|
| Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | Air Dried Beef Dog Food | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
|
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Camaro 3.4 vs. Prelude Si | |||
| The CAMARO!! |
|
9 | 50.00% |
| The Prelude |
|
9 | 50.00% |
| Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
Show Printable Version | Email this Page |
Subscribe to this Thread
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#16 | |
|
AF Newbie
![]() Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: winston salem, North Carolina
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Well, actually, ive done this race before, lol. I have an a/t 94 v6 3.4, and my buddy owns a 95 h23 prelude with m/t. We raced and he whooped my butt by about 2 1/2 car lenght doing a 1/4 mile. Hes got a stock car. ive got a whole catback dual exhaust system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
AF Enthusiast
Thread starter
|
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
The Prelude doesn't have a V-TEC. They didn't have the V-TEC in 1992. In 93 they came out with the vtec on the h22. The h23 doesn't have the v-tec b/c it is a bigger engine. They basically phased out the h23 and replaced it with the h22 v-tec. But this is all FYI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
AF Fanatic
![]() |
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
VTEC doesn't suck, it actually does help. A lot of my friends who are mechanics and love domestic cars only even admit that VTEC is great technology that they'd like to have in their American engine. Imagine a V8 engine with Variable valve timing, that would be awesome.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
AF Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: tallassee, Alabama
Posts: 43
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
azn3000GTRacer , Your a loser.. It was never meant to be a sports car. so dont "TRY" make it one.. F AND F has every one confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
AF Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: tallassee, Alabama
Posts: 43
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
also... who gives a fuck about a V6 camaro... and if you want the best demestic engine you get a LS1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 | |
|
AF Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Lancaster, Pennsylvania
Posts: 22
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
VTEC is great, if you think it doesn't do anything for those little 4-bangers, think again, thats why those things can keep up with you. Just go to www.howstuffworks.com, type in Variable Valve timing. All the major domestic builders are getting into VVT, helps create the power you need in your max power RPM band. Major upgrade from pushrod technology which domestics have been using since the 60s... and earlier.
-The 3.4 is 160hp with 200lbs of Torque weighing in at 3247lbs -The 3.8 is 200hp with 225lbs of Torque weighing in at 3323lbs -The pre-VTEC (VVT) Prelude is around 160hp with 156lbs of Torque weighing in at 2987lbs -The VTEC (VVT) Prelude is around 195hp with 156lbs of Torque weighing in at 3042lbs So from the HP torque and weight, and considering you had equal drivers i'd say the Camaro V6 3.4 and the Pre-VTEC lude would give eachother a race while the Camaro V6 3800 and the VTEC lude would give eachother a race. Both the 3800 and the 2.2liter VTEC would be able to beat the 3.4 and the 2.3 pre-vtec. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 | |
|
AF Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: navarre, Florida
Posts: 48
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
i had a 93 grand prix se with the 3.4. and i took a few preludes in that pos...not sure if they were vtech or not because i was never behind them to see the vtech decal. ofcourse i had my behind stomped by quite a few lil import cars during the year i had that car. but i would have to agree with maxcamero on what the outcomes would be. i also raced a new 2000 camero with the 3.8 and he owned my 3.4 with ease.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 | ||
|
AF Regular
![]() Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Mt.Pleasant, Iowa
Posts: 384
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
Quote:
LOL whoa whoa whoa who said anything bout FandF. Honda tuning was around more than a decade before that movie ever came out. And yes lol and if u say the prelude wasent ment for perforamance then ur just jewing ur self cause one these days u gonna come across a civic or a lude and thier gonna rip u a new hole. Cause a car that wasent ment for performance beats a perforamance car, lol that's just funny to think about. "VTEC" what's that then? that's strictly for performance. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#24 | |
|
AF Enthusiast
![]() |
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
a stock 3.4L no.. being the Camaro enthusiest that i am would even say that. But a Prelude against my 93 3.4L, and the Honda would be eatin the dust for a week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 | |
|
AF Fanatic
![]() Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Alexandria, Virginia
Posts: 7,134
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
hmmm, what mods to make hondas fast, turbo? springs? tires? nitrous? cams? hmmmm, so to make the playing feild fair.....
even using a weak sixer camaro, lets turbocharge it, put performance tires and springs on it, a nitrous system, aftemarket cams, and then put it up against your VTEC honda. and see who wins. i love how honda guys talk like we cant modify camaros either. geeze fast is fast, ill respect anyone who is faster than me. unless they are super rice, or dicks about it. simple as that.
__________________
Chevrolet Camaro - I enjoy beating the hell out of people http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=68052 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 | |
|
AF Enthusiast
|
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
2 things... 1, Turbocharged sixer f-body that kicks major ass, the Turo GTA... and import guys think that american muscle is v8 vs. import tech Turbo, ummm, I do believe the 3.8 Turbo monster was there first, or at the same time, but did it better, still does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#27 | |
|
AF Fanatic
![]() Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: fredericksburg, Virginia
Posts: 3,262
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
two words...grand national
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 | |
|
AF Enthusiast
|
Re: Camaro vs. Prelude
Zactly!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|