# 180 MPH on the HW



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

Superbike doing 180 MPH on the highway. Hold on to your panties!!!  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





It???s a 9.36mb video



http://www.linienmc.dk/mc-uheld/173mph%20R1.mpg


----------



## supertech (Jun 6, 2004)

Damn ......Thats insane.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 6, 2004)

I would love to have an R1, but the Busa's have been hitting over 220 so an R1 for all out speed is not impressive by comparison. Bikes have horrible aero, the most impressive thing about them is how quick they are from zero up. An R1 with a capable rider could pull about a 10 flat quarter @ 148 or thereabouts, but for having nearly 1HP per 2 pounds, it does not have great top end compared to a car.

Plenty of Busa vids out there, turbo and non-turbo.


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 6, 2004)

oops poop in pants poor guy - actually a guy in nevada said speed gives guys wood true????


----------



## Mudge (Jun 6, 2004)

I've done 150 in a car a couple years back and I got no wood. If speed makes him horny thats interesting, for me I just get nervous about "what if." I prefer to keep it on the track, I wont do high rates of speed on public roads any longer.

Interstates are great for that stuff though, loooooong straights. 280 freeway here is also very good. I used to get to work 35 miles away in 18/19 minutes doing 130 MPH on the clean parts of the freeway @ 3:30 AM in a beat suspension 69 Firebird 400.


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 6, 2004)

i was talkin to guys about 18 to 20 when it came up kids that were racing bikes a couple said every damn time...


----------



## Mudge (Jun 6, 2004)

Hmm, well circulation can be cut off in that area so I'd have to guess its a little mental and a little of the simple stimulation. I have wondered if that is one reason women love bikes so much, they are known to be "pussy magnets."


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

I get no wood either lol, speed for me is a scary feeling in a good way. It???s almost like my first rollercoaster ride; I felt like shiting myself but wanted to do it all over again. I don???t get on the gas on public streets, only race on the track. I have been tempted when some people try to get my attention at a stop light but never gone further than teasing them by letting my engine roar.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Busa's have been hitting over 220


Yup, proof is here

http://www.mccallcolors.com/video/busa.wmv


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 6, 2004)

THIS IS WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT LADIES AND GENTS !!!!!

04' BUSA


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 6, 2004)

oh and people have hit 250 on a BUSA !!!!! someone is building a BUSA to hit 275, coming soon.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> oh and people have hit 250 on a BUSA !!!!!


Yeah I???ve read, trying to find a video on that now


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 6, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> THIS IS WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT LADIES AND GENTS !!!!!
> 
> 04' BUSA



aka crotch rocket.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 6, 2004)

Busa is a pigs bike IMO, I like sporty and quick, not straight liners. It used to be more than 100 pounds over a GSXR 1k, making it over 500 pounds.

I love speed, but cornering fast is more important to me than salt flat speed.

Kata, have you seen the turbo busa clip?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

I saw this one on the turbo busa



22.11 mb

http://www.robry.org/~robry/elite/turbobusa.wmv


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

Busa Turbo 2 
499 HP
12.16MB
http://www.calculatedrisk.ca/clips/net3/gr_2_busa_turbo.wmv


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 6, 2004)

thats a one stripped down BUSA, its a lot lighter now, but also a lot uglier !!

ill take a stock BUSA, smoke any production car in the world !!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 6, 2004)

DP!

edited by bigballaga


----------



## BigKev75 (Jun 6, 2004)

nuts!!!!! 174 on a bike around turns then 220. nuts, Ive done 145 in a car in mild traffic.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

All I know is that???s some insane power for a streetable bike. But I do agree that for a bike having almost as much HP as the bikes weight it???s not nearly as impressive as a car.


----------



## BUSTINOUT (Jun 6, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> oh and people have hit 250 on a BUSA !!!!! someone is building a BUSA to hit 275, coming soon.


Cool, that should cull the gene pool nicely. lol


----------



## Michael D (Jun 6, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> ill take a stock BUSA, smoke any production car in the world !!!!!!!!!!!!!


 Go ahead and retract that statement.  The Enzo will wax a stock busa.  And that isn't even the fastest production car.

 I read that bikes are as aerodynamic as full size pickups.  Porportionally of course.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

Michael D said:
			
		

> Go ahead and retract that statement. The Enzo will wax a stock busa. And that isn't even the fastest production car.
> 
> I read that bikes are as aerodynamic as full size pickups. Porportionally of course.


 





lol true, but what are the chances of you racing an Enzo Ferrari. Shiat your chances of seen one on the streets are from extremely slim to none. I saw a clip on a Supercharged Viper take a stock busa; Viper won the race but hey, the busa was right on his tail. 


2003 Enzo Ferrai: $600,000 or so and all have been sold

2003 Suzuki Hayabusa: about $12,000 off of ebay


----------



## Mudge (Jun 6, 2004)

A busa with the right rider will run in the 9s, it will take a car much better than an off the shelf Ferrari to keep up with a bike like that.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 6, 2004)

BUSTINOUT said:
			
		

> Cool, that should cull the gene pool nicely. lol


My biker buddy in GA was telling me of a guy that launched himself off an overpass on one.


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 6, 2004)

Please God do not let my son get interested in these bikes.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> My biker buddy in GA was telling me of a guy that launched himself off an overpass on one.


Yeah there are a lot of horror stories out there. I personally had a computer aided drafting teacher who was involved in a motorcycle accident. He survived, but he is now in a nursing home can???t move an inch and with the mind of a 5 year old.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 6, 2004)

And thats after being in a coma for over a year


----------



## Randy (Jun 7, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> THIS IS WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT LADIES AND GENTS !!!!!
> 
> 04' BUSA


 
This will be waiting for Balla if he gets one of these 




http://www.casketsource.com/sheffield.jpg


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 7, 2004)

u r too funny but let's hope WRONG


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

Bikes are cool, but you wont see me doing wheelies @ 140 MPH on the freeway. You meet too many people with half the meat left on one side of their body to want to be an idiot like that, or so I'd hope.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 7, 2004)

Michael D said:
			
		

> Go ahead and retract that statement. The Enzo will wax a stock busa. And that isn't even the fastest production car.
> 
> 
> I read that bikes are as aerodynamic as full size pickups. Porportionally of course.


WRONG

AN ENZO or any other stock production car CAN NOT !!!!!!!!! even touch a BUSA

I like to deal in facts.

Fact is the BUSA has a much better power to weight ratio than your car. That means with decent traction, gearing and correct riding it WILL BEAT YOUR CAR BADDLY.

AND THIS IS FOR ALL THE LETS SAY LESS EDUCATED PEOPLE WHO THINK A CAR CAN BEAT A BUSA !!!!! 

this is a *900 HORSEPOWER VIPER* (which is much faster than an ENZO) thats gets its ass handed to it in the latter part of the video by injected BUSA and STOCK Busa !!!!

http://www.scottspangle.com/videos/VIPER2.wmv

ENJOY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

I though the Enzo was a low 10s car. Guess I wrong and all you???re paying for it???s the name???


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

Ok, so we know now that if you can afford a 900 HP Viper you can keep up with most bikes   I'd build up something cheaper than a Viper, but you'll spend a lot more than 10 or 15 grand.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 7, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I though the Enzo was a low 10s car. Guess I wrong and all you???re paying for it???s the name???


enzo is a great car, definitely worth every penny if you can afford 500grand for a car.  it is after all the best ferrari every built and is definitely the fastest.  BUT, speed wise nothing can touch a BUSA !!!

check out this 04 Limited Edition BUSA on EBAY 
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=2480608110&category=50030


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

can't beat bikes for the money, thats for sure


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 7, 2004)

yea !  for *US $9,895.00* you can have a bike that will annihilate everything on the road !!

i wish i had 10grand sitting around, i would definitely pick up this bike.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

Kata, even an R1 will hit bottom 10s. Look at the peice of crap SV650 budget bike, buy one used for $2800 and it hits 11.85 stock. A busa with a rider who is not overweight and knows how to ride will run 9s no questions asked, so still its a serious challenge for any car to keep up.

So we have a Viper making about 880 rear wheel HP that can keep up pretty well with a stock busa 

I love cars but even a slow ass bike will spank most cars, see aforementioned 60-65 RWHP SV650. The 2004 R1 will cost you about $10,700 cash, Busa is too much of a fat pig bike for me.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

400-500lbs Vs 3000-3600lbs. Not fair , lol


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 7, 2004)

the BUSA can run in the 8s !!!!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

But hey say you have a Mustang Cobra or a SS, drop $12,000 on it and I think you could get into the 8 or so car. I???m a member of a mustang forum and one of the member has a 5.0 Mustang GT running in the lows 8, and accordingly to him he spent around $12,000 on it. It all depends what your project is, you can make anything go fast. But stock by stock bikes can???t be beaten.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 7, 2004)

rockgazer69 said:
			
		

> aka crotch rocket.


We prefer the term: Sport bike.



I miss mine.....miss cranking corners...explodig out of one avory corner, only to set up and attack the next one then the next.....all seemless
Wish I could have had a cam corder mounted to me or the bike somewhere to relive the rides...
I got rid of the bike last spring...miss it, but I think it was best..I figured I used alot of my 'dummy' points riding..


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> But stock by stock bikes can???t be beaten.


It costs a lot more than that to get into the 8s brother, a LOT more. Not to mention we are talking a STOCK bike running 10s @ $10,700 brand new off the showroom floor, bottom 10s at that. We are not talking cost of the vehicle + mods.

To get a Camaro running into the deep 9s costs a lot of money because you break everything on it, the engine must be heavily rebuilt, your blower + intercooler + plumbing + fuel pumps will run you at least 5 grand (stock blower kits for the Vettes run $8k+), the rear end has to be replaced, you'll need a beefed up TH400 because the T56 and 4L60E neither stand a chance, the driveshaft will have to be replaced with something costing at least $500 because anything less wont put up to the power, slicks + spare wheels not stock tires like a bike, the list is a million miles long.

I made 411 RWHP out of $2260 and didn't have to replace the fuel system (other than my injectors obviously) or my rear end, or my transmission. You dont go very far beyond that point without it costing you a lot more money, exponentially. I did however drop $750 on $1250 shocks, $100ish on $200 springs, and some subframe connectors, STB and so on for the suspension which massively helped stability (I dont drag race). Now if you want to go drop $35k on a Cobra (I had a 97 Slobra) thats great, that + some mods will make a very fast car - but a 600 HP Slobra will still get plastered by almost any bike save the cheap entry level bikes ala SV650.

Like I said I love cars, but facts are facts. Your $50,000 or $60,000+ modded car will have a hard time keeping up with a good sport or super bike.

I have been considering a used C5 but to make it seriously fun, I'd be looking at $25,000 for a used 99/00 FRC C5 + 5-10k in engine/suspension mods, bringing me to 30/35k which is already BUDGET compared to 10k or so for a bike with nooooooooo mods spanking the living behoobies out of anything in sight. And hey, chicks dig em and the weather here is perfect for bikes 

Then I'll drop a 302/351 into my 2370 pound 240Z and have fun with that too, but it will be slower even if I hit 500+ HP. On a budget though it should toast any car in sight.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 7, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> But hey say you have a Mustang Cobra or a SS, drop $12,000 on it and I think you could get into the 8 or so car. I???m a member of a mustang forum and one of the member has a 5.0 Mustang GT running in the lows 8, and accordingly to him he spent around $12,000 on it. It all depends what your project is, you can make anything go fast. But stock by stock bikes can???t be beaten.


dude did you not the the video i posted, hahahaha

thats a *900* horsepower Viper with a supercharger, my guess would be he put atleast $80,000 into that car on top of the cost of the car itself and it STILLLLLLLL gets burned by the STOCK Busa and absolutely ANNIHILATED by like 100 car lengths by a modified BUSA !!!

cars should be raced solely against other cars, bikes against bikes !!! its like running a cheetah against a house cat.......you get the point


p.s.  i dont believe any street legal car can run in the low 8's or even really low 9's !!!!!


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 7, 2004)

Have u seen that movie, 'Torque'?
the first 10 minutes is good..the rest...can be scrapped.
The begining..the rice-boy racers dragging thru the desert and the guy comes up from behind, then pulls a wheelie thru the middle of theM" Good stuff..


----------



## Michael D (Jun 7, 2004)

Mudge, in the 1/4 yes but I was referring to top speed.  And he did say "any" production car in the world.


----------



## Michael D (Jun 7, 2004)

And Balla, you want to talk facts, show me a 'Busa that turns 216 mph in stock trim and I will retract my statements.

 Aerodynamics mean more to top speed than hp/lb fyi.


----------



## Randy (Jun 7, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Ok, so we know now that if you can afford a 900 HP Viper you can keep up with most bikes  I'd build up something cheaper than a Viper, but you'll spend a lot more than 10 or 15 grand.


You better get your own car runnin first Mudge


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

Do you think my slightly modified GT will take this


----------



## Randy (Jun 7, 2004)

I'll top that and race you with this...


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 7, 2004)

I got ya all beat! and....it's PRACTICAL!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

you're on


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 7, 2004)

don't forget to put the tassles on your bar ends!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

Mudge, I take it you don't like nitrous. Cheapes HP you can get


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 7, 2004)

there were SO many damn bikes out this past weekend...damn I miss my bike!

next toy..wheneverthat may be, will be an ATV. MAybe he new Honday 450.
Friends have the new Polaris Predator..and those things rip!

http://dunereview.com/rocksprings.htm
was here last fall..wanna go back..w/ my own toy....


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 7, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Mudge, I take it you don't like nitrous. Cheapes HP you can get


I think it is cheating


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 7, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> I think it is cheating


Yeah I lot of people this so that way. I personally I don???t think it is, if you???re racing for money and hiding it yeah it???s unfair. That???s HP in a bottle, there when you need it. If you got the internals to handle it, I don???t see anything wrong with it.


----------



## Randy (Jun 7, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> I got ya all beat! and....it's PRACTICAL!


No fair Burner, that has 4 wheels 
And you stole my bar stool dammit.


----------



## Rich46yo (Jun 7, 2004)

We call these crotch rockets "2 wheeled organ donators"..........take care........Rich


----------



## BigKev75 (Jun 7, 2004)

Rich46yo said:
			
		

> We call these crotch rockets "2 wheeled organ donators"..........take care........Rich


 My mom was a ER nurse and says that all the time.

 I know TOOOOO many people that got hurt on one


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Mudge, I take it you don't like nitrous. Cheapes HP you can get


True true, but I road race. You wont see me with 5 big ass bottles of nitrous in back 

A turbo bike would likely kill me anyway, an R1 bone stock would be good enough for a good long while. As for my car it was NA for several reasons, if I added a blower or something Ferd would be a better choice (lower compression, stronger rear end, old Fox bodies need new axles though).


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> thats a *900* horsepower Viper with a supercharger, my guess would be he put atleast $80,000 into that car on top of the cost of the car itself


Its a blower on a stock bottom end, the guy cant be that stupid. It would be tough to blow 80k into a Viper and only make that kind of power.

The Lingenspanker TT C5 though was at one point 60k to get the work done, but you are also working with less cubes and a rebuilt 6 liter block poked and stroked to 427 + the turbo/intercooler work, reprogramming yada yada.

Bang for the buck though you can't beat a bike, unless we are talking practicality of like buying things that dont fit in a backpack and driving them home


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> p.s. i dont believe any street legal car can run in the low 8's or even really low 9's !!!!!


In CA we have high 9 street legal cars passing smog, now on a pre-smog car even in CA we could easily beat that (with a lot of money and work). Now in other states? Dude they have street legal 7 second cars out there. If you dont mind the couple hundred pounds of electronics and bumpers and crap, you can do it with the money.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 7, 2004)

_It doesn´t look like 180 mph.  _


----------



## Mudge (Jun 7, 2004)

How fast have you been? Its actually somewhat slow looking especially when observed from the outside, 220 (Lingenfelter TT) looks like its crawling.

I haven't been past 150 MPH yet but its not all that fast feeling, the number itself and the reality of what COULD happen however are very real. I never went even that speed without heavy suspension mods, and the car was completely and utterly stable. However one supprise wind could easily have wiped me out if the circumstances were right, or wrong.

I'll stick to the track, where seeing even 150 is not likely, the track is wide and clean, and paremedics are at the ready just incase. I have went sideways into the dirt over 100 MPH and really you adjust to speed the more you do it, I wasn't that freaked. Now if that happened at SIR that would have been another story, I hit the dirt there too but the retaining walls I was more carefull around.

www.thunderhill.com is a nice, very safe track. Lots of run off room. Buttonwillow in SoCal is also pretty safe but speeds are FAR greater there.


----------



## Crono1000 (Jun 7, 2004)

my comp's too slow to download the movie, and I'm not familiar with any of this lingo, so I can only assume you're all talking about this:


----------



## Randy (Jun 7, 2004)

Crono....

It looks like the aero-dynamics need a bit of an adjustment on that one 
Or is that a new air bag design


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

I have never been over 110 mph. I???m not really much interested in top speed, I just put anything that will get me thru the quarter in the least amount of time. The GT supposedly max out at about 150mph stock. No way I???m able to do 150 now, I changed to 4.10 gears, but it sure throws you back into the seat from the start. That???s all I can ask for


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

I've had the speedo on my bike up to 160mph a few times. Once thru the area of South Park, Co. Long, flat, straight...
It definately keeps your mind focoused on the task at hand.
I preferred the corners....


----------



## Michael D (Jun 8, 2004)

The fastest I have been was 150 on my Ninja.  My balls started shrinking around then and/or my mind started working so I slowed down.

 My car use to top out at around 110 so that was as fast as I could go for a while.  Now I do 120 through the 1/4 which is more than the speedo reads lol.  I should be trapping around 125-128 in a couple of months


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

I was driving home rom the gym the toehr night. Two guys were waiting to pull out from a side street on sport bikes. just got them. Temp tags. been seeing a LOT of those this past month..
they were full on, newbie riders. You could tel by their lack of confidence w/ the bikes. After I turned onto the stet they were coming off, I saw them awkwardly turn right and go.
After I had passed the corner, I heard one of the geniuses slip the clutch and romp the trhottle...wondering how long before he goes down...


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

lol give the guys a brake Burner. We have all been newbies in whatever it is whe are good at now.


----------



## Michael D (Jun 8, 2004)

Yeah, it doesn't take long to build enough confidence up to do something stupid.  It feels good in a straight line but go into a curve too hot and hope noone is in the other lane.  I feel like that is common mistake newbies make.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 8, 2004)

Michael D said:
			
		

> The fastest I have been was 150 on my Ninja. My balls started shrinking around then and/or my mind started working so I slowed down.
> 
> My car use to top out at around 110 so that was as fast as I could go for a while. Now I do 120 through the 1/4 which is more than the speedo reads lol. I should be trapping around 125-128 in a couple of months


NINJA, cool name, weak bike !!!!


----------



## Mudge (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> No way I???m able to do 150 now, I changed to 4.10 gears


Gears dont change your top end unless you max out your RPM. Now in an Fbody shifting from 5th to 6th does drop top speed, because it was built to almost top out in stock form in 5th gear. So when a user shifts into 6th @ 163 (5400 RPM, not yet hitting the limiter),  they would eventually drop down to about 3400 RPM and not be able to pull anymore, putting them in the 143MPH area. If they could pull to 6k RPM in 6th they'd be doing 268, obviously not enough power to get there, nor the right tires or suspension.

I remember you having a V6, when did you get the GT?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I remember you having a V6, when did you get the GT?


  Never had a V6, always a GT


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> NINJA, cool name, weak bike !!!!


it was good in its day..andthe new Zx's are pretty sweet.
I still prefer HInday..but I really want that '03 black w/ flames R1...


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> lol give the guys a brake Burner. We have all been newbies in whatever it is whe are good at now.


I kknow...just reminecing.
(sp) Just thought it was funny that these kids were so scared to leave a corner..then drop the hammer in a corner.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

I was following the two leaders in our 8 man pack of riders a couple summers ago. We were flying up Mt. Evans. (highest paved road in N. America)
the leader was riding a Duccati 996. (swet bike) and burned the corner. Thankfully he was going 'into' the mountain, and no on coming cars were headed down. If he would have gone off the other side ofthe raod..he wouldn't have stopped until he reached the valley 800 or more feet down.
the 2nd guy in the pack, stopped to make sure his friend was ok and waved us on, which put me in the lead. Not to disappoint, I hit it. There was this sweet, straight stretch where we were able to open up to insane speeds. We passed a pack of bicyclists. (don't know about where y'all are from, but the damn bicyclists around ehre think they own the road) Ripped past them @ about 120mph..wish I could have seen the looks on their faces as a blur of machinery roared past them...


