Revolutionary Turbo idea!!!! - Page 2

xceebeex · #16 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GranMassaX

what am I comparing it to?

it's an iconic sports car, so I will laugh harder now that I know it only has 245hp, thanks.

You have to be kidding me. You were obviously comparing it to something, because you consider a 15.2 in the quarter a bad time, but what were other cars running back when that car was new? Engines evolve, cars did not always come with 400-500hp. Compare it to other sports cars of its time not to cars of today. The base corvette today has 436hp and it probably doesn't cost much more than your EVO did brand new.

bennyfizzle · #17 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 09:49 AM

my car's a 95 and i went 13.8@102

i thought c4's were good for high 13s with a downy driving...and mid 13s if you actually know what youre doing lol

mikecentola · #18 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 09:50 AM

c4 corvettes have to be the car i hate most. they are just so typical mullet redneck cars....

xceebeex · #19 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bennyfizzle

my car's a 95 and i went 13.8@102

i thought c4's were good for high 13s with a downy driving...and mid 13s if you actually know what youre doing lol

Is your car stock, if not, then again its apples to oranges. No, not all C4's are good for 13's stock. The LT1 was probably capable of high 13's. FWIW, my 94 Z28 went 13.7 with just exhaust and crappy headers on street tires.

bennyfizzle · #20 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xceebeex

Is your car stock, if not, then again its apples to oranges. No, not all C4's are good for 13's stock. The LT1 was probably capable of high 13's.

oh rly...

guess i can go pick on some c4 vettes...when i was at the valley my first time i pwnx0red two stingray's...the early to mid 80s body style...idk if they're c3's or what, totally thought i was gonna get hosed, apparently i'm misinformed.

and its not stock, no, but even stock is good for real low 14s with a decent driver, thought they'd be faster is all...w/e

GranMassaX · #21 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xceebeex

You have to be kidding me. You were obviously comparing it to something, because you consider a 15.2 in the quarter a bad time, but what were other cars running back when that car was new? Engines evolve, cars did not always come with 400-500hp. Compare it to other sports cars of its time not to cars of today. The base corvette today has 436hp and it probably doesn't cost much more than your EVO did brand new.

I said it was slow, cuz 15.2 is slow. I don't have to compare it to anything to know that. Sorry that I'm ragging on the all american god car that is the corvette. I hate the older vettes so maybe I'm a little biased, but I always thought they were faster than that..... plain, slow, heavy, underpowered... though I love the new ones

base vette - $46K
base 2006 evo (rs) - $28K

xceebeex · #22 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bennyfizzle

oh rly...

guess i can go pick on some c4 vettes...when i was at the valley my first time i pwnx0red two stingray's...the early to mid 80s body style...idk if they're c3's or what, totally thought i was gonna get hosed, apparently i'm misinformed.

and its not stock, no, but even stock is good for real low 14s with a decent driver, thought they'd be faster is all...w/e

Not all corvette's were fast by today's standards. My Z28 was rated at 275hp with the LT1 and was supposed to be a low 14second car, so you figure with the same motor, a little better breathing and lighter, you could probably get consistant mid-high 13's in the vette with the LT1. THe L98 has 55 less hp, so there is no way that thing was hitting 13's stock and then it gets worse the further back you go.

Cavi Mike · #23 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 10:00 AM

Failure at its finest.

hybrdthry911 · #24 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 10:00 AM

i love the guy on the second page that said:

"Did you just invent the first combustion engine with absolutely zero emissions? I really think you are on to something, I mean on something......"

xceebeex · #25 (**permalink**) 11-09-2007, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GranMassaX

I said it was slow, cuz 15.2 is slow. I don't have to compare it to anything to know that. Sorry that I'm ragging on the all american god car that is the corvette. I hate the older vettes so maybe I'm a little biased, but I always thought they were faster than that..... plain, slow, heavy, underpowered... though I love the new ones

base vette - $46K
base 2006 evo (rs) - $28K

15.2 is slow by today's standards, but I bet that seemed fast back then because there weren't many cars that were doing that stock whereas today, many many cars do that stock. The C4's were probably the worst corvette, but I like the years before and the later years as well. I don't think a vette was ever really that heavy for its size. I think the new C6 barely weighs 3000 pounds which is amazing considering the size of the motor and the vehicle.

Was that the base price of the 06 vette or the 08? I thought the EVO's cost more than that though.