaller pulley and a few other mods, your into the 13's. A turbo Z24 with 10 PSI of boost can run very low 13's. On stock internals. The engine is very reliable with added boost. So far ive been running with my supercharger for almost a year and have not had a single problem. Ive had the boost turned up for almost 2 months now, again no problems. Its not uncommon to get over 100k miles on these engines without any major problems. There are actually alot more powerful cavaliers out that you dont notice, cause most cavalier tuners dont rice out there cars.

The cavalier Z24 is a great tuner car, the cavalier just has a bad name because of all the crap it got from ricers.

kris
04-22-2005, 11:24 PM
Nobody talks shit on my huffy.

Thourun
04-23-2005, 12:17 AM
Nobody talks shit on my huffy.
Lol you have the one with the foam frame guard on top?

People always say the VR4 is too heavy, its not! True it does weigh a little more than a supra or 300ZX but tis the price we pay for our AWD ownage.

chexmixa
04-23-2005, 02:59 AM
Lol you have the one with the foam frame guard on top?

People always say the VR4 is too heavy, its not! True it does weigh a little more than a supra or 300ZX but tis the price we pay for our AWD ownage.

AWD is nice, A friend of mine has a SICK Vr4. Larger turbos and a whole slue of other things on there makes it fast on the striaghts. Him, my friends m3, and my friend GLI, with me in my SRT-4 we did some windy roads and the VR4 just dropped back. Either A) he can't drive for beans or B) that things a lil on the heavy side to handle some twisty ass roads.

PWRDbyUNCLEbens
04-23-2005, 10:39 AM
If anything people don't realise how fast the se-r is. Mid to Low 15's are in reach for a stock se-r. My friend just got a 2004 si, and I ran prety much neck and neck with him. I consider my car quick considering it's a 92'.

CivRacer95
04-23-2005, 02:08 PM
Nobody talks shit on my huffy.


Your Huffy blows :icon16:. L8...

Thourun
04-23-2005, 04:07 PM
Heres an article on the first gen VR4 and its handling capabilities. As you can see it bests the NSX in the road course and matches it on the skidpad. The RT/tt is different because they came with worse tires stock I think.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1990-12-motortrend.htm

drftk1d
04-24-2005, 11:44 AM
so we gonna do this or what.

seems like theres no lack of material :rofl:

Heres an article on the first gen VR4 and its handling capabilities. As you can see it bests the NSX in the road course and matches it on the skidpad. The RT/tt is different because they came with worse tires stock I think.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1990-12-motortrend.htm

the road course time difference was 0.1 seconds. thats not really "besting" the nsx. not only that but it was said that there was dust on the track that limited power. also, its known that the skidpad favors understeer and grip.

i'm fairly sure given different conditions, thje nsx would be faster on a track like that than the vr4. no offense man, but i dont see it.

evil6remlin
04-24-2005, 12:21 PM
3G eclipse. Fat, slow, underpowered, wrong wheel drive, can't handle boost.

First off, it is kinda fat weighing in at around 3000 lbs. and no one can defend the fact that its FWD.
And yes a 3000 pound vehicle with 200 hp stock is kinda underpowered for a sporty car.

Now, in stock form the v6's run mid-low 15's from factory. This is by no means a fast time but I think it puts it just behind if not the middle of the pack in terms of speed. In stock form the v6's can handle around 9-10 psi safely while the I4's can handle around 12 or so. The V6 CAN hold more boost by simply widening the piston ring gap to be more suitable for boost. This will allow up to around 15 psi with all the supporting mods in place of course.

The reason I think most people hate on 3G's is the fact they're mad at mitsu for getting rid of the turbo and AWD. So while it may take a little more work and thinking to get there, you can get some good power out of a 3G eclipse and its really not the bastard child of the DSM's that everyone makes it out to be.

Oh and before anybody else says it.

MY CAR SUCKS!! :thefinger

dampachi
04-24-2005, 12:37 PM
everything bad said about the 3G eclipse are said rightfully so. they ain't got shit going for them.

evil6remlin
04-24-2005, 12:53 PM
they ain't got shit going for them.


