great, so Nissan's new selling point is ricey looking taillights?

[LikeLinus]

Here's another site showing the 0-60 @ 6.8 for the 69 Camaro SS

 

[XZeroII]

rice is for Chineese

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01
Here's another site showing the 0-60 @ 6.8 for the 69 Camaro SS

14.77 @ almost 99mph and followed by this comment: that MPH shows Traction problem BTW for people who only dabble in article numbers.

However street warriors solved the problem with aftermarket traction kits and time proved that no '69 was "just another Camaro". With the 396

E.T. is all made up at the bottom, before my traction bars I only had 2.9 second 60 foot times also, then I got traction, now it's 2.2 in a 5300lb truck

Just cause it's got so much ungodly torque you can't hold stock numbers aginst it

 

[LikeLinus]

Oh i realize It's actually a helluva better engine (output and performance wise), but sitting around knocking Honda and Nissan gets old. I was just trying to prove a point that just because you think something is better, doesn't mean it is. Comparing a 69 car to a 02 is a huge difference in technology and build quality.

Anyway, I'd rather have This!

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01
Oh i realize It's actually a helluva better engine, but sitting around knocking Honda and Nissan gets old. I was just trying to prove a point that just because you think something is better, doesn't mean it is. Comparing a 69 car to a 02 is a huge difference in technology and build quality.

Anyway, I'd rather have This!

Thats cool, I read a little more, I see where you are coming from

Nice Vette BTW



Edit: I don't really like the new style lights myself, but it doesn't piss me off until they change the colors around, I think brakes should be red, turn yellow and reverse white... other then that, as long as it stays the standard I don't care

 

[Tom]

LikeLinus,

This is from your own link..

1969 Chevy Camaro SS L78 1/4 mile...13.00et 108.6 mph.

That is more in keeping with reality. The other info in the links seem to all come from a road test some magazine called "Car Life" did. I was heavily into car magazines and muscle cars back then and I never heard of "Car Life".

And the SS L78 wasn't the highest performance 1969 Camaro. The Z/28 had a lighter engine and either the same or more power than the 396. (The factory rated horsepower of all the cars of this era don't mean much.)

edit- and BTW, I agree with you that bashing of cars, wherever they were made, gets old if you are a car enthusiast like me. I think the Altima is an incredible car, but so is the 69 Camaro.

 

[ScrapSilicon]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01
Oh i realize It's actually a helluva better engine (output and performance wise), but sitting around knocking Honda and Nissan gets old. I was just trying to prove a point that just because you think something is better, doesn't mean it is. Comparing a 69 car to a 02 is a huge difference in technology and build quality.

Anyway, I'd rather have This!

they have kit cars of these .. use the Nissan drivetrain.. lol..flame away but I still remember the guy who had a 71 bug with a 69 Oldsmobile 425 cid Toronado transaxle(3 speed) in it..front tires seemed to always be in the air when he gave it to much throttle ..which was just off idle

 

[LikeLinus]

Exactly. A car is a car. Different people have different taste. I can't say I hate or like the new taillights cause i dont remember ever looking at them really good. But the bashing of one car or another goes on and on. Just kinda lame

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01

Hmmm... we'll put it this way: You can have a riced out Civic, I'll have a early Camaro SS. Then we'll drag them and see who wins. Good luck with that wing giving you downforce over the rear axle of a FWD car.

Pretty stupid comment. The '69 Chevy Camaro SS L78 had a 0-60 of 6.8. Problem here is they only made 4,889 with the L78. They did make an L34, 34, and 48, but they don't have as much HP/Torque as the L78. So even with the best engine you're only pulling a 0-60 @ 6.8

Considering the new Altima with a 5 speed stick and the 240HP (vs. the 396hp/375TQ that the Crapmaro puts out)...The Altima achieves a 0-60 in 5.9.

I don't know the Honda Accord's #'s off hand, but I know the new engine produces 240HP as well.

So keep your "Classic", but in the end you'll still be left looking at it's tail lights

Yes. Lets compare a brand new stock car to a 1969 camaro ss using data taken in 1969. Using puny bias 14" (maybe 15") tires on a vehicle with 375 hp. Real smart. You just proved why ricers are stupid.

With modern tires these cars are low 14 - high 13 sec cars. 0-60 times are meaningless in a drag race. 60 foot times are important. The only real important thing is the quarter mile time.

Edit: they also made the L89 too. You obviously need to do some research too.

 

[BowlingNut]

will you people stop bashing rice rockets? what is the matter with you? are you jealous that you dont have the ability or money to transform a car from sh!t to a showpiece? i'm not asian in any sense of te word, but i like rice rockets, i like the bmw 316ti, and i'd rather drive a riced civic over a POS camaro, mustang, or firebird any day. riced cars have the balance between handling and power that is difficult to find in any car under 50k. the chevrolet corvette is one, perhaps the new maseratti, and the bmw m3 spring to mind.
cobras and z28s may have more power under the hood, but they dont have the refinement of character that i want in a car. they may be able to beat me in a drag....but bring it on the track and let me show you that horspower will only get you so far in real racing.

