how bout them apples

[trigger]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...category=33742

I just ordered one of these off Ebay! Now I have a 924ci Trans Am! Maybe I should get another so I can have a 778-inch mill in my '63 Bonneville. Wouldn't that be fun?

I'd get a third unit for our "import" (1995 Formula) but I don't think my wife could handle the 700 cubic inches, as the car already struggles for traction and bends it's little suspension parts. (probably a result of being able to carry more than 2 golf bags)

At least I have no fear of her getting beaten on the street by a new "GTO" on the way back from the grocery store.

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)

[trigger]

to enter the back seat, you must manually flip a lever, which moves the seatback to vertical, then wait on a SLOW motor to slide the seat forward on it's tracks. It's accessible, but not conveniently.


And no, 13.4 (or 14.0, as another test indicated) or anywhere in between is not impressive. Ten years ago it would've been, but not now, and certainly not a few years down the line.

My question is "why not the LS6"? Why not shave a little weight? Why not give it mild body treatment so it doesn't look like a bastard Buick?

I'm not a prophet of doom, but they are really trying to pass off a peice of crap as a GTO. It can be fixed, and i hope they do fix it.

Until they do, you will not convince me of a thing. (if you don't count the 2 cubic feet in the trunk... both of them). So save your breath.

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)

[Mr_GTO]

So now it's not convient. LOL ok.

Well, show me the cars that run 12's stock and mid 13's stock. There are not a lot. I say less than 20.

Why not the LS6? Why give everyone all they can the 1st year? What incentive would they have to buy the same model the next year? Marketing.

Did you read the article in autoweek I posted earlier? The answer to your body looks question is answered in that article.

The car is the most sought after in Australia. 3/4 magazine articles here give the cars rave reviews for power, interior, ride and quality. Styling is always subjective and it is the main point of dissent. But nothing on the car says piece of crap.


Kind of hard to convince someone who doesn't read articles and has a set notion of something without looking or reading all the reviews.

[trigger]

as I stated above, I've read many reviews from various angles, including the Autoweek article. I'm far from uninformed.

I don't see where any of my "facts" are wrong, unless you expect me to always quote the most favorable number, rather than a realistic number. Would you be happy if I conceded that many people ran slower than 13.99 in stock LT1 cars? Perhaps GM did manage to calculate 9 cubic feet. Should I applaud them? Someone else measured 7 cubic feet. Is one of them wrong? Is 13.4 right and 14.0 wrong? Does a Subaru really lose because it's lighter and boosted? Or is it just "in a different class" because it's AWD and thousands less?

There is no reason for the GTO to NOT be one of the quickest cars available to the middle-class. It could and should be able to stomp every remotely comparable 4-seat offering from companies like Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, Toyota, etc... It should be able to out-muscle all but the most expensive German sedans (obviously and M5 or 12cyl AMG will smoke it).

Furthermore, in the abscense of the Firebird, the GTO has a DUTY to be able to easily dispatch a V8 Rustang. No dice there, either.

As far as "attainable" autos go, the GTO should be right atop the heap, much like the Corvette is in terms of the price/performance ratio it exhibits in its class. Obviously, the Vette and GTO can't be directly compared (unless you're talking about cargo space ... ha ha!)

Then add in the fact that it doesn't *subjectively* look right to about 98% of us... the car is a big ugly spot on Pontiac's nose.

As far as "why have a hoodscoop if it isn't functional", who cares? A GTO has to have a pair of nostrils. F*rd has been happily outselling GM in the ponycar market 3:1 for decades. Nobody complains that their ponycars have all had fake scoops forever. They line up to buy every one of them, year after year. If the next model didn't have fake hoodscoops, buyers would be outraged. Even Firebirds have had non-functional hood features of every sort three generations back.

So please, if you're going to maintain that my "facts are wrong", please show me specifically where and how. While you're at it, show me specifically where and how and why the Holden deserves to be a "GTO", with FACTS please.

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)

[Mr_GTO]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by trigger:
as I stated above, I've read many reviews from various angles, including the Autoweek article. I'm far from uninformed.

