another race
4/28/05 | 12:39 PM
#21
Mach 1 Member
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Originally posted by DraftHorsePower@April 27, 2005, 10:06 PM
haha
i'm just trying to be realistic here. This site cracks me up sometimes... i can really see why people think that the majority of mustang owners have that "attitude" i hear so much about. As much as i love my mustangs... stock, realistically they really *aren't* the fastest things out there. 90% of my friends cars can beat my GT. Thats why i plan on supercharging my second 05 when it gets here... gotta keep up ya know
hahai'm just trying to be realistic here. This site cracks me up sometimes... i can really see why people think that the majority of mustang owners have that "attitude" i hear so much about. As much as i love my mustangs... stock, realistically they really *aren't* the fastest things out there. 90% of my friends cars can beat my GT. Thats why i plan on supercharging my second 05 when it gets here... gotta keep up ya know
4/28/05 | 01:01 PM
#22
Needs to be more Astony
Joined: October 4, 2004
Posts: 8,609
Likes: 5
From: Volo, IL
Originally posted by stang101@April 27, 2005, 7:26 PM
1987 camaro Vs. 2005 V6 what do you all think?
1987 camaro Vs. 2005 V6 what do you all think?
350 i put my money on him...
but whos car is nicer .....YOURS OF COURSE!!
I bet his mid 14 to low 15 sec car gets like 15 mpg
edit: how big of mullet does this guy have?
4/28/05 | 03:36 PM
#23
V6 Member
Joined: September 1, 2004
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
If the camaro remains stock you have a chance . ..they run the 1/4 in 14.9-15.5. Race him a let us know the results!
http://www.car-stats.com/stats/search/choosemodel.aspx
http://www.car-stats.com/stats/search/choosemodel.aspx
4/28/05 | 05:08 PM
#24
GT Member
Joined: January 12, 2005
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Looked it up under autos on MSN home page, could only go back to 1988: IROCZ 5.0L 170hp V8, 255 lp/ft torque stock, ours 210, 240lb/ft torque.
You can compare any auto three at a time, the 127hp honda kills me
and this is the better model. Whats even funnier is the difference between a grand am [ which was my previous car] and a grand am gt, hp only 140 and 170 perspectively, and they call 170hp a GT thats funny.
You can compare any auto three at a time, the 127hp honda kills me
and this is the better model. Whats even funnier is the difference between a grand am [ which was my previous car] and a grand am gt, hp only 140 and 170 perspectively, and they call 170hp a GT thats funny.
4/28/05 | 09:01 PM
#26
GT Member
Joined: February 28, 2005
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
There you go! Good Job!!!!!!!!! 
The driver has alot to do with it. I saw a 93 cobra almost beat a 87 grand national, reason he didn't was he couldn't get off the line without ripping up the tires and sliding the rear end. Saw that same Grand National get beat by a Buick Regal T type.
Heck I saw a 79 Omni 4 banger take out a 82 Eagle straight 6. :scratch: Ok a little weird, but I was driving the Omni!
Horsepower vs reaction time!
And yes we Mustang owners do have a 'tude, cause we are just like our mopar and bowtie counterparts. Competitive! Do we have the fastest, nah, just the nicest!
A guy I work with, who is a chevyman, has two friends, one with a firebird, one with a new stang gt. The one with the firebird asked how he could make his car faster than the stang, my friend said "put a for sale sign on it!" :worship:
The driver has alot to do with it. I saw a 93 cobra almost beat a 87 grand national, reason he didn't was he couldn't get off the line without ripping up the tires and sliding the rear end. Saw that same Grand National get beat by a Buick Regal T type.
Heck I saw a 79 Omni 4 banger take out a 82 Eagle straight 6. :scratch: Ok a little weird, but I was driving the Omni!
Horsepower vs reaction time!
And yes we Mustang owners do have a 'tude, cause we are just like our mopar and bowtie counterparts. Competitive! Do we have the fastest, nah, just the nicest!
A guy I work with, who is a chevyman, has two friends, one with a firebird, one with a new stang gt. The one with the firebird asked how he could make his car faster than the stang, my friend said "put a for sale sign on it!" :worship:
4/28/05 | 09:14 PM
#29
Bullitt Member
Joined: February 19, 2005
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Dont' forget the V8's of the '80s were very underpowered cars. Your V6 Mustang has appox. the same power as the top engine option for the '87 Camaro. You would probably win just because your car is new and the other is 18 years old (and tired).
