Cars that you wouldn't think were fast.

  • Thread starter Thread starter SpeedKrazy620
  • 81 comments
  • 11,989 views
Vauxhall Carlton GSi 3000:

carlton5.jpg
 
Originally posted by Night_Drifter
11 second, hummm how old are you, and a stock probe with 50 shot NOS, are you serious, and about the 11 second FD, how come i never heard of it, and where's the proof of your car's video, dont say things that arent true and cant back it up. I'm not hating on you, but i just want to see some proof that your FD really hits 11, because i know it takes more than 20 thousand to make it 11 second. There was a CRX with a B18 engine, they spend about $55 G's in it, and it only runs high 11 with NOS. The CRX was strip also and plus the Engine was heavily Modified. It was from a shop also. Do anyone still believes that this guy got a 11 second FD?
Click to expand...
I'm 22, you never "heard of it" because I don't brag. My proof is that half the people in this town seen it at the track. I would put up slips, but being's it was a little over two years ago, my slips are long gone.

Saying it takes 20g to hit 11's in an FD shows me exactly what you "know". You know about as much as my 8yr old niece. There are FD's with the STOCK turbo's running low 11's - high 10's.

Here's a picture of my title I sent to the new owner when the car was sold. Let me know if you want a picture of my license too. :lol:
 

Attachments

  • brian_title.jpg
    brian_title.jpg
    35.8 KB · Views: 152
all of those GM cars with the supercharged 3800's in them,
Lincoln mark VIII's,
turbo Saab's,
turbo Dodge omnis,
Shelby Dodge spriits,
LT1 powered Caprices (mainly ex cop cars),
GMC Typhoons,

thats all of the cars i can think of.
 
Originally posted by Monster7
I'm 22, you never "heard of it" because I don't brag. My proof is that half the people in this town seen it at the track. I would put up slips, but being's it was a little over two years ago, my slips are long gone.

Saying it takes 20g to hit 11's in an FD shows me exactly what you "know". You know about as much as my 8yr old niece. There are FD's with the STOCK turbo's running low 11's - high 10's.

Here's a picture of my title I sent to the new owner when the car was sold. Let me know if you want a picture of my license too. :lol:
Click to expand...


Well my bad, i wasnt here when you posted on alright, well i guess i hear a lot about Hondas and Nissan, but i havent heard a lot about RX-7. So your 8yr old niece know a lot about cars too, wow thats good for her then, isnt that special hehehe well im not trying to hate on you ok, i was just wondering if its true or not, becuase if you havent seen me and i was saying i got a 11 second car, you would ask me the same to show proof and i would say the samething like you said to me too, hahaha its all good, i ask some of the older user in Gtplanet and they said you do have it, so its all good then. and no thanks i dont want ur license pics, its all good dude:)
 
Originally posted by ShobThaBob
You know drifter dude, I coulda sworn the the lincoln mark 8 had a 32valve cobra engine in it (4.6).
Click to expand...

It did (though 'Cobra engine' is probably a crap term for it since it was first used in the Lincoln Town Car about a zillion years ago), and he isn't saying it didn't. His list is in order and probably ought to be numbered; 1 is the supercharged 3800 GM cars and 2 is the Lincoln.

I don't understand why everybody thinks 'all' Supercharged 3.8L GM cars are fast. The Buick Regal GS, with a 240bhp supercharged 3.8L goes 0-60 in 6.9 seconds, which is no faster than a Grand Cherokee Overland or Subaru Outback 3.0 sedan. GM realised the engine wasn't good enough for the Bonneville and cancelled it, replacing it with a V8. The Grand Prix GTP is the only vehicle where that engine really shines.

I also heard the Nissan Quest runs like 15 flat with its engine that produce around 260hp but rated at 240hp.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you still believe this. There's several problems with you saying this:

1. Nobody under-rates power on minivans. 240 is the class high, and if they had more, they'd claim more.
2. The engine it uses has never produced more than 240bhp, even on the sporty Altima, Maxima, and G35, so why would it get extra power on a minivan?
3. The 2004 Quest's weight-to-power is 16.717. It weighs 4012lbs - more than two tons in its most basic form. Even with 260bhp, its weight-to-power is higher than all but three V6 family sedans.

If you still believe it runs the quarter-mile in 15.0 seconds, then logic defies you and I must ask: what speed does it start at?
 
Originally posted by MazKid

Also a car to add to the list, the 3rd gen(1988-1992) 626/MX-6 GT. 2.2L I4 Turbo, 0-60 in around 7.4 secs. My bro's(when it was driveable, before he cracked 2 pistons) MX-6 ran 13.8 at like 98mph, and it was still a daily driver and looks stock. Peels the tires off the car in the middle of 2nd, hehe.
Click to expand...

How far are the newer MX-6's (1993-1997) to the (1988-1992) in terms of performance. I know that the newer ones had not turbo, and 164 horses in the 5 spd manual (160 in 1996) But overall dont the 2 cars compare pretty close??
 
Originally posted by M5Power



I don't know why you still believe this. There's several problems with you saying this:

1. Nobody under-rates power on minivans. 240 is the class high, and if they had more, they'd claim more.
2. The engine it uses has never produced more than 240bhp, even on the sporty Altima, Maxima, and G35, so why would it get extra power on a minivan?
3. The 2004 Quest's weight-to-power is 16.717. It weighs 4012lbs - more than two tons in its most basic form. Even with 260bhp, its weight-to-power is higher than all but three V6 family sedans.

If you still believe it runs the quarter-mile in 15.0 seconds, then logic defies you and I must ask: what speed does it start at?
Click to expand...

