Well, this is interesting,,,
- Thread starter Taildragger
- Start date
- Status
It's always good fun to tell my dad that my econo-hatch and family sedan are both faster than his old Trans-Ams.
What's even more fun is that combined, the displacement of both of the engines in my cars do not equal the displacement of one of the engines in either of the Trans-Ams he had.
What's even more fun is that combined, the displacement of both of the engines in my cars do not equal the displacement of one of the engines in either of the Trans-Ams he had.
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I wonder how fuel efficient cars in the US could be if there wasn't a pointless HP race in this segment? A lot of cars are faster in a straight line now than what their operators can handle. You know, the people who sit at the light when it turns green, then floor their SE Special Edition with Moons & Tunes Tech Value package to get ahead of all the people who went around them as they sat at the green light.
Look at Europe, where a typical mid level car is just a bit slower than those US models mentioned by OP but the MPGs are far higher many cars range in the 45-65 MPG range and quite a few are small displacement gas engined turbos.
I "bit slower"? I'm sorry but cars in Europe, in general, are A LOT slower, like 0-60 in 10 seconds or more slower. Why, because over there a mid-size sedan on the road will most likely have a 2.0L I4 gas engine or a diesel one, not a 3.5L V6. That is why they get good MPG, but they are SLOW by NA standards.
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I wonder how fuel efficient cars in the US could be if there wasn't a pointless HP race in this segment? A lot of cars are faster in a straight line now than what their operators can handle. You know, the people who sit at the light when it turns green, then floor their SE Special Edition with Moons & Tunes Tech Value package to get ahead of all the people who went around them as they sat at the green light.
Look at Europe, where a typical mid level car is just a bit slower than those US models mentioned by OP but the MPGs are far higher many cars range in the 45-65 MPG range and quite a few are small displacement gas engined turbos.
I "bit slower"? I'm sorry but cars in Europe, in general, are A LOT slower, like 0-60 in 10 seconds or more slower. Why, because over there a mid-size sedan on the road will most likely have a 2.0L I4 gas engine or a diesel one, not a 3.5L V6. That is why they get good MPG, but they are SLOW by NA standards.
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Right you should see what some of those cars run on good rubber and they cherry picked. Look up the Regal GS from that time period.
Julie Pennington is running mid-11s in a 427 Corvette (a LEGIT Tripower car) on G70-15 bias plys...the car is 100% factory stock and proven so by a teardown!
Right you should see what some of those cars run on good rubber and they cherry picked. Look up the Regal GS from that time period.
Julie Pennington is running mid-11s in a 427 Corvette (a LEGIT Tripower car) on G70-15 bias plys...the car is 100% factory stock and proven so by a teardown!
I would not be interested in a FWD mid-size sedan either; but then I only tolerate FWD in a hot hatch. As far as vintage musclecars go, the only ones I really lust after are the 1970 Buick GSX, the 1970 Boss 302, and the 1971 440 Road Runner.
I think we are living in the true golden age of horsepower and I fully intend to own a Challenger SRT 392 or a 2013 Boss 302 sooner than later...
I think we are living in the true golden age of horsepower and I fully intend to own a Challenger SRT 392 or a 2013 Boss 302 sooner than later...
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
I would like to see MPH and tack conditions. Like altitude temperature. That can make a huge difference.
Originally Posted By: Taildragger
Originally Posted By: ryan_of_the_e34
OP, have you ever:
bladed at 45?
had to do a stakeout on your herby-curby trashcan?
felt compelled to ask someone if they made chilli "with or without beans" in a situation that had nothing to do with chilli?
Do I know you?
( yes, I get it!)
We don't "know" eachother. I semi-frequently see cross posts between that board and this, and I remember the thread about car "fastness" from earlier yesterday. Who'da guessed that crotchety, anal gun people would be concerned enough about a subject as boring as lubrication as to join a message board about it?
Originally Posted By: ryan_of_the_e34
OP, have you ever:
bladed at 45?
had to do a stakeout on your herby-curby trashcan?
felt compelled to ask someone if they made chilli "with or without beans" in a situation that had nothing to do with chilli?
Do I know you?
( yes, I get it!)
We don't "know" eachother. I semi-frequently see cross posts between that board and this, and I remember the thread about car "fastness" from earlier yesterday. Who'da guessed that crotchety, anal gun people would be concerned enough about a subject as boring as lubrication as to join a message board about it?
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
I would like to see MPH and tack conditions. Like altitude temperature. That can make a huge difference.
As can the DRIVER. OMG, that list is whacko in so many ways.
Cars run strongly these days, my car has easily squished several classic Mopars at the strip, two even had drag radials!
