|
Post by skimobile on Oct 7, 2007 11:23:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Sean on Oct 7, 2007 12:37:42 GMT -5
lol that's great. I love TG. I can't wait until the new season hits the internet.
|
|
|
Post by TeamGTO on Oct 7, 2007 16:13:23 GMT -5
Hahah I loved it!! Still a bad ass car tho.. (I saw one barely break into the low 13's at the track too) his 60 foot time was crap.. something like 2.6...
|
|
|
Post by SOHCman on Oct 7, 2007 19:19:34 GMT -5
They are a bunch of dumbasses anyway. That's not as bad as this one... youtube.com/watch?v=-NZpS_gndDEThey SAY it is a 4.6 liter 300hp V8... it is a friggin' 4.0 liter 200hp V6. They say it's slower than a horse... even a moron can see the car was doing at least 50 around the turns... last time I read about horses, they couldn't do 50 period... Funny thing... even BONE STOCK my V6 could kick its tail... media.putfile.com/SOHC-V6-stock-axle-burnout-with-stock-exhaust---Both-Fixed-NowAmazing how they can claim to be "experts" and not even once pop the hood and go, hmm 6 cylinders or how come it doesn't say GT? Thanks skimobile, you just reminded me why I don't live in the UK. ;D I'd be a heckler on that show! SOHC
|
|
|
Post by JonnyGT on Oct 8, 2007 0:00:25 GMT -5
hahaha agreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed stangs deserve more credit even if we are the belly button
|
|
|
Post by JonnyGT on Oct 8, 2007 0:04:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by SOHCman on Oct 8, 2007 12:12:14 GMT -5
I'll watch this when I get home. Missed your "belly button" comment... huh? Bob
|
|
|
Post by skimobile on Oct 8, 2007 12:30:55 GMT -5
The cars couldn't be too bad or the host wouldn't own an old fastback. The thing they kept harping on was that as a "sports car" they would prefer to see independent suspension, which they do have a point. Yea they did kind of slam it but it was in good fun. The whole dyno HP thing was an issue of crank HP (500) vs wheel HP (400) due to drive train loss. Subies are the same issue, losing ~60-75hp due to drivetrain loss. A 300 hp STi is really only ~245whp.... a WRX is about 160-175 vs the 227 claimed crank HP. I like the look of the new mustangs but a better rear suspension would rock!
|
|
|
Post by SOHCman on Oct 9, 2007 14:27:25 GMT -5
The cars couldn't be too bad or the host wouldn't own an old fastback. The thing they kept harping on was that as a "sports car" they would prefer to see independent suspension, which they do have a point. Yea they did kind of slam it but it was in good fun. The whole dyno HP thing was an issue of crank HP (500) vs wheel HP (400) due to drive train loss. Subies are the same issue, losing ~60-75hp due to drivetrain loss. A 300 hp STi is really only ~245whp.... a WRX is about 160-175 vs the 227 claimed crank HP. I like the look of the new mustangs but a better rear suspension would rock! Ya, I understand their bitchin' but the Mustang NEVER was a "sports" car. They need to get their attitudes in line with reality. Always had a live axle. Since it is a cost savings, the V6 stang is keeping Ford afloat, adding a NEW and complex suspension is very risky at this time! Stang drivers have survived with live axles for 40 years... what's a few more? Funny you don't hear Mustang drivers bitchin like those Limeys... Bob
|
|
|
Post by JonnyGT on Oct 16, 2007 20:11:57 GMT -5
belly button, everyones got one
|
|
|
Post by SOHCman on Oct 22, 2007 20:18:31 GMT -5
belly button, everyones got one Haha Got it. Somebody remind me to bring my sound meter on Saturday. I always forget.
|
|
|
Post by SOHCman on Oct 22, 2007 20:23:47 GMT -5
The cars couldn't be too bad or the host wouldn't own an old fastback. The thing they kept harping on was that as a "sports car" they would prefer to see independent suspension, which they do have a point. Yea they did kind of slam it but it was in good fun. The whole dyno HP thing was an issue of crank HP (500) vs wheel HP (400) due to drive train loss. Subies are the same issue, losing ~60-75hp due to drivetrain loss. A 300 hp STi is really only ~245whp.... a WRX is about 160-175 vs the 227 claimed crank HP. I like the look of the new mustangs but a better rear suspension would rock! I have a question on the WRX. Being 4 wheel drive, where does the power-loss of the extra set of gears/shafts take the most toll? 0-60 or top end? Just trying to figure out which would be quicker off the line since the V6 has 210hp (crank) to the subies 227. I know my V6 can keep up with the New Edge GTs from 50-80, and beat stock fox body 5.0's. Curious how it would do against the high-tech subie.
|
|
|
Post by ScrapinSTi on Oct 31, 2007 17:02:32 GMT -5
It is very well balanced in the subarus... Their gear ratios on the highway to offset the drivetrain loss... Stock vs stock, the mustang would have a much better chance on the highway than from a dig... From a dig... No way... AWD would take over and the car would just rock out of the hole...
|
|
|
Post by SOHCman on Nov 4, 2007 21:38:16 GMT -5
That's what I figured.
But then you'd beat me off the line AND in the top end.
I'll just follow and video tape.
LOL
|
|