User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/9/2017 9:52:18 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think you missed the point entirely. The quote is "I live my life a quarter mile at a time" No one says "I live my life road course at a time" Lame!  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Thanks for proving my point. The Corvette (a 5th gen mind you, which is now 20 years old) trapped the same speed as the Tesla, and although the Tesla reached 122mph faster, it was running out of steam. This is a limitation of electric motors, which I am sure will be overcome eventually, but today? The Tesla can't finish a road course without going into limp mode, and if you stretch into half-mile races, the Tesla is beaten by anything that can accelerate past 140mph. Lame!
The quarter is a good measure of acceleration and traction, but a poor measure of overall performance for today's vehicles (imo) and is a holdover from the times where the 1/4 pushed the limits of a vehicles' top speed. Now, with Accords cutting 14's (that Mustang GT's did in the 2000's) and nearly every new performance car able to do 180+ from factory room floor, the half-mile not only taxes the power / weight, but now the aero and stability of a vehicle at speed, as well as still being able to display the 1/4 prowess. With speed limits creeping up, and some areas like Texas and Utah seeing 80 and 85mph speed limits, it seems fitting. ETA: Even a roll race will wind up well past 120mph. The Tesla does poorly in roll races, and the faster/longer the race goes on, the more it wanes. Again, something that will probably be fixed over time, but for now -- the Tesla is something you buy to experience brutal acceleration in a small window and show off to your San Jose friends. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2017 8:22:11 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryThe quarter is a good measure of acceleration and traction, but a poor measure of overall performance for today's vehicles (imo) and is a holdover from the times where the 1/4 pushed the limits of a vehicles' top speed. Now, with Accords cutting 14's (that Mustang GT's did in the 2000's) and nearly every new performance car able to do 180+ from factory room floor, the half-mile not only taxes the power / weight, but now the aero and stability of a vehicle at speed, as well as still being able to display the 1/4 prowess. I had a stock 1985 Mustang GT fastback that would cut a 14 in the quarter and was damn close to cutting a 13. I'd smoke the fruity boys in their Corvettes and Ferrari 308s all day long from stoplight to stoplight to stoplight. Obviously not mine, but this will give you an idea:  Failed To Load Title ETA: Why can't I post photos or vids? Do I have to pay money for that? Here's a direct link to the video: http://youtu.be/8Y0tOZco-jg |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2017 1:48:35 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
2000s???? More like the 1980s. I had a stock 1985 Mustang GT fastback that would cut a 14 in the quarter and was damn close to cutting a 13. I'd smoke the fruity boys in their Corvettes and Ferrari 308s all day long from stoplight to stoplight to stoplight. Obviously not mine, but this will give you an idea:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Y0tOZco-jg
ETA: Why can't I post photos or vids? Do I have to pay money for that? Here's a direct link to the video: http://youtu.be/8Y0tOZco-jg |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2017 2:01:16 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And yet, Ford made no improvements into their 4.6L Mod motivated Mustangs, with the '04 Mustang GT's still cutting .... 14-15sec quarter miles stock. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2017 5:18:39 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
True, and the guy even said that. Too bad their follow up video of a manual Hellcat vs. a manual ZL1 wasn't "apples to apples" either. Dropping a Hennessey HPE750 pack on the ZLI, yeah it's going to win.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqf3B8wBXKA |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2017 7:35:35 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hennessey anything does not count . He fudges the numbers and has a history of stealing from customers . why anyone would buy anything from him I do not understand It's almost as though he ran the auto HC against the manual ZL1 so he would have an excuse when the ZL1 lost...which it did. Then he has to attach $15,000 worth of aftermarket equipment to the ZL1 to beat the HC. That pretty much says it all, really. lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2017 12:47:45 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, it really begs the question why won't they do a comparison between a stock auto HC and a stock auto ZL1? It's almost as though he ran the auto HC against the manual ZL1 so he would have an excuse when the ZL1 lost...which it did. Then he has to attach $15,000 worth of aftermarket equipment to the ZL1 to beat the HC. That pretty much says it all, really. lol  Stock Hellcat vs Stock ZL1 Race Auto vs Auto pretty even from a roll. can we safely assume the ZL1 will spank that fat girl from a dig? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2017 7:59:04 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO9185E9e_E
pretty even from a roll. can we safely assume the ZL1 will spank that fat girl from a dig? Looked like race 1 went to the ZL1 (but it looks like the Camaro got a head start of at least a half car length at the starting cone), race 2 to the HC (no question) and race 3 was the HC until the end when the camera cut away too quick (the angle from the Camaro's camera looks like it won but can't really tell since the HC is not in the frame at that angle). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 12:02:30 AM EDT