 

[dieselstation]

let me get this straight..

YOU GUYS ARE COMPARING 30 ODD YEARS OF TECHONOLOGY DRAG RACING AN ECONOBOX WITH A GT CAR? AND ALL THIS STARTED BECAUSE SOMEONE DIDN'T LIKE THE REAR LIGHTS??? lol!

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: BowlingNut
will you people stop bashing rice rockets? what is the matter with you? are you jealous that you dont have the ability or money to transform a car from sh!t to a showpiece? i'm not asian in any sense of te word, but i like rice rockets, i like the bmw 316ti, and i'd rather drive a riced civic over a POS camaro, mustang, or firebird any day. riced cars have the balance between handling and power that is difficult to find in any car under 50k. the chevrolet corvette is one, perhaps the new maseratti, and the bmw m3 spring to mind.
cobras and z28s may have more power under the hood, but they dont have the refinement of character that i want in a car. they may be able to beat me in a drag....but bring it on the track and let me show you that horspower will only get you so far in real racing.

Have fun in your car then.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01

Hmmm... we'll put it this way: You can have a riced out Civic, I'll have a early Camaro SS. Then we'll drag them and see who wins. Good luck with that wing giving you downforce over the rear axle of a FWD car.

Pretty stupid comment. The '69 Chevy Camaro SS L78 had a 0-60 of 6.8. Problem here is they only made 4,889 with the L78. They did make an L34, 34, and 48, but they don't have as much HP/Torque as the L78. So even with the best engine you're only pulling a 0-60 @ 6.8

Considering the new Altima with a 5 speed stick and the 240HP (vs. the 396hp/375TQ that the Crapmaro puts out)...The Altima achieves a 0-60 in 5.9.

I don't know the Honda Accord's #'s off hand, but I know the new engine produces 240HP as well.

So keep your "Classic", but in the end you'll still be left looking at it's tail lights

Yes. Lets compare a brand new stock car to a 1969 camaro ss using data taken in 1969. Using puny bias 14" (maybe 15") tires on a vehicle with 375 hp. Real smart. You just proved why ricers are stupid.

Wait, what does small rims have to do with quarter-mile times? Assuming equal tire widths, wouldn't the small, lightweight rims be better for acceleration?

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01

Hmmm... we'll put it this way: You can have a riced out Civic, I'll have a early Camaro SS. Then we'll drag them and see who wins. Good luck with that wing giving you downforce over the rear axle of a FWD car.

Pretty stupid comment. The '69 Chevy Camaro SS L78 had a 0-60 of 6.8. Problem here is they only made 4,889 with the L78. They did make an L34, 34, and 48, but they don't have as much HP/Torque as the L78. So even with the best engine you're only pulling a 0-60 @ 6.8

Considering the new Altima with a 5 speed stick and the 240HP (vs. the 396hp/375TQ that the Crapmaro puts out)...The Altima achieves a 0-60 in 5.9.

I don't know the Honda Accord's #'s off hand, but I know the new engine produces 240HP as well.

So keep your "Classic", but in the end you'll still be left looking at it's tail lights

Yes. Lets compare a brand new stock car to a 1969 camaro ss using data taken in 1969. Using puny bias 14" (maybe 15") tires on a vehicle with 375 hp. Real smart. You just proved why ricers are stupid.

Wait, what does small rims have to do with quarter-mile times? Assuming equal tire widths, wouldn't the small, lightweight rims be better for acceleration?

No, the rims also means the tires are smaller, not width wise, but height wise. Bigger tires means higher top speed, but slightly slower startup times because of inertia.

This gets old. Bash on the people with civics/altimas/accords with gt wings, a coffee can spoiler with nothing more then a k/n filter all you want, but then losers keep moving that over to other cars that actually have some performance. You'll probably laugh at somebody who pulls up next to you at a stoplight in something called a lancer evo or skyline just because he has altezzas? Well, you'll be seeing plenty of those altezzas as he blows by you. Bash on asian cars with exterior mods only with no performance, but don't translate that over to someone who has a 300hp+ engine but felt like putting on a body kit and new lights.

<== monkey dance

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
and nonricy = opaque old style tail lights?

no thanks

everythings ricey....

Anything ricey about a 1969 Camaro SS? I thought so

an old spooge spewing camaro? no thanks

Oh, I'm sorry it violates the Honda rule that all engines must not out displace a bottle of pop.

