i dont get it.......

[jackal2000]

Originally Posted by oldsnut

Not unlees you find a way to stuff an Aurora V-8 into it.

i guess i should have been specific. stock 2.2, 2.4 and 3400 = teh sl0w

[alerored04]

so a heavily modded 15.1 milzy car is not teh slow? lol. Had to dude, you left it open!!

[jackal2000]

damn i left that part out! LOL unless you're boosted forgetaboutit.

[alerored04]

nah, a good tune will get rid of your teh slowness.

[jackal2000]

Originally Posted by alerored04

nah, a good tune will get rid of your teh slowness.

and lighter rims

[alerored04]

for sure, i wish i could afford a set of nice light 17"s but i need the power first. Turbo is cooler than rims anyway.

[AlbinoMonkeyRat]

14" light rims FTW

[Cliff8928]

You can't install 14" wheels unless you down-size the brakes.

Oh, and i think the original point of this thread was-

Why does everyone say the 3400 is so much faster than the 2.4 if their as-tested ETs in the magazines (C&D R&T, MT, etc..) aren't all that far apart.

One thing, Is that i don't think the magazines really persist in any technique in getting better times out of cars that aren't flashy, trendy, or attention-getting - like 'vettes, vipers, and mustangs etc...

[number1alero]

^which you cant blame them...considering those are the popular cars for performance (which especially the new mustang...ive heard the engines are interchangeable between the different models) God im drooling over the shelby gt500, $40,000 with 500hp, definetely beats the vette price and you could buy two of them for the price of one viper

[AlbinoMonkeyRat]

Originally Posted by Cliff8928

You can't install 14" wheels unless you down-size the brakes.

precisely the point. down-sizing the brakes reduces rotational mass along with the light-weight wheels. doing this alone could probably get you 0.2sec on the 1/8, and between 0.3 and 0.4 on the quarter. on a drag-only car, this is a very worth-while mod.

Originally Posted by number1alero

^which you cant blame them...considering those are the popular cars for performance (which especially the new mustang...ive heard the engines are interchangeable between the different models) God im drooling over the shelby gt500, $40,000 with 500hp, definetely beats the vette price and you could buy two of them for the price of one viper

Yeah the new Mustangs are nice and all, but what do you mean by interchangeable engines? Are you saying you can buy a v6 and drop in a v8 from the GT. Almost all Mustangs are that way, I know alot of people who put Cobra engines into their v6 or GT. The new GT500 is pretty badass, but the Vette outperforms it in about every way possible, hell the new Z06 Vette almost outperforms the Ford GT. The GT500 weighs so damn much and runs the 1/4 in about 12.6 or so, that is about avg.

Originally Posted by Cliff8928

You can't install 14" wheels unless you down-size the brakes.

Oh, and i think the original point of this thread was-

Why does everyone say the 3400 is so much faster than the 2.4 if their as-tested ETs in the magazines (C&D R&T, MT, etc..) aren't all that far apart.

One thing, Is that i don't think the magazines really persist in any technique in getting better times out of cars that aren't flashy, trendy, or attention-getting - like 'vettes, vipers, and mustangs etc...

thank you!!!!!!!!!! someone was finally paying attention to what i was saying. this is the only decent reply to my question out of all these posts

[AlbinoMonkeyRat]

you guys do realize that magazine numbers don't count.

the engine itself is more powerful. if they had the same gear ratios, then the 3400 would be noticeably faster than the 2.4L. mfuller already said that.

why dont magazine numbers count?

[number1alero]

magazine numbers are usually numbers reported by the manufacturer, which can usually be off. until you get a car on a dyno, you can only guess what it puts out power wise. even though its the same engine, they can put out different HP numbers, some people end up with a junk engine, others get a freak engine. kinda luck of the draw, or like playing the lottery

[number1alero]

Originally Posted by FutureEcotecOwnerAgain

Yeah the new Mustangs are nice and all, but what do you mean by interchangeable engines? Are you saying you can buy a v6 and drop in a v8 from the GT. Almost all Mustangs are that way, I know alot of people who put Cobra engines into their v6 or GT. The new GT500 is pretty badass, but the Vette outperforms it in about every way possible, hell the new Z06 Vette almost outperforms the Ford GT. The GT500 weighs so damn much and runs the 1/4 in about 12.6 or so, that is about avg.

ill beg to differ...the vette is a shitty ride, because of the suspension setup that has the car so low to the ground, ive ridden in one and could easily feel the tiniest bump, just like the viper. besides...you missed the point here, for $40,000 u can have the GT500, spend another 20,000 to get to the new vette price, and beat the shit out of the vette.

[number1alero]

actually ill take that back, you can get the gt500 and throw 30,000 into it to get to the z06 price, its MSRP is $70,000. do your research before you start making stupid comments....

so who would take a z06 for $70,000 with 500 HP or the newer more rare GT500 for $40,000 with 500 HP ?

[derek_ski99]

and like it was already said...they don't exactly push the passenger cars and economic sedans like they would a corvette or viper, which is why you can't really judge magazine numbers.

Originally Posted by number1alero

magazine numbers are usually numbers reported by the manufacturer, which can usually be off. until you get a car on a dyno, you can only guess what it puts out power wise. even though its the same engine, they can put out different HP numbers, some people end up with a junk engine, others get a freak engine. kinda luck of the draw, or like playing the lottery

your right on that point, but nearly all magazines test the cars on the track for performance numbers even though they use manufacturers hp and tq specs