I don't see where any of my "facts" are wrong, unless you expect me to always quote the most favorable number, rather than a realistic number. Would you be happy if I conceded that many people ran slower than 13.99 in stock LT1 cars? Perhaps GM did manage to calculate 9 cubic feet. Should I applaud them? Someone else measured 7 cubic feet. Is one of them wrong? Is 13.4 right and 14.0 wrong? Does a Subaru really lose because it's lighter and boosted? Or is it just "in a different class" because it's AWD and thousands less?

There is no reason for the GTO to NOT be one of the quickest cars available to the middle-class. It could and should be able to stomp every remotely comparable 4-seat offering from companies like Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, Toyota, etc... It should be able to out-muscle all but the most expensive German sedans (obviously and M5 or 12cyl AMG will smoke it).

Furthermore, in the abscense of the Firebird, the GTO has a DUTY to be able to easily dispatch a V8 Rustang. No dice there, either.

As far as "attainable" autos go, the GTO should be right atop the heap, much like the Corvette is in terms of the price/performance ratio it exhibits in its class. Obviously, the Vette and GTO can't be directly compared (unless you're talking about cargo space ... ha ha!)

Then add in the fact that it doesn't *subjectively* look right to about 98% of us... the car is a big ugly spot on Pontiac's nose.

As far as "why have a hoodscoop if it isn't functional", who cares? A GTO has to have a pair of nostrils. F*rd has been happily outselling GM in the ponycar market 3:1 for decades. Nobody complains that their ponycars have all had fake scoops forever. They line up to buy every one of them, year after year. If the next model didn't have fake hoodscoops, buyers would be outraged. Even Firebirds have had non-functional hood features of every sort three generations back.

So please, if you're going to maintain that my "facts are wrong", please show me specifically where and how. While you're at it, show me specifically where and how and why the Holden deserves to be a "GTO", with FACTS please.

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I asked for links to back up your facts, I have provide mine. Where are yours again?

Want me to point out your WRONG FACTS?

1. Spouting the GTO isn't made in America but a car your wife owns wasn't either.

2.Claimed that a LT1 ran under 14 flat but yet to provide a link for it as I asked.

3. Claimed the GTP and Maxima would clean the GTO's clock. Oppps, wrong again. Links back it up yet again.

4. Claimed a F-body had 17" rims a 2.73 when in fact they never came that way.

5. Claimed the GTO would drop in value right way. Must be nostrodamous since none are available for resale.

6. Claimed that every dealer will have a markup. Not true at all. Many dealers offering MSRP. A few at the moment offering even less.

7. Claim you have read other articles but yet since your distane for the GTO is such you won't recognize that 3/4 loved the car and the one that hated the car you always side with.

8. Claimed the GTP is $10K less than a GTO and could clean it's clock with just a pulley. Nope, negative on that one. I asked the question too.
http://www.clubgp.com/newforum/tm.as...mode=1&smode=1

9. Claimed the GTO and GTP didn't look alike or not like a pontiac. I put the two together. Now to most they do look similar as they did in 1966. Want me to post pics of those too?

10. Claimed a 13.6 in test weight car of 3900lbs is not impressive. For a stock car that gets 29mpg and has a great build and interior. Hmmmm. Want a list of all the cars today that run quicker for the money? Or what about all the cars that ran 13.6's back in the 1960's? Were those impressive?

11. Claimed that the Mustang outsold the F-body for Decades. Wrong. in the mid 1990's the F-body outsold the mustang.

Toyota, Mazda, Nissan nor Honda have a car that is quicker than the GTO. Mitsu and Subaru do have a quicker car with AWD. And good for them. GTO wasn't the quickest car back in the 1960's nor is it now. Those facts are in your arguments in those threads.

http://forums.performanceyears.com/g...=147602635&p=1

http://forums.performanceyears.com/g...34&m=147602635

[trigger]

despite my multitudinous errors, the new GTo is still ugly, slow, and not a Pontiac. none of that is even up for dispute. I honestly don't have the time to scour the internet to come up with enough data to appease you. If I did, you'd simply discredit my sources. Have you noticed that many of us think this new GTO is an insult? How can you sleep at night with the thought of that on your mind?

One last question: Does GM pay you by the hour, or per enthusiast converted?

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)

[trigger]

1. never said it was made here. Get your "facts" straight.

