Fastest Stock Quad??????
Apr 2, 2003 | 02:38 PM
#141
Pro Rider
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
Fastest stock quad in an open area or in straight line racing has got to be the Quadzilla, I mean come on now, it is a 500cc 2-stroke... [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]
You know what they say - "there is no replacement for displacement"...
OH BTW I heard from a guy who bought one of those KFX700s that it was pretty fast from 0-40 and could beat a lot of stock quads off the line... the only problem with it was that it topped out at like 48 mph.... Must be geared awfully low and being that it is a shaft drive, there isn't a lot you can do about that..
You know what they say - "there is no replacement for displacement"...
OH BTW I heard from a guy who bought one of those KFX700s that it was pretty fast from 0-40 and could beat a lot of stock quads off the line... the only problem with it was that it topped out at like 48 mph.... Must be geared awfully low and being that it is a shaft drive, there isn't a lot you can do about that..
Apr 2, 2003 | 02:58 PM
#142
Trailblazer
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
As far as the musclecar comment, the reasons they dynoed such high numbers in the 60s was because it was "gross" horsepower, no air cleaner, no accessories, open exhaust, jetting and timing changes. Today they struggle to get a "stock" rebuilt V8 from that era to replicate the numbers of the day, because hours were spent on the engine dyno to get the big numbers. Todays ratings are in net hp, with accessories on, air cleaner system, and full exhaust. They didn't call it hp wars for nothing. The 1972 gas crunch lowered numbers because of less compression, but not as much as the 1972 gross to net change.
Example: a '71 440 4bbl rated at 375hp in fresh rebuild form dynoes about 220hp to the wheels (Mopar mags). A 20% drivetrain loss which is todays standard for an auto equipped would be 300hp to the wheels. In realtiy the engines were making only about 60% of thier rated output to the wheels. Yes you could tweak them with jetting, timing, and so on but the facts are most of the numbers were unrealistic and absolutely not off the showroom floor except for places like Mr Norms where they tuned cars to sell. A 14sec musclecar was fast, 13s were Hemi and LS6 territory. Most musclecars were in the 3300-3800lb area, do the math. Todays Neon SRT=4 runs 13s off the showroom floor, weighing about 3000lbs, Mustang GTs with 260hp run 14.0s, LS1s with 305hp can even bust 12s stock. The real musclecar era is TODAY.
Example: a '71 440 4bbl rated at 375hp in fresh rebuild form dynoes about 220hp to the wheels (Mopar mags). A 20% drivetrain loss which is todays standard for an auto equipped would be 300hp to the wheels. In realtiy the engines were making only about 60% of thier rated output to the wheels. Yes you could tweak them with jetting, timing, and so on but the facts are most of the numbers were unrealistic and absolutely not off the showroom floor except for places like Mr Norms where they tuned cars to sell. A 14sec musclecar was fast, 13s were Hemi and LS6 territory. Most musclecars were in the 3300-3800lb area, do the math. Todays Neon SRT=4 runs 13s off the showroom floor, weighing about 3000lbs, Mustang GTs with 260hp run 14.0s, LS1s with 305hp can even bust 12s stock. The real musclecar era is TODAY.
Apr 2, 2003 | 05:02 PM
#143
Pro Rider
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
I dunno about all that.. There aren't a lot of cars out there (stock) that will touch my 1969 Camaro on top end (been there raced it and I KNOW ... and before you ask yes, my Camaro is still a stock ZL-1 car except fot the exhaust. I took it off because I want to keep it intact - how many 1969 cars do you know of that have the original factory exhaust that is still in good condition?) That, and my S-15 with its "outdated" 1970 LT-1 motor has been dynoed at 648 hp....
Apr 2, 2003 | 10:41 PM
#144
Elite Pro Rider
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,380
Likes: 1
Fastest Stock Quad??????
Originally posted by: dragomni
As far as the musclecar comment, the reasons they dynoed such high numbers in the 60s was because it was "gross" horsepower, no air cleaner, no accessories, open exhaust, jetting and timing changes. Today they struggle to get a "stock" rebuilt V8 from that era to replicate the numbers of the day, because hours were spent on the engine dyno to get the big numbers. Todays ratings are in net hp, with accessories on, air cleaner system, and full exhaust. They didn't call it hp wars for nothing. The 1972 gas crunch lowered numbers because of less compression, but not as much as the 1972 gross to net change.
