v6 quarter mile times?
i have an 88 camaro 2.8 rs and i wanted to know what are the stock quarter times? i am trying to understand why i can not beat a 91 chevy beretta gtz with only 160lbs of t. and 180hp?

 

Because the 2.8 only has 135 HP and 160 lb-ft torque

 

hahahaha

 

Doward here...

LOL...

Yeah, he's got more power, and probably less weight than you

17.071 @ 79.48 mph here.... on a stock 2.8

 

just curious, what is your 0-60 time? my 3.1 feels like 11-12 seconds counting in my head. i think it could do better. i have my base timing advanced a bit, maybe its hurting the top end.

 

only 17.071 @ 79.48 mph on a stock 2.8?
and people think a 3.4 is so much better, a stock 3.4 is only 16.6sec.
my friend has a 95 camaro 3.4 and he beats my stock 2.8 by no more than front end!

check it out...................................
http://www.pr.streetracing.org/whats_new.html

:lala:

 

Doward again...

Don't forget, I'm pushing a 2950 (weighed) car. What's the average 4th gen weigh? a 3.4 should get me LOW 16s in my car. That's a good difference...

My 0-60 is just under 10.9. I know, because @ the 1/8th mile, I was 10.9 @ 64.64 mph. So a ~10.7 0-60?

 

A fourth gen 3.4 car is heavier by several hundred pounds Than a third gen 2.8 car. Put the 3.4 in a third gen and it will be quicker.

I have beat a freshly tuned 3.4 firebird (fourth gen) in my 2.8 by 3 car lengths (I'm not stock, it was)

 

do u have 2 replace the computer system also? when going 2 a 3.4 from a 2.8?

 

not if you use you stock sensors and intake.

 

15.6@89 MPH... 3.8L 2.4 sec 60ft

Seriously though 17.0 is decent for a 2.8 and it's faster than a lot of cars that you'd be surprised... a Beretta with 180 Hp? No not without some good mods.

 

my 3.0ltr 300zx did the quater in 14.8 at 95.1 mph. but it had upgrades... and no stickas or fert can!! i think most people can run faster than a 17.0 1/4 thats like go cart speed!!!

 

How were made the calculated values at "streetracing.org"?. Are they values from stock engines?, mod cars?, records?, factory calculations?, into laboratories?, in street racings?, test drives?, at sea level?......??????????, ???????, ?????, ...?!.

 

MY CAR WAS DONE AT dinwoody in va and it was a modded 300zx the stock 300zx pulls 15.7 1/4 with a 7.0 0-60 according to car and driver april 90 i think...???
but if you purchyase many of the rt or c and d mags they post 1/4 mile times on them and they imports right now are racking up on 15 secs and under!!!! almost all the import v5's on family cars pull 220 or more hp. the maxima is at 255 and the altima 245 new camry solara is 240 as well. the xtera suv supercharged has a 210 hp engine. if you don't beleive me look them up i won't lie to you. i love my v8 camaro but its outdated technolegy. they can still be made to perform great but the imports can do more with less because they are so efficient! my wives 4 cylder 97 camry comes 16.5 1/4 from the factory and it gets like 35 mpg. look at the toyota indy racing engine this last year was the first time gm lost in like forever!!! toyotas were the top 9 at indy 500!!! gm is stepping up to the challenge though hopefully they will do a good job

 

I find most of them 1/4 times are mute when it comes to street racin. Unless it a sponsored event or a gathering of real people. Most numbers don't matter.

A real 1/4 drag race with two racers is way different than the street.

 

and i am talking the race track at dinwoody. not street racing. i had my wife time me in the 300 from a stop light and i hit 60 at 5. something seconds. so sstreet racing is a little off

 

I was talking about the camaro and beretta. I think hes street racin. Which is rarley ever a real 1/4 but a race to see who lifts first / who can just walk away and leave ya. I find most are atleast a 1/2+ and most go until someone lifts.


Matt

 

ok sorry i thought you were talking about me... and i saw an article a few months ago about a beretta with mods that only pulled like a 16.9... very unimpressive!!

 

If they're more efficient, why does a Vette have similar EPA numbers to an S2000, despite weight 500lbs more and being rated at 110 more crank hp? Why does my car push 400 to the wheels, run low 12s and still average 22mpg in regular driving, and 27-28 on highway trips? Find me an import that can do that. Why can ported LS1 heads flow as much as most 4 valve import heads?

The whole "imports are more efficient" is a marketing ploy that all the ricers seem to love to buy into, especially when they find themselves looking at tailights so very often. There's more to engine technology than location of the cam or number of valves per cylinder.

And GM has quite a few cars in the Camry's class with the 3.8 making 200hp that will run mid-high 15s, and is rated at 30-32 mpg. Thats better than Toyota's V6 does, and unlike Toyota's 3.0, doesn't require premium.

 

Well, technically since toyota is owned by GM GM has several cars in the Camry's class including the Camry But I actually agree with your point, you can't really say just because one is smaller and makes more HP per litre then it is more efficient.

