Nic, face it... 108 mph trap speed... its a super charged dohc 390hp engine!!! wtf and it can only go a little faster then a n/a old school pushrod v-8.... I hope when the camaro comes back.... it kicks the mustang square in the ***** really hard.... like it always has.... aight, im done peace

 

The only reason the Cobra isnt putting out more power is Ford has to live up to the warrantees and face it a car making more than 10PSI a company is gonna get itchy putting a warrantee on it. The Cobra has a twin screw SCer, it can make plenty of power my friend.

 

And I guess you haven't heard about the 5.0L 400+ hp N/A engine that is going to go into the new Mustangs.

 

yes, i have.... but untill i see it its all just a dream..... sh%t i can say there gunna put a 560hp 427 in the next camaro.... dont mean sh%t......... untill it happens... its still a dream....

 

plus i just got my hot rod mag.... they tested it.... 1/4 in 12.93 at 114.5mph.... my uncle ran a 12.9 in his SS.... so that aint no big deal.... and no BS about missing 4th gear so i dont wana hear it...

 

Yeah, but look at that trap speed! That had some BAD traction. 114 mph trap speed is in low 12's category isn't it?

 

114 can get you into the 11's on a good suspension.

mid 12's @ 108+ mph with a 20 mph head wind in a 3700 lb vehicle with a warranty...yea, nothing too impressive

Could you be referring to the EXACT SAME ENGINE that Ford showcased in the FR500? :lala:

99% of you guys are cool, but some of you need to open your eyes and realize that a brand is nothing more than a badge on a bumper. Any fast car is cool whether its made by Ford, GM, Toyota, Ferrari, or whoever.

 

not true , the 92 firehawk was the fastest production fbody . granted more rare than a tta , but i had to be an ***

then again , an slp car really isnt a production car , it is and it isnt i dont know , take it where you wanna . i just remember the firehawk running close to or a little better that a stock tta

 

That's like saying the Turbo T/A, Buick GN/GNX/T-type and the Syclone would be nothing without their turbochargers

EDIT: Ok, i posted this after reading the TTA/GN comments.

This thread is getting a bit out of hand

 

I dont think so VERY close but the TTA went 0-60 in low 4's high 12's in 1/4 and over 165 mph top speed.

 

oh its VERY close , this would be a drivers race on the street , oh and a tta isnt going to run 12;s with an average driver

1992 firehawk

 

Well it looks all good on paper, do you know the top speed of the firehawk???

I have seen quite a few TTA's go 12 with "average drivers".

Also how many FH's were made?? Where can I find more info on them???

 

I don't see many average drivers running 12's in TTA's. Most stock TTA's i've seen were running anywhere from a high 13 to a low 13. Not saying they can't run 12's.. I just haven't witnessed it stock. And i'd definitly take a TTA over a firehawk. The firehawk may be rare but the TTA has the power of the darkside

 

top speed wise , i havent a clue . also , im not sure on exactly how many were made but, i know the number is very low . i dont know if you could even really call it a production car or not , thats up to the readers of the thread .

i was just tossing it out . but tta's still have the advantage of boost . all ya gotta do is turn it up a bit and fly . i love both cars though

oh and if you want to learn more about it , the only thing i can suggest is doing a search for some sites or something

have fun and nice car

 

Info i wa able to find out through searches was:

0-60 in 4.9.................slower than TTA
standing 1/4 13.5......slower than TTA
TOP speed 152.............slower than TTA


SO my original statement stands!!! LOL

 

hey why are we fighting with own brothers..... family people!! lets yell at the mustang kids.... i saw a mustang 5.0 with some mods get stompped by a olds ciera? i dunno some FWD olds.... the olds was ahead by 1 car length, im really not kidding... thats y i posted it... i was so proud of that kid.... anyway peace

 

Guess I have to post this pic.

 

I'm sorry, that Mustang looks like a family car next to the Iroc.

 

i agree

 

 

I like them.......I also own both.

 

You have a point, the front end of the Stang doesn't look the best, I should have taken it at an angle.

 

Too bad it's not a 5.0 with nicer wheels and shotgun exhaust pipes..The LX notchback is a sexy car in it's v8 form. But that's just my opinion.

 

I agree. The 5.0 Lxs look good with the bigger tires and lower stance, but the GTs with gfx look real tough.

 

You mean like this?






hehe..sorry

 

I still cant get over the fact that its supercharged .. stock. That seems kinda bitch to me. Maybe if it was a saleen or some tuner vehicle that would be a different story, but it just seems wrong to have a " sports" car... an american sports car... hell what was once considered a " muscle car"... come with a power adder. Never seen camaro's or vettes come with em. Theirs more that can be done to a car before power adders are necessary... look at the callaway supernaturals ... some bad *** vehicles.

http://www.callawaycars.com/Camaro/camaro_body.htm

without adders... but.. this is IMO of course.

 

some of yall guys are so fuhking ignorant. POWER IS POWER BOTTOM LINE. to me its funny that the same people that would bitch about ford putting a SC on a car are the people bitching chevy didnt. why would you not want a power adder from the factory, what are the disadvantages, a 25 dollar pulley that will gain you 40 hp??? would you race one at the local strip and get your *** handed to them then say i really won cuz i raced NA? the only time i would bitch about a car with a power adder is if i was in a specific racing class that has a rule, no power adders.
people seem to think it is bad *** when a fbody guy puts a power adder on their car, SVT does it and it isnt right? WTF is that?
open your eyes!

 

There's an interesting point. How does a SC Cobra fit into drag racing rules for stock? Do they have something in regards to power adders?