Fast and Furious argument

Originally posted by PWMAN
Well, while I agree the movie was inacurate, they didn't say 70,000 under the hood they said ''you blew up a 70,000 dollar car''. You can probably atleast 20 grand tied up in the exterior, maybe 10K in the interior including the stereo. So that leaves 40 for the engine, which i don't really know but is a stand alone fuel management system really 10K dollars? If so that leaves 30 for the rest, which is easily spent. I'd say a 9 second car is more accurate. But I saw the real specs, it was pretty much a stock GS-T decked out. It had 230 WHP, which takes like a grand to do, maybe not even that. The supra really had like 600 HP though.


i am pretty sure they said $70G under the hood. It was before he raced vin diesel and the nerdy guy (i think) goes to the eclipse and lifts up the hood and says it. Was the camaro supposed to be a 8 or 9 second car? Whatever it was, the eclipse was supposedly 1 second slower.

Ok, you can buy a fully decked out chevelle for $30000. I mean PERFECT condition (you wouldn't need a ricey paint job to make it look "good"). I'm pretty in muscle cars (i ALMOST bought one instead of my integra). Stick on a fat carb and a blower and you will rock a lotta shit.

A friend of mine bought an $8000 dollar 97 Camaro Z-28 and put about $8000 into it and was running 11.1 in the 1/4 @120 mph. There you go, and 11 sec $16,000 dollar muscle car.

the eclipse they used in the movie wasn't even turbocharged in real life. They put some sort of blow off valve on it to make it sound like it was. Also they didn't say $70.000 they said it was an "$80.000 vehicle".

lol, that reminded me of something else. ok, if you are a hardcore racer, you can put a HUGE turbo with lots of lag on a car and use nitrous while building up psi. Makes your care crazy fast. Remember when u pushed the n20 button at the beginning of the race, 5 minutes later, he pushes the stage 2 n20 button. yeah, that would be after the turbo was at full spin. can we say no more engine?

This is a gay ass argument about a gay ass movie....all of you need to stop arguing about it :finger:

Originally posted by TheNotoriousMogg
This is a gay ass argument about a gay ass movie....all of you need to stop arguing about it :finger:

I agree

this is a stupid argument. i do know the answer though. $70k car, NOT whats under the hood. i am positive, if u think otherwise then just break out the DVD.


chris

hey, MY topic. :D

Originally posted by sameintheend01


Was the camaro supposed to be a 8 or 9 second car?

Ahhhhhh, Camaro?????? WTF, it's a Dodge Charger. ''9 seconds flat''

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:


oooooppppsss! I'm sooooooo sorry! All i remember was the car was black. Last time i saw the movie i didn't know my muscle cars yet. Have you seen the movie Bullit? Now that has a good car chase in it! A charger and a bullit mustang. No sound effects there!

DIE CRAIG LIEBERMAN! :devil:

i dont think that you can spend 80k on an eclipse... maybe on a benz or something but not a cheap ricer

Originally posted by audi&benz
i dont think that you can spend 80k on an eclipse... maybe on a benz or something but not a cheap ricer

I read in a magazine there was somebody that had a half a million dollars in their civic. Of course it didn't look anything like a civic, but if you can put 500,000 in a civic I'm damn sure you can do 80K on an Eclipse. You can put 40K in an engine bay, let alone the rest of the car.