 

Not sure onthe motor but my buddy has a twin OHC toyota that Id like to get my hands on. Its a sleek looking 4 door and a few times we ended up looking the wrong direction on the road when it hit 2nd and spun us for a loop.

Matt

 

you guys seem a little off mine goes 12.2 at 111mph...

 

your GTA? you got a few cubic inches on us.

 

Well, actually GM doesn't own Toyota. They have had several joint ventures like NUMMI and others dating back to the '80s that have produced the Nova, the Geo Prizm, and most recently the Pontiac Vibe.

But yes, I agree with your sentiment, there is more to efficiency than HP/Liter.

 

yes an you misunderstand me... most gm's or fords do not get 30-40 mpg especially the v8's not that all don't just most of them heck i am happy with my camaro getting about 25 mpg with the tb but i want more power so i switched to carb...

 

A 6 speed LS1 car is EPA rated at 28mpg highway. Thats with a 5.7 V8 making 300 hp to the wheels. Your wife's 4 cylinder Camry gets 7 mpg more making maybe 110-120 to the wheels. So there's not a very large mpg difference considering the engine is around 2.5 times larger and puts out almost 3x the power. And again I point out that GM's V6 family sedans get equal or better gas mileage compared to a 6 cylinder Accord or Camry. Most of GM's 6 cylinder sedans are rated at 30mpg or better on the highway.

 

soory dude gm's do not get better gas milage in their v6's and like i said the ls1 isn't in every gm and i was talking about our freakin terdgens any way!!! of course ls1's are great engines duuuhhh..... most chevy and gm are not ls1's and i personally hate hondas with a passion. and my wives camry is a 4 cylinder that runs 16's the 97 camry v6 of that year ran in the 15's.
i actually like mt camaro and i am also a nissan buff!!! i have owned 5 nissans and 2 of them were 3.0 liters one had about 170 hp and the other one was modded, and a friend of mine with the same mods pulled 218 hp to the rear wheels and 201 ftlbs of torque. and i love the new impalas but come on they have a 200 hp 3.8 v6 and i don't think they run 15's nor do they get 302+ mpg!!! i also said gm is getting better but in the 80's the imports had a better hp advantage on "stock" cars and i did not thinhk ls1's came with 400hp from the factory... also there are plenty of modded turboed imports that get 20+ mpg and run 13's or less! the freakin subaru wrx sti has 300hp and gets 20 something miles per gallon. and it runs 13's so if you put in more boost and better exhaust i am sure they will run well into the 12's and still get 20 something mpg.
it is more expensive to build up imports and easier to buy stuff for gm cars!!! unless you count the crappy civics. and if valve placement and camshaft placement has nothing to do with it then why does caddy and ford use dohc engines with 4 valves per cylinder... hhhmmmmmmm..... i am still going to say most imports are mopre efficient when comparing the older cars from the 80's and early 90's!!! sorry but read consumer reports and look at all the black dots on gm and then look at toyota and see all the red dots. i think that even if i don't know what i am talking about then they must!!!

 

Had to look it up,

buddies car is a 1986 Toyota Cressida 2.8 DOHC but black. Even in fair condition which is still BB at $1450

Consumer Rated Condition: Fair
"Fair" condition means that the vehicle probably has some mechanical or cosmetic defects, but is still in safe running condition. The paint, body and/or interior need work to be performed by a professional in order to be sold. The tires need to be replaced. There may be some repairable rust damage.






He wants $400 buck for it right now with leaking valve covers. Oh and its in good to great condition. had new timing belts on it and it run good. christmas is kinda close to be buying my self toys.

Matt

 

yeah toyota cressidas were like an avalon is now... they were a little better than the camry's. they are nice cars though!!

 

Well I sent a pm, but again its not really fair to compare a 3rd gen that was designed in the late 70s-early 80s to the benchmark family sedan built in 97.

Anyways here's a Camry vs. Impala comparison

2003 Camry Impala
MSRP * $25,405 $24,260

Invoice * $22,610 $22,197

Engine 3.0L V-6 210HP 3.8L V-6 200HP

Transmission 4-spd auto 4-spd auto w/OD

Fuel Economy City 20.0 mpg 19.0 mpg

Fuel Economy Hwy 28.0 mpg 29.0 mpg

Bumper to Bumper Warranty (months/miles) 36/36,000
36/36,000

There ya have it, similar HP, similar gas mileage. And again IIRC the Camry V6 takes premium gas, vs 87 for the Impy.

Taken from http://www.carsdirect.com/researchce...,USB30CHC131B0

 

thats good info but also the camry has a smaller engine and needs the premium because of the compression ratio.
also that is for the regular v6 look up the camry solara and i think it has more hp

 

Well than that hurts the efficiency arguement even more, because the Impy has .8 more liters of displacement yet gets the same gas mileage. And if most of the other makes (Chevy, Ford, Honda, Nissan, Mazda) can make a 200+ hp V6 run on the cheap stuff, why does Toyota require premium? A value minded family sedan should run on low test, it is not a sports car or luxury sedan.

