93 Z28 v.s 03 GT
Originally Posted by oneclean97z
christ another mustang/camaro fight? we all know the truth and what it comes down to lol. even to this day the new gt500 is STILL slower than the vette it competes with. do not get me wrong though, i love mustangs
because of that and the fact that your a proud mustang owner seems like u are mocking me
christ another mustang/camaro fight? we all know the truth and what it comes down to lol. even to this day the new gt500 is STILL slower than the vette it competes with. do not get me wrong though, i love mustangs
because of that and the fact that your a proud mustang owner seems like u are mocking me
Last edited by oneclean97z; Jun 29, 2007 at 11:01 AM.
Originally Posted by oneclean97z
christ another mustang/camaro fight? we all know the truth and what it comes down to lol. even to this day the new gt500 is STILL slower than the vette it competes with. do not get me wrong though, i love mustangs
because of that and the fact that your a proud mustang owner seems like u are mocking me
christ another mustang/camaro fight? we all know the truth and what it comes down to lol. even to this day the new gt500 is STILL slower than the vette it competes with. do not get me wrong though, i love mustangs
because of that and the fact that your a proud mustang owner seems like u are mocking me
Pretty simple.
The weather was so so when I had it at the track...around 1800 DA.
I have had little time to learn it at the track...I went from 60's in the 2.4's to 2.0's by the third run....more practice I should be able to get into the 1.9's.
Car had a FULL tank of gas with no weight reduction. Give me a 1/4 tank, remove spare & jack.
So, give a good weather day, some more practice and a chunk of weight loss will = low 13's.
It also makes enough rwhp to do it.
The weather was so so when I had it at the track...around 1800 DA.
I have had little time to learn it at the track...I went from 60's in the 2.4's to 2.0's by the third run....more practice I should be able to get into the 1.9's.
Car had a FULL tank of gas with no weight reduction. Give me a 1/4 tank, remove spare & jack.
So, give a good weather day, some more practice and a chunk of weight loss will = low 13's.
It also makes enough rwhp to do it.
Pretty simple.
The weather was so so when I had it at the track...around 1800 DA.
I have had little time to learn it at the track...I went from 60's in the 2.4's to 2.0's by the third run....more practice I should be able to get into the 1.9's.
Car had a FULL tank of gas with no weight reduction. Give me a 1/4 tank, remove spare & jack.
So, give a good weather day, some more practice and a chunk of weight loss will = low 13's.
It also makes enough rwhp to do it.
The weather was so so when I had it at the track...around 1800 DA.
I have had little time to learn it at the track...I went from 60's in the 2.4's to 2.0's by the third run....more practice I should be able to get into the 1.9's.
Car had a FULL tank of gas with no weight reduction. Give me a 1/4 tank, remove spare & jack.
So, give a good weather day, some more practice and a chunk of weight loss will = low 13's.
It also makes enough rwhp to do it.
your just making excuses to. Show us some timeslips, put up or shut up.
Excuses would be if I raced my wife's car every weekend and I kept saying that.
I took her car ONE time to the track and it ran what it did.
Or are Mustangs exempt from running better in better weather....running better with less weight...running better by getting more practice to get a quicker 60'?
Something else...the car needs more gearing. The car was still in third gear on that run.
I took her car ONE time to the track and it ran what it did.
Or are Mustangs exempt from running better in better weather....running better with less weight...running better by getting more practice to get a quicker 60'?
Something else...the car needs more gearing. The car was still in third gear on that run.
Pretty simple.
The weather was so so when I had it at the track...around 1800 DA.
I have had little time to learn it at the track...I went from 60's in the 2.4's to 2.0's by the third run....more practice I should be able to get into the 1.9's.
Car had a FULL tank of gas with no weight reduction. Give me a 1/4 tank, remove spare & jack.
So, give a good weather day, some more practice and a chunk of weight loss will = low 13's.
It also makes enough rwhp to do it.
The weather was so so when I had it at the track...around 1800 DA.
I have had little time to learn it at the track...I went from 60's in the 2.4's to 2.0's by the third run....more practice I should be able to get into the 1.9's.
Car had a FULL tank of gas with no weight reduction. Give me a 1/4 tank, remove spare & jack.
So, give a good weather day, some more practice and a chunk of weight loss will = low 13's.
It also makes enough rwhp to do it.
Yea most ive seen without a flash come nowhere near low 13's...Ofcourse a few great drivers have hit it stock its certainly not common or "easily" a low 13 second car stock.
CANTONRACER is not exactly your average person trying to race. I suggest you check out his home page and his experience with all kinds of vehicles at the track including a rather fast F-body before drawing conclusions. He, like Tim Teal (1BadAzzGT), is one of the older members on here and reliable with his info.
Originally Posted by oneclean97z
christ another mustang/camaro fight? we all know the truth and what it comes down to lol. even to this day the new gt500 is STILL slower than the vette it competes with. do not get me wrong though, i love mustangs
because of that and the fact that your a proud mustang owner seems like u are mocking me
christ another mustang/camaro fight? we all know the truth and what it comes down to lol. even to this day the new gt500 is STILL slower than the vette it competes with. do not get me wrong though, i love mustangs
because of that and the fact that your a proud mustang owner seems like u are mocking me



