Actual times....

[buddiiee]

Hey, as i search around, on both on the various message boards, and on the street, im finding more and more information pointing to something i still cant believe. either these cars are UNGODLY freakin fast, or those porsches and camaros out there just suck hind tit. the average quarter mile times im seein for camaros from stock, to slightly modified, are hovering in the mid 13's, while the porche 911's are hovering around an average of mid to low 12's. But from what i see here every nite, is that MOST of the gnttype boards tr owners claim they run 12's, on the way to the grocery store, with their slightly modded TR's. is this true? 3800 pound, 5 person passenger V6 sedans, with street tires, runnin neck and neck with the most winningest name in auto history? Either SOMEones exaggerating a little bit on their times, or those 70,000 dollar built to the hilt turbo porsches, with z rated 325 wide tires suck..and somehow i dont see that happenin. someone please explain, im still kinda new.

[Raider9170]

It's all about potential my friend. The camaro comparison isn't really great because you have to remember that those are naturally aspirated and the turbo regals are not, forced induction is a great thing. Also, just as you said modified tr's and the stock porsche, if you did similar modifications to a turbo porsche it would be flat nasty. It's just that the design of the tr/gn's have great potential and the factory didn't tap into the power even a little bit. The other thing you have to keep in mind is that porsche's are designed for super handling and all that most of the tr/gn's are mostly straight line oriented, again giving them an advantage. Hope that shines some light on the subject. But again, just my .02

[buddiiee]

so do you mean that with the porsches, all that 'super handling' design makes em a little heavier? would that be it? more suspension parts? is that whats makin em slow? and i know that buick never unleashed the fury with that little V6 but, im still confused as to why an F body car, which is WAYYYYY more aerodynamic, about 300lbs lighter on average, has two more cylinders, and way better technology, still cant keep up with our TR's. Im in the dark. What the HELL is chevrolet and pontiac doing over there? are their exhaust ports like a freakin half in in diametre? do they drop lead weights in their trunks before they ship em to the dealers? i dont get it man.. someones times are off... period.

[Keller]

It's just that the design of the tr/gn's have great potential and the factory didn't tap into the power even a little bit.

That's true. Before I really knew what I was doing, I tried a used chip in my car. Something from a manufacturer that I wouldn't recommend at this point. But...it managed to get my T's times to go from 14.7-14.6 down to 13.6-13.4, immediately. Pump gas, radials, full stock exhaust w/ cat, stock air cleaner...no tricks. Pretty decent without spinning a wrench, I think.

What's different? Look at the torque numbers of the TRs vs. the brand X cars. While they tout HP, we've got loads of torque. And not to shabby in the HP department, either. Many of the F-body/Mustang/GTO/Vette/rice cars still haven't touched the TR's original torque number or are just cresting it. And while it was 355 lb/ft (all in at a low RPM, too I might mention) right out of the box, you know that it changed the minute a chip or any other enhancement has been made. Torque is what you need to move heavy objects...like Buicks!

[kenmosher]

... and to continue that thought ...

AVERAGE torque, not just peak numbers. If you look at a TR (or most any turbocharged application), you see the torque curve jumps right up as soon as the boost goes up and then pretty much stays high during the entire RPM range.

This also affects AVERAGE HP (since that's just the amount of force(torque) applied over a period of time (RPM) to get work (HP)). So, even though the peak HP numbers may not be huge, it's all about "area under the curve".

More total force is applied with a flat, high torque curve over the entire RPM band than a peaky torque curve. NOW... if you have gears/converter set up to stay in the peak on a peaky motor, then you'll have the same effect ... more total force applied, but it usually is a tougher car to drive fast (think Honda S2000 with it's 9K RPM and max power above 7500RPM!).

Then, add a chip, some fuel and boost and you just moved that nice flat torque curve UP ... MORE average HP = faster car.

Basically, boost is a wonderful thing! The biggest limiting factors are controlling detonation and the ECU in combination with intercooling and octane can do that. That's why a lot of very mild combos can put a little unleaded high octane gas in it, crank up the boost a bit and drive to the track with A/C on and then crank off a 12.

[buddiiee]

thats fu&^%n awesome lol, "put a little unleaded high octane gas in it, crank up the boost a bit and drive to the track with A/C on and then crank off a 12."

i guess i picked the right car to mess with.. though, i never doubted the aggression of our motors..theyre legendary. i always knew they were fearsome but, what i still cant believe, is how much those F body guys on my strip, have to work, to catch us. theyve GOT to be doing something wrong. an LT1 V8, in a lighter, more aerodynamic car, and they have to bust knuckles for an entire summer to do what we can do with ONE change, right off the dealers lot. either ive raced alot of fools, or my car is quicker than the previous owner told me... those 'thumpin' 3000 dollars stereo systems in those teenagers camaros out on gratiot ave. must weight like 300 lbs then. cuz those built LT1's or whatever they are arent that impressive at all. i guess those kids bought the wrong car. cuz they STILL cant fit 4 people in em when they cruise the strip on top of that. i have to get my car dynoed...

[Keller]

You learn fast, grasshopper... :D

Just read "The Recipe" and proceed gently. Its not about spending cubic dollars to go fast. Its doing the right things in the right order. And starting with the right platform, of course. My car owe's it's performance to a lot of luck, and my asking questions and listening to others before I make a move.

It may not be their cars, BTW. Sometimes it is what is being done and how. How many questions are asked here that could be answered if the person had a scan tool? Instead, they have purchased loads of parts, which they can not tune.

[buddiiee]

yea i totally see that. thats always the first thing you ask. do you have a scan tool. and people here STILL buy parts without getting a scan tool. im not going to make that mistake.
thats what i always do. i ask many questions. even if i already know the answer, i still ask, just to ENSURE the right people are telling me the right things. in the army, were totally accountable for what happens to our men, weapons and equipment. if something brakes, its your fault. period. thats how we do it. thats why i, almost to the brink of annoying people, ask many questions. i dont wanna HOPE, i wanna KNOW im doing it right, and above standard, mediochre, and average. thats why i come here. by the end of the summer, ill be virtually unbeatable on my strip here in detroit. thanks to you guys.

[SteveL87GN]

As an owner of both, I can tell you, yes, the GN is freakishly fast, and really easy to get there too. Buuuut, don't discount the LT1 either. Imagine strapping a turbo on that...mmmmmm lol :D. Do a Google search for George Baxter...very nice setup indeed. Plus my Z is actually slightly lighter and handles way better stock for stock. Now, if you want a really awesome car, imagine dropping the LC2 into a 4th Gen Z or TA...he he he :D.

With that said, I will never...EVER...sell my GN. She may not handle well...she may even be "ugly"...but she's FREAKIN' AWESOME!!!!! http://home.comcast.net/~budlopez/pictures/icon_twisted.gif. I mean, 11s for under $2k...yeowzah! Definitely an awesome beast...but don't discount the LT1 just yet ;)