Example: a '71 440 4bbl rated at 375hp in fresh rebuild form dynoes about 220hp to the wheels (Mopar mags). A 20% drivetrain loss which is todays standard for an auto equipped would be 300hp to the wheels. In realtiy the engines were making only about 60% of thier rated output to the wheels. Yes you could tweak them with jetting, timing, and so on but the facts are most of the numbers were unrealistic and absolutely not off the showroom floor except for places like Mr Norms where they tuned cars to sell. A 14sec musclecar was fast, 13s were Hemi and LS6 territory. Most musclecars were in the 3300-3800lb area, do the math. Todays Neon SRT=4 runs 13s off the showroom floor, weighing about 3000lbs, Mustang GTs with 260hp run 14.0s, LS1s with 305hp can even bust 12s stock. The real musclecar era is TODAY.
As far as the musclecar comment, the reasons they dynoed such high numbers in the 60s was because it was "gross" horsepower, no air cleaner, no accessories, open exhaust, jetting and timing changes. Today they struggle to get a "stock" rebuilt V8 from that era to replicate the numbers of the day, because hours were spent on the engine dyno to get the big numbers. Todays ratings are in net hp, with accessories on, air cleaner system, and full exhaust. They didn't call it hp wars for nothing. The 1972 gas crunch lowered numbers because of less compression, but not as much as the 1972 gross to net change.
Example: a '71 440 4bbl rated at 375hp in fresh rebuild form dynoes about 220hp to the wheels (Mopar mags). A 20% drivetrain loss which is todays standard for an auto equipped would be 300hp to the wheels. In realtiy the engines were making only about 60% of thier rated output to the wheels. Yes you could tweak them with jetting, timing, and so on but the facts are most of the numbers were unrealistic and absolutely not off the showroom floor except for places like Mr Norms where they tuned cars to sell. A 14sec musclecar was fast, 13s were Hemi and LS6 territory. Most musclecars were in the 3300-3800lb area, do the math. Todays Neon SRT=4 runs 13s off the showroom floor, weighing about 3000lbs, Mustang GTs with 260hp run 14.0s, LS1s with 305hp can even bust 12s stock. The real musclecar era is TODAY.
And as far as tech goes, yes, the cdale was more advanced than anything we have had to date. That doesnt mean it was the fastest, but its efi still made it more advanced than the faster bikes we have now and have had in the past.
Apr 2, 2003 | 11:09 PM
#145
Pro Rider
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
Originally posted by: dirtgirl
I dunno about all that.. There aren't a lot of cars out there (stock) that will touch my 1969 Camaro on top end (been there raced it and I KNOW ... and before you ask yes, my Camaro is still a stock ZL-1 car except fot the exhaust. I took it off because I want to keep it intact - how many 1969 cars do you know of that have the original factory exhaust that is still in good condition?) That, and my S-15 with its "outdated" 1970 LT-1 motor has been dynoed at 648 hp....
I dunno about all that.. There aren't a lot of cars out there (stock) that will touch my 1969 Camaro on top end (been there raced it and I KNOW ... and before you ask yes, my Camaro is still a stock ZL-1 car except fot the exhaust. I took it off because I want to keep it intact - how many 1969 cars do you know of that have the original factory exhaust that is still in good condition?) That, and my S-15 with its "outdated" 1970 LT-1 motor has been dynoed at 648 hp....
Apr 3, 2003 | 06:26 AM
#147
Trailblazer
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
Considering that only 69 '69 ZL1 Camaros ever were built I would consider you one lucky guy! Other than rare machines like that almost all musclecars were not all that impressive by todays standards. "Top end"?? Chances are you have 4:10 gears, you don't have much of a "Top end", run out of gear at pretty low mph, probly around 120mph.... It's a 1/4 mile machine, that's all.
http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...istory-1.shtml
A little info on the ZL1 Camaro from another Camaro site: With factory exhausts and tires, ZL1 Camaros could turn low 13s; with headers and slicks, they could turn 11.6s @ 122mph. Considering an LS1 Camaro has run 12.9s off the showroom floor rated at 305hp and weighing more that's not really that fast, again, the new SRT-4 Neon has run in the high 13s at over 100mph, a freakin Neon which is wrong wheel drive by mosts standards. 13.1@110mph is the best I have found for a "stock" ZL1. I don't have an exact weight of these cars, maybe you do but I am going to say 3100lbs which I beleive is high, with a 150lb driver, 3250 lbs, this is about 290-330hp to the wheels to run those numbers, with 20% drivetrain loss we are about right around the 375hp mark at the flywheel. An LS1 makes about 290hp to the wheels out of 5.7 liters of fuel efficient small block.