2. I haven't looked for a test, but i've seen it with my own two eyes many times. If ours was still stock, I'd tick off a 13.xx pass just for you.

3. Never claimed that, or even implied it. again, check your "facts".

4. Sorry for the mistake. substitute 3.23 for 2.76, recompute.

5. yes, i am in fact a prophet. live with it.

6. many dealers are jacking the price. Check Ebay to see what a reseervation for the privelidge to purchase at MSRP is going for. That's a markup.

7. again I've read plenty. Why you think otherwise is beyond me.

8. http://tacgp.clubgp.com/charissis_alexandros/index.html

there's one of many GTPs I found running just as quick or quicker than a GTO with only a cold air intake and pulley swap. There are hundreds more of them if you bother to look around. Sticker on a new GTP is $26,500. Sticker on a GTO is $33k with a manual trans. Not quite ten grand, sorry. But pretty damn close.

9. The GTO doesn't look like a Pontiac to me. Sorry. It looks like a bastard rental car.

10. For the last time, no I'm not impressed with the performance.

11. so my history's bad. Point is, the F-body was killed in part due to slagging sales, while the F*rd counterpart is thriving and selling well.

honda: RSX-S
Mazda: RX8
Nissan: 350z
Toyota: GS series (lexus)

all have 4 seats and will give the 14-second GTO a run for the money.

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)

[Nickv]

I love the 2004 GTO. But will wait for 2005 when the LS6 option is available.

"Everyone is entitled to be stupid sometimes, but you're abusing that privilege"

[Mr_GTO]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by trigger:
1. never said it was made here. Get your "facts" straight.

2. I haven't looked for a test, but i've seen it with my own two eyes many times. If ours was still stock, I'd tick off a 13.xx pass just for you.

3. Never claimed that, or even implied it. again, check your "facts".

4. Sorry for the mistake. substitute 3.23 for 2.76, recompute.

5. yes, i am in fact a prophet. live with it.

6. many dealers are jacking the price. Check Ebay to see what a reseervation for the privelidge to purchase at MSRP is going for. That's a markup.

7. again I've read plenty. Why you think otherwise is beyond me.

8. http://tacgp.clubgp.com/charissis_alexandros/index.html

there's one of many GTPs I found running just as quick or quicker than a GTO with only a cold air intake and pulley swap. There are hundreds more of them if you bother to look around. Sticker on a new GTP is $26,500. Sticker on a GTO is $33k with a manual trans. Not quite ten grand, sorry. But pretty damn close.

9. The GTO doesn't look like a Pontiac to me. Sorry. It looks like a bastard rental car.

10. For the last time, no I'm not impressed with the performance.

11. so my history's bad. Point is, the F-body was killed in part due to slagging sales, while the F*rd counterpart is thriving and selling well.

honda: RSX-S
Mazda: RX8
Nissan: 350z
Toyota: GS series (lexus)

all have 4 seats and will give the 14-second GTO a run for the money.

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. Right, I said you bitched it WASN'T made here.
2. Right, so look for a test and back up your claims.
3. Sorry, you said the GTO "barely" outperforms the maxima. Maxima ran a 14.8 and the GTO a 13.6
In drag racing that is an asswhooping.
4.
5.
6. Yup, many dealers will. More won't. And you think Ebay is a good baramoter for telling which dealer is going to offer MSRP? LOL
7. Because you don't want to recognize the facts stated by the other magazines. That's why.
8. yup, but with just a pully, nope, not quite to the GTO and it is Wrong wheel drive.
9.Looks are subjective all the time. Looks like a Pontiac to me with the split grill.
10. 13.6 isn't impressive. Ok. Fair enough. It is for most.
11. F-body was killed back in 1996 when the feds said there were new crash test regulations coming in '03 and they decided that the contract extension with Canada, retool and redesign the car were not in the cards. Had Bob Lutz been at GM during that time, the F-body might have survived.

[ctgross]

#9 "it looks like a bastard rental car"

Now I just gotta say that it would provide a fairly quick exit from the Avis lot at the airport!!

CT Gross
------------------------------------------

"It's never too late to have a happy childhood"!

