\\ Post Your Car vol. Been a minute //

[ninjahood]

lol 1/4s and 0-60 are BS stats dealers use to sell cars. They have little relevance in real world racing situations.... just try getting your tires sticky on a FWD

I didn't know motor trend & car and drivers were dealerships

Good to know

0 to 60 and 1/4 will actually tell you what these cars are capable of in real world situations

Dodge and Chevy need to put those cars on a serious weight reduction

THEN..they'd be monsters.

Adding 12 pounds of weight to my car is really going to affect my performance

Cus the wheels are 3 pounds each, right?

Oh, and since your wheels are gonna be much larger, you completely ****** your whole suspension geometry

This what happens when ****** stay on car forums or take opinions from people who don't have real experience with these vehicles

im just gonna leave this right here....



@ "then".....

 

[mondaynightraw]

That's a 60k zl1 that none of you will ever own.

Like i said, "real world experiences"

 

[mondaynightraw]

front wheel drive econo box with McPherson suspension suspension better then a r/t challenger? on what planet?

and i ain't even comment on da CVT transmissons some of those tin cans come with :x

Uh, the accord corners better.

Does better on the skidpad

Go read up.

 

[SneakerProSr.]

lol 1/4s and 0-60 are BS stats dealers use to sell cars. They have little relevance in real world racing situations.... just try getting your tires sticky on a FWD

I didn't know motor trend & car and drivers were dealerships

Good to know

0 to 60 and 1/4 will actually tell you what these cars are capable of in real world situations

Dodge and Chevy need to put those cars on a serious weight reduction

THEN..they'd be monsters.

Adding 12 pounds of weight to my car is really going to affect my performance

Cus the wheels are 3 pounds each, right?

Oh, and since your wheels are gonna be much larger, you completely ****** your whole suspension geometry

This what happens when ****** stay on car forums or take opinions from people who don't have real experience with these vehicles

Actually the wheels are 3 pounds heavier than the stocks. 3 x 4 = 12

With tires and fully inflated they will probably add about 25 pounds

After a decent tune it will actually be faster 0-60

You telling me about car forums when I've actually clocked sub 5s in my car and all you can do is post a spec sheet.

 

[dankenstien88]

lol 1/4s and 0-60 are BS stats dealers use to sell cars. They have little relevance in real world racing situations.... just try getting your tires sticky on a FWD

I didn't know motor trend & car and drivers were dealerships

Good to know

0 to 60 and 1/4 will actually tell you what these cars are capable of in real world situations

Dodge and Chevy need to put those cars on a serious weight reduction

THEN..they'd be monsters.

Adding 12 pounds of weight to my car is really going to affect my performance

Cus the wheels are 3 pounds each, right?

Oh, and since your wheels are gonna be much larger, you completely ****** your whole suspension geometry

This what happens when ****** stay on car forums or take opinions from people who don't have real experience with these vehicles

Actually the wheels are 3 pounds heavier than the stocks. 3 x 4 = 12

With tires and fully inflated they will probably add about 25 pounds

After a decent tune it will actually be faster 0-60

You telling me about car forums when I've actually clocked sub 5s in my car and all you can do is post a spec sheet.

BOOM


Real world times on muscle cars are usually considerably better than advertised.

 

[SneakerProSr.]

That's a 60k zl1 that none of you will ever own.

Like i said, "real world experiences"

Post this then says r/t gets 5.3 0-60. Mind blown

 

[ninjahood]

That's a 60k zl1 that none of you will ever own.

Like i said, "real world experiences"

U wanna bet money on that playboy?

I can also tell u you can add up those 6 cars u ever

Owned & it still wont add up to my closet.

Son, I havent gotten a car yet outta my own doing,

not cuz i cant.

Im on schedule to get my jesus piece X cuban combo

By da end of da year, dont make me switch it up

On you & cop da whip first just to make u feel

smaller. Doing **** outta spite is somewhat of a

Underated attribute of mine. Not for nothing b, im

A only child b, i will dust off that spoiled card so fast

On you

 

[mondaynightraw]

Post this then says r/t gets 5.3 0-60. Mind blown

Until you can prove it, it's BS.

