Ford, Chevy, Dodge, or ????
#161
[quote]
Originally posted by: WallStreet
By the way, Street Truck had a S-10 w/ a 475 horse LS1 in it and it only ran 12's, AKA a Lightning w/ a chip and K&N panel filter.q]
Yeah I have that magazine right in front of me now and you better re-read it. It's in a Sonoma and it's 430hp. It ran 12.34 in the quarter-mile without any modifications to increase traction. They put some decent tires on it and that was about it. There was suppose to be a second issue with more mod's done on it but I haven't seen it yet. The Lighting does 13.9 seconds in the quarter mile stock, so I doubt with a chip and K&N panel filter it will do any better then 12.5 in the quater mile. And thats being generious! And as for it being that hard you don't know a d*m thing about me. I'm a millwright and my best friend is a electrician. So as far as the conversion goes it will be a few weekends of work then I'll be at the track working over Lightnings. Why would I care what kind of gas mileage it's going to get when I'm not going to be driving it every day? As for reliability with a 500+hp engine it doesn't happen. And a lightning goes for $43,000cdn an S-10 extended cab for comfort goes for $26,000cdn. That's $17,000 dollars which I can sink into my truck, so catch me if you can.
Originally posted by: WallStreet
By the way, Street Truck had a S-10 w/ a 475 horse LS1 in it and it only ran 12's, AKA a Lightning w/ a chip and K&N panel filter.q]
Yeah I have that magazine right in front of me now and you better re-read it. It's in a Sonoma and it's 430hp. It ran 12.34 in the quarter-mile without any modifications to increase traction. They put some decent tires on it and that was about it. There was suppose to be a second issue with more mod's done on it but I haven't seen it yet. The Lighting does 13.9 seconds in the quarter mile stock, so I doubt with a chip and K&N panel filter it will do any better then 12.5 in the quater mile. And thats being generious! And as for it being that hard you don't know a d*m thing about me. I'm a millwright and my best friend is a electrician. So as far as the conversion goes it will be a few weekends of work then I'll be at the track working over Lightnings. Why would I care what kind of gas mileage it's going to get when I'm not going to be driving it every day? As for reliability with a 500+hp engine it doesn't happen. And a lightning goes for $43,000cdn an S-10 extended cab for comfort goes for $26,000cdn. That's $17,000 dollars which I can sink into my truck, so catch me if you can.
#164
you forgot to add a VW to your list, yeah thats right a 1997 vw jetta gl, pul behind trailer made for my quad......
oh by the way that only lasted about 5 mos until i found my 1999 dodge ram sport.....it was crazy using my jetta but it worked fine
oh by the way that only lasted about 5 mos until i found my 1999 dodge ram sport.....it was crazy using my jetta but it worked fine
#166
WallStreet - I thought the rear only burnout was strange for the AWD Skyline when I first saw it, I kept downloading car videos and eventually got some with syclones and Typhoons doing it. At first I assumed they took the front drive off, but there were to many of them. I wish I had a net site where I could post one of the videos so you all could see it. I don't know if any were small enough to e-mail. If I find one on the net again I'll post the URL. I know all about switching the front tires to the back I've done it on my old truck, I used to spin those all the time, usually several times a day.
Found some[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
Real quick syclone and typhoon no burnout though (10 sec Syclone)
Theres lots of vids here, the burntout, dounuts,....
Found some[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
Real quick syclone and typhoon no burnout though (10 sec Syclone)
Theres lots of vids here, the burntout, dounuts,....
#167
Yeah i'll admit after the huge price tag you could ad some good performance parts for cheap. The S-10 is light and the frame can handle huge hp with out having to beef it up big time, thats why I'm using the S-10. If you know what your doing there's other trucks that you could do up and still be under the price of the lightning as well, like the Dodge Dakota R/T, Ford F-150, and Ford Ranger. I personally haven't seen a ranger with mega HP engine in it, I think that would be sort of cool to see.
#168
A truck is not ment to go fast I think it is stupid to waste so much money in a truck so it will go fast. All a truck needs is a lot of torque and 4wheel drive. But do what you want and be happy. Myself I have a F-150 4x4 and a Jeep Cherokee for the mud and rocks.
#169
The Silverado SS just further proves how far back GM is falling in the performance market. Their supercar Z06 is 53,000 bucks, and you can take a 34,000 Cobra, change the pulley on it and out run the z06. I don't know what GM engineers are thinking, "Let's build a truck to compete with the Lightning, but it has to weigh more, have 50 less horsepower, and cost 10 grand more!" Personally on a truck like that I'm not too concerned about the towing capacity either, I'm not gonna buy a lightning to pull my travel trailer around with lol.
#170
RaptorRidrTX I totally agree with you that there falling behind. Getting ride of the Trans Am was a big mistake. I guess theirs less demand for the high performance vehicles. But the other manufacturer's aren't really doing alot either. It's seems like fast and the furious is going to ruin north american made sports cars and probably sport trucks soon as well. Plus with the price of gas every one wants a super fast car with good fuel mileage which isn't going to happen, unless you want to drive around in Jap Scrap.


