Hey guys, was on my way home tonight and pull up to a black camaro, really dont know much about american sports cars so i dont know what model it was, all it said was SS. So light turns green i start off perfect, pull slightly ahead through first, chirp second still slightly ahead. third and he starts to pull away. Gets his tail end to about my door then im assuming he shut down, cuz i pulled back on him. Im assuming this was the V6, but i really dont know, any help? Next light up i pull next to a civic, lowered, exhaust, neon gauges, hids. He reved at me so I reved back.. after second gear he was about a car and a half back.. why do they all think there cars are so fast?????? Two races in a row like this were really strange for me! Lucky if i pull up to a car who wants to race once every couple months!!!
Camaro Vs. Tc
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Joined
·
12,467 Posts
Even a V-6 Camaro is quicker than a tC. Pretty strange results there. The SS must have been like a Civic DX with a VTEC sticker. I raced an SS in my Supra. It was a fair fight, he lost, but it wasn't by more than a car length or so.
HAHA yea probably, I saw the SS though, if it was real or not, i dont know. I was suprised with the results too, thought it wouldnt even be close. If he had ridden out third a little longer im sure he would have taken a large lead. But "hey, you never know!" And dont forget i have two TRD stickers on my windows, those add some serious power.
![]()
Joined
·
12,467 Posts
V-6 Camaros have had at least 200 hp for a LONG time. If that thing wouldn't pass a Yugo, something was really wrong with it. Yes, they're a tad on the heavy side, but still 200 hp is pretty decent for the price point.
Joined
·
1,233 Posts
The F-body got a 200 horse v6 in 95, before that it had 160. Now if it is a 160 hp it's 21.5hp/LB. And if it's a 200 it's around 17.2hp/LB. The tC is 18.1hp/LB now im not saying these are the final numbers. God knows gearing can make up for the difference; Im just trying to show they are close.
Joined
·
12,467 Posts
All points well taken, but '95 is ten years ago. It's been a minute. Your hp/lb comparisons are dead on the money, they do tell a large truth about a vehicle. Agreed 21.5 lb/hp really sucks, but 17.2 lb/hp is a LOT better that 18.1.
Joined
·
113 Posts
all I have to say is that if it were a real ss camaro it would have laid waste to the tc (if he was really racing it and if he was a good driver). 315 horsepower. enough said.
I guarantee that was not a real "SS".
SS power ratings were from 315-345 depending on year and options. But most put down 310-315 rwhp stock. So actual Crank hp is about 360.
Just as a reference, my car bone stock, ran [email protected] 2.281 60'
It was my first time racing and I wasnt too good at launching.....
Joined
·
12,467 Posts
I imagine you're a bit better in the 60' department now. 2.281 is like a stock Supra, they're terrible in the first 60'.
Joined
·
1,233 Posts
The SS is fast, but the engine tech is crude. The ss at it's best is putting down 57.01 bhp/liter. The tC is putting down 67.13 bhp/liter. And remember the celica gt-s with it's 100.13 bhp/liter. It's easy to put a big engine in a mid size american car, but the trick is making it refined and smooth. Don't get me wrong the ss is nice but im getting sick of people thinking the LS2 is soo high tech for V8's.
Joined
·
12,467 Posts
Really hp/liter doesn't mean crap. Hp/lb means a lot more. Case in point: the new BMW M5 engine is a technological marvel. It makes great power/liter, and it is as overweight as a Hofbrau maid. More than 500 lbs. Compare that to the low tech LS2 making 500 hp in a 400 lb package. That's pretty impressive.
HP/liter doesn't mean a lot in the real world, and high tech does little to make you feel good when you get your ass handed to you by some low tech sedan. Don't get me wrong, I love high tech engines, but they don't always finish first except in F1 because they're all high tech.
HP/liter doesn't mean a lot in the real world, and high tech does little to make you feel good when you get your ass handed to you by some low tech sedan. Don't get me wrong, I love high tech engines, but they don't always finish first except in F1 because they're all high tech.
Joined
·
12,467 Posts
I hope so. 160 hp in a 3500 lb car isn't anything to write home about.
Yeah, my last 60' was 1.62 So, big improvement. I Hope to get some new #'s soon... Might go to the track wed... I just pray I dont snap my driveshaft.
BTW, to the hp/L argument.
No offense, but Hp/L means #### in a street car...even most race cars... My car is well over 57 hp/l. And I still get decent gas mileage. I have about 450 flywheel hp out of 346 ci -5.7L, im too lazy for math, so you figure it out.
My engine and tranny combined, (dry) weigh about 490 lbs.
Joined
·
12,467 Posts
No offense taken, you are right. Hp/liter is academic. When the green flag drops it's real simple: hp/lb wins. Didn't Penske go to Indy not too long ago with some pushrod engines and hurt everybody because they were allowed more boost to compensate for their lack of technology? More hp, same weight. Total power and total mass. The two most telling features of any racecar.
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Join the discussion
