2 days in and i already have a list - FirebirdV6.com/CamaroV6.com Message Board

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2 days in and i already have a list

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by odw777:
    I am basing this on real world experience.
    would you like a cookie?
    It\'s a beautiful life<br /><a href=\"http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2035163\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2035163</a>

    Comment


    • #17
      Well there are more credible sources than magazines. Check out other forums, you'll get a better idea about stock times from there than any magazine article.

      Also, why not just race a car for the hell of it? Its an addreniline(sp?) rush for sure still. When I had my 3.4, I would race GTs and 5.0s. To my suprise, I hung side by side with a M5 5.0 till about 80/85, then he started pulling. You never know until you've tried.
      Black \'94 Trans Am A4- SLP CAI & Loudmouth<br />Red \'93 Firebird A4- Ram Air under the WS6 hood, !cat, exhaust.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by odw777:
        I am basing this on real world experience. I raced against cavaliers and based my view of them from that.

        Magazine numbers are a good way to judge a car's performance. I mean the car (or often a group of cars)is driven by a professional driver numerous times and the best times are reported. If they have an auto they torque brake and find the best launch rpm.

        That's how I know roughly which cars I can or can't take, if something's significantly faster then my car then I'm not going to race it obviously.

        I'm not going to see what each car runs in real life, at least with magazine numbers you get some idea.
        Yea, but like I said before, magazine times can vary by as much as a second. It could be raining when they did the test, driver was hungover, it was really humid, ect.

        Magazines are OK to get an idea, but deffinatly not accurate. According to motortrend, a cobalt SS should run the same times as an SRT-4 (14.5). In reality, any decent driver can get a low 14 out of an SRT4, and a really good driver can get a mid 14 out of a cobalt.

        Car manufactures pay off magazines to slant their times in their favor.
        <a href=\"http://pics.projectpredator.com/thumbnails.php?album=16\" target=\"_blank\">2003 Zinc Yellow Mustang GT</a> 1 of 701<br />ET : TBD<br />But our shenanigans are cheeky and fun! Yeah, and his shenanigans are cruel and tragic. Which... makes t

        Comment


        • #19
          I was stupid like you. I just got my licence back a fter 8 and a half months. Honestly, you'll feel like a loser without youre license. Keep it on the track.
          Mystic Teal Metallic
          ET:15.1 NA 14.3@96 MPH 75 Dry Shot

          Comment


          • #20
            half of those were my friends cars, they all knew i was getting a camaro, so over the weekend we all went out to a lonely strip of road about 10 minutes from where i live, as for the racing on the road, i tend to shut down at about 60, which allows me to slow down enough for cops (i have a valentine 1 radar so im not too worried), plus all of the roads were speed limit 40 at least. i live out in the western suburbs of chicago, and my car is an auto... im going to the track the first warm day to time my car stock before i start modding. BTW any good suggestions for getting to mid 14's besides weight reduction?
            2000 Camaro 3800 A4

            Comment


            • #21
              Exhaust and Supercharger. [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/rock.gif[/img]
              sigpic
              1997 Camaro RS A4
              2006 Chevy Colorado
              2003 Kawasaki Ninja ZX6-R

              Comment


              • #22
                A long time ago my sister-in-law had a 1996 Z24...the one and only time it was ever ran at the track I drove it...16.1@84 mph...I am sure with more practice it would have ran better...and a cool down.
                2003 Lightning 12.618@112.80<br />1996 Camaro Z28 11.751@115.96 MPH soon stupid fast!<br />1999 Mustang V6 15.36@90.92 MPH<br /><br /><a href=\"http://www.geocities.com/jmaxnakron/\" target=\"_blank\">1996 Camaro Z28</a> <a href=\"http://www.geocities.com/jmaxnakron/Melissa_V6_Mustang\" target=\"_blank\">1999 Mustang V6</a> <a href=\"http://www.geocities.com/jmaxnakron/Ford_svt_lightning\" target=\"_blank\">2003 Lightning</a>

                Comment


                • #23
                  just goes to show ya... camaro &gt; mustang....

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Actually, heres a tip for you. Magazine test results are not done by professional drivers, thats unless you think columnists & writers are professional drivers....
                    Mustangs.. Come to the darkside...<br /><br />The dark side is the path to the shadow of greed. =D

                    Comment

                    Latest Topics

                    Collapse

                    There are no results that meet this criteria.

                    FORUM SPONSORS

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X