Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 49 of 49

02 WS6 vs 72 Challenger

This is a discussion on 02 WS6 vs 72 Challenger within the Firebird / WS6 forums, part of the Vehicle Specific category; i totally agreed with above converter statements. with my tci 3000rpm streetfighter, i knocked off .6 tenths in the 1/4...

  1. #41
    member since may 2000 nhraformula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    n/w chicago
    Age
    47
    Posts
    6,933

    black
    2000 nhra edition formula

    i totally agreed with above converter statements.
    with my tci 3000rpm streetfighter, i knocked off .6 tenths in the 1/4
    2000 nhra edition formula
    a few bolt ons, 379 rwhp
    11.96 @113.25

  2. #42
    member since may 2000 nhraformula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    n/w chicago
    Age
    47
    Posts
    6,933

    black
    2000 nhra edition formula

    Quote Originally Posted by 02_WS6 View Post
    About how much would this all cost me?
    the nittos for the rear, about 325
    im going to use what speed inc charged me for next two mods,
    tci stall converter, shift kit and install was about 1000
    cam kit, install and dyno tune is about 1500.
    so youre looking at almost $3000.
    youll be easily in the 11s and it will totally be streetable.
    now you can get a bigger cam but it wont be the best choice for a daily driver.

  3. #43
    Junior Member Armor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    wyoming
    Age
    47
    Posts
    57
    still...no guarantees you'll beat him....you've posed a very hypothetical question here...we have no idea what the Challenger can do in the 1/4 based on your description...all we know is that it has gears, some bolt ons...ect...the guts of the 440 are what matters in the older cars....

    I'm old enough I've lived in both eras...and there is a HUGE difference between what makes those cars fast compared to what makes our new cars fast. With a few simple internal mods, you can turn a 440 into a 500+hp engine easy...

    I grew up in the era where musclecars were cheap and plentiful...I had a '72 Chevelle SS with a 350...with less than $2000, (in 80's dollars mind you) I was able to make that car put well over 400HP to the rear tires, and turn high 12's at a strip 5000 feet above sea level....

    The new cars are amazing from a performance standpoint for what you get stock...but don't understimate the old cars...yeah, they are heavy, not nearly as efficient...but they have some huge adavantages over our new cars as well. Easy and cheap to modify, not limited by computers, ect...so beware...these things are for real....

    Armor

  4. #44
    member since may 2000 nhraformula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    n/w chicago
    Age
    47
    Posts
    6,933

    black
    2000 nhra edition formula

    Quote Originally Posted by Armor View Post
    still...no guarantees you'll beat him....you've posed a very hypothetical question here...we have no idea what the Challenger can do in the 1/4 based on your description...all we know is that it has gears, some bolt ons...ect...the guts of the 440 are what matters in the older cars....

    I'm old enough I've lived in both eras...and there is a HUGE difference between what makes those cars fast compared to what makes our new cars fast. With a few simple internal mods, you can turn a 440 into a 500+hp engine easy...

    I grew up in the era where musclecars were cheap and plentiful...I had a '72 Chevelle SS with a 350...with less than $2000, (in 80's dollars mind you) I was able to make that car put well over 400HP to the rear tires, and turn high 12's at a strip 5000 feet above sea level....

    The new cars are amazing from a performance standpoint for what you get stock...but don't understimate the old cars...yeah, they are heavy, not nearly as efficient...but they have some huge adavantages over our new cars as well. Easy and cheap to modify, not limited by computers, ect...so beware...these things are for real....

    Armor
    i also grew up in the same era as you. most of those cars you talk about were pigs by todays standards. yes those cars will run better with aftermarket bumpsticks, heads and so on, but so will the new f-bodies.
    it comes down to what a person wants to spend.
    one thing for sure about old muscle, its rare to see them do 11 second passes and drive the car home unlike todays cars.

  5. #45
    Junior Member Armor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    wyoming
    Age
    47
    Posts
    57
    I disagree...an 11 second F body car today is going to be every bit as unstreetable as an 11 second '60's/70's musclecar....