Plus I am far more interested in trap speed over ET as it is less affected by the launch and drivers skill level...
I would like to see MPH and tack conditions. Like altitude temperature. That can make a huge difference.
As can the DRIVER. OMG, that list is whacko in so many ways.
Cars run strongly these days, my car has easily squished several classic Mopars at the strip, two even had drag radials!
Plus I am far more interested in trap speed over ET as it is less affected by the launch and drivers skill level...
As I understand it a lot of those older muscle cars that got sent off for independent testing were factory ringers.
You know, like how Ferrari currently sends crews along with their vehicles to magazine tests and makes adjustments for the setting they're testing in. In the last C&D Lightning Lap they even said that the Ferrari they tested came with tires that weren't even available as an option. The fun irony being that the Ferrari guys supposedly questioned the tires on the Z-28 as being non standard (they were standard).
I'd like to see what the average example ran in the hands of a good driver. No doubt they were fast, awesome cars, but after the bar was lowered for a decade or two, that bar was quickly raised several notches before we got to where we are right now.
You know, like how Ferrari currently sends crews along with their vehicles to magazine tests and makes adjustments for the setting they're testing in. In the last C&D Lightning Lap they even said that the Ferrari they tested came with tires that weren't even available as an option. The fun irony being that the Ferrari guys supposedly questioned the tires on the Z-28 as being non standard (they were standard).
I'd like to see what the average example ran in the hands of a good driver. No doubt they were fast, awesome cars, but after the bar was lowered for a decade or two, that bar was quickly raised several notches before we got to where we are right now.
I really don't care today how fast it will go.
I wish the manufacturers would get better fuel economy.
I wish the manufacturers would get better fuel economy.
Originally Posted By: Papa Bear
I really don't care today how fast it will go.
I wish the manufacturers would get better fuel economy.
You can get a mid size sedan that almost gets 40 mpg. The average economy car now gets around 40 mpg or better.
There has been a lot of big improvement in that area over the last five years.
I really don't care today how fast it will go.
I wish the manufacturers would get better fuel economy.
You can get a mid size sedan that almost gets 40 mpg. The average economy car now gets around 40 mpg or better.
There has been a lot of big improvement in that area over the last five years.
I drove my MIL's Cruze (1.4 auto) to WV and back, and it got 38+ mpg. Had plenty of power and I was averaging 73 mph in a 70 mph zone to keep from getting run over. My Challenger would get 28 on the same trip, and it has a lot more power (3.5 V-6). To me that's really good mileage. I had a 1970 Camaro with a 307 auto when I was a young adult, and I can promise you the new car will outrun, out handle the Camaro. Best mileage I ever got in the Camaro was 21. It averaged 17-18 on the highway going 55. However, a V-6 Camry just isn't my thing. IMO the golden age for sports cars (I hate the term "muscle car") is now. You get good mileage and loads of power.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Or if you wanted a fast sedan in the late 80's early 90's you could have just gotten an AMG Hammer, Renntech 6.5L, Brabus, or an S600.
None of those modern Japanese 4 doors are faster today. Maybe a bit off the line because they are light with good gearing, but once you get rolling say good by.
You could NOT buy a 290 HP Camry in "the early 90s"
Or if you wanted a fast sedan in the late 80's early 90's you could have just gotten an AMG Hammer, Renntech 6.5L, Brabus, or an S600.
None of those modern Japanese 4 doors are faster today. Maybe a bit off the line because they are light with good gearing, but once you get rolling say good by.
You could NOT buy a 290 HP Camry in "the early 90s"
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Or if you wanted a fast sedan in the late 80's early 90's you could have just gotten an AMG Hammer, Renntech 6.5L, Brabus, or an S600.
None of those modern Japanese 4 doors are faster today. Maybe a bit off the line because they are light with good gearing, but once you get rolling say good by.
You could NOT buy a 290 HP Camry in "the early 90s"
I think he was saying there were sedans built before the current crop listed, that would run those numbers. I know my Grand Prix will lay down a 14.60 to 14.90 depending on track and weather conditions and that is an 04. My 01 Z28 with paper tags and 150 miles on it ran 12.95 at 110.02 mph(Just for comparison). The old 1992 Dodge Spirit R/T could touch 14.20 again depending on weather and track conditions Most of the intercooled turbo Mopars from the 80's were 14.50 to 15.20 cars. Lots of stuff prior to the current group of cars mentioned were able to do that.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Or if you wanted a fast sedan in the late 80's early 90's you could have just gotten an AMG Hammer, Renntech 6.5L, Brabus, or an S600.
None of those modern Japanese 4 doors are faster today. Maybe a bit off the line because they are light with good gearing, but once you get rolling say good by.