[#9]
Straight line there is now the Demon . A legit factory drag car
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 9:39:29 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Straight line there is now the Demon . A legit factory drag car |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 11:14:25 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There have been a number of factory drag cars before like the HEMI Dart or the Thunderbolt and most recently the COPO Camaro and the CobraJet Mustang. What makes the Demon different though is it is a STREET LEGAL purpose built drag car. All of the previous factory drag cars were not street legal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 1:57:28 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To quote Crazy Earl, these are great days we're living, bros. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 2:20:07 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My fear is it's 1970 right now with a 71/72 down turn or even a complete 73 style complete stoppage of performance oriented cars within the next couple years. 2019 CAFE standards are unmeetable for every V8 currently in production. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
To quote Crazy Earl, these are great days we're living, bros. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 3:44:36 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My fear is it's 1970 right now with a 71/72 down turn or even a complete 73 style complete stoppage of performance oriented cars within the next couple years. 2019 CAFE standards are unmeetable for every V8 currently in production. Also built a 331 Dart long block that was intended for the 95 but I am gonna put it into a 65-69 mustang if I find the right host in about 2 years. Was thinking Factory Five type 65 Daytona Coupe but I think Ca is about to screw the kit car exemption before I would have time to buy/build it. With Trump in office I think we will have a few more years on the Federal level but the Ca bullshit wont stop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 4:09:21 PM EDT
[#15]
So the stats for the Demon are out and boys, its time for Ford and Chevy to go back to the proverbial drawing board.
808 horsepower on premium gas and 840 horsepower on high-octane race fuel. 0-60 in 2.1 seconds, with a quarter-mile time in 9.65 seconds and 140 mph, as certified by the National Hot Rod Association. http://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/2018-dodge-challenger-srt-demon-arrives-with-840-horsepower-for-the-track/ar-BBzJWjX?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=UE09DHP |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 4:46:49 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So the stats for the Demon are out and boys, its time for Ford and Chevy to go back to the proverbial drawing board. 808 horsepower on premium gas and 840 horsepower on high-octane race fuel. 0-60 in 2.1 seconds, with a quarter-mile time in 9.65 seconds and 140 mph, as certified by the National Hot Rod Association. http://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/2018-dodge-challenger-srt-demon-arrives-with-840-horsepower-for-the-track/ar-BBzJWjX?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=UE09DHP Otherwise I would sell off my 95 and 05 and go supercharged or twin turbo charged on my 2015. The factory roots blower cars just dont interest me. I could have bought some MEAN 03/04 Terminators or even 08 GT500s already if they did. The 17 GT350(for standard coolers the 15-16 should have had) and the Z28 are in my realm of interest. I was trying to save for a GT350 when I realized it would take another year of 700+ hours of overtime to come up with a big enough cash deposit for me to be comfortable(would have gone for 40k down payment). Girlfriend came along and I took the down payment savings I had and paid off half of my 2015 GT when I purchased it, also 0% never is offered on the special stuff. But if I was in the "dont have to worry about money no more" group, I would have one of everything but the corner carving naturally aspirated cars are my favorite. I am a huge fan of GM and Ford doing road course focused cars for a little while. Kinda pissed that this Dodge Demon shit is going to shift the focus for awhile. GT 350 R, Z28, Viper ACR, and Corvette Grand Sport with Z06 handling packages please... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 6:37:44 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is pitiful. Mustang GTs owned the stoplight drags back in the '80s unless you were up against a 911, 928 or something like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 8:46:30 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol, in the 80's? No they didn't. I would routinely walk GTs in my 87 glhs. Small, light turbo 4 bangers. The GTs were heavy, LX versions were faster. Owned lmao! In the quarter, the bone stock GLHS was running in the high 14s, so not all that impressive. About half a second slower than a stock '85 GT. Sorry, but the numbers don't support your claim. They were fast for a shoe box, though. I'll give you that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 9:18:17 PM EDT
[#19]
Honestly I would still rather have the GT350 in stock trim than the Demon. Life isn't always about going in straight lines.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 9:19:28 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Helldiver. This is the magnificent aircraft you seek... https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/197999/IMG-1017-181949.JPG 
TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 9:25:11 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Honestly I would still rather have the GT350 in stock trim than the Demon. Life isn't always about going in straight lines. The main reason why I prefer the Challenger is the throwback styling. I've always liked the lines of the 1970 Challengers and now I have one that is very similar sitting in my garage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 10:35:48 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My fear is it's 1970 right now with a 71/72 down turn or even a complete 73 style complete stoppage of performance oriented cars within the next couple years. 2019 CAFE standards are unmeetable for every V8 currently in production. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 10:37:00 PM EDT
[#23]
In a way, now that someone has gone full retard, the HP war can ease up a bit and they can concentrate on handling/styling/driveability. There is really no purpose matching a street legal drag car unless you were already selling or planning to sell one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 10:50:30 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I only raced a GLHS once, and I spanked him from a roll. Sample of one. In the quarter, the bone stock GLHS was running in the high 14s, so not all that impressive. About half a second slower than a stock '85 GT. Sorry, but the numbers don't support your claim. They were fast for a shoe box, though. I'll give you that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Lol, in the 80's? No they didn't. I would routinely walk GTs in my 87 glhs. Small, light turbo 4 bangers. The GTs were heavy, LX versions were faster. Owned lmao! In the quarter, the bone stock GLHS was running in the high 14s, so not all that impressive. About half a second slower than a stock '85 GT. Sorry, but the numbers don't support your claim. They were fast for a shoe box, though. I'll give you that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 10:51:43 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In a way, now that someone has gone full retard, the HP war can ease up a bit and they can concentrate on handling/styling/driveability. There is really no purpose matching a street legal drag car unless you were already selling or planning to sell one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 11:05:41 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bone stock ones were not an issue. I would go out of my way to run them from a roll because traction in first was a rumor. And your numbers don't jive with printed numbers. GTs were not a mid to low 14 second car. Try low 15's and high 14's, same as the turbos and Firebirds and Camaros. You either didn't race one or you raced a bad driver. Bench racing and real racing are completely different Here's the video to prove it. Go to 2:56 - 1985 Mustang GT 14.3 Second Quarter Mile 1986 GLHS was running 14.8 - 14.9 while the 1987 was closer to 14.6 -14.7. Sorry but your numbers are simply wrong and your story is not accurate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 11:12:16 PM EDT
[#27]
Wait for the Demon and have a car that can do wheelies!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 11:21:45 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is pitiful. Mustang GTs owned the stoplight drags back in the '80s unless you were up against a 911, 928 or something like that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
And yet, Ford made no improvements into their 4.6L Mod motivated Mustangs, with the '04 Mustang GT's still cutting .... 14-15sec quarter miles stock. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2017 11:33:49 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
An 85 gt had 210 hp at the crank, weighed in at over 3k pounds, ran a 15 second 1/4 and had a 0-60 of 6.6 seconds.....it sucked. I had a 93 gt felt like a beast and was a blast to drive but it in reality was a slow pig with some torque that felt fast. Must GT - 14.3 T/A - 14.7 IROC-Z - 14.8 So, you can go with a printed number in a magazine or an actual video at a track. Maybe the GT driver in the video was just awesomely skilled, but it is what it is. If you think the 85 sucked, you must not have been driving in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Horsepower in the 1979 305 Camaros was around 130 HP and was around 170 HP in the 350s. It's all relative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2017 3:34:20 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2017 6:19:33 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wrong. 14.3 for the GT. Here's the video to prove it. Go to 2:56 - 1985 Mustang GT 14.3 Second Quarter Mile 1986 GLHS was running 14.8 - 14.9 while the 1987 was closer to 14.6 -14.7. Sorry but your numbers are simply wrong and your story is not accurate.  15.3 in the 1/4 mile...
The GLHS, both years, has a better HP to weight ratio as well.  Attached FileFULL ARTICLE |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2017 7:13:08 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
GM hasn't had issues in the handling department for decades, unless the "they" is Dodge. The Viper was one of the world's best time and time again but was an army of one for Dodge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2017 9:50:19 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here is a Road and Track article that actually tested it against an IROC. I wonder what was done to the one in the video you posted? 15.3 in the 1/4 mile...