Check out this site, has actual dyno numbers on an engine dyno of a fresh ZL1. 375hp off the showroom floor. You can tweak any engine to make more power than as it comes off the showroom floor. That's like taking a WRX,DSM, adding a boost controller, exhaust, other tweaks, or an LS1 with bolt ons, or a Lightning or a Cobra with pulley swap, exhaust, and tuning and calling it stock, don't think so. What was considered "stock" in the 60s is not true stock. Technology has come a long ways!
http://www.camaros.org/copo.shtml
http://www.gearheadracing.com/Refere...9ZL1Camaro.htm
Sorry to go off, back to ATVs!
http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...istory-1.shtml
A little info on the ZL1 Camaro from another Camaro site: With factory exhausts and tires, ZL1 Camaros could turn low 13s; with headers and slicks, they could turn 11.6s @ 122mph. Considering an LS1 Camaro has run 12.9s off the showroom floor rated at 305hp and weighing more that's not really that fast, again, the new SRT-4 Neon has run in the high 13s at over 100mph, a freakin Neon which is wrong wheel drive by mosts standards. 13.1@110mph is the best I have found for a "stock" ZL1. I don't have an exact weight of these cars, maybe you do but I am going to say 3100lbs which I beleive is high, with a 150lb driver, 3250 lbs, this is about 290-330hp to the wheels to run those numbers, with 20% drivetrain loss we are about right around the 375hp mark at the flywheel. An LS1 makes about 290hp to the wheels out of 5.7 liters of fuel efficient small block.
Check out this site, has actual dyno numbers on an engine dyno of a fresh ZL1. 375hp off the showroom floor. You can tweak any engine to make more power than as it comes off the showroom floor. That's like taking a WRX,DSM, adding a boost controller, exhaust, other tweaks, or an LS1 with bolt ons, or a Lightning or a Cobra with pulley swap, exhaust, and tuning and calling it stock, don't think so. What was considered "stock" in the 60s is not true stock. Technology has come a long ways!
http://www.camaros.org/copo.shtml
http://www.gearheadracing.com/Refere...9ZL1Camaro.htm
Sorry to go off, back to ATVs!
Apr 3, 2003 | 12:50 PM
#148
Pro Rider
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
I am lucky but not a guy.... I got that car off of somebody who had no idea what it was or that is was anything special. I gave $2500 for it - the car had 17,000 original miles. My car has a 3.08 rear diff and tops out at 167 mph.... I know this because I got clocked by the popo... (I got let go with a warning though [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] I have never seen any Neons that would go that fast...
My S-15 has 4.56 gears in it and yes it is definitely a 1/4 mile machine - it runs 10's in the 1/4....
My S-15 has 4.56 gears in it and yes it is definitely a 1/4 mile machine - it runs 10's in the 1/4....
Apr 3, 2003 | 01:59 PM
#149
Trailblazer
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
3.08 gears in a ZL1? That can't be stock. I don't beleive you could get optional gears for the ZL1 package. You should feel guilty getting that kind of a deal on that car!!
1969 Camaro ZL1 V8(427)/M4 430/5200 450/4400 4.10 gears, 5.2 0-60, 13.8/105 1/4 mile, 130mph top speed CD 12/97
The new Neon runs close 150mph stock, new Mustangs run around 160mph, Fbodys around 170mph
1969 Camaro ZL1 V8(427)/M4 430/5200 450/4400 4.10 gears, 5.2 0-60, 13.8/105 1/4 mile, 130mph top speed CD 12/97
The new Neon runs close 150mph stock, new Mustangs run around 160mph, Fbodys around 170mph
Apr 3, 2003 | 02:32 PM
#150
Pro Rider
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Fastest Stock Quad??????
Well it IS stock I have all the dealer paperwork to prove it - it was an option. you could also get a 2.73 from the dealer if you ordered it that way. I know another guy who has a 1969 Z-28 that was ordered with 5.13 gears. He is the original owner of the car and that is how he wanted it.