I tend to disagree but whatever. I wouldn't say that several 3G's with around 400 whp running high elevens ain't got shit going for them. Like I said they're not the easiest thing in the world to mod but we're steadliy getting better. Everyone is too quick to judge and say they're slow and they suck and "they ain't got shit going for them" without actually learning a little bit about them to find out they're not as bad as everyone makes them out to be. I'm starting to like everybody hating on it cause that means more dumbstruck faces for me later. But I'm not gonna change anybody's mind so fuck it.

Whumbachumba
04-24-2005, 01:47 PM
If anybody has some "shit" on a 1993 Oldsmobile ninety-eight, let me hear it so I can laugh.

dampachi
04-24-2005, 02:27 PM
I tend to disagree but whatever. I wouldn't say that several 3G's with around 400 whp running high elevens ain't got shit going for them. Like I said they're not the easiest thing in the world to mod but we're steadliy getting better. Everyone is too quick to judge and say they're slow and they suck and "they ain't got shit going for them" without actually learning a little bit about them to find out they're not as bad as everyone makes them out to be. I'm starting to like everybody hating on it cause that means more dumbstruck faces for me later. But I'm not gonna change anybody's mind so fuck it.

When I say my over 400rwhp GT mustang on drag radials will run high 11s. Nobody believes me.

Mr. Luos
04-24-2005, 02:33 PM
LS1 owners tend to catch some shit. And most of it is rightfully so. There are some dickhead F-Body owners. I know both the Mustang and the F-Body camps joke around about hating the other side, but for the most part, it is a mutual respect.
A lot of people have ragged me for 'starting out with all the power.' I laugh. Not like I haven't gained 70 RWHP with the mods I have done. Granted, it isn't slow outta the box, but I have made it much quicker than it was.
And of course the 'LS1 rules.' Those are just funny, and refering back to the fuckhead F-Body owners. There are some guys that have 4th gens and they seem to think their shit don't stink. Whatever....I love to see their faces the first time they line up with a 03/04 Cobra.

CassiesMan
04-24-2005, 03:36 PM
My car sucks becuase...well...

um...

The 2004 ///M3s motors exploded alot?

I dunno, I mean, other than the whole dickhead Bimmer owner thing, I myself have neaver really heard people talking shit on BMWs. But my first car, lets talk shit about it!

2000 Rav4. I did N-Drops from the upper RPM range, it was in two pretty big accidnets, it hopped curbs that had more height than it had ground clearence, I went flying through huge dips in it, I drove down a steep hill, bounced it off the little curl up at the body, and messed up the front bumper. I roasted its tires (by craninkg the wheels all the way over and standing on it...after doing a neutral drop form 5kish), and I bounced it off the speed limitor regularly. It just rolled past 100,000 miles. So far, all we've had to do mechanically is replace the tires and put in a new battery. It still drives fine for a cute ute Rav4, holds everything we need it to, and gets the job done. So I guess I really cant talk shit about it either. Damnit. Well, I guess it is fwd, so yeah.

GForce957
04-24-2005, 11:17 PM
Well since i have a Saturn, i hear alot of shit. Sadly most is true. But i still get pissed when people think that any wheeled vehicle (prob even unicycles) are faster than it, when its really not true. sigh...i need a better car

CivRacer95
04-24-2005, 11:20 PM
If anybody has some "shit" on a 1993 Oldsmobile ninety-eight, let me hear it so I can laugh.

They're ugly. Happy now :biggrin:




























J/K. They're really ugly :icon16:. L8...

dampachi
04-24-2005, 11:22 PM
Cassiesman has an M3???