66 Blue GTO
http://community.webtv.net/ctgross/GTO

[GTO_2004]

is this thread still going ??? carry on. rotfl.

GTO is back and its here to stay !!!!!
get used to the idea !!!



Australian RWD + American V8 - Now THAT'S what I call a "coalition".

[Geeto 67]

those electric turbos don't work...get a refund. The fact that it comes with regular hose clamps to attach the inlet and outlet hoses instead of the regular aircraft fastners should be a clue. I had a friend who bought one and he said it didn't make more than 1 psi and the car ran slower. I stayed away becasue it doesn't have the proper hardware.

Anyway...Turbos and supercharges only double the size of an engine when they are pushing 1 atmosphere of boost (about 12 to 15 psi depending on who you talk to). A turbo and supercharger forcibly increase volumetric efficiency, which makes the engine behave like it were a bigger naturally aspirated engine than it really is. For all intiensive purposes a 300 ci engine running 1 atmosphere will behave like a 600 ci n/a aspirated engine because the volumetric efficiency of a 600 ci engine is being rammed into the 300ci package.

Mr_GTO: It seems to me you are just making excuses for why the car doesn't run as fast as the sti and the evo. Yes 13s is very fast for a 3900lbs car, but is stating that you have seemed to miss the glaring fact that GM should not be making 3900lb cars of any type. Like it or not, the evo and the sti are the competition for this car, they cannot be ignored becasue they have 4 doors instead of 2. A 3900lbs rwd performance sedan in this marketplace is so outdated that words fail me. The lancer and the EVO run the number brecause they are light and they get a lot of performance out of a small package. Why can't GM figure out that light a small is they way to go. I betcha that this car will get hit with the $1000+ gas guzzler tax because it won't get over 22.5 mpg. At 3900lbs one might as well buy a mercury maurder, looks a hell of a lot better and is more practical than the GTO, and i have seen stock ones pull down the 13.6 number also...so much for this new performance sedan. Here is what really gets me...holden makes an awd setup for this body style....why didn't gm use that?!?!?! yeah the car would be heavy but then you could drive it in the snow...a thought heavily on my mind a i am getting pounded by the winter storm in NY and the only cars i saw driving through it (besides taxicabs) were jeeps, blazers and subaru wrx's and sti's (but then we have a disproportionate number of them in Queens).

[GTO_2004]

yeah whatever.. the sti is new and exciting for North America... we've had them for years "YAWN" everyone puts a fart can on them and yes with a bit of work they go alright.

personally i like the looks on their faces , when a bog stock 12.86 @ 103mph one-tonner (work vehicle) hands them their ass .. priceless !!!



Australian RWD + American V8 - Now THAT'S what I call a "coalition".

[Mr_GTO]

A maruader running 13.6? LOL, yea dropped off the empire state building. It was running that time it wasn't stock.

And FYI, 3900lbs is race weight, not curb weight.

[The Champ]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Sticker on a new GTP is $26,500. Sticker on a GTO is $33k with a manual trans. Not quite ten grand, sorry. But pretty damn close.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Trigger,

The base price of a GTP is 26,753.

But after you add the all the options...

My Selection: 2004 Grand Prix

Selected Style: GTP

Exterior: Fusion Orange Metallic

Interior: Dark Pewter Nuance Leather Appointed Seating



Selection Pricing:

Base MSRP*: $26,735.00

Options: $4,150.00



Total MSRP*: $30,885.00

These numbers are from the Pontiac website.

What are the options?

Well...

17" rims, leather seating, stereo system, spoiler, performance rear axle...

And you still can't get the 6 speed manual tranny...

The GTO and the GTP are alot closer in price than you claim...



My '64 GTO Convertible Webpage

The '49 Caddy Limo Page

The '72 Camaro Page

[TinInjun]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by trigger:
GTPs with nothing but a pulley regularly run low 13s with the tires wanting traction far past the 60' marker. Have you ever been to a dragstrip? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Trigger, I don't know where you get your info, but a GTP with just a pulley change is not going to get you in the low 13's not even close.
Yes I have been to a dragstrip, and have at least a hundred runs on a GTP. I can't even think of hanging with the V-8's. LS-1 f bodies just walk away from me after about 330 ft. Best time stock for this car is 14.65 @ 94, with OAT of 75 degrees. Slowest time with traction has been 15.26 @ 92 with OAT of 98 degrees. Car weighs 3550 with half a tank of fuel. 3735 race weight.

