Lets slay some ricers!

[Jared_80]

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.

[Jared_80]

We are still laughing at your stupidity.




=you (potty mouth)

[Jared_80]

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????? If you would at leased come up with some theory to explein that than I might not see you as such an idiot.

[Jared_80]

Originally Posted by BlkCamaroSS

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!

[RedLightning]

http://www.pontiac.com/firebird/gall...&imageNumber=7

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ire/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]

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]

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]

http://clubs.hemmings.com/clubsites/...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/...on_numbers.asp

Now show me that "3"...

[RedLightning]

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


No answers yet.

[-Josh-]

Originally Posted by Jared_80

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]

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]

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]

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]

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....&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....&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....&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....&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....&page_number=1 2 Japanese and 1 American car(s)

[RedLightning]

Originally Posted by BlkCamaroSS

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...

02 SS according to c/d does not quite make it(1/4 mile) in 13sec more like 13.8 but, its true about the evo, (according to c/d again) more like 14. but comapared to my Maxima, thats awsome lol. dudes with mods both cars are gunna whoop @$$ they already do.