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Never had a V6, always a GT


This is my baby right here


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

snazzy. I want an 03 cobra...
gonna be a while tho..

that's Florida? Where's the swampland and gaters?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> snazzy. I want an 03 cobra...
> gonna be a while tho..
> 
> that's Florida? Where's the swampland and gaters?


03 Cobra is a BEAST 

Yup sunny Florida. lol basically Florida is built right on top of a swaps so I guess it???s everywhere


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

I wanna go to key west to scuba dive. was reading one of my diving magazines and they are calling it the scuba diving capitol of the world.
gotta go!
now..if yu'all could just get rid of al that damn humidity!


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Seems my baby was born before yours.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Never had a V6, always a GT


Oh well, there went 3 brain cells. I am not a fan of the modulars, I like the old pushrod stuff. The mods are overweight and bigger than the 460 in most dimensions. I did feel good owning a DOHC at the time though but doggon that engine was huge, and all that size with only 4.6L of go-kart pushing power.

There are plusses and minuses to the GM/Ford game, but I'd rather have a dirt cheap fox body and shoe in a 351 if I think I could beat the smog man with it (some can't ID it), or an LS1 powered C5 or Camaro if I went GM.


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Mine is in need of Eibock kit bad ...


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Oh well, there went 3 brain cells. I am not a fan of the modulars, I like the old pushrod stuff. The mods are overweight and bigger than the 460 in most dimensions. I did feel good owning a DOHC at the time though but doggon that engine was huge, and all that size with only 4.6L of go-kart pushing power.
> 
> There are plusses and minuses to the GM/Ford game, but I'd rather have a dirt cheap fox body and shoe in a 351 if I think I could beat the smog man with it (some can't ID it), or an LS1 powered C5 or Camaro if I went GM.


This day and age Mudge, you can have a rocket engine and it wouldn't do you any good. (Unless you want to race on the track) There are few places to be able go fast anymore. For me I am lucky if I can get up to 65-75 without hitting traffic. Twenty years ago I could stay up till like 2-3am and just about have the roads to myself. Not any more. And if you get lucky and find a nice open space, there is usually an officer of the law with an itchy pen finger just waiting to write you a nice ticket. I'll tell ya, the days of my racing on the streets is over. Just one ticket on your record is not worth it.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Oh well, there went 3 brain cells. I am not a fan of the modulars, I like the old pushrod stuff. The mods are overweight and bigger than the 460 in most dimensions. I did feel good owning a DOHC at the time though but doggon that engine was huge, and all that size with only 4.6L of go-kart pushing power.
> 
> There are plusses and minuses to the GM/Ford game, but I'd rather have a dirt cheap fox body and shoe in a 351 if I think I could beat the smog man with it (some can't ID it), or an LS1 powered C5 or Camaro if I went GM.


Pluses and minuses to everything, the damn mods are so damn expensive also. You can make a damn neon smoke an SS if you put work and money into it. It???s all on personal preference. You would love living down here where I live man, no need to pass smog test  

***I didn???t realize until now how many times I said damn  ***


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> This day and age Mudge, you can have a rocket engine and it wouldn't do you any good. (Unless you want to race on the track) There are few places to be able go fast anymore. For me I am lucky if I can get up to 65-75 without hitting traffic. Twenty years ago I could stay up till like 2-3am and just about have the roads to myself. Not any more. And if you get lucky and find a nice open space, there is usually an officer of the law with an itchy pen finger just waiting to write you a nice ticket. I'll tell ya, the days of my racing on the streets is over. Just one ticket on your record is not worth it.


They get you doing 150mph down the HW and forget about the ticker lol, they are not even going to ask for you license


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> They get you doing 150mph down the HW and forget about the ticker lol, they are not even going to ask for you license


Exactly...   But here, you would be very lucky if you could even have a clearing free enough to do that.  

Especially with our conjestion here, it is stupid to go that fast.  It is not just the tickets, it is putting peoples lives in danger..  I say if you want to go that fast, the track it's all about.  That's the smartest way to race.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

so...for the 30 thousand dollar question...why does two on the coast living guys drive mustangs...with...HARDTOPS!

I suffer from no coast in my state envy..and wold have to have a rag top if I were there....


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

I personally I don???t like the look of convertibles, plus thats added weight to an already heavy car.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

details...


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

The coupe is around 3241 lbs and the convertible is at about 3479. It???s my understanding that that weight is when car if fully loaded with passengers. I want to build on my car little by little, and convertibles in my opinion are just not made for racing. Not that you can???t do it, just not my preference.  The only things I have done to my car are 4.10 gears, Magnaflow cat back, Bassani off road X-Pipe and chip to make my speedometer work right with the gears. Have had it for only 6 months.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

can u get that mudule for your chip that plugs into the diagnostics port to fine tune the car?
Friend's father put that on his 2500 duramax diesel. Even tho that truck is huge and heavy..it can be programmed to put out about 500 hp with a few other mods...kinda funy to see some wanna be rice boy in an integra get its ass handed to him by this HUGE truck! 
The truck actually puts you into your seat! (did I mention it is still getting 18 mpg?!?!?!?)


----------



## Mudge (Jun 8, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> can u get that mudule for your chip that plugs into the diagnostics port to fine tune the car?


I dont believe Ford uses EEPROM. GM does on most vehicles after 1993. Normally a Ford would require a piggy back system.

www.tunercat.com
www.wotelectronics.com for my GM tuning. For the OBD II cars though you'd need LT1/LS1 edit etc


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

I thnk they do. Its called power moduel, I think?
Being a f-150 owner, I got a magazine fomr performanceproducts.com and there is something to that effect in there. Deosn't look as advanced as my friend's, but does basically the same. Plus, friend her has the f-350 diesel and I think he said he put one on.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> can u get that mudule for your chip that plugs into the diagnostics port to fine tune the car?
> Friend's father put that on his 2500 duramax diesel. Even tho that truck is huge and heavy..it can be programmed to put out about 500 hp with a few other mods...kinda funy to see some wanna be rice boy in an integra get its ass handed to him by this HUGE truck!
> The truck actually puts you into your seat! (did I mention it is still getting 18 mpg?!?!?!?)


Down the line I???m going to be adding a supercharger more than likely and wanted to have the chip already to get a good tune on the car. 


I???m always pissing off my wannabe ???fast and furious??? buddies. Don???t take me wrong there are ricers out there with the power to smoke ya but they are in the minority.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

http://proficientperformance.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=GMS-998417&Category_Code=gms_flash-tuner_ford_mustang&Store_Code=PP


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

EEPROM in Fords..... Yes, I think they do Mudge.  I always have heard of guys stating they could add a chip to increase power at various stages.  

As for convertable tops,  I would have thought they would be lighter than heavier.  Well, you learn something new everyday. I guess the motor would be the heart of the weight.

It's not the weight reason that I didn't get one.  I just think they are a pain in the ass.
At least for me, most of my driving is short distance for the most part.  I would be having to open and close that thing all the time.   Secondly,  vandals love nice new convertable tops. I think they believe that it sharpens their knives or something .   They seem to be attracted to them.  Lastly,  many of the people who I knew that had them had an assortment of problems,   They don't close right, they get stuck, parts wear out,  and the most annoying they can leak.   Not to mention that when I bought my car they were about 10grand more for a convertable believe it or not.  But that is not why I didn't get one. It was for the prior reasons.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> (did I mention it is still getting 18 mpg?!?!?!?)


18 MPG? Holly shit. My car is no where near 500hp and I get the same mpg


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Yeah, I never heard of a 500hp car getting 18mpg unless it was parked


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

It???s a diesel, may be more economical than gas. Probably thats HW driving


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> It???s a diesel, may be more economical than gas. Probably thats HW driving


Well I know someone with a Cummings Diesel Truck...with the mod chip putting him up into the high horsepower range..  I forget exactly what his MPG is, but he says it is much better than gas engines.  Not to mention that they last 3-4 times longer.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> It???s a diesel, may be more economical than gas. Probably thats HW driving


yep-
diesel. the computer was reading 18mpg..after hauling a 4k travel trailer all over the mountains of Colorado.
mucho impressive!


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

off subject, but I fail to see why humer doens't put that duramax diesel and allison tranny in the H2 so it can get great mpg..instead of the over worked gas guzzling v-8?
9mpg? @ 2.00/gallon? no thanks!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

If you can afford buying a $50,000 H2 or a $100,000 H1 I doubt gas prices are of much concern to you.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 8, 2004)

not neccesarily. Plus...the diesel would allow it to tow a LOT more toys....


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Damn,

Who stole kata's license plate?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

gimme my license plate back 
Too much time on hand huh


----------



## Monolith (Jun 8, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> This day and age Mudge, you can have a rocket engine and it wouldn't do you any good. (Unless you want to race on the track) There are few places to be able go fast anymore. For me I am lucky if I can get up to 65-75 without hitting traffic. Twenty years ago I could stay up till like 2-3am and just about have the roads to myself. Not any more. And if you get lucky and find a nice open space, there is usually an officer of the law with an itchy pen finger just waiting to write you a nice ticket. I'll tell ya, the days of my racing on the streets is over. Just one ticket on your record is not worth it.


That about sums it up.

I speed all the damn time.  On my way to and from school over the past couple years, id do 100-120 down the highway.  I wouldnt even be late, id just have this urge to floor it.  When traffic was light/nonexistent, id be doing 140 "just because."

Of course, it all finally caught up with me, and i got one ticket too many... lost my license for a month (all of this past may) and had to take a driver retraining course.  If i get one more ticket in the next year i lose the license for 12 months.


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> gimme my license plate back
> Too much time on hand huh


Yeah just bored Kata


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Monolith said:
			
		

> That about sums it up.
> 
> I speed all the damn time. On my way to and from school over the past couple years, id do 100-120 down the highway. I wouldnt even be late, id just have this urge to floor it. When traffic was light/nonexistent, id be doing 140 "just because."
> 
> Of course, it all finally caught up with me, and i got one ticket too many... lost my license for a month (all of this past may) and had to take a driver retraining course. If i get one more ticket in the next year i lose the license for 12 months.


Yep Mono... It sure doesn't take many tickets to make you realize that driving is most definately a privilege. They make sure they emphasize that point with the high cost of these tickets and drivers license suspensions. I surely have been there too


----------



## Michael D (Jun 8, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> NINJA, cool name, weak bike !!!!


 Funny you could come in here and talk smack but ignored the facts(that you like to use) about the Hayabusa getting beat by a stock production car.

 And as far as weak goes concerning my bike, compared to what?  Your 'busa?  Well in that case, the 'busa is weak and has a crappy name.  Oh yeah, compared to a Y2K.  I think my bike does damn good for as old and heavy as it is.  

 Also, I should have a car with 500 hp and should be able to get in the neighborhood of 24 mpg in a couple of months.  T56+3.42s+supercharged stock motor=mpg


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I have never been over 110 mph. I???m not really much interested in top speed, I just put anything that will get me thru the quarter in the least amount of time. The GT supposedly max out at about 150mph stock. No way I???m able to do 150 now, I changed to 4.10 gears, but it sure throws you back into the seat from the start. That???s all I can ask for


What did that run you to have it converted to 4.10 gears?
And did you get your speedometer recalibrated?

Do you know what gears they come with stock...I don't even know what mine has.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 8, 2004)

Randy I believe Stangs get 3.55? But I'm sure there are several options. GM used anything from 2.9x to 4.xx, on modern GM cars though getting even a 3.73 is a special option but GM Motive Gears does put out a 4.10 and maybe a 4.56 (other MFG do).



> I always have heard of guys stating they could add a chip to increase power at various stages.


Randy, oh geeky Randy, thats a PROM not an Electronically Eraseable Programmable Read Only Memory chip.

As for having a fast car I fully agree, I could go from blah to OHSHITTHERES50HIGHWAYPATROLBEHINDME in about 10 seconds. My car on paper was worth an 11.2-11.4 or so, but with my Koni DA stiffened up suspension there was no way I got hook in first gear, either way it hauled fat ass, but compared to a bike its still a snooze. Once again yet another reason to get a bike, you go fast and slow down in much shorter time periods and catch less attention. If I took off from stop lights like a bike I'd be pulled over right quick.

However, I'd still like to have around 500HP or so to play with, one more time, this time on a non-smog car. Having a blower with some fat bottom end torque would be monsterously bonerific, but blowers suck a bit of gas especially with my current 3.90 gearing in the R200 (Ferds have 3.90 option as well).


----------



## Mudge (Jun 8, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I personally I don???t like the look of convertibles, plus thats added weight to an already heavy car.


My Cobra was a vert, the Stangs to me look good as verts but you give up chassis rigidity and some safety. The C5 is such an improvement over the C4 (5x more torsional rigidity) that it is classified to the 170 MPH class in the Silver State without a roll cage.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> What did that run you to have it converted to 4.10 gears?
> And did you get your speedometer recalibrated?
> 
> Do you know what gears they come with stock...I don't even know what mine has.


If I???m not mistaken they where 3.37 or something around those lines. You have a manual right? Because I think autos are different. HUGE difference in the 4.10s, that was the first thing I did to it. It ran me $300 for the whole work including the gears. The mechanic that did it is a good friend of my father and gave a discount; expect to pay a bit higher than that. It???s not something you want to be messing with if you have no experience, I did not want to take that risk. Yeah I did get the speedometer fixed.


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> *I dont believe Ford uses EEPROM*. GM does on most vehicles after 1993. Normally a Ford would require a piggy back system.
> 
> www.tunercat.com
> www.wotelectronics.com for my GM tuning. For the OBD II cars though you'd need LT1/LS1 edit etc





			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> Randy, oh geeky Randy, thats a PROM not an Electronically Eraseable Programmable Read Only Memory chip.


I was just quoting your previous statement Mudge  
But you're right, I've had much more experience with eproms in the computer business  In fact I have personally erased and reprogrammed a lot of them too


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Mudge calls me a Geek,

Here is Mudge signing on to the Iron Magazine Forum after a power failure.


----------



## Michael D (Jun 8, 2004)

Talk to me if you want to permanently erase your pcms memory.  I fried a pcm a few months ago and haven't had it socketed yet.  It sucks.


----------



## Randy (Jun 8, 2004)

Here is Mudge installing the most current Computer Anti Virus Protection.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 8, 2004)

LMFAO


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Randy I believe Stangs get 3.55?


I think that???s just for the Mach 1 and the Cobra not the GT for sure


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)

New for 2005
Ford???s flagship Ford GT supercar goes on sale this summer as a 2005 model. The Ford GT concept debuted at 2002 NAIAS and the first three production models were shown at Ford???s Centennial Celebration in June 2003.
This one looks awsome  Like fords version of the Viper 

This baby is packed with 500hp


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)

2005 Mustang
Standard 4.6 litre jumps from 260 horsepower to 300


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

I would rather have this Shelby Cobra if it ever comes out


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

Damn I remember when that POS was putting out 220. Then you have the 2000+ LS1s dumping out 330 HP to the f'ing ground 

Those mod moders suck in stock form and damn I can't get over the f'ing pigish size and weight. Of course things change when you slap a blower on it


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I would rather have this Shelby Cobra if it ever comes out


Ugly, give me the kit car version (widened) any day.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> 2005 Mustang
> Standard 4.6 litre jumps from 260 horsepower to 300


I don???t like the 05 Mustang, I liked the concept but they changed a few things around that I didn???t like, specially the headlights.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I was just quoting your previous statement Mudge
> But you're right, I've had much more experience with eproms in the computer business  In fact I have personally erased and reprogrammed a lot of them too


A replaceable chip is a PROM, an EEPROM is re-flashable which is what my car had. I could reprogram it all day long, didn't have to burn a doggon thing. Now either you burn your own chips, or you get a piggy back system, and I have not really seen any cheap solutions for the Ford guys doing their own tuning.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> The mechanic that did it is a good friend of my father and gave a discount; expect to pay a bit higher than that. It???s not something you want to be messing with if you have no experience, I did not want to take that risk.


I agree, even a lot of people that get shop installed gears break them. Defintely a precision job, experience a plus. I never swapped gears, I had 3.42s on my car.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Ugly, give me the kit car version (widened) any day.


I???m sure you wont find the rear end of the car ugly, that???s all you going to be seen


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

I dont know the specs on it, but in this smog era unless its blown I likely wont be impressed. I have never owned a blown car in my life, I like natural power (go figure, coming from me!  ). Blowers and turbos bring whole other things into the ball game, high octane gas, intercooling issues, internals that must be made for that purpose, blah blah blah. I went for a budget setup on my own car, nice lumpy cam, those are the things that give me wood with cars.

Nasty sounding old fashioned power, but I'd love to have some huge ass low end torque too someday. I was on track with a kit car Cobra, 17x9 fronts 17x11 rears and around 460 HP @ 2470 pounds I believe, that thing hauled ASS. He was the only car in my group that ran around me like I was sunday driving, badass. Of course I had like 130 HP


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)

I don't like the style of that Cobra... I would rather have that new Ford GT supercar (style wise) or I've always wanted a VIPER  , but not that partial to Dodge.


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Nasty sounding old fashioned power, but I'd love to have some huge ass low end torque too someday. I was on track with a kit car Cobra, 17x9 fronts 17x11 rears and around 460 HP @ 2470 pounds I believe, that thing hauled ASS. He was the only car in my group that ran around me like I was sunday driving, badass. Of course I had like 130 HP


I agree with you there Mudge, but the times pretty much turned me away from all of that. Everytime I took my Camaro out, I felt out of place. The car was like a bullseye for the cops... They didn't seem to like the lumpy cam and 2 chamber flow masters rattling the freakin neighborhoods  I got so I felt uncomfortable driving it. Then you get the majority giving you snob looks . Some being jealous, the others just not understanding why someone would enjoy a car like that.

I feel much more comfortable driving my mustang. But I have a good 10 plus years on you Mudge. I already had all that fun when things weren't like they are now.


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)

Well I think I'm turnin in...

Nite every 1


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

Damn dude when I had my 69 one cop pulled me over because my rear lights were out, and was telling me his brother had a Camaro (I had a 69 Firebird 400) blah blah, cops here loved the thing at that time.

10 years? You're old enough to be my dad  well you have about 15 or so anyway.

Seriously I'd love to have a first gen toy again, 67/68, throw a 6 liter Vortec in there with a 6 speed (that would be my ideal setup at this time).

Viper would be bitchin, but smog + gas + the cost of a GTS would just be assinine. Sheet though 800 some HP on a stock bottom? Ouch. I dont know what headers are even legal in this friggin state. RT/10, eh, kind of dated 

Cheapy C5 would be great too, but I think its bike time for me in a few months. I'd love to hit the track in one.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

DiabloSports makes the deltachip and you can do custom tuning, they are not the only ones either. I???m not sure if we are talking about the same thing here


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Well I think I'm turnin in...
> 
> Nite every 1


I find it hard to sleep long now on m1t. I only got 5 hours of sleep earlier and I feel great. 4:02 AM right now. Will be going to the gym at 5:00AM


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I dont know the specs on it,


http://www.maximum-cars.com/Cars/Car.php?carnumber=528

From what I have heard on a TV show that???s just taking it easy on that engine, you can go way WAY higher


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 9, 2004)

THIS is what its all about ladies and gents !! CASE CLOSED, the best production car in the world.

Acceleration: 0-100 km/h (0???62 mph) 3.2 seconds
Top speed: 395+ km/h (242+ mph)
Standing quartermile: 9 seconds, end speed 235 km/h (146 mph)
Braking distance: 31 m (100???0 km/h)
Lateral g-force: 1.3 g

Engine: Supercharged V8  |  Power: 806 hp  |  Torque: 920 Nm Acceleration: 0-100 km/h: 3,2 s  |  Topspeed: 395+ km/h  |  Chassis: Carbonfibre semi-monocoque  |  Body: Carbonfibre, Kevlar Aerodynamics: 0,297 Cd  |  Weight: 1180 kg


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 9, 2004)

k time to separate the men from the boyz how many of you playaz would ride this ? for real ? if you would win your dream ride if you made 8 seconds?