 

the 4 banger does not require premium!!! also the maxima and 6 banger altima require premium as well due to the high compression... and like i said b4 i was not trying to compare 97 camry to 92 camaro... almost all the cars i have owned 15 total were from the 80's and all but the camaro were imports. my 86 corrola gts twin cam ran 17's it had 135 hp also the 87 300zx i had was made to compete with the vette!! the turboed z had 200 hp and that was only 20 behind the same year model vette.
also like i said the quality was bad for gm's my friends 92 grand prix was practically falling apart!!! all the plastic inside was breaking and he had to take it to the shop about every month or so for anywhere from $100- 900. that is garbage if you ask me!!!
how many 80's gms do you see running around?? not alot unless its a thirdgen because noone cares about the other gm cars !!! look at the luminas. they are almost non exsistant as well as the beretta and corsica!!
i see mid to late 80's yoyo's and hondas and nissana everywhere!! my moms 86 camry had 230,000 miles b4 she traded it in. and if you saw my post for what it was you would know i like gm and i think they are better than they used to be!!
they have come along way from the 90's with much better quality stuff. also look at the pontiac fiero!!! i love the way they look but how many do you see running around?? almost nonexsistant!! but you see plenty of mr2's running around! and i think toyota won between the 2 cars!! fiero 84-88 or89??
mr2 85-95 then 01-now!! hmm must be a good car then.
and like i said b4 find an older consumer reports mag any april addition!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! my dad has them going all the way back to 84 every issue!!! gm's and chrysler and ford usually have alot of marks in the black!!! imports with the exception of a few cars have primarily all red!!! these tests are done on real cars and they are real life results!!! but like i said i love my junky camaro even though my wife hates it!!!

 

3.8 not all tham much...

 

Look at i tthis way.. With simple mods I ran 16.01 with my beast and my buddy with better mods ran 17's with his 2.8. What he learend never do rockers without new springs. Went to 1.6's and used stock 100K mile springs. LOL made him slower... LOL... Now he is still slower because I own a 97 Z and he has a 3.8 bird. Guess he is destined to be behind me forever.

 

I'm really loving this import vs. GM debate. Even though i don't want to get involved I'd ahve to argue for the Gm side of the issue b/c for various reasons I think im ports are overrated zand get lots of support with nothign to back it up.

 

also if anyone is interested... they sometimes show the the imports racing on spped tv and they have many running 7 sec 1/4 miles!!! hmmm i didn't know 4 bangers went that fast??? and they do have plenty of support. like i said b4 i like my camaro but imports in the 80's and 90's were better quality cars and at that time they were not really overpriced like they are now!

 

i was told the other day by someone that my camaro with a 3.4 does 17.9 i think thats BS. how can a car that does mid 7's in 0-60 mph, run a almost 18 second 1/4 mile?

 

BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THEY DO A mid 7 0-60! matbe mid 8's.
also they have a low gear usually my 305 only has 308 gears. some v6's come with 3.42 gears.

 

Stock V6's turned 17 second 1/4's (~17.2 IIIRC) and either high 8 or low 9 second 0-60's.

Keep in mind, even the newest 3rd gen is still 11 years old though.

 

17.07 here, 0-60 in about 10.5 (tripped the 1/8th @ 10.9 @ 64.64)

 

Non turbo right???

 

The fastest all motor Honda record was just set a couple weeks ago in a fiberglass bodied full race car with a 9.8 ET. Last weekend I was at a hick track and saw plenty of street cars running close to that time all motor, including a full weight GN that went 8.3@160 and had plates.

Does that include the MkIII Supras that ate head gaskets like Rosie O'Donell eats big Macs? Or the rotory RX7's that require the Pope's blessing to hold it together every time you start up?

 

i have posted this b4 but stephan papadakis(aka buttwipe) runs 6's in his turboed civic!!! they also had a 10 sec all motor neon...

 

also i had a 300zx from 90 and i had no motor issues!!! they make good motors! and the rx7's of the 93-96 model were very fragile!!! but i was talking about regular old cars!! supras are far as i have heard are not bad with headgaskets. i have a friend with 100,000 miles on his and no hg problems. and my all motor z screamed all the way to 7000 rpms with no problems even with 156,000 miles on it! the older turbo rx7's were great cars. they did not have the smae problem as the newer rx7's.

 

how did we get into the american vs. import thing? i thought this thread was started so that someone could find out what times a 60* v6 would run in the eigth mile, not what could/might beat it!?!?

 

the 91 beretta has 180hp stock its a 'gtz' 2.3 quad4 5 speed 15.9sec in the qtr mile with no mods

 

Yep. Three's right. 180hp/160tq Quad 4.

It's too bad they didn't try for a serious performance package on the GTZ using a 60 degree mill.. if they'd used the 3.4 DOHC in those there'd be many more of those motors in junk yards than there are now, and that would make me a fairly happy camper.

 

one more then i will surrender...
read this if you think gm's are more efficient


http://autos.msn.com/advice/article....018922&src=msn

 

Correct!