Whumbachumba
04-24-2005, 11:49 PM
CivRacer, that wasn't what I was talking about, I was wanting to hear some "shit" about the reliability or power of it, not the looks. Everybody knows power > looks, thats why you get a shit looking car and throw in the best engine and parts that you can.

youngvr4
04-25-2005, 12:00 AM
that is the rumor with the vr4, it cant handle.

you may not see it, but hell, i'll provide more proof than thourun gave you if needed.

anyone who drives a vr4 will tell you it handles very very well. my dad who drives a c5 vette everyday even says it handles like a dream

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 12:01 AM
everything bad said about the 3G eclipse are said rightfully so. they ain't got shit going for them.

I wouldn't say that, IMO educate youself a lil on the subject rather then just talk out of your ass. A good friend of mine has a 3G 2000 eclipse GS. About 2 months ago he slapped a T3/T4 on it and it SCREAMS!! We haven't raced yet but i am pretty sure he will beat me from a roll. With his setup he is looken at 240 to the wheels. He is a lil bit heavyer and i am geared a lil better so it should be close. The engine they have in the GS and RS is the 4g64. Wich is a varient of the 4g63. Lil bit bigger bottom end but same heads. It handles boost quite well from what i have gathered and is a formidable opponite.

Not all cars must be certified by you damp in order to be fast. Every car has potential to be fast. Hell in stock form vs me i would walk all over you with your rustang but you don't see me talken Sh!t. Why? because the mustang has a whole hell of alot of potenial.

youngvr4
04-25-2005, 12:13 AM
Mitsubishi 3000gt VR4
General Information
Price: $44,600
Miles Per Gallon: 18/24 mpg
Curb Weight: 3737 lbs
Layout: Front-Engine/AWD
Transmission: 6-Speed Manual
Engine
Type: Twin-Turbo V6
Displacement: 2972 cc
Horsepower: 320 bhp @ 6000 rpm
Torque: 315 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm
Redline: 7000 rpm
Performance
0-60 mph: 5.5 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.6 sec @ 102 mph
Skidpad: .90g
Top Speed: 160 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 122 ft
Slalom Speed: 63.7 mph
Information


Acura NSX
General Information
Price: $85,000
Miles Per Gallon: 17/24 mpg
Curb Weight: 3066 lbs
Layout: Mid-Engine/RWD
Transmission: 6-Speed Manual
Engine
Type: V6
Displacement: 3179 cc
Horsepower: 290 bhp @ 7100 rpm
Torque: 224 lb-ft @ 5500 rpm
Redline: 8000 rpm
Performance
0-60 mph: 4.9 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.5 sec @ 108 mph
Skidpad: .89g
Top Speed: 168 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 123 ft
Slalom Speed: 63.0 mph
Information

dampachi
04-25-2005, 12:23 AM
I wouldn't say that, IMO educate youself a lil on the subject rather then just talk out of your ass. A good friend of mine has a 3G 2000 eclipse GS. About 2 months ago he slapped a T3/T4 on it and it SCREAMS!! We haven't raced yet but i am pretty sure he will beat me from a roll. With his setup he is looken at 240 to the wheels. He is a lil bit heavyer and i am geared a lil better so it should be close. The engine they have in the GS and RS is the 4g64. Wich is a varient of the 4g63. Lil bit bigger bottom end but same heads. It handles boost quite well from what i have gathered and is a formidable opponite.

Not all cars must be certified by you damp in order to be fast. Every car has potential to be fast. Hell in stock form vs me i would walk all over you with your rustang but you don't see me talken Sh!t. Why? because the mustang has a whole hell of alot of potenial.

chexmixa, i've gladly taken money from cocky ass SRT-4 owners who felt the same way. oh wow. that car sure does scream. a whole 240fwhp in a 3200+ pound car. Low 14s are soooo fast.

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 12:39 AM
chexmixa, i've gladly taken money from cocky ass SRT-4 owners who felt the same way. oh wow. that car sure does scream. a whole 240fwhp in a 3200+ pound car. Low 14s are soooo fast.

