Subject	You are wrong then. They ARE that fast.
Posted by	Marshall on August 29, 2002 at 2:30 PM
	This message has been viewed 45 times.
In Reply To	Dont think they're that fast posted by sunrise089 on August 29, 2002 at 01:39 PM
Message	First of all, the 0-60 times of most cars is limited by how much traction they have. The old school Mustang 5.0's had a pretty good 0-60 time. But their 1/4 mile time sucked because they didn't have the HP. The 98-present Camaros with the LS1 engine are heavily under rated by the factory. They were rated at 305-330hp based on the model. But forget about that, because it's bullshit. In reality, a LS1 Camaro owner can expect to dyno 305-320 at his REAR WHEELS. When you take the drivetrain loss into account that means the engine is putting out 359-376 hp at the crank. Popular Mechanics tested the Firebird (same as Camaro) and ran a 13.15-second ET and 108.27 mph trap speed.
Follow Ups	I was just challenged by a former Boss who>> - NSANY(ATL) 10:03:25 08/29/02 I think its 383 to the crank. Also 383ci. Could be wrong. (n/m) - MattMc2281 10:11:06 08/29/02 Is that for a stock SS, or for the DEI car? - NSANY(ATL) 10:15:00 08/29/02 Stock SS is 330 HP Earn upgrades put it too 383 HP I think. (n/m) - MattMc2281 10:34:02 08/29/02 According to this site... - socos 10:45:06 08/29/02 The auto-dimming rearview mirror w/ compass adds 10rwhp (n/m) - J.R. (phx) 11:25:52 08/29/02 Stock LS1 number are bogus anyway - Marshall 11:21:04 08/29/02 If you race him.... - Mal1ce 10:13:09 08/29/02 Rubbin's racin', Son! (n/m) - boileralum00 10:14:06 08/29/02 As you spit a plug of tobbaco. (n/m) - zman92(ATL) 10:15:37 08/29/02 Hell naw! Reel min swalla da backy joos! (n/m) - boileralum00 11:53:01 08/29/02 Hell naw! Reel min swalla da backy joos! (n/m) - boileralum00 12:29:13 08/29/02 i was going to say that, but i feared it would be - Halo Z 10:31:45 08/29/02 LOL, very cold! (n/m) - RezidentEvil 10:54:59 08/29/02 Tell 'em 1 large and it's on. ;) (n/m) - kingtut(So.Cal) 10:31:54 08/29/02 i take it the car is running well? (n/m) - Halo Z 10:34:38 08/29/02 I can't get over 15psi b/c I have the wrong wastegate - NSANY(ATL) 11:52:18 08/29/02 on the road or on the dyno. - Halo Z 12:13:26 08/29/02 both (n/m) - NSANY(ATL) 12:21:37 08/29/02 ew that sux (n/m) - Halo Z 13:37:54 08/29/02 have u looked at what u have, u would win! (n/m) - 90TTKid 15:48:18 08/29/02 OH SHIT!! Just read your profile, The Z will prevail!! DO IT (n/m) - MattMc2281 10:35:42 08/29/02 Re: I was just challenged by a former Boss who>> - Cap927 10:45:39 08/29/02 uhh... i thought the Z-28 is lighter than a 300zx. (n/m) - TTony 10:59:24 08/29/02 Nope...It's actually 100 to 200lbs heavier... - Black Mammoth (VA) 11:05:30 08/29/02 Re: Nope...It's actually 100 to 200lbs heavier... - Cap927 11:24:08 08/29/02 Re: Re: Nope...It's actually 100 to 200lbs heavier... - Cap927 11:27:05 08/29/02 How is 3433 lbs 100 to 200 lbs heavier than 3475 lbs? - Marshall 11:49:14 08/29/02 Re: How is 3433 lbs 100 to 200 lbs heavier than 3475 lbs? - Cap927 12:05:33 08/29/02 I wouldn't say it's as heavy as a tank. - Marshall 12:08:11 08/29/02 Dont think they're that fast - sunrise089 13:39:32 08/29/02 2002 Z-28's run low 13's stock. (n/m) - TTony 14:09:01 08/29/02 You are wrong then. They ARE that fast. - Marshall 14:30:53 08/29/02 Ahem... - sunrise089 20:37:27 08/29/02 You are out of touch with reality. Educate yourself. - Marshall 21:16:56 08/29/02 not trying to argue for arguement's sake....but (long) - sunrise089 00:22:00 08/30/02 I mistake, sorry - sunrise089 00:24:43 08/30/02 about the geocities site: - Marshall 11:24:30 08/30/02 Re: not trying to argue for arguement's sake....but (long) - Marshall 11:53:49 08/30/02 Oh yeah- - Marshall 21:18:10 08/29/02 Check out this site: - Marshall 14:44:32 08/29/02 "former boss", so why not!? :-) (n/m) - FLY 1 (Dallaz) 10:52:24 08/29/02 Where can we buy those undisclosed turbos? :-\ - ZHOUND 11:11:56 08/29/02
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.