Fair enough?

 

[ninjahood]

lol 1/4s and 0-60 are BS stats dealers use to sell cars. They have little relevance in real world racing situations.... just try getting your tires sticky on a FWD

I didn't know motor trend & car and drivers were dealerships

Good to know

0 to 60 and 1/4 will actually tell you what these cars are capable of in real world situations

Dodge and Chevy need to put those cars on a serious weight reduction

THEN..they'd be monsters.

Adding 12 pounds of weight to my car is really going to affect my performance

Cus the wheels are 3 pounds each, right?

Oh, and since your wheels are gonna be much larger, you completely ****** your whole suspension geometry

This what happens when ****** stay on car forums or take opinions from people who don't have real experience with these vehicles

Actually the wheels are 3 pounds heavier than the stocks. 3 x 4 = 12

With tires and fully inflated they will probably add about 25 pounds

After a decent tune it will actually be faster 0-60

You telling me about car forums when I've actually clocked sub 5s in my car and all you can do is post a spec sheet.

BOOM


Real world times on muscle cars are usually considerably better than advertised.

"For insurance purposes"

 

[dankenstien88]

Post this then says r/t gets 5.3 0-60. Mind blown

Until you can prove it, it's BS.

Fair enough?

Fair enough...



4.84....

 

[mondaynightraw]

Fair enough...



4.84....

Not stock.

Don't care what the description says.

U wanna bet money on that playboy?

I can also tell u you can add up those 6 cars u ever

Owned & it still wont add up to my closet.

Son, I havent gotten a car yet outta my own doing,

not cuz i cant.

Im on schedule to get my jesus piece X cuban combo

By da end of da year, dont make me switch it up

On you & cop da whip first just to make u feel

smaller. Doing **** outta spite is somewhat of a

Underated attribute of mine. Not for nothing b, im

A only child b, i will dust off that spoiled card so fast

On you

Tell you what

Hit a chevy dealer today

See if you can get a zl1 camaro on your own credit...no cosigner.

Mattafact

You probably could..with 20% apr

 

[dankenstien88]

Stock... all stock

















4.00 flat !! with female driver

 

[SneakerProSr.]

Post this then says r/t gets 5.3 0-60. Mind blown

Until you can prove it, it's BS.

Fair enough?

Fair enough...



4.84....

http://www.challengertalk.com/forums/f37/r-t-0-60-times-47820/

A lot of these cars are modded most aren't. The highest number you'll see for the most part 5.3ish for the 2011s and up

 

[mondaynightraw]

http://www.challengertalk.com/forums/f37/r-t-0-60-times-47820/

A lot of these cars are modded most aren't. The highest number you'll see for the most part 5.3ish for the 2011s and up

Okay.

Lets average it out and say it does 0 to 60 in 5 seconds flat.

It's still only .6 seconds faster than the accord coupe ex-l

Even if I gave you a 4.5 second 0 to 60, you'd only be 1.1 seconds faster.

This thing is quick. Honda's revised Earth Dreams 3.5-liter V6 produces 278 horsepower and 252 pound-feet of torque in this application, and that's plenty in a car that weighs in at just 3,400 pounds. Honda does not release performance data, but instrumented buff-book testing has revealed 0-60 times as low as 5.6 seconds. For reference, that's three-tenths of a second quicker than the bonkers Ford Focus ST.

And it's 1100 pounds lighter.



