Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online!
Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! 
-
Latest | 0 Rplys
Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Racing > Street Racing
Closed Thread Show Printable Version Show Printable Version | Email this Page Email this Page | Subscription Subscribe to this Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-05-2005, 09:07 PM   #1
bcook
AF Newbie
 
bcook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tallahassee, Florida
Posts: 95
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to bcook
2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

Which would when in a race?

The MC has a 3.8L 200 hp V6, while the Intrigue has a 3.5L 215 hp V6.

Also which is more important displacement or horsepower?
bcook is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 09:28 PM   #2
del
móddə rąytər
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: idon'twantto
Posts: 3,325
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

displacement and horsepower do have a close relationship. but having more displacement doesn't always equate to more hp and vice versa. my little 1.8L 4 banger makes more horsepower than some larger V6's and V8's out there. i'd say horsepower is more important. and there are many ways to make more horsepower, more displacement is one way.

this doesn't belong in car comparisons anyway. moving.
del is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 09:46 PM   #3
ZackKVtec
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 489
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
horsepower and displacement both mean about the same as the next thing, the weight of the car... think about a lotus elyse with like 190 hp, running roughly the same 1/4 mile time as a 2003 GTO
ZackKVtec is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 09:53 PM   #4
Amish_kid
AF Enthusiast
 
Amish_kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: k, Illinois
Posts: 2,277
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

Horsepower sells cars, Torque wins races
Amish_kid is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 10:02 PM   #5
clawhammer
AF Fanatic
 
clawhammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Niles, Michigan
Posts: 4,945
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

Probably should be in the non-specific forum. I would say that it would be one close race. I can't pick a winner.
clawhammer is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 10:15 PM   #6
mixxt
AF Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: aurora, Colorado
Posts: 53
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to mixxt
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

his first question deals solely with street racing
__________________
1999 gsx
iceman cai
bbk headers
3'' turbo exhaust
16g
keep it real
mixxt is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 10:33 PM   #7
clawhammer
AF Fanatic
 
clawhammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Niles, Michigan
Posts: 4,945
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixxt
his first question deals solely with street racing
the street racing forum is about racing STORIES, not who would win threads, which car I should buy, etc. That's what the non-specific forum is for.
clawhammer is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 11:32 PM   #8
AWP9521
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Erie, Pennsylvania
Posts: 719
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

Depending on the drivers, the weight of the vehicles, and the powerband of the engines I say neck and neck. My reasons below.

Vehicle 1: (My Brother's former vehicle)
1997 Buick LeSabre Custom
Pushrod 12 Valve V6, 231 CID (3.8L) 205 HP
Engine redline 5500 RPM
Vehicle Weight 3441 pounds

Vehicle 2: (My former vehicle)
1995 Chrysler Concorde
SOHC 24 Valve V6, 215 CID (3.5L) 214 HP
Engine Redline 6500 RPM
Vehicle weight 3376 pounds

You would think the Concorde being lighter with more power would flat walk the LeSabre right? Read on.

The Buick has better low end torque due to the more displacement it's engine has, although it never would spin it's tires from a dig especially on a few dragstrip runs we made, it had enough low RPM torque to move the car rather quickly. It's torque band was also relatively smooth throughout the RPM range. If it gets a good enough jump (2 cars or more) on the Concorde off the line it wins everytime.

The Concorde although will chirp it's tires (tripping the Traction Control) on the street, it wouldn't hook on the strip unless staged on the concrete surface instead of the rubber (staging on the rubber with the Traction Control off would smoke the tires from a dead stop for the first 60 feet, with the control on it would buck like a horse! not good on the halfshafts.) and even then it would still chirp them, but the engine is peaky, it doesn't really get into it's stride until the RPM's get past 4000 and once there will pull very hard straight to redline, once underway will start to reel in the Buick. Again if the Concorde gets a good launch (as in good traction) and doesn't loose too much ground to the Buick (less than 2 cars) from a dig, it will eventually overtake the Buick and run away from it.