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> From what I have heard on a TV show that???s just taking it easy on that engine, you can go way WAY higher


Concept is whuppin ass, but so did the Mustang concept. They stick 700 HP powerplants in concepts, that crap doesn't make it to the showroom floor 



			
				BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> THIS is what its all about ladies and gents !! CASE CLOSED, the best production car in the world.
> 
> Acceleration: 0-100 km/h (0???62 mph) 3.2 seconds


Supercharged V8, how, not really exotic   We are talking Stangs and Camaros i.e. cheap ass cars not bling blingy I'll never have one cars


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 9, 2004)

Answer the ?


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 9, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Concept is whuppin ass, but so did the Mustang concept. They stick 700 HP powerplants in concepts, that crap doesn't make it to the showroom floor
> 
> Supercharged V8, how, not really exotic  We are talking Stangs and Camaros i.e. cheap ass cars not bling blingy I'll never have one cars


that v8 puts out 805 BHP  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! at top speed of 243 mph


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 9, 2004)

i knew it you would be too afraid to get on the bull so you won't answer... I think a bull wreck would be scary but if you wreck 1 of those high speed bikes or cars do they ever find the body?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

rockgazer69 said:
			
		

> k time to separate the men from the boyz how many of you playaz would ride this ? for real ? if you would win your dream ride if you made 8 seconds?


I rode one before at a friend farm once without knowing what the heck I was doing. Definitely not as mean as the ones you see on TV, but it was still awesome.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> that v8 puts out 805 BHP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! at top speed of 243 mph


I if it is only speed we are talking about for a fraction of the price you can make any car out there faster in the ¼ then that. Sure if it is looks we are talking about here that???s something else???


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 9, 2004)

its not about 1/4

its not about 1/2

its about the Koenigsegg CCR being the fastest production car in the world

its about 242 that it can hit with beauty and grace !!!!!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Concept is whuppin ass, but so did the Mustang concept. They stick 700 HP powerplants in concepts, that crap doesn't make it to the showroom floor


That sucks. But it being a car like the Shelby that may change their minds about not performing to what everyone is expecting, or at least I would hope so.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Supercharged V8, how, not really exotic


Sounds like the muscle car of the exotic world


----------



## Michael D (Jun 9, 2004)

Really don't mean to sound like I am picking on anyone but the fastest production car that I know of is the Bugatti Veyron.  I may be wrong though.

 W16 engine @ 1001 hp,
 Top speed @ 250+mph,
 0-60 in 3 seconds,
 0-180 in 14 seconds,
 about 1 million dollars.


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 9, 2004)




----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 9, 2004)

Michael D said:
			
		

> Really don't mean to sound like I am picking on anyone but the fastest production car that I know of is the Bugatti Veyron. I may be wrong though.
> 
> W16 engine @ 1001 hp,
> Top speed @ 250+mph,
> ...


#1 this car is NOT in production 

#2 it has a huge engine fit for a john deer tracktor rather than a car

#3 the Koenigsegg CCR can do A LOT more with A LOT less price wise, engine size wise, horsepower wise and top speed wise !!!!

oh and weight wise, this very expensive 1 million dollar piece of crap will probably weight 3 times as much as the CCR if it ever goes into production.

and #4 Koenigsegg CCR top speed of 242 is documented on several occasions by the company and individual media sources as well as many top car magazines, the veyron claims are just that claims !!!!!!

and #5 Koenigsegg has better handling, maneuverability and steering than any car, including ferraris, zondas and lambroghinis.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Again a car that the majority of us will not ever see, even less own.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Made a kid look bad tonight in front of his friends. Not really a race but I was driving my g/f from work and I see this kid on an Accord at every stop light flooring it, all you could hear was his fart can and going basically nowhere. I get on his tail and at every stop light when he floors it to get ahead of everybody I stay about a car length from him all the time and give him one big smile. He wasn???t speeding either, it was on a 50 mph zone, and he was just going from a stop until he reached about 55mph and then take his foot out of the gas. Went on like that until it was time to take my turn; about 4 or 5 lights. It was fun specially seen his friend looking back at me


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Again a car that the majority of us will not ever see, even less own.


Maybe Balla will be so Kind as to send us a photo of the car at least


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Maybe Balla will be so Kind as to send us a photo of the car at least


The car looks HOT but the $1,300,000 price tag is kinda out of my reach.


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)

A more reasonable choice in my mind is the Viper...


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 9, 2004)

This would be my reasonable choice.


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2004)




----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Sounds like the muscle car of the exotic world


Koeniggsegg uses a Ferd V8, just doesn't make me feel like dropping the cash on such a beast if I could build it myself   And they say American engines are bullcrap, I want to see how many 180 HP Honduh kids say that when they get spanked by a car like that.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 9, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> and #4 Koenigsegg CCR top speed of 242 is documented on several occasions by the company and individual media sources as well as many top car magazines, the veyron claims are just that claims !!!!!!


And the standard non GT version of the McLaren F1 is faster ever so slightly, naturally aspirated.


----------



## Michael D (Jun 9, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> #1 this car is NOT in production
> 
> My mistake.  I still like it though.  Along with the F1.
> 
> The CCR looks badass.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I want to see how many 180 HP Honduh kids say that when they get spanked by a car like that.


Something that a lot of times comes up when talking to friends of mine is how reliable their Honda or Toyotas are, can???t find any more excused b/c the first time I went to the track spanked them all and I still wasn???t even used to the manual trany. All I can say is no wonder they are so reliable when you have a <200 HP engine that you can fit two of them inside of my


----------



## Mudge (Jun 10, 2004)

I lost a bearing in a 140k mile Mazda 323


----------



## Randy (Jun 10, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I lost a bearing in a 140k mile Mazda 323


So did I racing a Dodge Charger years ago down the freeway.
I was juiced up and had the radio blasting.   The bearing was a water pump bearing that when it failed it forced the fan into the radiator.  My radio was on so loud I didn't hear it.  When I got home, and drove into the driveway all I could hear was loud knocking.  The motor was dust.    I had to scrap the car.

But I did win the race  
And with a Dodge Dart... 318 
I was doing about 130 something I believe.


----------



## supertech (Jun 10, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Something that a lot of times comes up when talking to friends of mine is how reliable their Honda or Toyotas are, can???t find any more excused b/c the first time I went to the track spanked them all and I still wasn???t even used to the manual trany. All I can say is no wonder they are so reliable when you have a <200 HP engine that you can fit two of them inside of my


honda and toyota are two of the most reliable cars out there.And yeah any v-8 can beat a 4 banger lol...But i have seen some souped up honda give stocked stangs and camaros a run for there money. BTW try racing honda S2000, at least thats a sports car and not a family car.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

supertech said:
			
		

> honda and toyota are two of the most reliable cars out there.And yeah any v-8 can beat a 4 banger lol...But i have seen some souped up honda give stocked stangs and camaros a run for there money. BTW try racing honda S2000, at least thats a sports car and not a family car.


BTW I ran better time at the track than an S2000 FYI 

And my stang is about $10,000 less. Imagine if I put 10,000 into that V8 ouch. You could say the same thing about a cheap Honda or Toyota but the thing is that most of the kids all they do it rice up the car with crap that have nothing to do with performance. Stickers and 6ft high wing do NOT add hp


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

BTW I have nothing wrong with people driving exports; there are a lot out there that would smoke my car without a sweat. What I do find amusing is the person that tries to make their car something is not, and that is basically in the majority.


----------



## Randy (Jun 10, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> BTW I have nothing wrong with people driving exports; there are a lot out there that would smoke my car without a sweat. What I do find amusing is the person that tries to make their car something is not, and that is basically in the majority.


You mean like this?


----------



## naturaltan (Jun 10, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> But I did win the race
> And with a Dodge Dart... 318
> I was doing about 130 something I believe.


being a newbie to hotrodding, I ask, did you like the 318?  I have one in my 52 dodge truck and would like to buidl upon it, but I've been told by most that I might was well go up to a 360 ... thoughts?


----------



## Randy (Jun 10, 2004)

naturaltan said:
			
		

> being a newbie to hotrodding, I ask, did you like the 318? I have one in my 52 dodge truck and would like to buidl upon it, but I've been told by most that I might was well go up to a 360 ... thoughts?


Well to answer that question depends on what kind of driving you plan on doing.You have to consider weight. If your doing mountain racing then you want something smaller. Tossing in a big block motor weighs much more than the small block in most cases. But that can be argued I guess with aluminum blocks and heads. With the high dollar motors they make lots of power, have superior cooling, and are lightweight.

As for my dart, I would have rather had the 340 than the 318. I haven't been in the Dodge circuit for a long time, and can't remember whether the 360 still fits in the small block class... If so and you have the bucks...Sure go with a 360. 
With me I've had very fast cars running like 10.5:1 compression which will now run on the street gas and like a 480 lift 289 duration cam running an Edlebrock Torquer manifold that comes on like 5 grand and up.... You don't want those shitty manifolds with like 3-5 grand range they suck. Then of course run a nice dual timing chain or gears, but mine were pretty noisy. I had the pete jackson gears on mine... dual idler with a single gear in the middle. and run a high volume oil pump and some good heads. I ran hydrolic lifters that seemed to work ok for awhile, but had one of the retaining rings once get sucked into the oil pickup and broke my oil pump shaft off... I had to pull the motor and rebuild it again.


----------



## supertech (Jun 10, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> BTW I ran better time at the track than an S2000 FYI
> 
> And my stang is about $10,000 less. Imagine if I put 10,000 into that V8 ouch. You could say the same thing about a cheap Honda or Toyota but the thing is that most of the kids all they do it rice up the car with crap that have nothing to do with performance. Stickers and 6ft high wing do NOT add hp


A stock mustang GT has 260 horses from a 4.6 litre v-8 a S2000 has 240 horses from a 2.2 litre.......Just imagine if Honda made a V-8. And you really shouldn't call toyotas and hondas cheap. BTW I like mustangs....Every time they come into my shop for repairs I see $$ signs


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 10, 2004)

indeed ^^^^^^ 

american cars suck ass !!!!!! period

european and japanese cars are far superior.


----------



## Rich46yo (Jun 10, 2004)

All this talk about race cars, bikes, and horsepower is giving me a chubby............................Rich


----------



## Mudge (Jun 10, 2004)

supertech said:
			
		

> A stock mustang GT has 260 horses from a 4.6 litre v-8 a S2000 has 240 horses from a 2.2 litre.......


Power under the curve means nothing these days does it. Its easier to make big power with cubes, and retain driveability, instead of wearing out the bearings by revving it to the moon.

Wonder why motorcycle engines dont last long? Look at the RPM.



			
				BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> american cars suck ass !!!!!! period


Gee and I thought just a second ago you were yapping about how great a car was with an AMERICAN ENGINE, and now they suck ass, hmmmmm.

Randy, 360 is a small block.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 10, 2004)

supertech said:
			
		

> BTW try racing honda S2000, at least thats a sports car and not a family car.


Real sports cars are RWD, what are all these Civic drivers doing thinking they are hot potatos. At least Honda made one decent, non-$90,000 RWD car.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 10, 2004)

the Koenigsegg CCR DOES NOT use an american engine, it uses an in house developed engine by Koenigsegg of Sweden.

















The Koenigsegg CC 8S and CCR are powered by supercharged eight cylinder engines, specially developed by the Koenigsegg engineering crew for use in these mid-engined supercars. Their pure racing performance power and torque have been achieved whilst maintaining the low weight and superb drivability of the car. 

The CC 8S engine delivers 655 HP at 6,800 rpm and 750 Nm (550 ftlb) of torque at 5,000 rpm. It is a state-of-the-art Quad Cam semi-stressed V8 construction with a 4.7 litre displacement and 32 valves. Built to cope with extreme stress during racing conditions, the engine is equipped with forged Diamond pistons and forged Manley connecting rods. This is complemented by Billet camshafts and an exceptionally strong forged crankshaft manufactured by Gerlach Werke in Germany, known for their high quality and outstanding performance. The CCR engine delivers an astonishing 806 hp at 6900 rpm and 920 Nm (678 ftlb) at 5700 rpm.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 10, 2004)

and check this out

aerodynamics !!! the best in the world









http://www.koenigsegg.se/graphics/enlarge/wind2.jpg


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 10, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Real sports cars are RWD, what are all these Civic drivers doing thinking they are hot potatos. At least Honda made one decent, non-$90,000 RWD car.


actually real EXOTIC sports cars are ALL wheel drive, like the Koenigsegg CCR & Lamborghini Murcielago and most Ferraris and Zondas etc etc etc......


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

supertech said:
			
		

> A stock mustang GT has 260 horses from a 4.6 litre v-8 a S2000 has 240 horses from a 2.2 litre.......Just imagine if Honda made a V-8. And you really shouldn't call toyotas and hondas cheap. BTW I like mustangs....Every time they come into my shop for repairs I see $$ signs


But they don???t have a V8 on the S2000 so it does not really matter does it??? Bottom line Honda and the likes are cars that will not ever come close to real American Muscle not matter what you do to it. End of Story. 



BTW you misunderstood my cheap statement. But right now gota go to the gym I???ll clear it up when I get back if you still don???t get it.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> actually real EXOTIC sports cars are ALL wheel drive, like the Koenigsegg CCR & Lamborghini Murcielago and most Ferraris and Zondas etc etc etc......


What do you drive? Just wondering


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

supertech said:
			
		

> A stock mustang GT has 260 horses from a 4.6 litre v-8 a S2000 has 240 horses from a 2.2 litre.......Just imagine if Honda made a V-8. And you really shouldn't call toyotas and hondas cheap. BTW I like mustangs....Every time they come into my shop for repairs I see $$ signs


Ok first of all the GT does come with low hp compared to other sports cars out there with a V8. I got it because first of all a love Mustangs and Camaros, got a good deal on the Mustang and went for it. Comes with an engine with potential and gives me a chance to work on it myself which I enjoy doing so. Also here is a newsflash for you, the more moving parts and the more power your pushing the more likely thing may go wrong. Sure little four bangers out there don???t know what power is so that would explain why you don???t see many of them at your shop. 



I mentioned the word cheap because as I said, the S2000 is about $10,000 + of what I paid for my GT and if I put $10,000 on top of my car for modification there would be no comparison between my car and the S2000 in the ¼. Not to mention I only have $800 in modifications and I already ran a better time than an S2000 at the track. For a kid that gets a $5,000 Honda or whatever could say the same thing, ???well you paid $15,000 more than what I did; just imagine if I put $15,000 into my car???. So that why I mentioned the word cheap b/c in reality not many kids out there are driving the latest and the greatest Honda or whatever, they look for something cheap so the can start adding body kits, a bunch of stickers, a fart can, and big ass wings. And never open the hood of the car.



My hat if off to you if you get a cheap car and make it a beast I see nothing wrong with that, in fact I would like to get a old Mustang GT and play with it before I do any major work on my car.


----------



## supertech (Jun 10, 2004)

450 hp nissan silvia


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

Rich46yo said:
			
		

> All this talk about race cars, bikes, and horsepower is giving me a chubby............................Rich


Easy fix; don???t look


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

supertech said:
			
		

> 450 hp nissan silvia


See a lot of those every day huh


----------



## supertech (Jun 10, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> See a lot of those every day huh


you got me there....If i was going to get a fast car i too would purchase a mustang ...I just think its funny when poeple say they beat hondas all the time and there driving a stang or camaro....those are 2 different class of cars.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 10, 2004)

supertech said:
			
		

> you got me there....If i was going to get a fast car i too would purchase a mustang ...I just think its funny when poeple say they beat hondas all the time and there driving a stang or camaro....those are 2 different class of cars.


True that, but a lot of the time the ones driving the Hondas and so on are the ones challenging us like if they had something to proof.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 10, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> actually real EXOTIC sports cars are ALL wheel drive, like the Koenigsegg CCR & Lamborghini Murcielago and most Ferraris and Zondas etc etc etc......


Correction, exotic supercars. Sports cars can simple Triumphs or the old Datsun Sportster 1600/2000 cars, rear wheel drive, 2 seats, tiny as hell and hardly any power to speak of. Lets keep supercars and sports cars seperate, which is how they belong.

Read up son:

http://autozine.kyul.net/html/Koenigsegg.htm



> Start the engine, it roars like an American V8. Yes, it is an American V8 ! very disappointing, like many cheaper British sports cars and American tuner cars, this Swedish supercar is powered by a supercharged version of Ford Mustang dohc 32-valve V8. 60% of it has been modified, from the titanium header that lifts capacity to 4.7 litres, the lowered 8.6:1 compression, the intercooled Vortec supercharger which boosts 1.2 bar, the forged pistons and con-rods, the dry-sump aluminum crankcase that allows the engine to be installed lower in the chassis, the weight-saving carbon-fiber intakes.... however, you still feel a modified Ford V8 is never an ideal engine to a supercar. It might work in Ford GT, but not a car costing 4 times the money. For sound, for willingness and response, there is no replacement to a high-tech V12 or V10. Unfortunately, Koenigsegg could neither source a better engine nor develop a one itself.


Methinks maybe you should stick to beauty mods instead of engine talk.

Tell me, what does your car dyno? Or is it just all for show, yet you are facinated by cars with real power?


----------



## Michael D (Jun 10, 2004)

According to Koenigsegg.com, it's cd(coefficient of drag) is .297.  The Vette C6 rings in at .28 so the American muscle has better aerodynamics than the supercar CCR.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 10, 2004)

mudge

that might be describing the earlier version of the Koenigsegg (older models 99,01,02), and certainly NOT the 2004 CCR with 805bhp and 243mph !


----------



## Randy (Jun 10, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Ok first of all the GT does come with low hp compared to other sports cars out there with a V8. I got it because first of all a love Mustangs and Camaros, got a good deal on the Mustang and went for it. Comes with an engine with potential and gives me a chance to work on it myself which I enjoy doing so. Also here is a newsflash for you, the more moving parts and the more power your pushing the more likely thing may go wrong. Sure little four bangers out there don???t know what power is so that would explain why you don???t see many of them at your shop.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I bought my GT for like 3 main reasons.

1. I wanted a new car with affordable insurance... 
   Camaro and Firebird where substantially higher to insure and in 2000
   I believe the Z28 standard motor was dishing out about 290-295.  I figured
   for that little bit extra horsepower wasn't worth the insurance cost..

2. Number 2 I wanted a new car that looked sporty and had air conditioning .

3. It felt much more comfortable to me to sit in than the Z28 and Firebird.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 10, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> 1. I wanted a new car with affordable insurance...
> Camaro and Firebird where substantially higher to insure and in 2000
> I believe the Z28 standard motor was dishing out about 290-295. I figured
> for that little bit extra horsepower wasn't worth the insurance cost..


Man they will dump 475 to the ground with a driveable cam (heads/headers/injectors/lid/tune), unfortunately it wont pass smog in this state. Thats why I dont do the newer cars anymore, you either blow it or you get freaking weenie cams.


----------



## Randy (Jun 10, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Man they will dump 475 to the ground with a driveable cam (heads/headers/injectors/lid/tune), unfortunately it wont pass smog in this state. Thats why I dont do the newer cars anymore, you either blow it or you get freaking weenie cams.


Smog is the least of your worries. It's the traffic conjestion, the laws, and the repercussions associated. This is why I learned that 260hp is all I need . Even a little short burst race isn't worth the risk of the fine or hurting someone anymore. When I was young and dumb all those things didn't seem to matter.It's funny how a little wisdom and several tickets later convince you otherwise 

I never thought I would ever say this, but the way things are now, I would rather enjoy all the amenities of a new car.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 10, 2004)

Yeah there is nothing quite like having a new car. Does that mean you are dumping your project first gen?


----------



## Randy (Jun 10, 2004)

I guess you might say that I already did Mudge


----------



## Mudge (Jun 10, 2004)

Ruh roh.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 11, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I bought my GT for like 3 main reasons.
> 
> 1. I wanted a new car with affordable insurance...
> Camaro and Firebird where substantially higher to insure and in 2000
> ...


That LS1 is one bad ass engine. Before I bought the mustang I took a drive on a used Z28 but something about it just didn???t feel right. It felt like the mustang handled better.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 11, 2004)

Michael D said:
			
		

> According to Koenigsegg.com, it's cd(coefficient of drag) is .297. The Vette C6 rings in at .28 so the American muscle has better aerodynamics than the supercar CCR.