For you information big guy i am not stock ne more. I finally put Stage 1 on my car and it DEF feels alot dif. you wanna talk low hp in a heavy car? how much a stock gt runnen to the wheels? and how much might that weigh? can you say 14s?

dampachi
04-25-2005, 12:42 AM
For your information, buddy. You said stock. Yes, I ran 14s stock. Stock. Not with a turbo kit and other supporting mods.

dampachi
04-25-2005, 12:43 AM
I wouldn't say that, IMO educate youself a lil on the subject rather then just talk out of your ass. A good friend of mine has a 3G 2000 eclipse GS. About 2 months ago he slapped a T3/T4 on it and it SCREAMS!! We haven't raced yet but i am pretty sure he will beat me from a roll. With his setup he is looken at 240 to the wheels. He is a lil bit heavyer and i am geared a lil better so it should be close. The engine they have in the GS and RS is the 4g64. Wich is a varient of the 4g63. Lil bit bigger bottom end but same heads. It handles boost quite well from what i have gathered and is a formidable opponite.

Not all cars must be certified by you damp in order to be fast. Every car has potential to be fast. Hell in stock form vs me i would walk all over you with your rustang but you don't see me talken Sh!t. Why? because the mustang has a whole hell of alot of potenial.

Sounds like shit talking to me. :rolleyes:

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 12:46 AM
For your information, buddy. You said stock. Yes, I ran 14s stock. Stock. Not with a turbo kit and other supporting mods.

Well if you read it my way and want to get technical i said you to be stock. I think it was "you in stock form, VS Me."

Stage 1 is no turbo kit. All it is a new ECU. Lets the boost come on stronger and faster. I spike a lil higher and i only drop to 13-14 psi on redline, rather then 10-12

I wasn't talken shit just speaken the truth :)

SHUT UP YOU NAYSAYER!!! ALLWAYS NAYSAYING EVERYTHING I CREATE!

CassiesMan
04-25-2005, 10:25 AM
Cassiesman has an M3???

I wish. I was just saying that with BMWs in general, the only real bad things I've heard is that the '04 ///M3s, becuase of the compression, were blowin motors, and that the current gen 7 serries (E65/66) have had a bit of mechanical problems.

dampachi
04-25-2005, 02:02 PM
Yes, you with $1,000 worth of mods might have a better shot at beating me while stock.

-Jayson-
04-25-2005, 02:12 PM
dampachi you run 14.6 stock. Thats as fast as i was stock. And so far ive raced 4 mustang GT's all 2000+ models, and none of them could pull an inch on me. Dead even. Mustang GTs are slow. The only thing that makes a mustang GT worth buying is its aftermarket. But a stock SRT4 vs a Stock Mustang GT, ill put my money on the SRT4.

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 02:22 PM
Yes, you with $1,000 worth of mods might have a better shot at beating me while stock.

1000? try 300 man. Stage 1 costed(is that correct english? "costed") me $326. That is the only go fast mod i have as of yet. Eventually i will buy a DP and a full exhaust but until then Stage 1 is golden.

Hypsi87
04-25-2005, 02:26 PM
You guys don't know the meaning of shit talking........


Try hot rodding a Buick...

Even people who know what a GN is capable of still diss on it because it's a buick.


Oh and the handleing thing as well.. They used G-bodies in NASCAR, Trans Am, varouis SCCA events.

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 02:28 PM
You guys don't know the meaning of shit talking........


Try hot rodding a Buick...

Even people who know what a GN is capable of still diss on it because it's a buick.


Oh and the handleing thing as well.. They used G-bodies in NASCAR, Trans Am, varouis SCCA events.

I would never talk shit about a GN. I fear those things, i have seen people drive up in thier GN run a 9 sec pass and then go home cause they got kicked off the track. A daily driven 9 sec car no problem.

Polygon
04-25-2005, 02:42 PM
You guys don't know the meaning of shit talking........


Try hot rodding a Buick...

Even people who know what a GN is capable of still diss on it because it's a buick.


Oh and the handleing thing as well.. They used G-bodies in NASCAR, Trans Am, varouis SCCA events.