    Armor

  6. #46
    member since may 2000 nhraformula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    n/w chicago
    Age
    47
    Posts
    6,933

    black
    2000 nhra edition formula

    Quote Originally Posted by Armor View Post
    I disagree...an 11 second F body car today is going to be every bit as unstreetable as an 11 second '60's/70's musclecar....

    Armor
    if you think a LS1 is unstreetable that does 11s, you still have alot to learn about ls1 cars.
    i throw slicks on and im in the 11s.
    i have a mild cam and a 3000 rpm converter. i get about 300 miles to the tank and can have my air condo on without overheating.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    rochester,ny
    Age
    39
    Posts
    2,667

    pewter
    2001 z28 lingenfelter 383

    stall, 150shot of juice, drag rads.....fuckem up and take the old mans pride and joy!!!!!!! how good would that feel!!! ..oh yeah and throw some 373s in the rear end if u have any money left over.

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    rochester,ny
    Age
    39
    Posts
    2,667

    pewter
    2001 z28 lingenfelter 383

    11 sec fbody is unstreetable???????? wtf.......www.lingenfelter.com ......check out the 427 twin turbo package....750 horse.......believe lpe got in the 9's with one of them ..eh maybe it was 8s...article was in motortrend i believe with the vette racing a jet .....kinda rediculous.....and VERY streetable.....heres a 1000 hp one for sale.....somone ask the seller if its streetable....
    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevr...spagenameZWDVW

  9. #49
    Junior Member Armor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    wyoming
    Age
    47
    Posts
    57
    I meant "unstreetable" as a reletive term. Sure, you can drive an 11 second F body on the street in reasonable comfort, but you can do the same with many 11 second 60's/70's musclecars. The point I was trying to make is that making any car go that fast, you sacrifice some driveability and some reliability in that vehicle, period. No matter what car you drive...more power=less street manners. Depending on the car, you'll have traction issues, you'll have noise/vibration issues, you'll have reliability issues due to some stock parts not designed to handle the higher power failure, you'll have ride comfort issues in some cases due to stall converters, heating/cooling issues...ect...

    The new cars like our 4th gen F bodies have some marked improvements in many areas compared to their older counterparts. These cars are defiantly more drivealble than their older counter-parts to start with. I've owned every generation of Firebird, (I've owned a '69 firebird 455, a '73 T/A 455, 2 '78's both W72 400's, an '80 Turbo 4.9, an '87 GTA 5.7L, and currently own a '97 LT1 T/A and a '99 WS6 Formula) the performace vs. driveability has definatey increased with every generation. More sophisticated suspention, handling, more efficent engines, ect lend to a higher degree of "streetability". I'm not argueing that at all. But the 60's/70's cars have some advantages over our new ones as well. No computers to mess with, simpler, cheaper parts...it's much easier to build bigger numbers in an older car on a similar budget, without resorting to the whole mess of reprogramming computers, relying on forced induction, or nitrous....all you need is a decent bump stick, a good compression ratio piston, decent intake and exhaust, you are in business with an old engine...

    The issue comes when you change the stock makeup of a vehicle. I know several people that have 11 second "old" muscle cars they drive on the street on a regular basis....the ones that are the most comfortable are the ones that have done it smartly, same with the newer F bodies...bottom line, it takes "x" amount of HP and torque to make a car that weighs "x" lbs to turn a 12, 11, whatever 1/4 mile...the new cars have some advantages, but so do the old ones....and in both cases, you have a sacrifice in "streetability"....

    Armor

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. challenger vs. me
    By Ws6islife in forum Firebird / WS6
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 05-31-2010, 07:20 PM
  2. 98 ss vs 09 challenger rt
    By ivan1 in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-03-2010, 10:01 PM
  3. 02 z/28 vs 09?srt-8 challenger
    By blue02Z in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-30-2010, 11:24 AM
  4. Challenger R/T
    By 1 RedHot TransAm in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-19-2010, 11:27 PM
  5. 2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 - '08 Challenger SRT8
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Almost Anything Goes
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 04-13-2008, 11:19 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •