Post Something Interesting

[RedRook]

2014 z/28 vs 2014 GT-R Spoiler alert, the $75,000 car beat the $116,000 one.

Amazing, when I think of a Camaro, I think of $100 beaters in college bought out of someone's front yard off of cinder blocks. It's good for about 2-3 races before something just falls off. Then you end up with another beater, realizing you can't afford to race cars that aren't fast. You can however, tie a sled to the boat towing hitch of your "new" car and go mudding, since after all, you can't afford a boat. Then you end up walking to class.

[Nicotti]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeMg6SP05gs

[SubLunar]

2014 z/28 vs 2014 GT-R Spoiler alert, the $75,000 car beat the $116,000 one.

Amazing, when I think of a Camaro, I think of $100 beaters in college bought out of someone's front yard off of cinder blocks. It's good for about 2-3 races before something just falls off. Then you end up with another beater, realizing you can't afford to race cars that aren't fast. You can however, tie a sled to the boat towing hitch of your "new" car and go mudding, since after all, you can't afford a boat. Then you end up walking to class.

I shall pretend you didn't say that. I get ricers trying to fuck with me all the time on the highway. But they forget: there's no replacement for displacement. Had a mustang beat me once. But I don't give a shit about having the faster car. My engine is fucking old. I just like to drive it.

[RedRook]

As the owner of a first gen, I shall pretend you didn't say that. I get ricers trying to fuck with me all the time on the highway. But they forget: there's no replacement for displacement. Had a mustang beat me once. But I don't give a shit about having the faster car. My engine is 46 fucking years old. I just like to drive it.

We were working with a third generation Camaro. I can guarantee it was a step down from a first gen. The one we slapped tires on was a 2.5L 4 cylinder, if I remember right. We didn't have displacement, and I'm positive it was only a four cylinder. I'm sure if you bought the right Camaro, you'd be fast. A $100 car out of someone's front yard is apparently not where you buy the right kind of Camaro. I mean honestly, the tires we put on it were worth more than the car.

[SubLunar]

haha, yeah I don't care much for any camaro or mustang for that matter built between 1970 and 2010.

[BROUSER]

Friend of mine poured a bunch of money into a '67 Camaro. He was pulling the front wheels and running high tens. Then he blew the motor. Now he's bought a '55 Mercury and rebuilding it stock. At least he stands a chance of getting his money back out of that.

[ropingk]

As the owner of a first gen, I shall pretend you didn't say that. I get ricers trying to fuck with me all the time on the highway. But they forget: there's no replacement for displacement. Had a mustang beat me once. But I don't give a shit about having the faster car. My engine is 46 fucking years old. I just like to drive it.

We were working with a third generation Camaro. I can guarantee it was a step down from a first gen. The one we slapped tires on was a 2.5L 4 cylinder, if I remember right. We didn't have displacement, and I'm positive it was only a four cylinder. I'm sure if you bought the right Camaro, you'd be fast. A $100 car out of someone's front yard is apparently not where you buy the right kind of Camaro. I mean honestly, the tires we put on it were worth more than the car.

ME I love Camaros 67-68-69-70-71- then the 2010-2014 had many in the past but i dont think GM ever did a 4 cyl in a camaro i have had the 2.8 v 6 and I think a 3.4 but who knows they were putting a 302 in a mustang II Cobra want to be

I had one of the HUGE camaros like a 89???? it had the 305 sloppy slip and slide auto tranny Big Ugly SLOW and drank fuel did I mention it was a ugly brown color

But hey it was MY camaro i slapped some cherry bombs on it and some shinney wheels and I was styling--big back seat stock crapy stero and a auto working on getting a nice 94 I think with a built 383 stroker in it and a stick its till not fast but it is a bright red nice interor killer sound system and a mean sound

would love the 2010 in that GREEN it is a 6 cyl but its pretty fast and so cool looking

[BagHead727]

But hey it was MY camaro i slapped some cherry bombs on it

I don't get why everyone loved cherry bombs. I had cherry bombs on mine and it sounded like a diesel truck. I put some flowmasters on and it sounds a lot cleaner in my opinion.

here's my before/after comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1Nto_KosAU

[RedRook]

I dont think GM ever did a 4 cyl in a camaro i have had the 2.8 v 6 and I think a 3.4 but who knows they were putting a 302 in a mustang II Cobra want to be

You had me doubting myself, so I looked it up. For a short time in the early 80's, they were selling an economy version with a 2.5L Iron Duke Pushrod 4 cylinder Engine. It was a flop, so they decided they should at minimum have a 2.8 V6. Looks like the first gens went all the way up to a 7L V8. It seems like there was a wide gap between Camaros depending on which one you got. They certainly looked cool, which is why we were excited.

[SubLunar]

But hey it was MY camaro i slapped some cherry bombs on it

I don't get why everyone loved cherry bombs. I had cherry bombs on mine and it sounded like a diesel truck. I put some flowmasters on and it sounds a lot cleaner in my opinion.

here's my before/after comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1Nto_KosAU

Flowmaster all the way. Your car sounds great. Wish mine sounded that good but as long as my old motor still runs I'm happy. Hell, I'm still running the original exhaust manifolds and all. Mine is mechanically bone stock except for the recent dual point distributor replacement to an electronic system. Not that i'm proud of this, I'm merely too broke to do anything about it.

[paul06660]

2014 z/28 vs 2014 GT-R Spoiler alert, the $75,000 car beat the $116,000 one.

Amazing, when I think of a Camaro, I think of $100 beaters in college bought out of someone's front yard off of cinder blocks. It's good for about 2-3 races before something just falls off. Then you end up with another beater, realizing you can't afford to race cars that aren't fast. You can however, tie a sled to the boat towing hitch of your "new" car and go mudding, since after all, you can't afford a boat. Then you end up walking to class.

I shall pretend you didn't say that. I get ricers trying to fuck with me all the time on the highway. But they forget: there's no replacement for displacement. Had a mustang beat me once. But I don't give a shit about having the faster car. My engine is fucking old. I just like to drive it.

True, there is no replacement for displacement, however most domestics hardly put out much power per cubic inch to compete with the imports. Case in point, I own an 06 Acura RSX Type S, which puts out around 105 hp per liter naturally aspirated. All day it will take out most older z28 Camaros, and pre-2002 Mustang GT's, stock for stock. Hell even my old Integra with 140 hp would take out older Dodge Ram 1500 v8's all day. Now if you want to start talking about v8's, I am currently trying to obtain a 1994-95 Infiniti q45, which has the coveted VH45DE putting out around 320 hp and 300 torque from 4.5 liters naturally aspirated. This engine was built by factory race technicians with forged crank, rods, and titanium valves with variable valve timing.

Now when it comes to the video posted, even though the Camaro won, I would still choose the GTR over it anyday. Why? Because there is no fucking way in hell GM can compete with the GTR's build quality, which is nothing less than world-class. Because of this, and the lack of long-term reliability in any GM vehicle, the GTR will hold an extremely high resale value for years to come. Furthermore, why would anyone want to buy from GM, a company which continues to build shitty small cars with cheap engines built in China? Thats right, fucking China. One can easily argue that Honda, Nissan, and Toyota are now the new domestics, because they build most of their cars and car parts here in the U.S.

[BagHead727]

I hate when people always rag on about displacement/cubic inches and act like domestics are inferior because they have a larger displacement. Cubic-inches of displacement = bore X stroke. Believe it or not, the bore of a large displacement engine can often be the same or similar size of that of a smaller displacement engine. You can have a small displacement engine and compensate by having higher revolutions. It means nothing, it's all about how you tune it. Shoot, up until 5,500rpm (close to my max rpm) I make more power than a v10 Lamborghini Gallardo at that same engine speed.

Fun fact: The bore of a Chevy 302 is the same as a 383. The stroke of a 267 is the same as a 377.

[ropingk]

But hey it was MY camaro i slapped some cherry bombs on it

I don't get why everyone loved cherry bombs. I had cherry bombs on mine and it sounded like a diesel truck. I put some flowmasters on and it sounds a lot cleaner in my opinion.

here's my before/after comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1Nto_KosAU

OH I agree NOW but now I ahve more money than I did back in the 70s-80s now on my farm trucks im flowmaster the other fuunny thing is while in a stright 1/4 mile it is about90% car and 10% driver that 10% could mean winning and loosing by a lot

the old 350 chevy motor was a wuss from the factory but do some work spend some bucks and you can have apavement eating machine

the motor i really liked that chevy came out with was the small block 400---it didnt have the torque of a big block but it was fun

[ropingk]

I dont think GM ever did a 4 cyl in a camaro i have had the 2.8 v 6 and I think a 3.4 but who knows they were putting a 302 in a mustang II Cobra want to be

You had me doubting myself, so I looked it up. For a short time in the early 80's, they were selling an economy version with a 2.5L Iron Duke Pushrod 4 cylinder Engine. It was a flop, so they decided they should at minimum have a 2.8 V6. Looks like the first gens went all the way up to a 7L V8. It seems like there was a wide gap between Camaros depending on which one you got. They certainly looked cool, which is why we were excited.

Yea I was 100% back then who knew what they were doing i just never drove one witjh a 4 cyl sure would be a struggle to go any place verry fast


I did have a 1964 with a inlince 230??? 3 on the tree 4 door oh man was it a dog but it got me to school every day and was easy on gas

[RedRook]

Everything is a piece of the puzzle, displacement is no exception. Displacement is the maximum you are going to get out of a rev of the engine. Your main limiting factor for power is the amount of oxygen available to consume fuel. You can't possibly consume more fuel than the room you have for containing oxygen in a combustion. We all know the ways of jamming more fresh oxygen in those chambers. Displacement is the max you can reach, reality is somewhere below that.

The rev issue I think is not as relevant as it seems. We can all see the HP curves, we all know that higher revs don't always produce more power, because engines aren't perfect. Power = mass * acceleration * velocity at any given speed. You can't increase your acceleration without increasing power at the wheels. If increasing revs by 1000 RPM makes your HP drop at the engine, it's going to drop at the wheels near the same ratio. The simplest thing to do is look at how much horse power you are actually getting at each rev and find the best band to be in. It is a clear summary of all the other pieces put together.

Aerodynamics is the sneak attack on power that everyone forgets, because it is so hard for us to change it. The power aerodynamics take from your car is based on Velocity cubed. If you double your velocity, you have 8 times more power from the wind holding you back. That's the main downside of the older cars, even if they look better, they are way worse aerodynamically. That is far harder to fix than the jamming oxygen into the engine problem.

A small displacement can be better, but according to the laws of physics, it should be easier to make a large displacement engine stronger than a small displacement one.