Both vehicles ran mid 16's at the strip within a tenth of a second on a 80 degree day, (Can't find the slips or I'd post them but both ran about 16.6x - 16.8x that day) we ran 6 times and I won 3 and he won 3. The only time at the strip where the Concorde actually did run away from the Buick just about everytime was on a cooler 50 degree where the Buick got more consistent times posting 16.6x on every run and the Concorde ran 16.2x - 16.3x.

My brother and I both mutually agreed that the cars were equal as a lot of the little street speed contests we did were won by driver reactions, sometimes I won and sometimes he did, all depended on who got the jump on who.

And before the comments come, yes the times posted are considered to be SSSSSLLLLLLOOOOOOOWWWWW by today's standards, but heck, these are large family cars, not speed demons, but really for the size they are with only V6 power to move them they really don't run too bad for option ladened family haulers.
AWP9521 is offline  
Old 04-06-2005, 06:05 AM   #9
Guywithacar
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: london
Posts: 32
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

200 hp out of a 3.8L uhgg, i think domestic designers need to lay off the jesus juice
Guywithacar is offline  
Old 04-06-2005, 10:57 AM   #10
drftk1d
boost in, apex seals out
 
drftk1d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: sv, New York
Posts: 3,543
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to drftk1d
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

intrigue is an oldsmobile. there is a model that has the same 3.8 as the monte carlo.
__________________
RX-7 TII
drftk1d is offline  
Old 04-06-2005, 11:06 AM   #11
Twizted_3KGT
AF Enthusiast
 
Twizted_3KGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Rochester, New York
Posts: 1,780
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guywithacar
200 hp out of a 3.8L uhgg, i think domestic designers need to lay off the jesus juice
Was that sarcastic? I hope so.
__________________
1997 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 - 269AWHP/290AWTQ (Mustang Dyno) - 12.616@106.74 - 1.756 60ft. - 8.06@83.59 (Best TDO4-9B Time) - Driver Mod - IPS TD04-19TL - SPEC 4+ - Wiseco Pistons - 3SX Custom Forged Rods - PMP FMIC + Much More.
Twizted_3KGT is offline  
Old 04-06-2005, 01:50 PM   #12
Guywithacar
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: london
Posts: 32
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

200 hp out of a 3.8l v6, kinda weak
Guywithacar is offline  
Old 04-06-2005, 03:57 PM   #13
drdisque
AF Enthusiast
 
drdisque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 3,476
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Send a message via AIM to drdisque
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

I have driven both of these engines so here's what I have to offer. My dad had a '97 Grand Prix GT with the 3.8 (exact same encine and chassis as the Monte Carlo) and a '01 Aurora 3.5 (same engine as the Intrigue) I felt that the Aurora was considerably faster than the Grand Prix and that on a track it would run a 15.4 or 15.5 (this was comparing to my taurus that runs 15.8) Most non SC 3.8L W-bodies run high 15's, so I feel that the Intrigue would win in a 1/4 mile race by a few tenths.
__________________
Dr. Disque -
Current cars:
2008 BMW 135i M-Sport
2011 Mazda2 Touring

Past cars:
2007 Mazda 6S 5-door MT
1999 Ford Taurus SE Duratec
drdisque is offline  
Old 04-06-2005, 05:18 PM   #14
RedLightning
AF Enthusiast
 
RedLightning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,385
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: 2000 Monte Carlo SS VS. 2000 Intrigue

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZackKVtec
2003 GTO

Just fyi there was no GTO in 03...It came back in 04.
__________________
1993 F-150 Lightning
Mods-March UD pullies, Ltngdrvr CAI, Flowmasters, E-fans, and Eibach / Bell-Tech Drop Kit in the garage.
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2149061/1
Quote:
Originally Posted by KustmAce
Real emo kids kill themselves.
RedLightning is offline  
Old 04-06-2005, 07:26 PM   #15
ZackKVtec
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 489
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
my b, i was just hoping not to say the 400 hp one and then get flamed...
ZackKVtec is offline  
 
Closed Thread

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD

Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Racing > Street Racing

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:03 PM.

Community Participation Guidelines | How to use your User Control Panel

Powered by: vBulletin | Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
 
 
no new posts