LMAO I didn???t know this. Interesting that a $45,000 muscle car is more aerodynamic than a $200,000+ supercar


----------



## Mudge (Jun 11, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> That LS1 is one bad ass engine. Before I bought the mustang I took a drive on a used Z28 but something about it just didn???t feel right. It felt like the mustang handled better.


 My Z28 handled much more neutral than the Slobra I had, not supprised since the weight distribution is better, its lower to the ground, and it has a wider and longer wheelbase. The Mustang sits like a normal car.

However the Mustang therefore DRIVES like a normal car with such a high roofline, and that was nice. The Fbodies cockpit was modeled after F1 fighter jets, not everyone likes how they sit in one.

The LS1 Camaro should have a coefficient of .32


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 11, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> My Z28 handled much more neutral than the Slobra I had, not supprised since the weight distribution is better, its lower to the ground, and it has a wider and longer wheelbase. The Mustang sits like a normal car.
> 
> However the Mustang therefore DRIVES like a normal car with such a high roofline, and that was nice. The Fbodies cockpit was modeled after F1 fighter jets, not everyone likes how they sit in one.
> 
> The LS1 Camaro should have a coefficient of .32


 What year was you cobra?


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 11, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> LMAO I didn???t know this. Interesting that a $45,000 muscle car is more aerodynamic than a $200,000+ supercar


1 word, BULLSHIT !


----------



## naturaltan (Jun 11, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> 1 word, BULLSHIT !


one would think so ... but so far you haven't backed that statement up.  If I'm paying 200+Gs ... it better be better in everyway shape and form from a car most people may be able to purchase.


----------



## Randy (Jun 11, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> That LS1 is one bad ass engine. Before I bought the mustang I took a drive on a used Z28 but something about it just didn???t feel right. It felt like the mustang handled better.


Yeah I felt the same way. 
Well for one thing the mustang is more of a mid sized car and that would go to reason it would handle better then a full size car that is much longer. Also once you got in the Z28, it was hard to get out. It was just very uncomfortable for me. But my mustang is leather too, and the Z28 I tried was cloth...but still 

But then on the negative side, the mustang does not have independent suspension. I think the Z28 does. I'm not really up on the frame technology of the mustang, but it looks weak in that department. However, I understand if you jump to like the Cobra or Roush that they do have independent suspension. At least one of the upper class models does I know anyway.


----------



## naturaltan (Jun 11, 2004)

I personally have never felt the need to go fast just because I can.  I'm all about the looks and sound of a ground pounding bad a$$ v8!   If it I had one, I would never know whether it went fast, but I'd sure know that when I roll in for the club at 3 in the morning, it would wake you up!  Ahhhh ... the good ole days.  Those days will soon return.


----------



## Randy (Jun 11, 2004)

naturaltan said:
			
		

> I personally have never felt the need to go fast just because I can. I'm all about the looks and sound of a ground pounding bad a$$ v8!  If it I had one, I would never know whether it went fast, but I'd sure know that when I roll in for the club at 3 in the morning, it would wake you up! Ahhhh ... the good ole days. Those days will soon return.


Well Naturaltan, 

You're smart... As I said in previous posts, those tickets just aren't worth it anymore.  They have just become far to strict on the penalties.   The working man just can't afford em.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 11, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> 1 word, BULLSHIT !


 


> At *0.28 coefficient* of drag, the C6 is the most aerodynamically efficient Corvette ever and has improved anti-lift characteristics that enable improved high-speed stability and confidence.
> 
> 
> http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/frame.mv?file=car.mv&num=1842





> Engine: Supercharged V8  |  Power: 655 hp  |  Torque: 750 Nm Acceleration: 0-100 km/h: 3,5 s  |  Topspeed: 390 km/h  |  Chassis: Carbonfibre semi-monocoque  |  Body: Carbonfibre, Kevlar Aerodynamics: *0.297 Cd*  |  Weight: 1175 kg
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.koenigsegg.se/


Sure you got a word in there, just nothing to back it up


----------



## Randy (Jun 11, 2004)

Here's Balla's hot rod... 

Now this is some true horsepower, or is that cowpower


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 11, 2004)

LMFAO


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 12, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Yeah I felt the same way.
> Well for one thing the mustang is more of a mid sized car and that would go to reason it would handle better then a full size car that is much longer. Also once you got in the Z28, it was hard to get out. It was just very uncomfortable for me. But my mustang is leather too, and the Z28 I tried was cloth...but still
> 
> But then on the negative side, the mustang does not have independent suspension. I think the Z28 does. I'm not really up on the frame technology of the mustang, but it looks weak in that department. However, I understand if you jump to like the Cobra or Roush that they do have independent suspension. At least one of the upper class models does I know anyway.


Yeah that???s another thing; I got the 40th Anniversary Edition loaded except the optional Mach 1000 sound system. The difference is only cosmetic though, everything else it???s just like the normal GT. 



Roush, Cobra, Cobra R, and Saleen all have better suspension than the GT.


----------



## Randy (Jun 12, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Yeah that???s another thing; I got the 40th Anniversary Edition loaded except the optional Mach 1000 sound system. The difference is only cosmetic though, everything else it???s just like the normal GT.
> 
> 
> 
> Roush, Cobra, Cobra R, and Saleen all have better suspension than the GT.


Mine was fully loaded and included the Mach system and traction control, and power seats and lighted visors (for the ladies you know ) and keyless entry (I think all came with that).  When I seen mine, it was the only one in my color that had the black leather package that I wanted, so I had to take it.  

Don't worry about the stereo, the mach system is ok but you can get much better stereo systems installed that will blow the mach system away.  All those optional things can be installed if you don't have them.   Hey check this photo out... I talked to someone way back when who sent me a picture of their car after adding a few mods.....It's killer.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 12, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> What year was you cobra?


97, it did not have the IRS, that came in 99 or Y2K I believe. I lost track of the lineage.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 12, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I think the Z28 does.


#1 Has never had an IRS, then it would be a Corvette.
#2 Has not had dual exaust since 1973, or else it would be a Corvette.

The Mustang is the pinacle that Ford has to offer, it is not GMs high priced beast of a car, therefore the Fbody gets the bullcrap hand me downs.


----------



## Randy (Jun 12, 2004)

Thanks Mudge


----------



## BUSTINOUT (Jun 12, 2004)

The Ballamobile


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 12, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Mine was fully loaded and included the Mach system and traction control, and power seats and lighted visors (for the ladies you know ) and keyless entry (I think all came with that). When I seen mine, it was the only one in my color that had the black leather package that I wanted, so I had to take it.
> 
> Don't worry about the stereo, the mach system is ok but you can get much better stereo systems installed that will blow the mach system away. All those optional things can be installed if you don't have them. Hey check this photo out... I talked to someone way back when who sent me a picture of their car after adding a few mods.....It's killer.


Yup that???s the Cobra R, kick ass car. I have a Mach sound system just not the Mach 1000. They also have the Mach 460 that comes with the 6 CD changer which is the one I have. The only difference between the mach 1000 and mach 460 is that they installed a subwoofer in the trunk.


----------



## Randy (Jun 12, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Yup that???s the Cobra R, kick ass car. I have a Mach sound system just not the Mach 1000. They also have the Mach 460 that comes with the 6 CD changer which is the one I have. The only difference between the mach 1000 and mach 460 is that they installed a subwoofer in the trunk.


I believe mine is the mach 460 which was the first introduced that unfortunately came with neither sub woofer in trunk or 6 CD changer   All I have is a single cd unit.   Sounds better than the stock stereos I've heard from most cars.  But I'm sure it would sound much better with the sub woofer.  I'm sure I could have that added down the line though.   I think the mach 1000 has more power as well...  Or I am assuming it does.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 12, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I believe mine is the mach 460 which was the first introduced that unfortunately came with neither sub woofer in trunk or 6 CD changer  All I have is a single cd unit. Sounds better than the stock stereos I've heard from most cars. But I'm sure it would sound much better with the sub woofer. I'm sure I could have that added down the line though. I think the mach 1000 has more power as well... Or I am assuming it does.


You can add a subwoofer to the stock mach 460. Not something I???m thinking on doing though, the stock sound system meets my needs. It definitely sounds better then the stock sound system of many cars out there. 



http://mustangworld.com/ourpics/fcar/despeeds1.htm


----------



## Randy (Jun 12, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> You can add a subwoofer to the stock mach 460. Not something I???m thinking on doing though, the stock sound system meets my needs. It definitely sounds better then the stock sound system of many cars out there.
> 
> 
> 
> [url="http://mustangworld.com/ourpics/fcar/despeeds1.htm"]http://mustangworld.com/ourpics/fcar/despeeds1.htm[/url]


Thanks for the link, however that one may be a bit different than mine.
Mine doesn't have the 6 disk changer.   But I agree with what you say.
I think it sounds just fine to me the way it is.  If it ever blows, then I will consider a new stereo and subwoofer


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 12, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> 97, it did not have the IRS, that came in 99 or Y2K I believe. I lost track of the lineage.


Yeah older Cobras are not too impressive. Newer ones are much more improved.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 12, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Yup that???s the Cobra R, kick ass car. I have a Mach sound system just not the Mach 1000. They also have the Mach 460 that comes with the 6 CD changer which is the one I have. The only difference between the mach 1000 and mach 460 is that they installed a subwoofer in the trunk.


Except for the fact that the Viper GTS and original Z06 handed its balls back to it on the track   On top of all of that, the Cobra R was the least comfortable because of the stiff suspension, where the Z06 won out on riding comfort and lap times. The Mustang looks nice but it is not at all my #1 performance platform choice, if I had a stang to play with it would be a Fox body without question.


----------



## Randy (Jun 12, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Except for the fact that the Viper GTS and original Z06 handed its balls back to it on the track  On top of all of that, the Cobra R was the least comfortable because of the stiff suspension, where the Z06 won out on riding comfort and lap times. The Mustang looks nice but it is not at all my #1 performance platform choice, if I had a stang to play with it would be a Fox body without question.


I agree, anyone who thinks that a stock V8 mustang falls into any performance category, they better think again.  But that was definately not my reason for buying one.  If I wanted to race, I would have put my dollars into the old generation hot rod.  Your dollar goes a lot farther believe me.  But I thought the stang looked nice and sporty, and I was tired of always having an old car with no air conditioning, and a car that you could feel every bump in the road and one that while driving down the freeway you would hear a whistle in your ear from the air leaking through the damn hard or cracked rubber seals    It was funny also that my Camaro at the time had a bad heater core.  It was freezing ass cold in the winter so I had to pull the boot off the shifter so all the heat from the engine would come through to warm me up    Having a hot rod motor, it would warm up pretty damn quick that way too believe it or not .


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 12, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Except for the fact that the Viper GTS and original Z06 handed its balls back to it on the track  On top of all of that, the Cobra R was the least comfortable because of the stiff suspension, where the Z06 won out on riding comfort and lap times. The Mustang looks nice but it is not at all my #1 performance platform choice, if I had a stang to play with it would be a Fox body without question.


 Mudge the Cobra R is about $35,000 less than the Viper GTS. Gimme $35,000 on top of the Cobra R and it will rip the viper to shreds.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 12, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I agree, anyone who thinks that a stock V8 mustang falls into any performance category, they better think again.


Can you name any new car out there under $22,000 that falls into your performance category?


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Can you name any new car out there under $22,000 that falls into your performance category?


 
Yeah, My 1968 Camaro that I just sold


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Yeah, My 1968 Camaro that I just sold


Talking about a new car here Randy, not used. True money goes further by buying an old car if you want it strictly for racing.


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

Now see what this Heiniken did to me....  I can't even read. 
Ok new car @ 22k that would fit a good performance car role.... Well with the crap out there nowdays... I would say that I can't think of any new car that would fit that classification for 22k


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Now see what this Heiniken did to me....  I can't even read.
> Ok new car @ 22k that would fit a good performance car role.... Well with the crap out there nowdays... I would say that I can't think of any new car that would fit that classification for 22k


Exactly; so for people like me that want a new car but can???t spend the $30,000 + go out and get a Mustang GT which it not the fasted thing out there but faster than the average car on the road. And with money put on it, it will take any SS, Cobra and the likes out there. Sure is sweet to come right out of the dealer with a Cobra or SS but need to have the money first. The closest thing in the price range of a GT that I know of is the Z28 but then some people will be sacrificing comfort and looks for 40 or so HP difference in a heavier car. If I ever where to get a Camaro, it would most definitely be an old one; don???t like how the new ones look. Now if I where completely into racing my car (I???m not, only do so every now and then) then I would most likely have chosen the Z28 over the GT, eyes closed.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 13, 2004)

2004 BASE Mustang GT Curb Weight: 3347 lbs. Horsepower: 260 hp

2004 BASE Z28 Curb Weight: 3439 lbs. Horsepower 310, actual 320-330 to the wheels, approximately 380 HP at the crank


92 pounds more, way more horsepower, an engine bigger than a Go Kart, superior weight distribution. The bigger doors are a drawback, same issue with the Corvette, I guess everyone knows what a peice of crap the Corvette is though.  Sports cars and muscle cars are not about panty waste convenience, look at the Cobra R, no heater, no stereo. If you want a ladies car, look elsewhere.


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Exactly; so for people like me that want a new car but can???t spend the $30,000 + go out and get a Mustang GT which it not the fasted thing out there but faster than the average car on the road. And with money put on it, it will take any SS, Cobra and the likes out there. Sure is sweet to come right out of the dealer with a Cobra or SS but need to have the money first. The closest thing in the price range of a GT that I know of is the Z28 but then some people will be sacrificing comfort and looks for 40 or so HP difference in a heavier car. If I ever where to get a Camaro, it would most definitely be an old one; don???t like how the new ones look. Now if I where completely into racing my car (I???m not, only do so every now and then) then I would most likely have chosen the Z28 over the GT, eyes closed.


Kata,

You forgot to mention insurance as well... Very big factor. That is another primary reason I got the Mustang.  Like you say the 40 horsepower difference sure wasn't worth the 400-800 dollars a year more in insurance to me.  And I was like 37 with a crystal clean driving record 

When I bought my Mustang in 2000, the standard Z28 camaros where not putting out 310 horsepower.. they were about 290 or 295.   So irregardless of whether the horsepower increase was 40 or 80. The insurance increase was enormous as well.  And if it was this high for a man 37-38 years old with a clean record, you can imagine what it would be like for someone in their 20's.
In addition to that, the more horsepower you have the more likely you are to use it thereby getting more tickets.   Then for each ticket, your insurance skyrockets even more than it was originally.  And for each ticket added after that you're risking losing your license.   So again, another reason to get a Mustang.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 13, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> When I bought my Mustang in 2000, the standard Z28 camaros where not putting out 310 horsepower..


93-95 275HP Rated (and close)
96-97 285HP Rated (and close)
98-2002 310HP Rated (and closer to rear wheel than flywheel)

My Camaro's insurance was $100 more for 6 months over a beater car, wow how expensive. For the record I had 1 star on my record and my insurance hardly skyrocketed, I believe it was $40 for 6 months


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

Well I know they were not 310 when I looked at them so if your information is correct, then that means I must have looked at them in 97, but I could have swore that the 285hp carried out to 2000.. But as I said before, horsepower wasn't in my list of objectives for purchasing a new car.  


As for insurance,  you were very lucky to get such a great rate.  I had called the top 3 and my quotes were substantially different.   


And as for your comment here, you sound like a child Mudge.  



> My Camaro's insurance was $100 more for 6 months over a beater car, wow how expensive. For the record I had 1 star on my record and my insurance hardly skyrocketed, I believe it was $40 for 6 months


I am so happy that you were able to find a great deal on insurance, and that you like your camaro.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

You where 37 at the time and insurance where high for you. Just imagine what I would be paying for insurance, I???m 18. 



Mudge I hope you???re not taking this the wrong way; I???m not trying to knock on camaros. They are great cars, but you seem to put there way above the Mustangs and they are not really that much of a car. Here is how I like to pair them up.





Z28 Vs. GT 

¼ mile time

Z28=?

GT= 14.1 sec

http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/fordmustanggt.html

Don???t know the time for Z28 but it has to be faster

CAMARO WINS



SS Vs. Cobra

¼ mile time

SS= 13.5 seconds

Cobra= 12.9 sec


http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/03fordcobra.html

http://www.fast-autos.net/chevrolet/02chevroletcamaroanniv.html

MUSTANG WINS


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

See others can pull a Mudge and dig out statistics...
But why play that game.  Just to make someone feel bad because of a car they believe in.  Again that is low and childish.  If you like your camaro Mudge, great!  But don't go pulling out statistics and trying to take derogatory pop shots at other peoples comments.
This is what makes life interesting, everyone is different.  Some like Mustangs,  some like Z28's ,  some even like volkswagens (end of story).


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Sports cars and muscle cars are not about panty waste convenience, look at the Cobra R, no heater, no stereo. If you want a ladies car, look elsewhere.


What do you say Mudge, do you think this baby will do it for me.


----------



## Michael D (Jun 13, 2004)

If I had a new SS that only went 13.5, I would be pissed. I have seen several bone stock SSs run low 13s with a good driver. I have read about some touching 12s.  I also read in MM@FF(I believe it was them) that when they tested the Mach 1, it was the fastest Mustang they had ever tested. Even faster than the new supercharged Cobra. That is strange because I have never seen any Mach 1 run 13.1 around here. I have even heard of Cobras not breaking into the 12s around here. Traction issues. Pretty damn sad for a supercharged Mustang. They look bad as hell but just aren't as fast as they look.

  Mudge, a friend of mine had a 97 snake.  With some homemade air intake, gears, slicks and a wad of gas, he went 7.20s with it.

 And Katamaster, seems we both see the same thing. My friend has a SVX and his cd is .290. So that means that a car that was made 10 years ago still has better aerodynamics than the CCR. It is starting to look less like it is worth the money to me.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

All I can say is your car is what you make it out to be. It???s all on your personal preference, can???t go out generalizing.  It is often a drivers race


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

Nice one Kata  



			
				KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> What do you say Mudge, do you think this baby will do it for me.


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

...



			
				Michael D said:
			
		

> If I had a new SS that only went 13.5, I would be pissed. I have seen several bone stock SSs run low 13s with a good driver. I have read about some touching 12s. I also read in MM@FF(I believe it was them) that when they tested the Mach 1, it was the fastest Mustang they had ever tested. Even faster than the new supercharged Cobra. That is strange because I have never seen any Mach 1 run 13.1 around here.
> 
> *Does this mean it isn't true?  *
> 
> ...


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

Michael D said:
			
		

> And Katamaster, seems we both see the same thing. My friend has a SVX and his cd is .290. So that means that a car that was made 10 years ago still has better aerodynamics than the CCR. It is starting to look less like it is worth the money to me.


I would say is all about show and pussy for people buying that kind of car. Shiat if I had that kind of money to throw like that you can be sure I would have some type of supercar or many different types for that matter  But then I would also have my own little collection of muscle cars from the beginning until now. We can all dream can???t we


----------



## Mudge (Jun 13, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I am so happy that you were able to find a great deal on insurance, and that you like your camaro.


It was fun, but I sold it last year.



> SS Vs. Cobra
> 
> ¼ mile time
> 
> ...




The SS is not much more than a sticker package (figuratively speaking), it was an SLP effort and really you get better interior, slightly better exaust, nicer wheels, big farkin deal. Not worth the $.




> But why play that game. Just to make someone feel bad because of a car they believe in.




I'm just here for facts, the LS1 was never rated at 285 HP.



> But don't go pulling out statistics and trying to take derogatory pop shots at other peoples comments.


Facts, not pot shots. I like the look of the stang, but I dont like a 4.6L engine thats bigger than a 460, has worse weight distribution, and frankly is not that performance oriented. The Fox body had horrible aerodynamics (which is why Turbo Volvos were spanking it), but they are cheap, easy to work with, and have that fabulous Ford sound along with a very low bodyweight.

There is certainly more to a car than aero, obviously having an assload of horsepower on tap can overpower that to a degree. The Cobra I owned was more of a regular car-car, it was fun to drive even on long trips, but for performance I am a Z28 guy.

