this is funny...
08-28-2007, 03:46 PM
#31
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: this is funny...
poor thing, one of the fastest if not the fastest supercars in the world. for 700k and uses a poor lonely pushrod motor 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7pcbgbbQqo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOMHZ...elated&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7pcbgbbQqo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOMHZ...elated&search=
08-28-2007, 03:46 PM
#32
1.5 BAR
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 752
Re: this is funny...
Originally Posted by random-strike
will that 5l 500hp engine power the car its in to 30mpg? will it have 475ft-lbs of torque?
the 4.6l engines (without the blower) in the mustangs are gigantic heaps of ---- compared to ls1s stock for stock and mod for mod.
the 4.6l mod motors are good motors, just not as a good as lsx motors.
the 4.6l engines (without the blower) in the mustangs are gigantic heaps of ---- compared to ls1s stock for stock and mod for mod.
the 4.6l mod motors are good motors, just not as a good as lsx motors.
and i dont even know what the 4.6 is. the engine i'm thinking of is the one in the late model falcons its called "the boss" i think, but dont quote me, its 5.0l
its cast iron blocked though, so the balance of the car isnt as good as its gm counterpart...
another 4 (edit 5) posts there. you dont think you could take a second to think before posting do you?
08-28-2007, 03:48 PM
#33
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: this is funny...
Originally Posted by fe3tcourier
no, it will have about 500nm as 100nm per litre is around about what all engines make unless they are very ---- indeed.
and i dont even know what the 4.6 is. the engine i'm thinking of is the one in the late model falcons its called "the boss" i think, but dont quote me, its 5.0l
its cast iron blocked though, so the balance of the car isnt as good as its gm counterpart...
another 4 (edit 5) posts there. you dont think you could take a second to think before posting do you?
and i dont even know what the 4.6 is. the engine i'm thinking of is the one in the late model falcons its called "the boss" i think, but dont quote me, its 5.0l
its cast iron blocked though, so the balance of the car isnt as good as its gm counterpart...
another 4 (edit 5) posts there. you dont think you could take a second to think before posting do you?
08-28-2007, 03:48 PM
#34
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: this is funny...
how about you tell us what it will get in miles per gallon.
i bet it does get the 26-30mpg the c6 z06 does ehh
i bet it does get the 26-30mpg the c6 z06 does ehh
08-28-2007, 03:50 PM
#35
3.0 BAR
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,631
Re: this is funny...
post -----....
lol.
lol.
08-28-2007, 03:50 PM
#36
1.5 BAR
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 752
Re: this is funny...
its hypothetical... but i'm sure it would manage if in the same light chassis.
08-28-2007, 03:52 PM
#37
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: this is funny...
Originally Posted by fe3tcourier
its hypothetical... but i'm sure it would manage if in the same light chassis.
we're talking about real life.
im sure you're a dumbass and thats not hypothetical
08-28-2007, 03:53 PM
#38
3.0 BAR
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,838
Re: this is funny...
Originally Posted by random-strike
why don't you try to come into reality.
i love the ricer ifs and coulds.
will that 5l 500hp engine power the car its in to 30mpg? will it have 475ft-lbs of torque?
the 4.6l engines (without the blower) in the mustangs are gigantic heaps of ---- compared to ls1s stock for stock and mod for mod.
worse mileage, less torque, more weight, respond worse to mods, need i say more.
the 4.6l mod motors are good motors, just not as a good as lsx motors.
there are a lot of warranty claims on every car/motor ever made
ahh yes the 280hp limit, the greatest ricer excuse of them all.
ls1, ls2, ls3, ls6, ls7 > YOU
i love the ricer ifs and coulds.
will that 5l 500hp engine power the car its in to 30mpg? will it have 475ft-lbs of torque?
the 4.6l engines (without the blower) in the mustangs are gigantic heaps of ---- compared to ls1s stock for stock and mod for mod.
worse mileage, less torque, more weight, respond worse to mods, need i say more.
the 4.6l mod motors are good motors, just not as a good as lsx motors.
there are a lot of warranty claims on every car/motor ever made
ahh yes the 280hp limit, the greatest ricer excuse of them all.
ls1, ls2, ls3, ls6, ls7 > YOU
08-28-2007, 03:54 PM
#39
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: this is funny...
Originally Posted by 88dx
Johnny u really should work at a GM dealership too see how big of piles of ---- all GM ---- is
compared to what cars that cost 20k more?
08-28-2007, 03:58 PM
#40
3.0 BAR
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Your mom's panties
Posts: 3,696
Re: this is funny...
From my experiences vehicle weight is the biggest contributor to shitty gas mileage. For instance, my dad's i4 Sonoma got the same mileage as his magnum v8 Dakota when the Sonoma was loaded and the Dakota was empty. I'm talking 2-3 AC compressors on the Sonoma + misc tools and ----. The total weights were comparable, yet the Sonoma with its underpowered engine had to have tons of the throttle to keep going on the highway. Unloaded the Sonoma was great, but loaded it sucked *****, like the magnum v8.