I'm Paul Harvey, and thats the rest of the story.

"Suppose you were an idiot... And suppose you were a member of Congress... seems I repeated myself." --Mark Twain

[judge_jury_executioner_69]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Champ:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by judge_jury_executioner_69:
ive made my point time and time again. i back my point up with facts. i dont need ot say anything else.

Greatest Of All Time<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For someone that should enjoy the throaty roar of a V8, you sure spend alot of time checking out the oversized lawn mower engines...

No matter what you have, their will always be something bigger, faster, better...

The new GTO is a car that has decent performance.

I can live with that.

I don't want to drive something with a three foot wing and a fart pipe out the back. I don't even want to be near one.

So go ahead and spend your time on the 4 banger sites if that's what trips your trigger.

As for the folks that glorify the rUsTanG, just remember that the rUsTanG comes in many different varieties. The base rUsTanG comes with a V6, the modern equivalent of the original L6 that that the original rUsTanG had.

The GTO has never had a 6 cylinder. Not in 1964, and not in 2004.

I sure hope I never see the Pontiac equivalent of this from the rUsTanG website:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>V6 buyers get an exciting offering with the Pony Appearance Package. It includes special 16” polished wheels, unique rear fascia with black MUSTANG letters, GT hood, and leather-wrapped steering wheel (available with Deluxe and Premium models.) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When you see a GTO (new or old) you know that it is a performance vehicle.

I can live with the fact that their may be a bigger, faster, better something or other out there.

But at least I know that if I drive a GTO, I won't be confused with the school marm that bought the car because she thought it was cute, but wanted an economy car.

And I sure as hell hope that I never see a 4 cylinder GTO like fOrD put in the rUsTanG.

_The Champ now gets off soap box. Please excuse the rant, but I'm getting sick of all this BS..._

http://kurtsplates.homestead.com/files/wisconsin.jpg

http://kurtspontiac.homestead.com/Mi...64GTOConv.html

http://community.webshots.com/album/15849580xmGcRmPeoB/

http://community.webshots.com/album/...></BLOCKQUOTE>


actually i have friends that drive 4 cylinder imports. this guy is talking like the new GTO is the best car ever. and if it goes slower then a 4 banger import thats the worst insult imaginable. and now hes making excuses as why its slower them imports with the 3 foot wing ( no fart can they dont come like that from the factory ). 13.6 isnt anything to write home about. especially out of a V8. dont hate me beause GM's responce to everything is to throw a 350 in it. im embarassed about it. i cant stand imports. but they can beat the new GTO just remember that.

Greatest Of All Time

[Mr_GTO]

2 4cyl imports. and depending on driver and conditions it could be completely different results. But if you want to magazine race, then yes, the EVO and STi are slightly quicker.

[judge_jury_executioner_69]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr_GTO:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by trigger:
as I stated above, I've read many reviews from various angles, including the Autoweek article. I'm far from uninformed.

I don't see where any of my "facts" are wrong, unless you expect me to always quote the most favorable number, rather than a realistic number. Would you be happy if I conceded that many people ran slower than 13.99 in stock LT1 cars? Perhaps GM did manage to calculate 9 cubic feet. Should I applaud them? Someone else measured 7 cubic feet. Is one of them wrong? Is 13.4 right and 14.0 wrong? Does a Subaru really lose because it's lighter and boosted? Or is it just "in a different class" because it's AWD and thousands less?

There is no reason for the GTO to NOT be one of the quickest cars available to the middle-class. It could and should be able to stomp every remotely comparable 4-seat offering from companies like Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, Toyota, etc... It should be able to out-muscle all but the most expensive German sedans (obviously and M5 or 12cyl AMG will smoke it).

Furthermore, in the abscense of the Firebird, the GTO has a DUTY to be able to easily dispatch a V8 Rustang. No dice there, either.

As far as "attainable" autos go, the GTO should be right atop the heap, much like the Corvette is in terms of the price/performance ratio it exhibits in its class. Obviously, the Vette and GTO can't be directly compared (unless you're talking about cargo space ... ha ha!)