No offense Randy, but you dont even know what the facts are, while full of opinions (partially like me) I have been around the cars knee deep and I had fun while doing it. Most of that is behind me now as I concentrate on trying to get 'in shape' as it were, but the LT1/LS1s and some of the Fords I know well enough. If you want me to shyt talk about the Camaros I'll do it, there are drawbacks to both platforms.


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

...


			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> It was fun, but I sold it last year.
> 
> [/size][/font]
> 
> ...


----------



## Michael D (Jun 13, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> ...


If I had a new SS that only went 13.5, I would be pissed. I have seen several bone stock SSs run low 13s with a good driver. I have read about some touching 12s. I also read in MM@FF(I believe it was them) that when they tested the Mach 1, it was the fastest Mustang they had ever tested. Even faster than the new supercharged Cobra. That is strange because I have never seen any Mach 1 run 13.1 around here.

*Does this mean it isn't true?  ****_No, it doesn't mean it isn't true.  I will say that an SS has a better chance at turning a 13.1 than a Mach 1._

I have even heard of Cobras not breaking into the 12s around here. Traction issues. Pretty damn sad for a supercharged Mustang. They look bad as hell but just aren't as fast as they look.

*"You've heard". Again, does this mean it is true.*
*Traction problems can happen with any high performance car.*
*They can also be easily resolved. . There will always be variables that affect performance in any car. Weather, tires, track, driver ...I can go on and on and on. Also there will always be stories of faster cars no matter which car you are referring to.  ****_In this case, yes it is true.  Friends of mine who know more about drag racing than me have seen it, then relay the message to me.  So once again, it does mean it is true._

Mudge, a friend of mine had a 97 snake. With some homemade air intake, gears, slicks and a wad of gas, he went 7.20s with it.

*How many times have I heard stories like this *** *_What is so funny about this?  Please tell._

And Katamaster, seems we both see the same thing. My friend has a SVX and his cd is .290. So that means that a car that was made 10 years ago still has better aerodynamics than the CCR. It is starting to look less like it is worth the money to me.

*Everyone is entitled to their opinions *** *_I am assuming you meant the part about it looking less like it's worth it, since that is the only statement that isn't a fact in that paragraph._


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

Michael D said:
			
		

> If I had a new SS that only went 13.5, I would be pissed. I have seen several bone stock SSs run low 13s with a good driver. I have read about some touching 12s. I also read in MM@FF(I believe it was them) that when they tested the Mach 1, it was the fastest Mustang they had ever tested. Even faster than the new supercharged Cobra. That is strange because I have never seen any Mach 1 run 13.1 around here.
> 
> *Does this mean it isn't true?  ****_No, it doesn't mean it isn't true. I will say that an SS has a better chance at turning a 13.1 than a Mach 1._
> 
> ...


Was never talking about the mach 1 just the cobra which are more closely comparable to the SS. No traction is a good sign for me of some serious power and it could be fixed starting with a better driver first, sliks and so on. Because you friend have not seen it, it does not mean it can???t or hasn???t happened. A friend of a friend of his granddaddy friends told me cars are for pussyes, real man get on horses.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 13, 2004)

BTW put the same driver that knows what he is doing behind a Mach 1 and a Cobra and the Mach 1 will DEFINITELY NOT beat the Cobra. And that???s a FACT because my friend told me so . Nah but seriously it will not beat the Cobra unless you put a driver like me behind the Cobra, then we're screwed


----------



## Randy (Jun 13, 2004)

I think we have all stated our opinions....
I'm not going to beat a dead horse I mean camaro ..  I'm done .


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 14, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> 2004 BASE Z28 Curb Weight: 3439 lbs. Horsepower 310, actual 320-330 to the wheels, approximately 380 HP at the crank


Mudge I though 2002 was the last your for the Camaro. Are they bringing them back or something


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2004)

Doggonit, and I thought I made sure I got that down right too. No traction is more a sign of a bad driver and/or suspension setup. Drag racing and road racing suspensions are very different, I could skate around in first gear and not hook up for a good while, lack of traction.



> But the derogatory nature of your insurance statement was.


It was not derogatory at all, you chose to take it that way. My insurance shifted $100 one way or the other from POS car to Z28 car, yes I'm going to roll my eyes that I should change my car decision based on that. And no, I hardly shopped around at all, I found one good carrier and stuck with them, hell they are online, www.esurance.com



> Contrary though I believe they out sold the Z28.


Correct, V8 sales were close to the same but overall, thanks to the popularity of the V6 Mustang they outsold the Fbody about 3:1, the Mustang almost was dropped after the introduction of the Ford Probe which was the Mustang's replacement, obviously and thankfully, that never happened.

If you want to talk fast Fords you need to get Pitboss in here. By the way Randy, Beta was better than VHS, so that argument is a bit weak. Most people dont really want to drive a racey car, although the Miata with its tiny size is a nice simulation.


----------



## Randy (Jun 14, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Doggonit, and I thought I made sure I got that down right too. No traction is more a sign of a bad driver and/or suspension setup. Drag racing and road racing suspensions are very different, I could skate around in first gear and not hook up for a good while, lack of traction.
> 
> It was not derogatory at all, you chose to take it that way. My insurance shifted $100 one way or the other from POS car to Z28 car
> 
> ...


*Why do you keep bringing up Fast Fords... I guess you need some glasses.  I told you enough times now that speed and performance was not the reason I bought my mustang.  Come on now Mudge 260 HP...  Wow! I better put my Mustang on a trailer and head for the Track with that power     Now you're talking about the Miata *
*
Give Mudge another 10 years,  maybe he will grow up by then *


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Pay it off and drop the insurance to PL/PD. But to tell me that your insurance will charge you only 100.00 difference from POS to Z28 sounds fishy. But either case Mudge, it was not this statement that was derogatory .. it was the part where you tossed in that smart ass comment "Oh big deal only 100.00 difference Wow!!!!") That was the derogatory part Mudge. I think anyone would have taken it that way my friend. It's funny how you keep trying to deny that the comment was a smart ass comment.



You and I call it different things I guess, no, not full coverage. I owned the Camaro.




> Try pulling up some current statistics... The ones where they are dropping the Z28 cause they can't sell em  And the Ford Probe was a POS , what are you talking about..



Yes, Ford was going to stop selling the Mustang. The Probe GT was the replacement, thats a fact Jack. Then Mustang sales started to go up again, and of course the Mustang fans spoke out as well.




> Wow! I better put my Mustang on a trailer and head for the Track with that power   Now you're talking about the Miata


 
I dont drag race, so yes I like the Miata.

Sorry you aren't as educated as I am brother, you are living in the dark ages 

Peace out


----------



## Randy (Jun 14, 2004)

...


			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> You and I call it different things I guess, no, not full coverage. I owned the Camaro.
> 
> *Then your comment regarding your 100.00 difference is meaningless then.  Darn, and you had to waste that derogatory comment for nothing  **Why would you compare your insurance cost being 100.00 difference when you know we are talking about insurance relating to the purchase of a brand new car?   Obviously I am referring to full coverage comparison.   That is funny, it is a state law my friend. *
> 
> ...


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> *Educated.  Is that what you call having the impressive ability to move your mouse around the screen and surf the internet for prehistoric information?  The only dark ages here, are from the information that your posting*


I'll have you know this is a sophisticated mouse mother f'er


----------



## Randy (Jun 14, 2004)




----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 14, 2004)

Come on people I think you guys are taking this too serious now. Whatever car anyone drives good for you, there must be something good about that one that the other does not have and vise versa, but no need to start this BS.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 14, 2004)

let me step in here and mediate things


----------



## maniclion (Jun 14, 2004)

At 245 HP my Nissan Murano will stomp pavement with the best of 'em but I don't care.  The only thing a car has to do is get you from point a to b and back, I could have 1000 mice running a wheel as my motor as long as it did the speed limit (or a little over) I could care less about the insides as long as I can get to where I'm going and know that it won't die on me half way there.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 14, 2004)

I like Nissan and all (I own a classic Datsun) but 245 HP isn't even going to compare to an old ass Fox body, much less a Z06 or "the best of 'em."


----------



## Randy (Jun 14, 2004)

Balla announces to the football team that he was buying @ mcdonalds....


----------



## Randy (Jun 14, 2004)

Balla hires a cheerleader for the team ...


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 15, 2004)




----------



## Mudge (Jun 15, 2004)

Here is a favorite

http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8142


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 15, 2004)

I got a better one 






BUT


----------



## Randy (Jun 15, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Here is a favorite
> 
> http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8142


Ah, you mean this one...


----------



## Mudge (Jun 15, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I got a better one


All I have to say is, whatever dude.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 15, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> All I have to say is, whatever dude.


 are you ok man


----------



## Little Wing (Jun 15, 2004)

From Novermber 2003 Playboy forum


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

Letting go will also keep its weight from grinding your leg/ankles into the ground.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> are you ok man


I felt it was like saying I ruined the thread, which is open to interpretation but I'm just here to give feedback, as a person who has spent money on cars and had a lot of fun with them at one point in my life. I'd like to be out on the track again someday soon but its been over a year for me now.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I felt it was like saying I ruined the thread, which is open to interpretation but I'm just here to give feedback, as a person who has spent money on cars and had a lot of fun with them at one point in my life. I'd like to be out on the track again someday soon but its been over a year for me now.


Oh bro your interpretations sucks  . Or maybe I???m the one that sucks being clear, don???t know. It was kind of a reply to your picture ???this thread sucks??? so I pulled out a better one. It had nothing to do with you. It was all a joke. There is no question in my mind you know your cars well; I just hope someday I???ll know half of what you do.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

My "this thread sucks" was just because it was funny really, maybe thats what you meant. I've been dreaming of a new car lately, thanks a lot guys


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 16, 2004)

Anyone watch that show, Overhauled on TLC, on Tuesday nights?
D A M !


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I've been dreaming of a new car lately, thanks a lot guys


What new car have been thinking about? If you ever decide to go with Ford the 05 Mustang GT is coming out with 300hp stock. But I would wait for the next Cobra if you have the money or until they take all the bugs out of the GT which I???m sure will have some. I???m personally not too thrilled about the new design of the GT judging from what I have seen on pictures, but I have had people that have gone to see it in person at car shows tell me that it looks badass is person.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 16, 2004)

it's gona have the new supercharged cobra motor in it..which comes stock @ damn near 400 hp..add a few add ons..like a chip and pulley set..and you are cranking out some serious uummppff!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

The first thing I did to my car was change the gears and I feel I made the right choice, is not a HP mod, but you definitely feel a big difference in your car. I changed the whole exhaust system, off road x pipes which is supposed to lean more towards the performance side than the H pipe and adds more HP than cated pipes. Also put in Magnaflow cat back and the difference was nothing compared to the change of gears. Next I???m going to take care of the intake. Little by little but in the next 2-3 years I???m going to make a so so GT into a rice eating, z28 killer GT


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> What new car have been thinking about? If you ever decide to go with Ford the 05 Mustang GT is coming out with 300hp stock. But I would wait for the next Cobra if you have the money or until they take all the bugs out of the GT which I???m sure will have some.


Believe me, I'd buy a used FRC C5 loooooooong before a Mustang that cost anything over 10k. If I really was a huge modern stang lover and wanted power I'd go blown Cobra, no question. I like the pushrod engine better overall, and the fox is nice and light, easy to mod, and good looking (old for some of you folks).

Do all the GTs come with a T56 now for the manual? I dont want a 5 speed in a performance car, thats kind of lame, even the dinky imports get 6s now. I likely wont buy a completely new car though, goes against my bang for the buck self-training 

I do miss having a V8 though, torque and horsepower on tap is something to experience. I'd love to have a blown car someday to feel that low end evil.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Also put in Magnaflow cat back and the difference was nothing compared to the change of gears. Next I???m going to take care of the intake. Little by little but in the next 2-3 years I???m going to make a so so GT into a rice eating, z28 killer GT


Catbacks are basically a sound mod, you wont see much power difference until you are making power, and stock cars aren't making squat.

Intake, headers, cams - up to you (OHC, $ and not the most fun to swap), blower, fuel pump if neccessary, injectors, yada yada tuning and so on. I'd go for intake/headers/blower/injectors + tune in short order though if I were looking for nice power without opening the engine. I love nasty cams that get horrible gas mileage unfortunately, and wont pass smog in my state  those are the most fun. That is my #1 problem with modern V8 cars, the state I live in versus lumpy cams.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Do all the GTs come with a T56 now for the manual? I dont want a 5 speed in a performance car, thats kind of lame, even the dinky imports get 6s now. I likely wont buy a completely new car though, goes against my bang for the buck self-training


I may be mistaken but I though the T56 is a 6 speed transmission. GT only comes with 5 speed trany, the 6 speed is only for the cobras and saleen. I do agree is kinda lame


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

Yes, the T56 is a 6 speed, my 94 had one.

2 liter rotary, 6.99@201 http://www.fullboost.com.au/racing/records/video.html


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Catbacks are basically a sound mod, you wont see much power difference until you are making power, and stock cars aren't making squat.
> 
> Intake, headers, cams - up to you (OHC, $ and not the most fun to swap), blower, fuel pump if neccessary, injectors, yada yada tuning and so on. I'd go for intake/headers/blower/injectors + tune in short order though if I were looking for nice power without opening the engine. I love nasty cams that get horrible gas mileage unfortunately, and wont pass smog in my state  those are the most fun. That is my #1 problem with modern V8 cars, the state I live in versus lumpy cams.


MPG, what's that? I don???t think they offer that with the V8 package  Sound about right what I want to do but before I get it blown I want to take care of the internals, I'd like to drive it more than 10k miles. I think I would fail the smog test with the off road x pipe But one thing I love about where I live is that I don???t have to pass that test


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> 2 liter rotary, 6.99@201 http://www.fullboost.com.au/racing/records/video.html


I don't know what to say


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

Our test is even more strict than before, its on a roller now simulating real life conditions.

MPG, miles per gallon.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> MPG, miles per gallon.


 
LMFAO I meant that as a joke  , what I was trying to say is that V8 is not what you buy if your concerned with MPG.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 16, 2004)

hey...my little Mazda 3 is getting me 30 mpg...


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

I get anywhere from 17-20 mpg.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Our test is even more strict than before, its on a roller now simulating real life conditions.


Damn is that in the whole state or just where you live?


----------



## Mudge (Jun 16, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> LMFAO I meant that as a joke  , what I was trying to say is that V8 is not what you buy if your concerned with MPG.


I wasn't 100% sure 

We have 3 types of zones in CA, some very low populated areas have no smog requirements (Napa, CA I think is one, wine country, but I forget), so most of the state is this way yes. The dyno test.


----------



## Randy (Jun 16, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I wasn't 100% sure
> 
> We have 3 types of zones in CA, some very low populated areas have no smog requirements (Napa, CA I think is one, wine country, but I forget), so most of the state is this way yes. The dyno test.


Your freakin gas cap even has to pass the smog test here in california 
That is unless you have a 25 year old plus vehicle I believe it is and are lucky enough to be exempt  . Then you can run those nasty gas guzzlin cams to your hearts content. Kind of like I did in my Camaro


----------



## Mudge (Jun 17, 2004)

Yep, the dyno test was mandatory in october and they check the gas cap for pressure seal. In the old days, evaporation of gasoline was one of the bigger issues, hence the seal neccessary.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 17, 2004)

lol next this you know everyone in California is going to be required to ride in a scooter


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 17, 2004)

What do you say mudge and randy, how do you like your new calicruiser


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 17, 2004)

don't forget the tassles!


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 17, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> don't forget the tassles!


That???s only for the heavily moded ones


----------



## Mudge (Jun 17, 2004)

As long as that Scooter says R1 on the side 

If I pick up anything interesting I'll let everyone know.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 18, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> If I pick up anything interesting I'll let everyone know.


Alright cool, but make sure you done get a honda


----------



## Mudge (Jun 19, 2004)

Well, there is a good chance I am picking up an LS1/6 speed tomorow, I'll let everyone know either way. It was tempting to consider a 5 speed convertable GT, but since this will be a commuter the extra 5 miles per gallon would be nice, and of course the horsepower difference is important to me.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 20, 2004)

That???s a good choice; I would have done the same thing over a convertible GT.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 20, 2004)

I really liked my time in the convertible, but I can't get over horsepower   I had also taken a liking to the white LS1s a couple years ago when I was hating how much better their cars were than my old LT1.

And if I feel the need to be a jackass, I can get 200 MPH gauges for it  Re-visiting CZ28 it looks like I should pull around 300-310 RWHP stock for the year (339-350 crank HP), and around 320 RWTQ. This has exaust, short shifter, and is lowered about an inch (I'll peek under to see whats up with the springs/shocks if and when I pick it up, dont want torched springs).

Like almost every Camaro made it has T tops, the performance guys (Camaro Mustang Challenge) really want hardtops but they are hard to find outside of the V6 so sometimes a V6 + engine swap is what happens for them I guess. Unibody cars with T tops are really funny to explain to someone, there is really nothing in the middle of the car but floorboard and trans tunnel.  I'll definitely do subframes relatively soon, they make a big difference.


----------



## Randy (Jun 20, 2004)

Well Mudge, did you get the car?


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 20, 2004)

300th post


----------



## Mudge (Jun 20, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Well Mudge, did you get the car?


I called not long ago and I dont know yet. They want more for it than its worth even though the paint is immaculate, I want them to cut about 2k off of it. I will find out tomorow supposedly by noon what they can do for me.

I'm cheap, its a great car but there are always others.

They had a really nice 99 pewter, fresh paint (found a drip mark on the handle), but the pass door has already been paint impregnated by careless door openings and there is a crack near the right front light which says it was in at least some minor amount of trouble. Plus it had tweeters removed from the doors leaving a nice stupid 2 inch or so hole in each door.

From what I can tell the white car is stock paint which is what I'd prefer.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 20, 2004)

Hope they see it your way, you???re a hardcore HP guy it seems and for the money you can???t beat an LS1. Have you also tried looking on eBay? You may find something worth looking at in your area.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 20, 2004)

I'm not that hardcore about power, I like handling hence my dinky little underpowered 240Z. But I am not ready to go back to a 200 something HP car if I'm getting a V8.

340-350 HP stock and 380 rear wheel on stock heads and a weenie smog cam? Sounds like I'll be happy for awhile. It took me decent levels of mods and $2260 in cash to reach 411 RW on my last car, parts for the LS1 are more expensive but I can take the car a lot further with less work and ultimately less $ to match the old car, all while still passing smog.

Heads/cam guys with non-smogger cams are making an easy mid 500 HP (470 RW+).


----------



## Randy (Jun 21, 2004)

Well good luck Mudge... Hope you get the car


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

I pick it up around 4PM.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 21, 2004)

So, you got the camaro? Budy just tried out a '03 GT. at this altitude, he was very disappointed. I guess it even had a K&N and exhaust system on it..still was slow...about 7 thousand feet here.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

Yeah a lot of the altitude guys just go forced induction. I wouldn't mind a blower myself, a lot of the blower guys retain great gas mileage. I could keep my 3.42s (1600 RPM on the freeway), probably take a small hit in the city and still bang down around 30 for the freeway.

But NA is cheaper in the short term, so I dunno. It will have to be stock for awhile of course though 

The LS1 is the first really marvelous consumer engine of late by GM. In the old days of the L98 and the Ferd 302, the 302 was the clear victor, the L98 was nothing but a torquer, a truck engine if you will (think motorhome). The LT1 was a nice improvement, good intake manifold (L98s weak point), but still old school.

Of course SB2 is nice but costs many thousands more than I'd ever want to spend. The LS1 is just awesome, I can't compare it to a 4.6L SOHC without sticking a blower on the 4.6L first.

One of Randy's "neighbors" is a young gal dumping 520 RWHP to the ground with 6psi in her LS1, smog legal. I have to lean in favor of starting out with cubes, especially with 91 octane here in CA there is only so much boost we can run without timing being on the floor, or $8 a gallon gas prices (or $11-13 a gallon Tolulene).


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 21, 2004)

buddy has a '02 Pontiac GTP 4-door sedan w/ 3.8 liter supercharged. Does very nicely up here. Except for the new SC Cobras...he does well. and gets 25mpg all over.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

The Cobras aren't impressive until they replace the blower, but then as long as they hook up, they will put up with some abuse for sure (not like the recall Cobra era). 390 crank HP? Wake me when its over. I dont need 900 HP or any crap like that, but 390 HP is not some freakishly huge number unless you are 16 years old. The best things about the blown Cobra are potential on a stock bottom, and the sounds.

