3kgt, intergra, or hard to find n/a mr2

[ZackKVtec]

uh oh hyde, you just crossed the line, everyone who has an sl on this board runs a high 14 even if they havent been to the track

[Thourun]

No I have an SL and Hyde was justified in what he said, they're not fast as hell but they aren't slow like alot of people think. Its obviously a drivers race in the straight line for the NA versions. Although I have heard of stock SLs running high 14s, but I know I couldnet do that!

[JekylandHyde]

Regardless of car, 16 seconds to 14 seconds is a HUGE difference.
I have no doubt that an SL can run 14s, but not in stock form.
No way. The car is just too heavy and doesn't have the power to move that muhc mass.

[PearlGT]

Originally Posted by JekylandHyde

Regardless of car, 16 seconds to 14 seconds is a HUGE difference.
I have no doubt that an SL can run 14s, but not in stock form.
No way. The car is just too heavy and doesn't have the power to move that muhc mass.

i own a base (dohc which is same as sl model) and i completely agree with you hyde, i highly doubt we can reach 14's in stock form, however with some minimal mods we've been known to dip lower than 15. Our 3000gt autos will run 16.0 - 16.5 stock as far as i know, maybe even higher, this is mostly because we can't launch nearly as well as manuals. However, manual 3000gt's have been known to run a second below the autos and some claim to have very low 15's and i believe i've seen a few slips to prove very low 15's on 3si.org

[JekylandHyde]

I could believe a mid-to-low 15 ... if only from the error of the testing done on published times.

Published times are usually an average of at least 2 runs ... so there is always one faster ~ by how much is the question.

Also you could be at a lower elevation track on a much cooler day and realy beat up on published times.

[ZackKVtec]

there is one person on this board who has run a 14.9 in their stock sl, but when you go to the track it is sooo much different than published times, the launch, the shifting, the shift point you choose, everything has to be absolutely perfect to run your best time

[Sleepr awd]

Originally Posted by PearlGT

i own a base (dohc which is same as sl model)

last time i looked it up, the base was a sohc 3.0l at160 hp...not likethe dohc sl
just curious, those were the numbersi found when i was searching for a car to buy, is the base really dohc?

[TRD2000]

do they make anything SOHC these days? well aside from their grandma cars....

ghost96gt gave a pretty good analogy about what can go wrong with RWD, but a stang is pretty extreme cause of the low down torque...

[Thourun]

The base was 222 Hp DOHC, the same engine as the SL till the 97+ modle years and then it became a crappy 164 Hp SOHC, and the SL went down to 218... It was all downhill from there for mitsubishi except the sexy new look the VR4 got for 99.

[DiscoChyme]

"The stats I read say the 1991 3000 GT SL is 0-60 in 8.5 and 1/4 mile in 16.4"

Uh, a guy with an ATX R/T ran 16.8 at the track, stock, with over 1s reaction times (i.e. bad driver). A mtx SL will run 15s stock.

According to SCC magazine, the TT/VR4 are the 63rd and 64th best sport compact cars. Civic is 2nd. Do you believe everything that is in print?

[JekylandHyde]

Do you realize that reaction time has NOTHING to do with ET?
I can sit at the light for 5 minutes and still run a 12 second pass.

As for believing things in print, I am more apt to accept a published, tested time from a reputable source as a basis for comparison of two vehicles than I am to accept the highly biased statements of over-zealous key-board jockeys that (a) are not realistic about their car's potential OR (b) highly exaggerate.

[TRD2000]

that the civic... light, high revving, quality ff

can be rated as a better SPORTS car than the GTO
sorry 3000GT- heavy, medium revving, mitsubushi(not the GSR) FF on a floppy chassis???

ummm yes

[PearlGT]

Originally Posted by TRD2000

that the civic... light, high revving, quality ff

can be rated as a better SPORTS car than the GTO
sorry 3000GT- heavy, medium revving, mitsubushi(not the GSR) FF on a floppy chassis???

ummm yes

i try not to be biased at all and i believe i am doing a pretty good job. Seeing as we've basically hijacked this guys thread to argue up such comparisons, let me send my 2 cents your way.

I believe he was comparing the vr-4/stealth tt, which i dont think your quite aware of, but it will run circles around any civic stock for stock. I agree, the 3000gt series of cars are extremely heavy compared to other sports cars out there but also pushes more power stock than many other 'sports' cars out there.

To the nay-sayers out there of the 3000gt series of cars, i must thank you, being qualified as a sleeper because my car is 'far too heavy' to beat or better a civic stock for stock is a rewarding experience which makes a victory just that much more enjoyable.

I apologize for the last statement as some may see it as biased, but i am no more biased than the mr2 owners or integra owners who have shared their views here.

as for the specifications on all three models of 3000gt

Base sohc - produced i believe in 1996 or 1997 to take over or maybe just add to the base styled 3000gt with a stock rated horsepower of around 160-165

Base dohc - produced all years with a stock rated 222hp etc etc

SL model - NOW this is where people get confused and frustrated with trying to find specs for our cars. Do you know what differences the sl model dohc engine and the base dohc engine have between them? None! that is correct, the SL dohc model and Base dohc model differed only in their interior where as the SL came with nicer seats and a better sound system along with maybe one or 2 options i believe.

3000gt vr-4 - twin turbo, awd, 320 horsepower, i feel i need to list these specifications once more as it seems some haven't taken the appropriate amount of time to read through this topic and understand that there are initially 3 different versions of the stock 3000gt engine wise.

1. Sohc - 160 horsepower
2. Dohc - 222 horsepower
3. vr-4 - 300-320 horsepower (first 2 years of vr-4 had lower stock psi i believe so that led to a small drop in horsepower in the beginning)

Also if you are trying to figure out whether somone has an sohc or dohc, ask the person to pop his hood and then you can look as you please to see whether the big letters on the motor say DOHC or SOHC

sorry for the long post, i hope i've helped some of you out

[TRD2000]

pearl GT of wisdom

sounds like the GTO (3000gt) is similar to the FTO in the way they do their lettering then... ambiguous... theres not as many different engines etc. as there are letter combinations! What you guys call a VR4 is definately not a slow car.

sorry for goign so off topic, we weren't even meant to be discussing the turbo thing!

[Sleepr awd]

Originally Posted by TRD2000

do they make anything SOHC these days? well aside from their grandma cars....

FYI all the new model eclipses are SOHC, mines a 3.0l and the other is a 2.4l i4, along w/ the Galant GTZ sebring LXi and the Stratus R/T (all top of the line cars of their names)
WHY THEY DID THIS?! i don't know, i wish they had given me dohc instead just because of the hp advantage i could be running 15.3 instead of 15.7

i'm still contemplating the benefits of putting the SL engine into my car after i blow this one (or just as a temp while i rebuild and boost it)