You could NOT buy a 290 HP Camry in "the early 90s"
I think he was saying there were sedans built before the current crop listed, that would run those numbers. I know my Grand Prix will lay down a 14.60 to 14.90 depending on track and weather conditions and that is an 04. My 01 Z28 with paper tags and 150 miles on it ran 12.95 at 110.02 mph(Just for comparison). The old 1992 Dodge Spirit R/T could touch 14.20 again depending on weather and track conditions Most of the intercooled turbo Mopars from the 80's were 14.50 to 15.20 cars. Lots of stuff prior to the current group of cars mentioned were able to do that.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Or if you wanted a fast sedan in the late 80's early 90's you could have just gotten an AMG Hammer, Renntech 6.5L, Brabus, or an S600.
None of those modern Japanese 4 doors are faster today. Maybe a bit off the line because they are light with good gearing, but once you get rolling say good by.
You could NOT buy a 290 HP Camry in "the early 90s"
I think he was saying there were sedans built before the current crop listed, that would run those numbers. I know my Grand Prix will lay down a 14.60 to 14.90 depending on track and weather conditions and that is an 04. My 01 Z28 with paper tags and 150 miles on it ran 12.95 at 110.02 mph(Just for comparison). The old 1992 Dodge Spirit R/T could touch 14.20 again depending on weather and track conditions Most of the intercooled turbo Mopars from the 80's were 14.50 to 15.20 cars. Lots of stuff prior to the current group of cars mentioned were able to do that.
Exactly. 1998, the E39 M5 with a good driver would run mid to high 12's in the 11x-teens area. That's on street tires with a good launch from what I've seen on M5board. Was the world's fastest sedan for many years with a top speed of 190Mph too FWIW. And yeah, I'm proud of that fact, LOL!
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Or if you wanted a fast sedan in the late 80's early 90's you could have just gotten an AMG Hammer, Renntech 6.5L, Brabus, or an S600.
None of those modern Japanese 4 doors are faster today. Maybe a bit off the line because they are light with good gearing, but once you get rolling say good by.
You could NOT buy a 290 HP Camry in "the early 90s"
I think he was saying there were sedans built before the current crop listed, that would run those numbers. I know my Grand Prix will lay down a 14.60 to 14.90 depending on track and weather conditions and that is an 04. My 01 Z28 with paper tags and 150 miles on it ran 12.95 at 110.02 mph(Just for comparison). The old 1992 Dodge Spirit R/T could touch 14.20 again depending on weather and track conditions Most of the intercooled turbo Mopars from the 80's were 14.50 to 15.20 cars. Lots of stuff prior to the current group of cars mentioned were able to do that.
Exactly. 1998, the E39 M5 with a good driver would run mid to high 12's in the 11x-teens area. That's on street tires with a good launch from what I've seen on M5board. Was the world's fastest sedan for many years with a top speed of 190Mph too FWIW. And yeah, I'm proud of that fact, LOL!
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Difference is I don't want anything from the top part of the list.
LOL!! True. No matter what their performance is they are still BORING!
That is one of the major issues I have with the US automotive market today, and well it has always tended to be that way, they are obsessed with hard calculation numbers and have NO clue about making a car engaging to drive. Heaven forbid that they be interested in the "art" of suspension, steering, and brake tuning. So that the car
"feels" good to a human beings analog inputs.
Other car companies from around the world consistently get this right, and no I'm not talking about sports car handling either.
Look at Peugeot, Renault, VW, and many others in Europe, they make nice handling cars that are also comfortable daily drivers too.
Although I will say of late even they have become obsessed with
stats like the American makers but most still offer at least some models that are excellent overall.
Paying attention you engineering egg heads? LOL
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Difference is I don't want anything from the top part of the list.
LOL!! True. No matter what their performance is they are still BORING!
That is one of the major issues I have with the US automotive market today, and well it has always tended to be that way, they are obsessed with hard calculation numbers and have NO clue about making a car engaging to drive. Heaven forbid that they be interested in the "art" of suspension, steering, and brake tuning. So that the car
"feels" good to a human beings analog inputs.
Other car companies from around the world consistently get this right, and no I'm not talking about sports car handling either.
Look at Peugeot, Renault, VW, and many others in Europe, they make nice handling cars that are also comfortable daily drivers too.
Although I will say of late even they have become obsessed with
stats like the American makers but most still offer at least some models that are excellent overall.
Paying attention you engineering egg heads? LOL
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Difference is I don't want anything from the top part of the list.
LOL!! True. No matter what their performance is they are still BORING!