I'll spend far less than 35k and be much happier thanks. I already had a 35 thousand dollar underperformer 

Of course if it were an all out dollar war, I should be spending 2 or 3k in a junkyard and coming home with 500+ HP in a 1700 pound hoopty ride.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 21, 2004)

well, as I nunderstand, that 390 hp is an underestimate and with a few mods it wil be between 500 - 600hp. Don't quote me.
More than fast enough for me.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

That few mods includes throwing away your old blower and getting a Ken Bell etc, as far as dyno sheets I've seen (months back) it was not underestimated by much if any. I also keep thinking that any jackhole can slap a blower on a car, although it helps to be built for one from the start.

500-650 though at the wheels, completely doable.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 21, 2004)

didn't think it was, but you are more of a 'motor head' than I am..


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

I spent more time and money on that stuff than I want to go through again, which is one good reason why I was never a mod on a car board. I could spend enough time talking about cam specs and headflow numbers, if you want to talk tumble and swirl though you'd want to find someone else  I dont get toooo deep in theory, I just like to go fast and be punched back in my seat.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

Here we go for the nerds, related to both carburation AND head flow.

http://www.googlism.com/what_is/v/venturi_effect/


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 21, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I just like to go fast and be punched back in my seat.


that's why I had a sports bike..


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

No kidding, I want an R1


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

Oh damn I can't believe how light the clutch is! Totally different than the LT1, and still has balls down low (pulls in 6th @55MPH).

Who would have thought 7 months would make me forget what it was like to drive a V8.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 21, 2004)

lol, congratulation man. Enjoy


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

I'll be watching for you RANDY.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 21, 2004)

Don't pick on the mustangs now


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

Its not the stang, its Randy in particular


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 21, 2004)

Randy, I would hate to be you right now.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 21, 2004)

I found out actually a good friend just got an 89 vert Stang, I dont know if its a GT or LX, it is a 5.0 and T5 though. His car is white also.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> No kidding, I want an R1


buddy of mine just picked up the 04 R1...I wanna ride it!
I dunno if I would want to own a bike that fast. I love canyon running. My buddy's got a 01 GSX-R 1k..and that thing is awesome! It is WAY to fast for the average rider. So much power on tap, easy to get away from you if you are on top of your game. (I can ride, put nearly 19k miles on my 99 F4) I wore out 3 rear tires and 2 fronts in a season in the rocky mountains.

I have sat on and like the new CBR 1000. Still too fast, but damn..nice bike. Maybe next year, pick up a used bike..buying new is stupid for bikes...lose value faster than cars do..
especially w/ all the posers around here. Kinda funy. Guys seem to get the bikes to look cool. Cruise the Sonics and hang out. 2 years later, they still only have 2 - 3k miles on them..for 1/2 the price. 


Hey Mudge-
not to get into argument, as I don't have the knowledge, but friend who has looked into the 03 cobras and articles that have ben written, people are turning out the 500+ hp wiht the eaton sc. Besides the air intakes and basics, I guess it is a matter of changing out the pulleys? I will see if I can get articles for ya. either way, if I could..I still wanna vette..


----------



## Mudge (Jun 22, 2004)

With the stock blower? I am not majorly educated on them so I would not need to argue on that one, there comes a point though where efficiency is poor (high intake heat, power band freakiness). I would know a little more about turbo AR efficiency though, and still not much at that because I am an NA guy (hey, its cheaper).

The pulleys will do most of the trick yeah, but like forcing a little turbo to put out high boost it only does it for short spurts, puts stress on the turbo (super high RPM of the internal wheel), and creates massive intake heat because of that high friction. Anything that sees over 100k RPM is going to heat up no matter ceramic bearings or not 

From what I remember of the Lightnings they were hitting 11s on mostly stock parts with a pulley swap and maybe some intake ducting work.

Yeah I would have loved a Vette, but they still cost twice as much  I got my Camaro for 11,5 and seriously you can find them for less (98+ for me), this one had awesome paint though and overall was in good shape plus a couple weenie mods. Of course sometimes mods are not something you like to see because you know someone had some fun with it 

So changing out the blower probably saves intake heat and with our CA 91 Craptane gas that would be nice, and probably gives a broader overall powerband. If you look at the Supras that are so wickedly peaky, we always joke "what is the difference between a 450 HP Supra and a 950 HP Supra? They both run 11s"

Those guys hit boost and wham, wheel spin. Boost creep and big ass single turbos plus a short wheelbase on an IRS, it just doesn't work well most of the time. There are 9 second street Supras though, but they are overweight, "Supra expensive," just not my kind of car. I have a 973 RWHP Supra on a dyno vid somewhere and it just kicks like a pissed off hog when it gets into boost, it half looked like it was about to come off the dyno.

As for bikes if I thought I could utilize the full output of a bike doing a near 10 flat quarter @ 146 I'd be lying, that would scare the crap out of most anyone and for good reason. Going from 16 and 15 second cars (most people who think they are fast) onto a low 10 second bike is just stupid. Most of my riding buddies suggest a Seca II or Knighthawk, or an older CBR 600 for a starter bike. Dimensions of the person matter too of course, and how they like to sit. CBRs seem to not be overly aggressive stance wise and the older ones dont make too much power.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 22, 2004)

co-worker here has an 02 SS with some basic mods. Looks nice, sure it moves out. Be nice to have a SC on it at thei altitude...we lose 30% of HP at this height.

my bike was a '99 600F4. Nice bike. Was comfortable to ride around, and screamed in the corners. It fit me better than the R6 and was available when I wanted to buy. THe two best bikes for that year were the R6 and my F4. R6 was a little faster..whoopty-doo! but mine handled better..
I miss the bike, but I think I have used up a lot of 'dummy' points with it. Someone likes me, as a couple times..I should have met my maker....ego got biger than abilities...those dam corners are addicting!


----------



## Randy (Jun 22, 2004)

Congratulations Mudge on the car...
Despite all the crap you were giving me back there  




			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> Oh damn I can't believe how light the clutch is! Totally different than the LT1, and still has balls down low (pulls in 6th @55MPH).
> 
> Who would have thought 7 months would make me forget what it was like to drive a V8.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 22, 2004)

This Bud's for you Randy 

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/47901/page013.html



> Is the Bullitt worth the extra price? From a get-up-and-go standpoint, the $3,700 doesn't seem to add much. The 4.6-liter SOHC V8 makes 265 hp at 5,000 rpm and 305 lb-ft of torque at 4,000 rpm, an increase of just 5 hp and 3 lb-ft of torque over a regular GT. Of course, this is still plenty of oomph, and the Bullitt does produce more useable power in the midrange as well as a fantastic burbling V8 soundtrack thanks to specially tuned mufflers. But as has been the case with the Mustang over the past decade or two, it finds itself getting whooped when it stands up head-to-head against the Camaro.


Certainly not true during the L98/302 era, the L98 was a torquey bastard but no top end. Back then it was Grand Nationals and Mustangs. What I found amusing before SLP came out with their crappy SS, was the comparison of how to get the Cobras to match the Z28 cars which were 18k base price at the time 



> The Camaro also has the best binders; stops from 60 mph take just 116 feet, compared to the Bullitt's 125 feet.


The brakes are SO much better than the LT1 car.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 22, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> ego got biger than abilities...those dam corners are addicting!


Yep, I'm a corner fan, screw drag racing.


----------



## Randy (Jun 22, 2004)

Mudge,

That's funny...Everyone knows the stock camaro Z28 can beat a stock GT 4.6 litre Mustang. If I could race more than 3-4 car lengths before getting caught in traffic or written a 100.00 - 200.00 speeding ticket everywhere I turned around herein the busy cities of California, maybe someone could benefit from a camaro  . You'll learn though after a few of those tickets  

But what is funny is my girlfriend had a 98 Z28. It had a georgeous burgundy paint job and the all aluminum block and heads with roller rockers. For a stock car it cooked ass.... I drove it all the time. But when I compared the comfort to my mustang, there was no comparison. Also the fenders and body panels were all coming loose and rattled. You couldn't tell by looking at the car, but when I touch the fenders the plastic grommets were breaking lose. When you drove the car down the freeway you could feel a lot of rattles. I'll tell you the car was built very poorly. Unfortunately do to some unfortunate circumstances, the car has been replaced. Guess what, she bought a new mustang 

Well someone needs to drive those camaros to help pay for our police forces salary. Have to keep them out there so they can continue writing tickets and making the city money 

*** wait I think I see Mudge zipping by now as we speak  *****




			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> This Bud's for you Randy
> 
> http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/47901/page013.html
> 
> ...


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 22, 2004)

any poser 'squid' can go fast in a straight line on a bike...hit some corners and see if ya can keep up


----------



## Randy (Jun 22, 2004)

Hey I think Mudge is back there somewhere


----------



## Randy (Jun 22, 2004)

This is all Mudge see's in his camaro....
But only while in 1st gear


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 22, 2004)

where do I get one of those? I want mine to be either red or black..


----------



## Randy (Jun 22, 2004)

I hear you Burner....a nice Burgundy Red ....

Oh wait,  see this cop?  I think he's looking for Mudge


----------



## Randy (Jun 22, 2004)

Now this should be a good race...

Watch this camaro cop catch Mudge


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 22, 2004)

BRIGHT red..


----------



## Mudge (Jun 22, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Now this should be a good race...
> 
> Watch this camaro cop catch Mudge


B4C police package, they get automatics. I have seen a couple white ones here, highway patrol. What are the stats on that ricey lookin GTR with dinky little donut wheels?   One thing I dont like about the stangs is those lame little 17x8"s they get, I want grip. Anything beyond 17x11" takes some bit of work though on a Camaro, although someone did 17x12" all the way around without tubs or fender flares.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> B4C police package, they get automatics. I have seen a couple white ones here, highway patrol. What are the stats on that ricey lookin GTR with dinky little donut wheels?  One thing I dont like about the stangs is those lame little 17x8"s they get, I want grip. Anything beyond 17x11" takes some bit of work though on a Camaro, although someone did 17x12" all the way around without tubs or fender flares.


I would not go above 18s on my car. Tell me mudge, what rims look good on a Camaro? I never seen Camaro with nice looking rims, I???m dead serious. I love the Camaro performance thats for sure but when it comes to looks all the loving stops there.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 22, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> This is all Mudge see's in his camaro....
> But only while in 1st gear


Is that thing really ever going to come out? That wing looks kinda ricey to me, the rest looks good though


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> B4C police package, they get automatics.


I think automatics are kinda underrated, it does not mean you???re automatically driving a slow car. If I ever go above 600HP in a car you wont be seen me driving a manual that???s for sure, even though it???s more fun to drive but human can shit as fast as a computer does and also does not missed shifts.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 22, 2004)

There are plenty of 6 second cars running manuals my friend. However for most drivers using old fashioned shifters, it would be better to run an auto. With less gears, it takes the car out of the powerband, so yes it would be slower on a top speed run. For a drag race, you must balance your trans and rear gears together, but a lot of cars still run powerglides - with major power to get the car moving.



			
				KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I would not go above 18s on my car. Tell me mudge, what rims look good on a Camaro? I never seen Camaro with nice looking rims, I???m dead serious. I love the Camaro performance thats for sure but when it comes to looks all the loving stops there.


I like Z06 wheels, I'd like a set. I am not big on bling at all though, but I need some better stick than 16x8s.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 22, 2004)

Not questioning weather there are 6 second cars with manual transmission; that I know. But for bad drivers like myself I would be better off with an automatic with a shiatload of power behind it. 



As for the rims and all that crap I need a dose from both worlds, looks and performance. I could not be any happier with my stang. This morning I placed an order for an intake plenum and a 75mm throttle body. That should do it for the intake for now. Next stop is long tube headers


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> What are the stats .


Here they have an article on the GTR you may want to read.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 22, 2004)

Take that wing out and I would be set


----------



## Mudge (Jun 22, 2004)

I'm not big on the orange, but I'll check the article out for some salivation.

Posting a pic, it looks familiar I'm sure as you see them all the time.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 22, 2004)

I think the yellow and the carbon fiver hood looks good. The only beef I have is that damn wing  . I see a lot of V6s not many Z28 or SS around here, I see more corvettes cruising around then I do Z28 and SS


----------



## aggies1ut (Jun 22, 2004)

That wing is terrible.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 22, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I see a lot of V6s not many Z28 or SS around here, I see more corvettes cruising around then I do Z28 and SS


Strange. Its the V6 sales that were horrible for GM, the V8 sales were about equal to V8 Mustang sales.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

I???m guessing everyone that bought a V6 moved around where I live, I wasn???t joking when I said I see more corvettes around than Z28 and SS put together


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Take that wing out and I would be set


I'm removing it right now as we speak Kata


----------



## Mudge (Jun 23, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I???m guessing everyone that bought a V6 moved around where I live, I wasn???t joking when I said I see more corvettes around than Z28 and SS put together


Now that the C5 prices have come down so much they are defintely a nice buy, for those that can live with a 2 seater.


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

...


----------



## Mudge (Jun 23, 2004)

It has underbody work too, very nice. The wing was functional though I'm sure, the Cobra R wing looks "ricey" but still, functional.

Even the C5 will get light in the back at high speeds and its weight distribution blows away the Mustangs.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> ...


Randy take that GTR back to the dealer they fucked up the paint job


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> It has underbody work too, very nice. The wing was functional though I'm sure, the Cobra R wing looks "ricey" but still, functional.


Cobra R wing IMO flows with the car, it would look ugly without it because of that hood it has. That???s just my personal opinion though. Yeah you right it looks kind of ricey but not as bad as the one that GTR had on.


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Randy take that GTR back to the dealer they fucked up the paint job


Sorry Kata,  had a clogged spray gun man


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Sorry Kata, had a clogged spray gun man


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Even the C5 will get light in the back at high speeds and its weight distribution blows away the Mustangs.


They can always do what I do with my stang which has no wing either, only one left had to use the rest. 











BTW this is just a joke I don???t really do this  , but now that I think about its not a bad idea if I ever run across traction problems


----------



## Mudge (Jun 23, 2004)

Yeah sandbagging the car, but then you have a heavy car where as a wing "adds weight" but does not cause you to decrease your side grip because it is DOWNFORCE not raw weight. 

Sandbagging (if legal) is better for drag racing, then you only have to worry about your brakes.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

lol I didn???t know people actually did this. I???m the new kid on the block when it comes to all this car talk


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> lol I didn???t know people actually did this. I???m the new kid on the block when it comes to all this car talk


 
Yeah Kata...that was a very old trick that was mainly used with trucks or El Caminos where there was no weight in the ass end.   In those cases you wanted the weight to keep your ass from fish tailing.  No wing would help that.
Although the purpose of trucks are not to race,  but you know every vehicle manufactured was raced at some point of time whether designed to or not


----------



## Mudge (Jun 23, 2004)

Yep, I've seen a cage installed in a Ford Festiva. The only car that could beat that for  are you doing factor would be, a Yugo (3 lug nuts).


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)




----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

Here goes Mudge off to the races


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

Those sleepers are the scary ones.  

http://members.cox.net/demarco65/Caravan%20_vs_Z28.MPG


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

DAAAAYYYYYYAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMM.... Mudge better go hide 
And hell the family was still in the damn caravan too 




			
				KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Those sleepers are the scary ones.
> 
> http://members.cox.net/demarco65/Caravan%20_vs_Z28.MPG


----------



## PreMier (Jun 23, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Here they have an article on the GTR you may want to read.


Wow... Wow... Wow...  Thats one sweet car.


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

Yeah Premier...I'm the one that posted it god dammit 
I want it....  or will trade motors


----------



## PreMier (Jun 23, 2004)

Oh, sorry Randy.  

I would need to put another seat in it... that way I could puck up chicks


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

PreMier said:
			
		

> Oh, sorry Randy.
> 
> I would need to put another seat in it... that way I could puck up chicks


Why, just have them sit on your lap


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

Now if you had a choice between this and a women, what would you take


----------



## PreMier (Jun 23, 2004)

How much does it cost?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Yeah Premier...I'm the one that posted it god dammit


You posted the pics, I added more details to it


----------



## Randy (Jun 23, 2004)

I'm not sure how much it costs... do you know Kata?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

The car is not out yet but word is that is going to be in the 100s. I???m not sure how correct that is, just word from others


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

I quote from http://www.brothersperformance.com/newsletter/MustangGTR/
???pricing will be announced closer to launch??? so I???m guessing nobody really knows and all they can take are guesses.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 23, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Those sleepers are the scary ones.
> 
> http://members.cox.net/demarco65/Caravan%20_vs_Z28.MPGhttp://members.cox.net/demarco65/Caravan _vs_Z28.MPGhttp://members.cox.net/demarco65/Caravan _vs_Z28.MPG


Mid 12s mini van, he wanted something different. There is also a K car that beat a turbo Supra badly.

If the car comes out like that I wonder if it would even be legal in CA, no airbag. Over 100k seems a bit far fetched for a race car, no carpet over the trans tunnel? I dont see a lot of boy racers with 100k, even Ferraris have carpet.

The shifter looks horrible, but who knows how it feels.

Cars far cheaper have paddle shifters now, why not this one for a price like that? If this is a raw concept though it may change in a huge huge way by the time it hits the floor, concept cars always have a bajillion horsepower and look cool until they hit production.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 23, 2004)

The engine it has on the concept is already being made, in fact according to what I read you can even buy one for the $15,000 price tag on it, so I???m thinking the concept HP rating and the final production model won???t be much different. The outside of the car and interior could see some big changes though, you never know.


----------



## Randy (Jun 24, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I quote from http://www.brothersperformance.com/newsletter/MustangGTR/
> ???pricing will be announced closer to launch??? so I???m guessing nobody really knows and all they can take are guesses.


Link is dead Kata


----------



## Randy (Jun 24, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> The engine it has on the concept is already being made, in fact according to what I read you can even buy one for the $15,000 price tag on it, so I???m thinking the concept HP rating and the final production model won???t be much different. The outside of the car and interior could see some big changes though, you never know.


That would be an awsome upgrade motor for any GT


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 25, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Link is dead Kata


They must be having some problem, try some other time when you get a chance. It was working when I posted it


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 25, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> That would be an awsome upgrade motor for any GT


I seen engines for sale for about 5k less and producing a whole lot more HP than that one. 

http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=4622&prmenbr=361

http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=217731&prmenbr=361


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 25, 2004)

You know sometimes I think it would be easier for me and cheaper to reach 500+ HP by buying a new engine and drop it in than spending all the money in the mods. Of course that would be no fun though.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 25, 2004)

No way man, 15 grand for a new engine vs 5k in mods? 

One big reason I stayed NA though, was no blower to repair (bearings), no fuel pump to replace (not that expensive but it adds up), just things like that which add up on you. When you want to hit a certain power level it just all comes together and eventually costs a good deal if you do it right.

Not counting suspension mods I spent $2260 to make around 470 crank HP on my dinosaur LT1. I did the tuning myself which ran  me $100 an hour, only spent one hour, fuel is quick work if you have a brain but timing can be played with for hundreds of flashes (I have heard of 400 for a 'perfect' tune). One the low end of things (under 1400) there was a big difference with a degree here or there of timing, unfortunately I could never fmind my old sweet spot where it had balls EVERYWHERE without getting ping on the 91 cat pee we have here.

Now I can throw a cam and headers on and make 400+ RW if I wanted, with a tune of course. At this time though I am thinking of, if I go balls to the wall later on, a small blower cam, headers, injectors, and maybe 6-8psi. Since your compression ratio is much lower than mine you are somewhat free to play on your pressure, if the blower is efficient at those levels (builds up heat). There are some CARB legal turbo kits though that I may look into, there are several reasons to go turbo over blower for me.

Before you drop cash just make sure you think it through. Like Randy keeps saying, there is really a limit to how much and how often you can have fun with a low 11 second car. My car didn't have enough tire on it to really enjoy it full throttle without pushing the rear hard and making it risky, not to mention that a few seconds of pedal = no license for you buddy. I could throw the car in second gear on the freeway and fly past anyone at will.