I know EXACTLY how you feel.

dampachi
04-25-2005, 03:24 PM
14.6 is the fastest I'll fess up to running. I've beat stage 1 SRT-4s with him at my GT logo 3 times in a row. Twice from a roll, just as he requested.

Mr. Luos
04-25-2005, 03:35 PM
My car sucks. Ever try driving a 350+ RWHP car in the snow on Nitto DR's?? :icon16:

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 04:30 PM
14.6 is the fastest I'll fess up to running. I've beat stage 1 SRT-4s with him at my GT logo 3 times in a row. Twice from a roll, just as he requested.

I find that quite hard to believe unless he was the infamous "bad driver" I don't think you gods gift to this earth when it comes to driving either so what ever. I have walked GT's Stock auto and manual alike. With Stage 1 i can finally keep up with n ls1 past 100mph.

GForce957
04-25-2005, 04:33 PM
Chex have u raced any 05 mustangs yet?

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 04:50 PM
Chex have u raced any 05 mustangs yet?

No not yet, the only 05's i have seen have been v6's and chix driven em. As soon as i race one i will be sure to post it. I personally can't wait to race a 350z. There are about 4-5 of em around where i live and they think they have the fastest cars on the planet. I can't wait to walk em and see the look on thier face as they get beat by a neon.

Mr. Luos
04-25-2005, 05:06 PM
I personally can't wait to race a 350z.
If you can hang with an LS1 car, then you should be eating up the 350Z's.

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 05:29 PM
If you can hang with an LS1 car, then you should be eating up the 350Z's.

I know i can, When i first got my car and i was stock i raced my boss a couple of times in his 6 spd 350z. I slowly pulled on him from a 40-120 roll. I am hopen to walk 350z's, just to smash thier ego's a lil bit.

drftk1d
04-25-2005, 06:29 PM
wow this thread is OFF TOPIC.

dampachi
04-25-2005, 07:18 PM
Pulling on an LS1 past 100mph ain't shit. You probably trap 99mph. And I ran that SRT-4 on a roll twice. Second gear rolls, might I add.

drftk1d
04-25-2005, 07:19 PM
Pulling on an LS1 past 100mph ain't shit. You probably trap 99mph. And I ran that SRT-4 on a roll twice. Second gear rolls, might I add.


wow this thread is OFF TOPIC.


:disappoin

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 07:37 PM
^^^^ Don't care this is a non specific forum.



Pulling on an LS1 past 100mph ain't shit. You probably trap 99mph. And I ran that SRT-4 on a roll twice. Second gear rolls, might I add.

well i have no clue what i trap at yet. I haven't been to the track with stage 1. I would hope for a 103-104 mph trap. and a secound gear pull means nothing. A stock Srt-4 with a decent driver, will pull on a mustang GT even with the best imaginable driver from a roll. Stage 1 would murder you. Only chance you would have is a low mph roll or from a stop.

Now if you were to actually put that blower on it would be another story.

dampachi
04-25-2005, 07:40 PM
Okay, you can come on down here and tell that guy I ran that I didn't actually beat his stage 1 SRT-4 because you said so. :yawn:

chexmixa
04-25-2005, 07:43 PM
Okay, you can come on down here and tell that guy I ran that I didn't actually beat his stage 1 SRT-4 because you said so. :yawn:

I don't have to, i will just say it here. Now it could be possible you wont say all the details. For example you went from 35 and went to 60 mph. Went from a roll and you honked down. You grab a half a car on jump because it take a sec for the turbo to spool. You shut down when he starts to pull and call it a kill.

dampachi
04-25-2005, 08:27 PM
from 0-100. from 30-100ish twice.

TheStang00
04-25-2005, 08:35 PM
chex, i dont see how its so hard to believe dampy. we got a 230 hp car the weighs close to 3000lbs being beaten by a 260hp car that weighs around 3300lbs, and it has better traction.

GritMaster
04-25-2005, 08:37 PM
that of course is not accounting for driver error.

Add your comment to this topic!