I won't talk about mods, since every application reacts differently... Even if they have the same exact modifications

 

[mondaynightraw]

Many Honda and Toyota engines were never officially rated to the SAE standard in the first place, they just said they were. Whether sales and communications staff were aware of it or not, they were just giving Japanese data calcuated using the DIN standard and often metric rather than US hp. The "stricter" SAE standard just brought this discrepancy to light. No official figures have yet been released. No American engines will be affected, but Saab, Jaguar, Volvo and Chrysler's European sourced diesels may be, but not to the same extent as the European EEC standard is much closer to the SAE and turbos largely eliminate the remaining differences. The main problem they have is inadvertant use of metric rather than US hp. Marketing and communications staff have been more careless and ignorant than anything, unaware that Swedish and German words for horsepower refer to metric hp, not the US/Imperial standard. Media are often caught out as well, rushing to publication before manufacturers release US data in hp (SAE or not). Even though GM and Chrysler test using the SAE standard, published figures (even in dealer guides) regularly show obvious errors such as kW and hp ratings that don't match. The loopholes they closed are modifications made to a vehicle used in testing. There is no honest mistake, or some new procedure that caught everyone off guard. They just stopped companies from making modifications to engines that would not be found in production cars. And what happened? GM numbers go up, imports go down. You may not like the results, but don't make excuses. GM has said they will certify their entire line-up. That shows they have nothing to hide. If Toyota does the same, good for them. That Honda/Acura and Nissan/Infiniti don't, then you know they've been making modifications to misrepresent actual performance. Companies found to have substantially misled customers should be sued. People make purchasing decisions based on engine performance, and billion-dollar corporations should not be allowed to cheat customers because they didn't feel like actually spending the money to make their cars perform they way they claim.

Cheat customers you say?

Looks like honda actually underrated this car


Looks like it makes 290-300 at the crank.

 

[dankenstien88]

Monday... do you have any idea how long .5- 1.1 seconds is in a race ? Its an eternity... Combine that with the fact that when your v6 is reaching max hp output the Hemi is just getting into its power band and you will see why the challenger is considered a real "sports car" and the Accord/maxima/camry is not.

 

[dankenstien88]

Many Honda and Toyota engines were never officially rated to the SAE standard in the first place, they just said they were. Whether sales and communications staff were aware of it or not, they were just giving Japanese data calcuated using the DIN standard and often metric rather than US hp. The "stricter" SAE standard just brought this discrepancy to light. No official figures have yet been released. No American engines will be affected, but Saab, Jaguar, Volvo and Chrysler's European sourced diesels may be, but not to the same extent as the European EEC standard is much closer to the SAE and turbos largely eliminate the remaining differences. The main problem they have is inadvertant use of metric rather than US hp. Marketing and communications staff have been more careless and ignorant than anything, unaware that Swedish and German words for horsepower refer to metric hp, not the US/Imperial standard. Media are often caught out as well, rushing to publication before manufacturers release US data in hp (SAE or not). Even though GM and Chrysler test using the SAE standard, published figures (even in dealer guides) regularly show obvious errors such as kW and hp ratings that don't match. The loopholes they closed are modifications made to a vehicle used in testing. There is no honest mistake, or some new procedure that caught everyone off guard. They just stopped companies from making modifications to engines that would not be found in production cars. And what happened? GM numbers go up, imports go down. You may not like the results, but don't make excuses. GM has said they will certify their entire line-up. That shows they have nothing to hide. If Toyota does the same, good for them. That Honda/Acura and Nissan/Infiniti don't, then you know they've been making modifications to misrepresent actual performance. Companies found to have substantially misled customers should be sued. People make purchasing decisions based on engine performance, and billion-dollar corporations should not be allowed to cheat customers because they didn't feel like actually spending the money to make their cars perform they way they claim.

Cheat customers you say?

Looks like honda actually underrated this car


Looks like it makes 290-300 at the crank.

Good for honda... its still slower than a 20 year old Cadillac

 

[SneakerProSr.]

http://www.challengertalk.com/forums/f37/r-t-0-60-times-47820/

A lot of these cars are modded most aren't. The highest number you'll see for the most part 5.3ish for the 2011s and up

Okay.

Lets average it out and say it does 0 to 60 in 5 seconds flat.

It's still only .6 seconds faster than the accord coupe ex-l

Even if I gave you a 4.5 second 0 to 60, you'd only be 1.1 seconds faster.

This thing is quick. Honda's revised Earth Dreams 3.5-liter V6 produces 278 horsepower and 252 pound-feet of torque in this application, and that's plenty in a car that weighs in at just 3,400 pounds. Honda does not release performance data, but instrumented buff-book testing has revealed 0-60 times as low as 5.6 seconds. For reference, that's three-tenths of a second quicker than the bonkers Ford Focus ST.