----------



## Burner02 (Jun 25, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I seen engines for sale for about 5k less and producing a whole lot more HP than that one.
> 
> http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=4622&prmenbr=361
> 
> http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=217731&prmenbr=361http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=217731&prmenbr=361


 
dang mudge, stick THAT into your 240..and hold on!


----------



## Mudge (Jun 25, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=4622&prmenbr=361
> 
> http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=217731&prmenbr=361http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=217731&prmenbr=361


Costs some bread to convert to fuel injection, the LT1 intake was popular to put on older SBCs, www.lt1intake.com I believe.

Your car will handle 450HP if not a bit more, I know when I had my Cobra people were blowing the GTs and getting 450ish and around 500 on the Cobra. One thing I'd keep in mind when making that kind of power is to not go mad on the cam and rev the snot out of it. The Viper also does not have a lot of RPM range, you can simply gear it down and spread that RPM out without shifting all day long. For serious HP/TQ I'd look into a blower, used from a reputable person or etc, injectors, a tune, and headers. Then down the line grab a blower cam setup, have fun working with OHC   If you plan to use that power for extended durations then you'll want an intercooler, the piping costs some bread too. For me this is the only option, I need extended full time power.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 25, 2004)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> dang mudge, stick THAT into your 240..and hold on!


There are some big block 240Z cars that pull nice wheelies (they go live axle at that point). I have a 9.35@143 "RATSUN" clip, women driven/owned. I believe there is only one 9 second 240Z running an R200 (later model stock rear), 200mm ring gear similar to the automatic C4 cars. The R230 off the Q45 is a semi-popular swap, and comes with CV joints instead of the earlier Us.

My favorite project is http://www.fastassdatsun.com/

Solid frame, 17x11"/17x9" Vette wheels, lots of Vette parts (front suspension, not sure which IRS but C4 has been used), 2400-2500 pounds and around 650 HP I believe. Intended for road race use of course.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 25, 2004)

On a serious note though, going from 200 or 300 something horsepower to 400/500/600 something is going to completely change the dynamics of the car (it will push HARD). I weant from headers/cold air to pushing around 470 HP and just lifting off the gas too quickly sent me sideways slightly over 100 MPH into the dirt on the track. If you are shooting for an honest 500+ the problem is going to be even worse, especially on a shorter wheelbase car.

Baby steps would be prudent, otherwise seriously you probably wont be able to drive the car full throttle again or at least anytime soon, safely.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 25, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> On a serious note though, going from 200 or 300 something horsepower to 400/500/600 something is going to completely change the dynamics of the car (it will push HARD). I weant from headers/cold air to pushing around 470 HP and just lifting off the gas too quickly sent me sideways slightly over 100 MPH into the dirt on the track. If you are shooting for an honest 500+ the problem is going to be even worse, especially on a shorter wheelbase car.
> 
> Baby steps would be prudent, otherwise seriously you probably wont be able to drive the car full throttle again or at least anytime soon, safely.


Mudge my thought is not to jump from my 270 or so HP stang to 500+ from night to day. As I have mentioned before I???m taking it one step at the time. My goal is to reach that number or something around there within the next two to three years. I???m a fairly good driver in reality compared to so many of my buddies (although I always say I???m an worst driver ever, I know when you get too confident and lose a sense of some fear that???s when problems start to happen), but 500 hp from night to day is pushing it for me. It???s a long road ahead of me to get up there


----------



## Randy (Jun 25, 2004)

Good luck to you guys....

I've been down the high horsepower road many many times again. While it is loads of fun while things are going well, you are always in for problems. The car ends up sitting more than it does driving. Either that or you have many endless nights of staying up all night with the drop light and cherry picker   

Mark my words, "Keeping your car reasonably stock has many benefits" .
Adding a few mods is fine, but when you get into swapping motors and stuff, I recommend that be done on a secondary vehicle that you call your "Toy". 

Weren't you just discussing trying to get your car together Mudge after sitting?
Could this be why you bought your camaro?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 25, 2004)

I don???t plan on swapping engine Randy, what I posted before about buying a 500hp crate motor for 5 or 6 grand being cheaper than making my engine reach those numbers was just a random though I get sometimes, not something I really plan on doing. I want to get a chance to work on the car myself. I do agree keeping your car stock has its benefits when it comes time to sell or trade in, something which I do not plan on doing. The day I need another car for whatever reason I will buy one, but this one is not going anywhere. I doubt I???m the only one who feels that way about their first car.


----------



## Randy (Jun 25, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I don???t plan on swapping engine Randy, what I posted before about buying a 500hp crate motor for 5 or 6 grand being cheaper than making my engine reach those numbers was just a random though I get sometimes, not something I really plan on doing. I want to get a chance to work on the car myself. I do agree keeping your car stock has its benefits when it comes time to sell or trade in, something which I do not plan on doing. The day I need another car for whatever reason I will buy one, but this one is not going anywhere. I doubt I???m the only one who feels that way about their first car.


Oh, this is your first car Kata?  Well damn nice one for your first car.  My brother was nice enough to give me my first car.   It was a 1966 Plymouth Valient.  I was thrilled to have it, but like a fool I wrecked it.   The car had 3 on the tree slant 6 and purred like a kitten.  I had a blue metalic paint job put on by miracle and bought some 60 series radials and nice chrome rims for it.   I had to go out drinking one night and showing off ...well you can imagine the rest.  I guess it was a good learning experience though.  I wrecked the entire front end.  My punishment was having to get my tools together and go down to pick and pull and dismantle another car to get the front end.  I was able to fix it and then sold it to a college girl.    

My second car was a 69 Dodge Dart with a 318.  It had a muncie 4 speed and kicked some royal ass.  I beat lots of cars with that one...  On its last day I pulled a 383 mopar in a charger I believe it was.... I was buzzed, had the stereo cranked, and had the water pump bearing go out.  It forced the fan into the radiator.  By the time I pulled into the drive way I had a serious rod knock and blown the head gasket big time... The motor was toast.

After that I went through my VW stage and used to race some mean VW's that would blow V8's away.  They were so fast they would lift the front end off the ground about 2 feet in the air in second and third    I definately used to get some head turns with those..    I cut the front ends and twisted them about 1/4 inch and dropped them and put the small tires on.. They handled like go carts...   I had a buddy in the car once and was driving down the freeway in the rain one night..  I took it up to about 80 and hit the e-brake and spun the car like 6 times ....Scared the hell out of my buddy 
That was something I used to love to do...   With the ebrakes and lowered you couldn't flip em...   With the right speed and some rain they would spin in a straight line with no problem.    Was a blast...


Well then after blowing up several bug motors do to the extreme modified nature and the fact that their cylinders where as thin as paper,  I moved back to the V8 class.....


----------



## Mudge (Jun 25, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Good luck to you guys....
> 
> I've been down the high horsepower road many many times again. While it is loads of fun while things are going well, you are always in for problems. The car ends up sitting more than it does driving. Either that or you have many endless nights of staying up all night with the drop light and cherry picker


Another reason I chose to stay NA, plug and play.



> Weren't you just discussing trying to get your car together Mudge after sitting?
> Could this be why you bought your camaro?


That is supposed to be my 'race car,' I had a CRX as my beater, and before that a Mazda 323.


----------



## Randy (Jun 25, 2004)

...


			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> Another reason I chose to stay NA, plug and play.
> 
> Isn't the correct term,  "Plug and Pray?"
> 
> ...


----------



## Mudge (Jun 25, 2004)

The only real pray part is tuning and hoping you dont over-rev the thing or something, but yeah I almost brought up the joke.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Isn't the correct term, "Plug and Pray?"


You know the day I was changing the stock H pipe that my mustang came with an X pipe I spent the first I???d say 30 min wanting tear the car up. The passenger side was a biatch to get off from the headers, there was just no way of doing it a comfortable manner, I???m a big guy and the car wasn???t too high off the ground so I got a few cramps in there. But you know after I was done and I heard that baby roar every sec I spent kicking myself was worth it, it was a good feeling. You can???t expect everything to go your way, but when you get the job done, it???s an awesome feeling you get.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

I just noticed I???m getting into the habit of starting the sentence of with ???you know???  , gota brake that, been using that way too many times lately


----------



## Mudge (Jun 26, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> You know the day I was changing the stock H pipe that my mustang came with an X pipe I spent the first I???d say 30 min wanting tear the car up. The passenger side was a biatch to get off from the headers, there was just no way of doing it a comfortable manner, I???m a big guy and the car wasn???t too high off the ground so I got a few cramps in there. But you know after I was done and I heard that baby roar every sec I spent kicking myself was worth it, it was a good feeling. You can???t expect everything to go your way, but when you get the job done, it???s an awesome feeling you get.


Damn dude and you are just beginning. Like was said above, wait until it takes you so long and supprise things come up, that your car doesn't run for a few days.

For me to do a heads/cam swap on the Camaro I could not do it in a single day, not with my breaks (food, coffee etc) anyway. I've tried and I just could not do it, always took me 2 days.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Damn dude and you are just beginning. Like was said above, wait until it takes you so long and supprise things come up, that your car doesn't run for a few days.
> 
> For me to do a heads/cam swap on the Camaro I could not do it in a single day, not with my breaks (food, coffee etc) anyway. I've tried and I just could not do it, always took me 2 days.


  what do you expect? I'm not an old fart like you guys  . I imagine the trouble may begin opening the engine up. I may not even do it. As far as I know 99+ Mustangs came with PI heads that are decent. So I may jump when I get done with intake and headers to a blower and not mess around with the engine. Fortunately I know a lot of people who know a shiatload more about mechanics than I do who I know would be happy to help me with any problems. 




 I spent more time tacking the passenger side off than I did with the rest of the pipe, it even took me less time to completely install the new X pipe, so you can imagine what a biatch it was to take that one side off, the whole work took me a good three hours; with water brakes every now and then. I did it outside that day, it wasn't so hot but it was so humid. Catback was no problem, I have more trouble putting my shoes on than installing that.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 26, 2004)

Catback on our cars sucks, have to raise the rear end about 3 feet or else drop it via the shocks, I would rather drop it (which also means removing the rear sway bar end links). This is mainly because of the big ass bend in the pipe that wraps over the axle tube.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

I had to cut the stock catback before the bend to be able to take it off, after that it was all straight forward.


----------



## Randy (Jun 26, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> You know the day I was changing the stock H pipe that my mustang came with an X pipe I spent the first I???d say 30 min wanting tear the car up. The passenger side was a biatch to get off from the headers, there was just no way of doing it a comfortable manner, I???m a big guy and the car wasn???t too high off the ground so I got a few cramps in there. But you know after I was done and I heard that baby roar every sec I spent kicking myself was worth it, it was a good feeling. You can???t expect everything to go your way, but when you get the job done, it???s an awesome feeling you get.


Kata,

Welcome to the world of headers


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Kata,
> 
> Welcome to the world of headers


Changing the headers I know is going to be a biatch, from what I have heard I will need to raise the engine up to take one of the sides off. It???s definitely not a job I will take on to myself, I will have someone more experienced at my side to kind of guide me thru it.


----------



## Randy (Jun 26, 2004)

Well in my experience I have not run into a simple header installation.  Now some of course are much less painful than others, but most are all a pain in the ass.

With my Chevy Camaro I have tried 2 brands...  The early Headman headers and Hooker.  The headman were far easier in my application.  I did have one spark plug wire that rubbed the header tube though.   I heated that tube with a torch and knocked a little dimple in the pipe..  Never had a problem with it again.   Then prior to its becoming smog exempt I had to remove them and drop on a set of hookers with air injection tubes.... (That sucked).    The Hookers I had thought had a pretty good reputation.  In my opinion they sucked big time.   With those I could barely get the wires on at all on at least 2 cylinders.   I ended up having to get shorty plugs and still had issues.    In any case, I got the smog those things were the first to go.  I put the headmans back and all was fine again. 

But the moral of the story here is that each header/car application has their own personalities...  All though, are a pain in the ass..   Unless you have a hot rod with the fender walls cut then it's pretty easy.... but most don't.


----------



## BigBallaGA (Jun 26, 2004)

pretty sweet !!!!!!


http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mustangspin.wmv


----------



## Mudge (Jun 26, 2004)

He must have been driving a stolen V6   What a dumbass.


----------



## Randy (Jun 26, 2004)

BigBallaGA said:
			
		

> pretty sweet !!!!!!
> 
> 
> http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mustangspin.wmv


That was hillarious


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 26, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> That was hillarious


Agreed.  Especially because he obviously had no chance of outrunning the cops with that V6 stang.  Police cruisers are slow and heavy.  There are plenty of cars that could outrun it.  Steal one of those.  

I've actually run from the police before, and my car smoked the shit out of their cruisers.  Not say anyone should try it.  I ended up crashing because I was just about to get away on an exit ramp, but I was still going well over 100.  Somebody jumped onto the exit ramp at the last second right in front of me.  Needless to say, my car wasn't quite capable of emergency lane change manuvers (It was a two lane exit ramp) at whatever speed I was going.  On the bright side, no one was injured and my car still runs.  I drove the bitch home from 200 miles away.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

LMAO that video was great. V6 stangs are incredible slow though, my uncle has a 98 auto V6 mustang and he though he had a pretty fast car until I let him take a little test drive on my stang


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 26, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> LMAO that video was great. V6 stangs are incredible slow though, my uncle has a 98 auto V6 mustang and he though he had a pretty fast car until I let him take a little test drive on my stang


What kind of Stang do you have?


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> What kind of Stang do you have?


 04 GT 5 speed with 4.10 gears, off road x pipe, and magnaflow catback. It???s not incredibly fast compared to other sports cars out there with a V8; but compared to a V6 stang and most of the everyday car out there I???m driving a rocket with wheels.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 26, 2004)

Going to 4.10s from a 3.42 seems to pull about 3/10ths off the Fbody time slip in the quarter, unless that was 3.73s I already dont remember (I dont drag).


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 26, 2004)

Yeah must be 4.10s or lower to pull 3/10 off from your slip. I really doubt it could happen with 3.73 or even 3.90 for that mater


----------



## Mudge (Jun 26, 2004)

No 3.90s for us in a 10 bolt 

http://www.sixstroke.com/index.html

A 6 stroke engine, claimed 35% more power over a similar 4 stroke.


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 26, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> 04 GT 5 speed with 4.10 gears, off road x pipe, and magnaflow catback. It???s not incredibly fast compared to other sports cars out there with a V8; but compared to a V6 stang and most of the everyday car out there I???m driving a rocket with wheels.


Good stuff.  It would probably be a fun race if you lived around here.  I'm guessing you run mid-high 13s?  If so, that is very respectable.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> A 6 stroke engine, claimed 35% more power over a similar 4 stroke.


    Interesting, soon is not going to be weather your bike can run a 6 sec flat, but weather you got the cojones to do it.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 27, 2004)

Even a much slower bike most people can't drive them as fast as a pro rider, same for cars really though but on a bike its even worse. A busa will run 9s, most riders couldn't pull it off.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I'm guessing you run mid-high 13s? If so, that is very respectable.


 That???s about right; my latest times are from mid to high 13s in that range


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> It would probably be a fun race if you lived around here.


  What do you drive?


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> No 3.90s for us in a 10 bolt
> 
> 
> http://www.sixstroke.com/index.html
> ...


10 bolts I hear are fine up to like 400-500 horsepower . Then they tend to get twisted in half like a freakin pretzel


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

Kata,

What did the 4.10 gear ratio do to your gas milaege?
My stock mustang now gets about 18 mpg on the freeway at best.
In town with lots of stop and go driving like I'm forced to do most of the time I get about 16.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> 10 bolts I hear are fine up to like 400-500 horsepower . Then they tend to get twisted in half like a freakin pretzel


With slicks even stock cars will break them, you are probably thinking about the 8.5" 10 bolt. Since I dont drag race, I dont break parts


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Kata,
> 
> What did the 4.10 gear ratio do to your gas milaege?
> My stock mustang now gets about 18 mpg on the freeway at best.
> In town with lots of stop and go driving like I'm forced to do most of the time I get about 16.


   I didn???t really notice any noticeable different in my gas mileage. It's all on how you drive it.


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 27, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> What do you drive?


I have a 96 Eagle Talon TSi AWD, but with some significant mods.  Awesome car for street racing, although I only actually race once in a blue moon.  AWD means I can launch at 6K RPM on the street without wheelspin.  Of course, AWD also means the drivetrain likes to break if you launch like that too much.


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

I was talking about street cars..
Same goes for exhaust... Many drop on that 3 inch exhaust which they say is not necessary until you get into the 400-500hp stage...  Otherwise you rob yourself of needed back pressure.   That's what I read anyway.




			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> With slicks even stock cars will break them, you are probably thinking about the 8.5" 10 bolt. Since I dont drag race, I dont break parts


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I didn???t really notice any noticeable different in my gas mileage. It's all on how you drive it.


Wow! I would think you would notice a considerable drop in gas mileage with that low gear ratio. 

You must be reving at 4-5 grand at 60mph on the freeway.


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I have a 96 Eagle Talon TSi AWD, but with some significant mods. Awesome car for street racing, although I only actually race once in a blue moon. AWD means I can launch at 6K RPM on the street without wheelspin. Of course, AWD also means the drivetrain likes to break if you launch like that too much.


AWD means all wheel drive...  That would definately assure minimal lost traction on swift take offs    I never had an AWD car though.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Wow! I would think you would notice a considerable drop in gas mileage with that low gear ratio.
> 
> You must be reving at 4-5 grand at 60mph on the freeway.


 If you do a lot of driving on the HW you will notice a drop, but I don???t so it doesn???t really bother me. Is not going to be 4000-5000 rpm on the highway, not at 60mph. The difference with 4.10 over stock is about a 15-20% increase in rpm or something around there.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Wow! I would think you would notice a considerable drop in gas mileage with that low gear ratio.
> 
> You must be reving at 4-5 grand at 60mph on the freeway.


Damn Randy you are smokin something good, this isn't a 4 speed with a 4.56 we are talking about here.

1998 Camaro 6th gear
89 @ 2k RPM 3.42
74 @ 2k RPM 4.10

So 15 MPH difference for me. IIRC the Mustang gets a .68 5th unless that has changed recently (Word Class T5 is different).

Assuming .68 is correct
82 @ 2600 RPM 5th 3.55 (I dont recall what you guys get stock, 3.55 is a popular swap)
71 @ 2600 RPM 5th 4.10

Seriously in my 3.90 old ass 5 speed (12% OD 5th gear) 240Z I dont even see 4k RPM unless I'm breaking the law. The Mazda Miata is similar, very high RPM on the freeway in 5th or even the new 6th gear.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Many drop on that 3 inch exhaust which they say is not necessary until you get into the 400-500hp stage... Otherwise you rob yourself of needed back pressure.


Nope, backpressure (holding spent hot exaust in the cylinder head) never did anyone any good, NEVER. However you do want a nice smooth exaust flow, which is where tuned pipe length and things of that nature come in. If you removed the exaust header/manifold completely you'd burn the exaust valves, you dont want back pressure but you do want smooth flow.

Even with our puny 2.75" exaust a cutout nets people nearly 20 RWHP on an otherwise stock car, so no, backpressure is not a good thing. For $35 its one of the cheapest power mods available (2 for you dual exaust guys).


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

BTW Randy you must have a real heavy foot man; I get better gas mileage than you with my 4.10s. I get anywhere from 17-20 mpg, depending on how I feel like driving 


Also you may want to take your air silencer off if you haven???t, you car is basically breathing thru a straw with that thing; not good.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Nope, backpressure (holding spent hot exaust in the cylinder head) never did anyone any good, NEVER. However you do want a nice smooth exaust flow, which is where tuned pipe length and things of that nature come in. If you removed the exaust header/manifold completely you'd burn the exaust valves, you dont want back pressure but you do want smooth flow.


Agreed


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> BTW Randy you must have a real heavy foot man; I get better gas mileage than you with my 4.10s. I get anywhere from 17-20 mpg, depending on how I feel like driving
> 
> 
> Also you may want to take your air silencer off if you haven???t, you car is basically breathing thru a straw with that thing; not good.


Yeah, that is why all these figures that are being tossed out seems fictitious to me.   I am getting exactly what the sticker on my car said when I bought my car new.    And this is when I would consider myself as babying the car. 