Performance returned in a big way for 1987 with the return of the 5.7 (350 cid) as an option on the IROC-Z. Using the TPI system, the 5.7 was rated at 225bhp, the most horsepower in a Camaro in 13 years, and had much better driveability. While the TPI 5.7 was only available with an automatic transmission, the TPI 5.0 was now available with a five-speed manual transmission. 1987 also saw the return of the convertible body style and the demise of the four cylinder engine. The High Output 5.0 engine was dropped and a new 5.0 V8 rated at 165bhp became the standard Z28 engine. The Berlinetta model was also dropped and was replaced by an "LT" option package. Camaros fitted with a rear spoiler had their CHMSL built into the spoiler, instead of on an ugly housing on the glass.
Production:
Engines:
2.8 V6 135 bhp.
5.0 V8 165 bhp.
5.0 TPI V8 215 bhp.
IROC: 5.7 TPI V8 225 bhp.
Performance returned in a big way for 1987 with the return of the 5.7 (350 cid) as an option on the IROC-Z. Using the TPI system, the 5.7 was rated at 225bhp, the most horsepower in a Camaro in 13 years, and had much better driveability. While the TPI 5.7 was only available with an automatic transmission, the TPI 5.0 was now available with a five-speed manual transmission. 1987 also saw the return of the convertible body style and the demise of the four cylinder engine. The High Output 5.0 engine was dropped and a new 5.0 V8 rated at 165bhp became the standard Z28 engine. The Berlinetta model was also dropped and was replaced by an "LT" option package. Camaros fitted with a rear spoiler had their CHMSL built into the spoiler, instead of on an ugly housing on the glass.
Production:
Engines:
2.8 V6 135 bhp.
5.0 V8 165 bhp.
5.0 TPI V8 215 bhp.
IROC: 5.7 TPI V8 225 bhp.
4/28/05 | 09:15 PM
#30
I lust for a M24
Joined: November 6, 2004
Posts: 7,045
Likes: 4
From: Football HOF, Canton OH
Originally posted by stang101@April 28, 2005, 10:15 PM
i dont really know haha its a Z-somthing
i dont really know haha its a Z-somthing
Isn't everything Chevy a Z something. Z24, Z28, Z06, ZR1, Z71, Iroc Z... blah... blah... isn't there even a Z26? Lumina maybe?
4/29/05 | 11:21 AM
#32
Needs to be more Astony
Joined: October 4, 2004
Posts: 8,609
Likes: 5
From: Volo, IL
4/29/05 | 11:43 AM
#33
Cobra R Member
Joined: March 12, 2004
Posts: 1,560
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA
Originally posted by Knight+April 29, 2005, 11:24 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Knight @ April 29, 2005, 11:24 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-stang101@April 28, 2005, 9:23 PM
Z24 i think it was
Z24 i think it was
[/b][/quote]
Lol!
9/10/05 | 09:24 PM
#34
GTR Member
Joined: October 30, 2004
Posts: 4,989
Likes: 0
Originally posted by DraftHorsePower@April 27, 2005, 10:59 PM
no. my friend has a stock 1987 camaro and it runs 14.5 sec 1/4 miles. Far as i know thats quite a bit faster than the 05 V6.
no. my friend has a stock 1987 camaro and it runs 14.5 sec 1/4 miles. Far as i know thats quite a bit faster than the 05 V6.
9/10/05 | 09:27 PM
#35
GTR Member
Joined: October 30, 2004
Posts: 4,989
Likes: 0
Originally posted by DraftHorsePower@April 27, 2005, 10:59 PM
no. my friend has a stock 1987 camaro and it runs 14.5 sec 1/4 miles. Far as i know thats quite a bit faster than the 05 V6.
no. my friend has a stock 1987 camaro and it runs 14.5 sec 1/4 miles. Far as i know thats quite a bit faster than the 05 V6.
9/11/05 | 09:35 PM
#37
GT Member
Joined: August 22, 2005
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Aren't most of those Z-model just body kits or stickers? (except corvette and camaro). And isn't it true that stickers add extra weight that slows down a car. ?
14.5 1/4 sucks? I guess. According to that car stats website give above my '02 Elantra can do 16.7s 1/4s. Must have dynamite or a rocketship attched to the back Its hilarious that this little car is only a couple secs behind a camaro.
7 days til my GT.
-C
14.5 1/4 sucks? I guess. According to that car stats website give above my '02 Elantra can do 16.7s 1/4s. Must have dynamite or a rocketship attched to the back
Its hilarious that this little car is only a couple secs behind a camaro.7 days til my GT.
-C
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post