Then add in the fact that it doesn't *subjectively* look right to about 98% of us... the car is a big ugly spot on Pontiac's nose.

As far as "why have a hoodscoop if it isn't functional", who cares? A GTO has to have a pair of nostrils. F*rd has been happily outselling GM in the ponycar market 3:1 for decades. Nobody complains that their ponycars have all had fake scoops forever. They line up to buy every one of them, year after year. If the next model didn't have fake hoodscoops, buyers would be outraged. Even Firebirds have had non-functional hood features of every sort three generations back.

So please, if you're going to maintain that my "facts are wrong", please show me specifically where and how. While you're at it, show me specifically where and how and why the Holden deserves to be a "GTO", with FACTS please.

1981 Trans Am, 462ci/4sp
1995 Formula
1963 Bonnie (for sale)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I asked for links to back up your facts, I have provide mine. Where are yours again?

Want me to point out your WRONG FACTS?

1. Spouting the GTO isn't made in America but a car your wife owns wasn't either.

2.Claimed that a LT1 ran under 14 flat but yet to provide a link for it as I asked.

3. Claimed the GTP and Maxima would clean the GTO's clock. Oppps, wrong again. Links back it up yet again.

4. Claimed a F-body had 17" rims a 2.73 when in fact they never came that way.

5. Claimed the GTO would drop in value right way. Must be nostrodamous since none are available for resale.

6. Claimed that every dealer will have a markup. Not true at all. Many dealers offering MSRP. A few at the moment offering even less.

7. Claim you have read other articles but yet since your distane for the GTO is such you won't recognize that 3/4 loved the car and the one that hated the car you always side with.

8. Claimed the GTP is $10K less than a GTO and could clean it's clock with just a pulley. Nope, negative on that one. I asked the question too.
http://www.clubgp.com/newforum/tm.as...mode=1&smode=1

9. Claimed the GTO and GTP didn't look alike or not like a pontiac. I put the two together. Now to most they do look similar as they did in 1966. Want me to post pics of those too?

10. Claimed a 13.6 in test weight car of 3900lbs is not impressive. For a stock car that gets 29mpg and has a great build and interior. Hmmmm. Want a list of all the cars today that run quicker for the money? Or what about all the cars that ran 13.6's back in the 1960's? Were those impressive?

11. Claimed that the Mustang outsold the F-body for Decades. Wrong. in the mid 1990's the F-body outsold the mustang.

Toyota, Mazda, Nissan nor Honda have a car that is quicker than the GTO. Mitsu and Subaru do have a quicker car with AWD. And good for them. GTO wasn't the quickest car back in the 1960's nor is it now. Those facts are in your arguments in those threads.

http://forums.performanceyears.com/g...=147602635&p=1

http://forums.performanceyears.com/g...></BLOCKQUOTE>



LS1 times
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/t88767.html

LT1 times
http://www.gmvsford.com/forums/showt...7f58410&t=1497

someone getting 13.7-13.8 1/4 out of a stock LT1 (unless you dont call it stock because he put a flowmaster muffler on it)

my roommate had a 97 t/a. it ran mid/high 13's with a hakcked up exaust and home made ram air ( dryer duct running from foglight hole to throttle body )

yet again youre proven wrong. this is getting old. what excuse this time ?

Greatest Of All Time

[Mr_GTO]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by judge_jury_executioner_69:


LS1 times
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/t88767.html

LT1 times
http://www.gmvsford.com/forums/showt...7f58410&t=1497

someone getting 13.7-13.8 1/4 out of a stock LT1 (unless you dont call it stock because he put a flowmaster muffler on it)

my roommate had a 97 t/a. it ran mid/high 13's with a hakcked up exaust and home made ram air ( dryer duct running from foglight hole to throttle body )

yet again youre proven wrong. this is getting old. what excuse this time ?

Greatest Of All Time<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Nope, it ain't stock. Find me a LT1 test where a F-body went 13.6 and I will say I was wrong.

Please do not quote 1/4 mile LS1 times to me. I have owned 2 of them. How many of you owned?

So where was I wrong again?