So my friend and I are talking about who's car would win in a normal 1/4 mile drag. I know more about cars than him but that isnt saying much haha. Anyways, my car:

1986 Chevy Camaro Z28.
Automatic 700r4 tranny
brand new 4bbl carb
Brand new 5.7 V8 engine

the rest is basically stock.

His car is a bone stock 2002 Chevy Malibu. He says it'll get 170hp, and its a v6

So who'd win?

 

You should kill him.
Google calls his car a 16.7 1/4 mile.
Their is no reason you shouldn't be in the low 15's with the worse case scenario.

 

That gen Malibu will run in the 15's. I have an '00 with 246K miles on it and it'll probably run low 16's, it might still hit the high 15's.

You should be able to beat it though.

 

Why not just run him and find out?

 

Not likely. I have a 2003 Olds Alero which is exactly the same as a Malibu asside from the body and the fact that the Olds got the 3400 making 170hp and 210lb/tq and the Chevy got the 3100 making 155hp and 185lb/tq. I took my Olds to the strip last year just to see what it'd run and my best run was a 16.06et. Motor Week got a 15.9x from their test car. With the the 3100 MW got a best et of 16.4x. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipIyq3U49UM

The win goes to the Camaro for sure.

 

3100 in the Malibu makes 170hp at least in '00. I'm sure it was the same throughout the rest of the run.

 

thanks for the replies guys, I'm pretty confident about it, even more now for what you're telling me.

I'm planning too as soon as all the snow melts. As of now my car is on a seasonal waiver because of not being able to pass emissions, so I can only
drive it from April 1st through October 31st. Plus the fact that the roads here don't get totally dry until around Mid to late April..

 

my freind had one, i ran him with my camaro when i first got it when it was having engine troubles with my 305. i obliterated him

 

Why would you even waste the gas? Is that what 3rdgenners have resorted to? Racing mid-sized economy cars? lol

Start out at half throttle, let him stay even then drop the hammer on him.

 

nah its just abiding by he law of going fast and whooping a s s

 

i agree 100%. Why are our cars being compared to v6 cars, and mid sizes v6 cars at that? I wouldn't even waste the gas.

 

Mainly because the V6 cars are quicker than most of the V8 3rd gens made. Heck most of them make more power.

Even my '11 Equinox has 264HP out of a 3.0 V6.

 

then you must not drive a 350 powered thirdgen. Also, hp means very little,it is the 0-60 time that matters. For example a 350 tpi thirdgen is quicker than a 2010 dodge charger that has 425 hp.

 

most thirdgens have 140+ more ft lbs of torque more than an Equinox.lol

 

I don't know about that but a Charger will out run a 350 3rd gen. I'd have to look up what 0-60 for both was. Have to remember the Charger weighs 5-600 lbs more. And I've driven plenty of 305 and 350 3rd gens.

I think only the TTA would qualify.

 

how about the charger weighs 800 plus lbs more, closer to 1,000. Basically, a stock 350 thirdgen is about the same as a 68' Plymouth GTX 440 big block in 0-60. That is a fact.I don't think any new v6 car or any crossover or Suv comes close.

 

SRT-8 can go 0-60 in under 5 seconds. There is no 3rd gen that could do that. Even with the weight, the Charger is quicker.

A GTX was not the quick 0-60, close to 7 seconds. I'll have to check but the new Equinox is fairly quick since it has a A6. Gearing does wonders.

 

With the '92 SLP Firehawk being the only exception, of course....

 

I should have stated that and the TTA.

 

Why not? A race is a race, even if both people know the thirdgen will win its still just for fun if their both friends. A few bucks in gas is worth the smile.

But on the other hand would I race a random stranger in a econobox showing off at a red light? Hell no.

 

Dodge Charger r/t is capable of 0-60 in the low 5 sec. range. Maybe the 2011 is different

 

Those Chargers are nice,but they are a little heavy.

 

Direct-Injected ECOTEC 2.4L:

• 182 HP @ 6700 rpm (unchanged)
• 174 lb.-ft. torque @ 4800 rpm (up from 172 lb.-ft.)
• 21/30 MPG on FWD models (unchanged)
• 20/27 MPG on AWD models (unchanged)
• Projected 0-60 mph: 9.5 seconds (new information!)

Direct-Injected 3.0L High-Feature V6:

• 264 HP @ 6950 rpm (up from 255 HP)
• 222 lb.-ft. @ 5100 rpm (up from 214 lb.-ft.)
• 19/25 MPG on FWD models (up from 18/25 MPG)
• 18/24 MPG on AWD models (up from 17/24 MPG)
• Projected 0-60 mph: 7.8 seconds (new information!)

There you go. 7.8 compared to the 1990 IRoc 350 TPI that is 5.8 seconds 0-60 . Big difference. The equinox probably just feels fast.LOL.

 

I saw that from Motor Trend when they tested a '10. Have to see what the IROC did when they tested it. They leave at idle. If I remember right, it went upper 6's-low 7's for the IROC. But memory fades after 20+ years ago...

As far as the Equinox feeling fast, its the slowest car we have

 

Sorry to the OP as this has gotten way off track.

 

So, the snow melted here. How is it doing out there?

 

Roads are dry! I ran him a few times, both from a 65mph roll and from a standstill. I killed him both times lol. I need to find some better competition haha...

 

My wife has a 2000 malibu v6 3100 170hp 190tq. Its not even a challenge for my lo3 with headers.
Torque prevails.

 

Threads like this literally bring tears to my eyes with laughter.


You're worried about beating an econo-sedan like a Malibu?

 

i wouldnt even waiste the gas or conversation at that

 

It is rather funny.

 

theres alot of arguing here over stock vs stock number when the reality is that our cars are between basicly 20 and 30 year old musclecars that most likely didnt make it this far without havin some power adders thrown on somewhere along the line. take a show of hands of third gen owners, cause i bet less than 20% are bone stock

 

The messed up part is that a bone stock L03 Camaro isn't much if any faster than the Malibu.

 

I did that to my sister in-law on day, just messing around. She kept talking smack about her intrepid, so I happened to catch her at a light, and I paced her until my car shifted into second. I then stomped on it, and left her sitting there. At first, I wasn't even sure she was racing, but her conversation with my wife proved otherwise.

 

What year of Intrepid was that? My 2000 Intrepid has the 2.7 and is pretty nimble and can squeel the tires (it has 200 hp). I have been able to run even with V6 Mustangs.

 

I'm thinking it was a 95 with the 3.5l. It wasn't in the best of health by this time, either.

 

Did they do an engine swap? The 95's didnt come with 3.5's but they did come with a 3.3 with a street shaking 161 hp! lol

About the OP's question it shoud be a pretty easy race.

 

not to get back to the charger debate but brotherin law owens a 2008 rt with cai and i have 89n formula 350 with only cai air foil and ud pulleys and we have raced many times since the wheather got better from a standstill up to about 90 i keep a full car on him after that he starts to pull pretty good and from a 65 punch he pulls steady stop light to stop light no problem 1/4 very close any further he is faster

 

Remember people all new cars have rev and speed limiters where as an 86 IROC doesn't. Here is some sadness for you though my 06 Silverado 4x4 crew cab is faster than my 86 IROC. The IROC gets its revenge though since it fits in the garage and the truck doesn't .

 

Come on now, we will race anything!! lol

 

Your right, this was many years ago. I do remember that the intrepids had 2 ~3l engine options at that time, and her's was the larger of the two. Not that it matters much anymore.