As far as Mudges statement regarding back pressure, that is contrary to everything I heard.   Now I know if you have a serious exhaust leak or run open headers for a long period of time you are mixing cold are with hot which can cause a burnt exhaust valve...That I agree with.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Yeah, that is why all these figures that are being tossed out seems fictitious to me. I am getting exactly what the sticker on my car said when I bought my car new.  And this is when I would consider myself as babying the car.
> 
> As far as Mudges statement regarding back pressure, that is contrary to everything I heard. Now I know if you have a serious exhaust leak or run open headers for a long period of time you are mixing cold are with hot which can cause a burnt exhaust valve...That I agree with.


My sticker gas mileage for city driving was 18, and HW was about 20 or 21 don???t remember. Backpressure thing is a myth; I will try to find an article I read that disproved all that crap people say about back pressure being good.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

Read this Randy, there are a few more out there also. 

http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/html_product/sue462/backpressuretorquemyth.htm


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I was talking about street cars..
> Same goes for exhaust... Many drop on that 3 inch exhaust which they say is not necessary until you get into the 400-500hp stage... Otherwise you rob yourself of needed back pressure. That's what I read anyway.


Back pressure is always bad for drag racing.  Back pressure is only good for gas mileage figures quoted by manufacturers.  This is because back pressure increases torque a little bit in the 1-3K RPM range, which is where most people keep their engine's cranking under normal acceleration.  However, this means nothing when drag racing.  You want peak WHP and the powerband only has to be strong in the upper portion of the RPM range.

Things get even worst for back pressure in a turbocharged car.  This is because the turbocharger is powered by the exhaust gases.  Therefore, you want the best flowing exhaust possible so that your turbo will spool lower and faster.


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

Here's Mudge's Race Car  
Mudge believes in saying no to back pressure


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 27, 2004)

My dream exhaust


----------



## supertech (Jun 27, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Here's Mudge's Race Car
> Mudge believes in saying no to back pressure


----------



## Randy (Jun 27, 2004)

Mudge feels with all the power of his race car he was forced to design his own modified rear spoiler...


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 27, 2004)

I'm not sure whether laughing or crying is the appropriate emotion for those pictures...


----------



## Randy (Jun 28, 2004)

I would say that "Crying" would be the one Cowpimp.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 28, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> As far as Mudges statement regarding back pressure, that is contrary to everything I heard. Now I know if you have a serious exhaust leak or run open headers for a long period of time you are mixing cold are with hot which can cause a burnt exhaust valve...That I agree with.


How many people out there open their mouth and dont know what they are talking about brother? How many people talk about bodybuilding information from the 60s that has since been disproven, but people still do it? I read Arnold's Bodybuilding Encyclopedia so I was guilty of some of the same things too.

Exaust leaks are no good especially on todays cars, where an O2 sensor will pick up that oxygen and give you an incorrect AF ratio. Vacuum leaks and exaust leaks on one side of the car will give you what we call a BLM split, a block learns AF trim difference on both sides of the car making it run crappily.

Turbos are great for getting big torque numbers, but back pressure is not a neccessity for anyone. Peak torque and horsepower will go up with a freed up exaust. If you look at David Vizard's books he will talk about exaust length tuning not just header primaries but total exaust itself, as well as diameter. He will also go into how to build your own backpressure meter, but anyhow, it serves nobody a purpose at all. Backpressure is a side effect of a quiet exaust, the cheaper the muffler the worse the effect per decibel.

Nobody is saying get a dual 8" exaust here, you want exaust velocity here, which is why also exaust will be taylored for the exact RPM range someone expects to me in when we are talking race cars. Look into a pair of cutouts if you want cheap horsepower, to keep "the man" off your back about it they would have to be post-cats. You should pick up a nice 10-20 HP off of them, and have your temporarily "cool" loud exaust, although I'm not a fan of them on stock cars for idle sound 

I dont read about this stuff like I used to but if you want to learn something and not just to off some kids "interweb legend," pick up a book(s) from David Vizard who will talk theory so that you actually understand the how and why. I have his head porting SBC book but none of the other titles.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 28, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I'm not sure whether laughing or crying is the appropriate emotion for those pictures...


I can???t help it but to laugh every time


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 28, 2004)

That 10-20hp sound good from just cutouts, BUT I wouldn???t do it unless you have stock exaust. My exaust system is already crazy loud because I have no cats and my mufflers are not too restrictive, far less restrictive than the popular flowmasters. I imagine you wont see much difference if you have a good aftermaker exaust system, even less if you have off road mid pipes. Good little mod for stock exaust though


----------



## Mudge (Jun 28, 2004)

Catbacks on the Camaros produce very little horsepower over stock in almost every instance on an otherwise stock car, its the cutouts that produce the most. As for the flowbees I have one on my car, I had them on my Cobra and on my old 69 Firebird, now I know better and will be getting probably a Hooker sometime soon or maybe a straight through style muffler.

I have heard of .2 gained by trashing the Flowbees and going Hooker/Borla.

On a modified car, I would expect 30 and up horsepower loss without a cutout. Our fans dont run off a belt and still getting rid of the alternator alone gives about 15 RWHP on dynos with larger cams. Electric water pump is worth about 7 on the top end, keep in mind this is almost all top end loss we are talking, so yes an open exaust is worth something.

Stock engine and stock exaust, nice mod. Modded engine, must have mod.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 28, 2004)

I have seen dyno sheet on a Mustang GT with only LT headers, cated x-pipe and Mac catback gained 28rwhp over the stock dyno.


----------



## Randy (Jun 28, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> That 10-20hp sound good from just cutouts, BUT I wouldn???t do it unless you have stock exaust. My exaust system is already crazy loud because I have no cats and my mufflers are not too restrictive, far less restrictive than the popular flowmasters. I imagine you wont see much difference if you have a good aftermaker exaust system, even less if you have off road mid pipes. Good little mod for stock exaust though


After making the mistake on my Camaro several years ago of installing dual chamber flowmasters,   I have acquired a preference toward quiet exhaust


----------



## Randy (Jun 28, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> How many people out there open their mouth and dont know what they are talking about brother? How many people talk about bodybuilding information from the 60s that has since been disproven, but people still do it? I read Arnold's Bodybuilding Encyclopedia so I was guilty of some of the same things too.
> 
> Exaust leaks are no good especially on todays cars, where an O2 sensor will pick up that oxygen and give you an incorrect AF ratio. Vacuum leaks and exaust leaks on one side of the car will give you what we call a BLM split, a block learns AF trim difference on both sides of the car making it run crappily.
> 
> ...


Thanks Dr. Mudge for clearing up this misconception BRUTHA


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 28, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> After making the mistake on my Camaro several years ago of installing dual chamber flowmasters, I have acquired a preference toward quiet exhaust


Camaro will never sound like a Mustang no matter what you do to it. My exaust is LAUD, but in a good way. I love the sound


----------



## Mudge (Jun 29, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I have seen dyno sheet on a Mustang GT with only LT headers, cated x-pipe and Mac catback gained 28rwhp over the stock dyno.


LT1s were getting 25+ with just LTs 



			
				Randy said:
			
		

> After making the mistake on my Camaro several years ago of installing dual chamber flowmasters, I have acquired a preference toward quiet exhaust


I used to have to be to work 35 miles away, at 3:30 in the morning. My car was a 69 Firebird, dual long tubes and dual 3" exaust back to dual chamber flows. I pushed my car out of the neighborhood. 



			
				KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Camaro will never sound like a Mustang no matter what you do to it. My exaust is LAUD, but in a good way. I love the sound


The stang does still sound different, however the LS1 is very similar since its the SAME firing order  My car reminds me very much of my Cobra days, same muffler, same firing order.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Camaro will never sound like a Mustang no matter what you do to it. My exaust is LAUD, but in a good way. I love the sound


You never heard a 68 camaro 387 cu in with headers and dual chamber flows...
Especially with the 3 inch pipes only run 3/4 of the way with turnbuckles pointing down... (total resinance to compound the matters). If you took a drive in the car, your ears would literally ring for 30 minutes. Neighbors windows would vibrate.. I can almost guarantee that it was much loader than your mustang. I'm not bragging here, that is a bad thing.
I was not happy with that at all since it was just to loud. I would drive down the road and cops clear on the other side would look at me. I had one that was writing someone a ticket on the opposite side of an expressway and he stopped writing to look and stare... I would have been much happier with the 3 chamber flowmasters... I heard them on a mustang and they sounded very nice. You still get the mean low pitched sound when you get on it, but yet its not overbearing.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 29, 2004)

The older Mustangs will sound very similar to an old Chevy, the new ones though I can tell virtually 100% of the time if not 100%. I dont recall when the firing order changed, 1983?

My 94 LT1 with an open cutout was not as loud nor had resonation like my 69 did, I set off car alarms 2 blocks away with my Firebird but my Camaro didn't unless I was gas happy. I had turndowns on my mufflers too but it wasn't far enough back, so I had too much cabin resonation because of it. You could not talk in the car on the freeway at all, you could not yell successfully either. 15 MPH or so you could talk if you were very loud, thats about the end of the line. Yes I had headache issues, but I was still you and dumb so I loved it.

I am becoming more like Randy, I still dream of big ass cams and open exaust but its not something I'd live with around the clock very well, nor would my  neighbors or the police. I got one fix it ticket for my 94 when it was modded, because of decibel level.

On the dyno I pegged the meter @ 125db, about like standing next to an ambulence.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I used to have to be to work 35 miles away, at 3:30 in the morning. My car was a 69 Firebird, dual long tubes and dual 3" exaust back to dual chamber flows. I pushed my car out of the neighborhood.
> .


Hell yeah  I can relate Mudge.. I couldn't even fire the car up after say 10pm. I didn't want to get any worse of a reputation than I had just by starting the car during normal hours . 

But unless you actually have had dual chamber flowmasters on a early model hot rod, you can't even imagine the sound they make 

Now as far as different sound, most definately the late model mustangs are completely different sounding than the early model hot rods. They have more of a cleaner fast reving sound. But I would say the early models had the potential of being louder and more obnoxious.

It's funny you mention car alarms....I used to set them off just idling     That is another reason why I didn't go out past 10pm...    Everywhere I went I was setting those damn alarms off...


----------



## Mudge (Jun 29, 2004)

Yep realistically my 69 was WEAK (3 speed, econo rear, probably tired) but daaaaaaamn it was loud and sounded SO badass, I loved stepping on the gas. 400 cubes of tired old Pontiac fun.

The one cop that pulled me over in that car (tail light was out) was telling me about his brothers old Camaro, cops LOVED that car. Seriously you get looks in a muscle car, newer cars, beh. I still want a 68 or something someday 

That car was riding on 225s and was maybe 3300ish pounds, so it was pretty easy to push the 4 blocks neccessary, plus it was on a slight grade downhill (couple degrees) so really it was not so bad, but a bit humorous. At the movie theater with some chick I was seeing in college, every time I started that thing up everyone would stare, seriously its like being a woman and going from an A cup to a double D or something, people treat you and look at you way differently for the rest of your days.

Every car I have had since then, I still think back to that sound and just feel like something is missing. My 94 had shorties (CARB legal) and of course a single exaust. EVERY time I see a fixed up first gen I get serious car envy.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2004)

I can't think of a single cop that liked my camaro, or me for that matter since I was driving it 

I remember one time when it was pretty late and not a car on the road I was out joy riding with some buddies.. I decided to bring it up to about 120 for a short burst. I ripped by an intersection and who do I see (Mr. officer of the law)  Well, at that point the question in my mind was "hmmm should I pull over after going 120 past the cop?" or "should I go even faster and lose him down a few residential neighborhoods?"
Well, I think you know the one I selected  Well after ripping through a few residentials, I pulled over and hit the lights. We just sat there shooting the breeze for at least 5-10 minutes until I seen headlights coming down the road  It was the cop. He asked me what I was doing in front of the house. I told him that I had just detailed the car and noticed I spilled some sunflower seeds and pulled over to pick them up  I couldn't think of anything else to say. And I did spill the seeds. He told me that he thought I was full of shit and asked for my license..He then accused me of being the yellow streak that flew by him like a blurred vision. I just played dumb, and denied it. He wrote on the back of my license... Advised by officer (Joe Blow) 22350 vehicle code. When I got home I just erased it with a pen eraser .... I thought it was funny then, but it was a stupid thing to do... You live and learn. I was like you , just young and dumb.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 29, 2004)

I was about 20 when I had that car, so perhaps my age meant something, and perhaps I got lucky with cops. I've seen them shoot the sheet with Harley guys too, guys on looooud ass bikes, so maybe we have some enthusiasts here dunno.

Anyhow, past my bedtime little Miss Muffet


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2004)

L8R Mudge...

I'm hitting the rack too


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 29, 2004)

I have to go to California one day and hear all this Camaros, I???m secluded from the rest of the world here it seems. I have never heard a Camaro or Corvette with a nice sounding exaust. I???m also talking about newer cars here not old ones. 



(By the way Randy I wasn???t born in 86, true I have never owned an older mustang or camaro made back 20 years before I was born. My comment made thinking on the newer cars)

I???m not trying to sound like an ass, just talking about the cars I been around.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> I have to go to California one day and hear all this Camaros, I???m secluded from the rest of the world here it seems. I have never heard a Camaro or Corvette with a nice sounding exaust. I???m also talking about newer cars here not old ones.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Kata,

I didn't mean to come across like you were born in a turnup truck 
I figured though that you were referring to the newer models. This is why I emphasized my statement about the early ones. I have not heard a new model mustang with equal flowmaster exhaust sound lounder than the early models.. That was my point. Face it Kata, the early 1967-1969 models arent't exactly filling the streets on every corner  . I don't care were you are, if your into the newer models, you may never really come across an early model and if you did you might not get the chance to hear it or pay much attention to it. Not only that with the limited 1967-1969 models out there, how many of them are running dual chamber flowmasters? I'll tell you, slim to none. You know how it is...If you're totally into something you seem to see and notice much more of them. If your not, you may not see any...  And I wasn't saying you didn't hear a camaro or corvette with a nice sounding exhaust. We were talking about obnoxiously loud exhaust.


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 29, 2004)

I think I'm the only one here who has a 4 cylinder car.  Don't get me wrong, there is no replacement for displacement, but I already can't afford gas.  Also, I love the sound of a nice 8 cylinder exhaust tone.  Plus, I love being able to smash V8s with half the cylinders.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 29, 2004)

I'm getting over 20 MPG, but it was nice being near 40 with a 4 cylinder yep.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 29, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Kata,
> 
> I didn't mean to come across like you were born in a turnup truck
> I figured though that you were referring to the newer models. This is why I emphasized my statement about the early ones. I have not heard a new model mustang with equal flowmaster exhaust sound lounder than the early models.. That was my point. Face it Kata, the early 1967-1969 models arent't exactly filling the streets on every corner  . I don't care were you are, if your into the newer models, you may never really come across an early model and if you did you might not get the chance to hear it or pay much attention to it. Not only that with the limited 1967-1969 models out there, how many of them are running dual chamber flowmasters? I'll tell you, slim to none. You know how it is...If you're totally into something you seem to see and notice much more of them. If your not, you may not see any... And I wasn't saying you didn't hear a camaro or corvette with a nice sounding exhaust. We were talking about obnoxiously loud exhaust.


 Loud exaust get old real quick on your daily driven car, at least it does for me. I can tell you this because after installation of the 4.10 gears my following buy was the off road x pipe. It was very loud indeed with the x pipe, but with the stock muffler is sounded like crap and only was kind of cool for me the first two weeks. After that I could not wait to get my hands on the Magnaflows. After installing my Magnaflows the tone was even louder, but it has an awesome sound, I just love it every single time I hear my baby roar. I have seen a couple of Mustangs from the 60s, and they sound incredible, way WAY better than my car; I was never arguing that point. As for Flowmaster I???m not a big fan. In the mustangs with an H pipe they sound great, now put them on an off road x pipe like the one I have and they sound like crap. I know this because I have heard them myself and also heard a lot of people talk about it. They are also more restrictive than some of the competitors. I wanted something not as restrictive as Flowmaster and still delivering a good tone, Magnaflows was my best bet and I couldn???t be any happier with my buy.


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 29, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I'm getting over 20 MPG, but it was nice being near 40 with a 4 cylinder yep.


Actually, I only get about 20MPG on my car in the city.  However, I make over 300HP at the crank.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Loud exaust get old real quick on your daily driven car, at least it does for me. I can tell you this because after installation of the 4.10 gears my following buy was the off road x pipe. It was very loud indeed with the x pipe, but with the stock muffler is sounded like crap and only was kind of cool for me the first two weeks. After that I could not wait to get my hands on the Magnaflows. After installing my Magnaflows the tone was even louder, but it has an awesome sound, I just love it every single time I hear my baby roar. I have seen a couple of Mustangs from the 60s, and they sound incredible, way WAY better than my car; I was never arguing that point. As for Flowmaster I???m not a big fan. In the mustangs with an H pipe they sound great, now put them on an off road x pipe like the one I have and they sound like crap. I know this because I have heard them myself and also heard a lot of people talk about it. They are also more restrictive than some of the competitors. I wanted something not as restrictive as Flowmaster and still delivering a good tone, Magnaflows was my best bet and I couldn???t be any happier with my buy.


Yeah, I hated the loud sound too....sucked.   When I can afford it, I will look at the Magnaflows for mine as well   But lowering it will come first.


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 29, 2004)

Found this video kind of funny  
   Reminds me of the saying "My Drill has more torque than your Honda..."

http://2north.net/forum/download.php?id=45


----------



## KataMaStEr (Jun 29, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> LT1s were getting 25+ with just LTs


 What about on an LS1, is that on a NA car? Is so that???s pretty darn impressive, I thought camaros where crap as far as exaust goes.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 29, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Actually, I only get about 20MPG on my car in the city. However, I make over 300HP at the crank.


My 37 MPG car was an 85 CRX, so I had about 86 HP at the crank.



			
				KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> What about on an LS1, is that on a NA car? Is so that???s pretty darn impressive, I thought camaros where crap as far as exaust goes.


I'm talking about an otherwise bone dead stock car brother, the LS1s dont get as much because the tubular exaust is better than the older cast iron manifolds. Incidentally however the Vettes went back to iron later on, but till an improved design over the old stuff. The LS1s pick up around 18 HP or so for starters, otherwise stock, air lid a bit less, and a K&N filter alone only shows about 3HP over stock.

Borla catback on a 96 LT1, not worth the price although it has a built in "cutout."
http://www.ws6.com/mod-5.htm


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 30, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> My 37 MPG car was an 85 CRX, so I had about 86 HP at the crank.


Not to mention those things weigh right about 2000 pounds curb weight.  My car is about 3150 curb weight due to the iron block the engine contains and the additional weight of the AWD drivetrain.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 30, 2004)

1830 pounds or thereabouts yep, rest assured a CRX with AWD and an iron block would weigh far less than 3150 pounds brother 

I carried a straight 6 shortblock (iron) up 4 flights of stairs, they dont weigh THAT much more than aluminum.


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 30, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> 1830 pounds or thereabouts yep, rest assured a CRX with AWD and an iron block would weigh far less than 3150 pounds brother
> 
> I carried a straight 6 shortblock (iron) up 4 flights of stairs, they dont weigh THAT much more than aluminum.


I know, it's still pretty heavy.  The FWD variant is about 2900 pounds.  I'm not entirely sure why.  Either way, these engines can handle 450HP at the crank without internal modification (Which is good for high 11s or low 12s).  So they can haul ass for a 4 cylinder.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 30, 2004)

250 pounds comes and goes pretty fast on a car these days, so who really knows yep.


----------



## Randy (Jun 30, 2004)

KataMaStEr said:
			
		

> Found this video kind of funny
> Reminds me of the saying "My Drill has more torque than your Honda..."
> 
> http://2north.net/forum/download.php?id=45


Some serious torque on that one don't you think?


----------



## Mudge (Jun 30, 2004)

"My 2 liter bottle of Mountain Dew has more cubes than your Honda" or something like that.


----------



## god hand (Jan 16, 2006)

Mustangs suck ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## kicka19 (Jan 16, 2006)

14 mpg, it is so horrible, v8 jeep 5.2, sucks my bank account dry


----------



## The Monkey Man (Jan 16, 2006)

http://www.streetcarforums.com/videos/JUDGEMENT%20DAY%202HR.wmv


----------