That is one of the major issues I have with the US automotive market today, and well it has always tended to be that way, they are obsessed with hard calculation numbers and have NO clue about making a car engaging to drive. Heaven forbid that they be interested in the "art" of suspension, steering, and brake tuning. So that the car
"feels" good to a human beings analog inputs.
Other car companies from around the world consistently get this right, and no I'm not talking about sports car handling either.
Look at Peugeot, Renault, VW, and many others in Europe, they make nice handling cars that are also comfortable daily drivers too.
Although I will say of late even they have become obsessed with
stats like the American makers but most still offer at least some models that are excellent overall.
Paying attention you engineering egg heads? LOL
Hmmm CTS-V? ATS-V? Plain ATS? Corvette? Charger? SHO? Mustang? Regal GS? Chevy SS? All have great reviews and Motor Trend said the SS is the car BMW and Mercedes should be building.
Been awhile since you have driven an American car or even read about one eh?
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Difference is I don't want anything from the top part of the list.
LOL!! True. No matter what their performance is they are still BORING!
That is one of the major issues I have with the US automotive market today, and well it has always tended to be that way, they are obsessed with hard calculation numbers and have NO clue about making a car engaging to drive. Heaven forbid that they be interested in the "art" of suspension, steering, and brake tuning. So that the car
"feels" good to a human beings analog inputs.
Other car companies from around the world consistently get this right, and no I'm not talking about sports car handling either.
Look at Peugeot, Renault, VW, and many others in Europe, they make nice handling cars that are also comfortable daily drivers too.
Although I will say of late even they have become obsessed with
stats like the American makers but most still offer at least some models that are excellent overall.
Paying attention you engineering egg heads? LOL
Hmmm CTS-V? ATS-V? Plain ATS? Corvette? Charger? SHO? Mustang? Regal GS? Chevy SS? All have great reviews and Motor Trend said the SS is the car BMW and Mercedes should be building.
Been awhile since you have driven an American car or even read about one eh?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Difference is I don't want anything from the top part of the list.
LOL!! True. No matter what their performance is they are still BORING!
That is one of the major issues I have with the US automotive market today, and well it has always tended to be that way, they are obsessed with hard calculation numbers and have NO clue about making a car engaging to drive. Heaven forbid that they be interested in the "art" of suspension, steering, and brake tuning. So that the car
"feels" good to a human beings analog inputs.
Other car companies from around the world consistently get this right, and no I'm not talking about sports car handling either.
Look at Peugeot, Renault, VW, and many others in Europe, they make nice handling cars that are also comfortable daily drivers too.
Although I will say of late even they have become obsessed with
stats like the American makers but most still offer at least some models that are excellent overall.
Paying attention you engineering egg heads? LOL
Hmmm CTS-V? ATS-V? Plain ATS? Corvette? Charger? SHO? Mustang? Regal GS? Chevy SS? All have great reviews and Motor Trend said the SS is the car BMW and Mercedes should be building.
Been awhile since you have driven an American car or even read about one eh?
In that vein, many feel that BMW lost their way after the E39 and E46 cars, that they started numbing them down after that...
Not good for a company that claims to be the "drivers car".
My Fox was always engaging to drive. No nannies, no fancy anything. It would kill you if you let it. That just made driving it that much more exciting. I love the sound of a well warmed over 302, probably my favourite engine sound. At 7K, they are just intoxicating.
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Difference is I don't want anything from the top part of the list.
LOL!! True. No matter what their performance is they are still BORING!
That is one of the major issues I have with the US automotive market today, and well it has always tended to be that way, they are obsessed with hard calculation numbers and have NO clue about making a car engaging to drive. Heaven forbid that they be interested in the "art" of suspension, steering, and brake tuning. So that the car
"feels" good to a human beings analog inputs.
Other car companies from around the world consistently get this right, and no I'm not talking about sports car handling either.
Look at Peugeot, Renault, VW, and many others in Europe, they make nice handling cars that are also comfortable daily drivers too.
Although I will say of late even they have become obsessed with
stats like the American makers but most still offer at least some models that are excellent overall.
Paying attention you engineering egg heads? LOL
Hmmm CTS-V? ATS-V? Plain ATS? Corvette? Charger? SHO? Mustang? Regal GS? Chevy SS? All have great reviews and Motor Trend said the SS is the car BMW and Mercedes should be building.
Been awhile since you have driven an American car or even read about one eh?
In that vein, many feel that BMW lost their way after the E39 and E46 cars, that they started numbing them down after that...
My Fox was always engaging to drive. No nannies, no fancy anything. It would kill you if you let it. That just made driving it that much more exciting. I love the sound of a well warmed over 302, probably my favourite engine sound. At 7K, they are just intoxicating.
- Status