The GLHS, both years, has a better HP to weight ratio as well. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/96423/87-MustangGTvsCamaroIROC-Z-Article1g-186618.JPG FULL ARTICLE Any given driver can post a different time on any given day. Your own magazine examples prove that....14.9, 15.3, what's next? lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2017 10:01:18 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can rely on whatever you want, but the video taped result of 14.3 is there for everyone to see. Any given driver can post a different time on any given day. Your own magazine examples prove that....14.9, 15.3, what's next? lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2017 10:05:32 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More articles out there by other magazines with similar results. What you posted was an anomoly. Like I said, something was done to the car to run 1 second faster than what it does from the factory. GT was a pig and didn't OWN anything. Keep dreaming. BTW, that video is on the internet and is now 30 years old. Find something that says the car was messed with. Maybe it was the Russians! lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2017 7:02:55 AM EDT
[#36]
If there was ever a car just begging for fender flares it's the Challenger. Looks like they finally fixed that with the Demon but the Hellcat and every Challenger before it are ancient looking and ugly due to the flat sides.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2017 9:40:48 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sorry for the butt-hurt. You really shouldn't take it so personally. lol BTW, that video is on the internet and is now 30 years old. Find something that says the car was messed with. Maybe it was the Russians! lol Just sayin'... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2017 11:17:47 AM EDT
[#38]
You guys still bitching about over if a stock 5.0 fox body mustang can run a low 14?
Let me throw more gas on that fire and tell you that the 80's cars battle came down to two things EVERY SINGLE TIME 1. rear gear ratio (and in Ford's case manual vs. auto trans) - Every article I read about a 15 second 5.0 or 350 TPI IROC for whatever strange as fuck reason the car ended up having like a 2.73 rear gear which on the Camaros wasn't supposed to happen. Verify what rear gear the test car has and there's your answer to the difference (same as Ford with the auto trans as those would slow a 5.0 down big time) 2. DRIVER mod - this by far is the biggest differentiator for the 5.0 fox and TPI cars. I was neck deep in this battle back then and have actual track results for you --- stock 1990 LX 5.0 5spd - 14.5 --- stock 1987 5.0 (305) TPI 5spd IROC - 14.4 (power shifting) --- stock 1988 Trans Am GTA 350 TPI auto - 14.7 (TA was heavier) Now again if you go to any of the magazines at the time ALL of these cars were 14.8-15.2 by their standards so either I had a bunch of factory freaks or they couldn't drive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2017 11:37:38 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You guys still bitching about over if a stock 5.0 fox body mustang can run a low 14? Let me throw more gas on that fire and tell you that the 80's cars battle came down to two things EVERY SINGLE TIME 1. rear gear ratio (and in Ford's case manual vs. auto trans) - Every article I read about a 15 second 5.0 or 350 TPI IROC for whatever strange as fuck reason the car ended up having like a 2.73 rear gear which on the Camaros wasn't supposed to happen. Verify what rear gear the test car has and there's your answer to the difference (same as Ford with the auto trans as those would slow a 5.0 down big time) 2. DRIVER mod - this by far is the biggest differentiator for the 5.0 fox and TPI cars. I was neck deep in this battle back then and have actual track results for you --- stock 1990 LX 5.0 5spd - 14.5 --- stock 1987 5.0 (305) TPI 5spd IROC - 14.4 (power shifting) --- stock 1988 Trans Am GTA 350 TPI auto - 14.7 (TA was heavier) Now again if you go to any of the magazines at the time ALL of these cars were 14.8-15.2 by their standards so either I had a bunch of factory freaks or they couldn't drive. But thanks for posting up your experiences, which are more or less in line with the results shown in the video I posted. Informally on the street without a clock, I'm telling you my 85 GT would beat all comers unless they were driving something really high dollar like a 911. Even the GLHS. The only mod I made was to change out the spring in the Holley, which made the secondaries open a bit quicker. Come to think of it, the driver of the GLHS I spanked was super pissed and shot me the bird when he finally caught up at the next light. I think I now know who the driver was. lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2017 11:43:40 AM EDT
[#40]
Double tap.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2017 11:52:51 AM EDT
[#41]
You quoted yourself?
Edit. Never mind, I guess it was a mistake.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2017 12:29:49 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You quoted yourself?
Edit. Never mind, I guess it was a mistake. Yeah, I hit quote instead of edit, then edited my own quote. Doh!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2017 12:56:39 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
(same as Ford with the auto trans as those would slow a 5.0 down big time). |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