And it's 1100 pounds lighter.



I won't talk about mods, since every application reacts differently... Even if they have the same exact modifications

Dude 1.1 seconds in the 0-60 is the difference between regular cars Ferraris and ****.

Like IMO if you have decent conditions and know how to drive you should hit 4.6-4.9 in an rt

An r/t is 30-35k and an Accord that can go 5.6 fast is around that price.

To find a car that is 1 second faster in the 0-60 than an r/t you spending 60k at least.

That's the whole point of my argument. For the money if you like fast cars American muscle can't be beat.

 

[thadoctadvocate]

What's hp and torque when your car weighs close to 5000 pounds?

When a V-6 Camry can line up next to a V-8 challenger and be near the E.T. and mph through the 1/4 mile, it's a pretty sobering thing.

Not promoting them in any way, but a single exhaust, ricer, with a small engine that can rival a V-8 is impressive.

And it should be respected.

What about the mustang

 

[eiddyfouw]

You, are living my dream.

Ha, thanks. That dream could probably become a reality, man. These cars have hit rock bottom in terms of their value, at least here in southern California. For what they sell for you get a whole lot of car. It is a 30 year old S class, though. Maintenance costs are killer if you cannot work on it yourself. I do everything myself and that's the only way I can justify owning it on my college student budget.

Great cars though, I love this one like a family member. I would never trade it even for today's equivalent CL550....well I would just so I could sell the new Benz and start a collection of classics

I hear you on that. You're right about the prices. I've seen some of them for the low low, but I intend on pumping a lot of money into a complete overhaul. I would only push it on Sundays and public holidays though I'd be too worried about something happening if it was my daily driver.
I really hope I can make it happen next year. I got a guy who is a wizard with Benz's, but I know not doing the work myself can become a real money pit.

But yours is looking clean. How's the interior? Did you pick it up with a lot of miles? Any major work you needed to do?

 

[mondaynightraw]

What about the mustang

Beasts

Love them.

Dude 1.1 seconds in the 0-60 is the difference between regular cars Ferraris and ****.

Like IMO if you have decent conditions and know how to drive you should hit 4.6-4.9 in an rt

An r/t is 30-35k and an Accord that can go 5.6 fast is around that price.

To find a car that is 1 second faster in the 0-60 than an r/t you spending 60k at least.

That's the whole point of my argument. For the money if you like fast cars American muscle can't be beat.

nah, mustang gt's do 12's on stock street tires

And i think those are in the 30's

 

[SneakerProSr.]

Bickering aside I want a Tesla.

Also Da Hemi's are the slowest of American muscle because they are so damn big but like I said earlier that's one of the reasons I bought my car. I wanted a bigger coupe with a functional trunk that could still eat on the tollway.

Bring 5.0's into this argument and there is no argument.

 

[ninjahood]

That's the whole point of my argument. For the money if you like fast cars American muscle can't be beat.

thats all ****** been tryin to say up in here.... 60k camaro ZL1 is faster then porsches, ferraris, and lamborghinis twice da price.

you can't beat that...at all

 

[mondaynightraw]

Bickering aside I want a Tesla.

Also Da Hemi's are the slowest of American muscle because they are so damn big but like I said earlier that's one of the reasons I bought my car. I wanted a bigger coupe with a functional trunk that could still eat on the tollway.

Bring 5.0's into this argument and there is no argument.

I said this, though.

If they shaved weight off those r/t's, they'd be monsters.

 

[dankenstien88]

Bickering aside I want a Tesla.

Also Da Hemi's are the slowest of American muscle because they are so damn big but like I said earlier that's one of the reasons I bought my car. I wanted a bigger coupe with a functional trunk that could still eat on the tollway.

Bring 5.0's into this argument and there is no argument.

I said this, though.

If they shaved weight off those r/t's, they'd be monsters.

Chally RTs only weight about 140 lbs more than a Mustang gt. .