The maxima (new one 2004 model) use a 260hp engine, and so i have heard that the Quest has the same 260hp engine. It might not be low 15s but i have heard like around low to mid 15s. Im not sure if its true i dont have any proof but i dont know. I might be wrong. Your probably right since you know alot :)
 
I'm trying to think of some quick, but affordable V6's. There are a ton of fast 4 cylinder cars out there but few fast V6's. The only nice ones I could think of is Ford Contour SVT, Ford Probe 24V and Mustang. Either my mind is going blank or there really isn't many nice V6's out there.:odd:
 
Originally posted by Firebird
I must also bring up turbocharged FWD Mopars. Granted they're modified, but it's still funny as hell to see this video.

:lol:
Click to expand...


That video is retarted. It's a freaking trailered drag car vs. a SLIGHTY modified daily driven Supra. That Supra ran a 12.14. That POS k-car ran a 10.53 That would be like me racing my Dad in his BMW back when I had a 420+hp WS6.


BTW- All of the cars named in this thread are like 15-18 second cars. I wouldn't consider those fast unless my car was an Excursion.
 
Originally posted by hanker
How far are the newer MX-6's (1993-1997) to the (1988-1992) in terms of performance. I know that the newer ones had not turbo, and 164 horses in the 5 spd manual (160 in 1996) But overall dont the 2 cars compare pretty close??
Click to expand...

Well, the 1st gen MX-6 GT was rated at 145hp and something like 170 ft lbs, but many dynoed stock with around 175hp and over 200 ft lbs.

Ofcourse though, you have some turbo lag with that, while the KL-V6 was one of Mazdas great all around engines. The 1st gens feel faster than the 2nd gens, but that could be because of the suspension, the 1st gens was a fair amount softer than the 2nd gens.

They both pin you against the seat though. :)

Ohh, and the 2nd gen automatic ones ran something like 2.5 secs slower in the quarter. Yikes!
 
Buick Grand National and the Conquest/Starion. Great cars out of the box, and when modefied, move to the side of the road:D
 
Originally posted by rollazn
The maxima (new one 2004 model) use a 260hp engine, and so i have heard that the Quest has the same 260hp engine.
Click to expand...


It does have the same engine as the Maxima, but check that - other Nissan products using that 3.5L engine are the 350Z (287bhp, the engine's actual high, not 245 as I said), the Altima (245bhp), the Maxima, (265bhp), the Murano (245bhp), the Pathfinder (240bhp), the Quest, the Infiniti FX (280bhp), the Infiniti G35 (260/280bhp), and the Infiniti I35 (255bhp). In fact, with the exception of two Infinitis and five Nissans, the engine is range-wide, and it's rated all over the place on power, from 240 to 287 - meaning that though the engine is the same as the one in the Maxima, I'd take Nissan's word for it on power in the Quest.
 
Originally posted by TS1AWD
Buick Grand National and the Conquest/Starion. Great cars out of the box, and when modefied, move to the side of the road:D
Click to expand...
the Grand National will destroy ALOT of cars. too bad they put it in a ugly body...
put that engine in a 510... and ull be racing bikes
v6 turbo all aluminum baby :cool:

& hell yea the svt contour is a sweet ride too, i have 1
:D
 
Originally posted by Josh
That video is retarted. It's a freaking trailered drag car vs. a SLIGHTY modified daily driven Supra. That Supra ran a 12.14. That POS k-car ran a 10.53. That would be like me racing my Dad in his BMW back when I had a 420+hp WS6.
Click to expand...

Unbunch your panties and take it for what it is: a POS 1985 Plymouth Reliant that just happens to be modified to the point that it easily outruns a "slightly modified Supra".

Just imagine the look on the Supra driver's face when that little box went flying by, and then tell me in all honesty that that doesn't seem the least bit humourous.
 
hey! I Just got my new car!! (i'm only 17) and its a 94 Volvo 850 turbo, and its pretty quick! I picked it up for only $8000 cnd, minus the 6 grand I sold the ol' wagon for, so not bad, and this thing moves! it does from 0-60 in about 7 sec flat..its great!! so it surprises alot of people at the lights!:D
 
It "easily" outruns the Supra, because it has an obscene ammount of money into it.

And it is humorous... Meh, not really.
Originally posted by Firebird
a POS 1985 Plymouth Reliant that just happens to be modified to the point that it easily outruns a "slightly modified Supra".

Just imagine the look on the Supra driver's face when that little box went flying by, and then tell me in all honesty that that doesn't seem the least bit humourous.
Click to expand...
 
Id rather have the Supra, im a toyota guy :) Now just spend the amount of money put into that Plymouth into the Supra and see which is better then ;) One was made to be fast the other wasnt so in the long run the Supra is the ****naz hah
 
Originally posted by Firebird
Unbunch your panties and take it for what it is: a POS 1985 Plymouth Reliant that just happens to be modified to the point that it easily outruns a "slightly modified Supra".

Just imagine the look on the Supra driver's face when that little box went flying by, and then tell me in all honesty that that doesn't seem the least bit humourous.
Click to expand...


:rolleyes:
I am taking it for what it is. It's a retarted ass video of a drag car racing a daily driver. People always laugh at the Supra, but fail to realize it only has a few modifications done to it, whereas the piece has a ton done to it.


Actually, no, I don't find it humorous. I might if there was a story of the Supra owner talking **** about the Dodge beforehand, and about how he could beat it, but there isn't. It's just two cars chosen randomly to race at a track.
 
That video was not retarded. My first reaction was "HOLY S***!". But i've seen many videos like that. If anyone has kazaa, search for dodge neon vs dodge viper. Now that will make you mess your pants.
 

Latest Posts

Back