Hmmm... we'll put it this way: You can have a riced out Civic, I'll have a early Camaro SS. Then we'll drag them and see who wins. Good luck with that wing giving you downforce over the rear axle of a FWD car.

by spooge spewing i meant pollution belching. being behind one of those old muscle cars is a good way to get high while crapping up your lungs.

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01

Hmmm... we'll put it this way: You can have a riced out Civic, I'll have a early Camaro SS. Then we'll drag them and see who wins. Good luck with that wing giving you downforce over the rear axle of a FWD car.

Pretty stupid comment. The '69 Chevy Camaro SS L78 had a 0-60 of 6.8. Problem here is they only made 4,889 with the L78. They did make an L34, 34, and 48, but they don't have as much HP/Torque as the L78. So even with the best engine you're only pulling a 0-60 @ 6.8

Considering the new Altima with a 5 speed stick and the 240HP (vs. the 396hp/375TQ that the Crapmaro puts out)...The Altima achieves a 0-60 in 5.9.

I don't know the Honda Accord's #'s off hand, but I know the new engine produces 240HP as well.

So keep your "Classic", but in the end you'll still be left looking at it's tail lights

Yes. Lets compare a brand new stock car to a 1969 camaro ss using data taken in 1969. Using puny bias 14" (maybe 15") tires on a vehicle with 375 hp. Real smart. You just proved why ricers are stupid.

Wait, what does small rims have to do with quarter-mile times? Assuming equal tire widths, wouldn't the small, lightweight rims be better for acceleration?

Again ricers miss the point because they don't anything about real cars. 14" Bias refers to the tires. They were very small by todays standards. Basically they would be equal to a p195 75 14. Now try hooking up 375 hp with 3.55 or better rear axle. You spend most of your 0-60 spinning your tires, trying to get traction. A sub 7 sec 0-60 in that situation is considered very good. Put real tires on the Camaro and things change dramaticly. You now see near 6 sec flat 0-60. And quarter mile times in the low 14's - high 13's. Your ricemobile just got its 240 hp ass kicked in the quarter by that "crapmaro".

We won't even mention what some real musclecars can do. Try racing a well tuned 1969 340 Dart. All you will see will be taillights that actually look nice. Feeling lucky? Try racing a 440 6bbl or a hemi car. They may even waste their gas on you when they are finished laughing at your ricemobile.

 

[geno]

Yes. Lets compare a brand new stock car to a 1969 camaro ss using data taken in 1969. Using puny bias 14" (maybe 15") tires on a vehicle with 375 hp. Real smart. You just proved why ricers are stupid.

That made no sense - the smaller the rim/tire diameter, the better the acceleration will be from a stop. Good one genious

I think you meant tire width, which isn't easily mistaken for tire diameter...

 

[LikeLinus]

Iron Woode. Hmm I did research and I provided links? Yet you did none of the above, you just spout off a load of crap and dog other people? I atleast took the time to try and prove a point and back up my claims. Secondly my point never really was that the Altima/Honda is faster than the Camaro. What I was proving is that let people like what they want. Don't sit around and flame it just because you don't feel the same. Cars are just cars.

Well I did my research, but the L78 396/375 hp, and the L89 396/375 hp are about dead even in performance. I found no track times for the L89. They only made 4k L78 and even fewer L89. I'm oh so sorry Mr. Know-It-All that I couldn't provide any data for the L89, but I did for the L78 so that is the info I provided. The only difference between the two engines was the Aluminum heads, but the overall performance is insignifigant and No one on this board will ever own a L89. So whats the point? Feel better big shot?


Also FYI. I drive a Ford F-150 EXT w/ 5.4L Tritron so you can quit your talking down to me or ricers just cause you dont like them. It really goes to show your biggotry towards others. There is absolutely nothing wrong if someone wants clear tail lights or any other effects on their car. What gives you the right to try and belittle them for having different opinions on car looks? Calling them names?

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: LikeLinus01

Hmmm... we'll put it this way: You can have a riced out Civic, I'll have a early Camaro SS. Then we'll drag them and see who wins. Good luck with that wing giving you downforce over the rear axle of a FWD car.

Pretty stupid comment. The '69 Chevy Camaro SS L78 had a 0-60 of 6.8. Problem here is they only made 4,889 with the L78. They did make an L34, 34, and 48, but they don't have as much HP/Torque as the L78. So even with the best engine you're only pulling a 0-60 @ 6.8

Considering the new Altima with a 5 speed stick and the 240HP (vs. the 396hp/375TQ that the Crapmaro puts out)...The Altima achieves a 0-60 in 5.9.

I don't know the Honda Accord's #'s off hand, but I know the new engine produces 240HP as well.

So keep your "Classic", but in the end you'll still be left looking at it's tail lights

Yes. Lets compare a brand new stock car to a 1969 camaro ss using data taken in 1969. Using puny bias 14" (maybe 15") tires on a vehicle with 375 hp. Real smart. You just proved why ricers are stupid.

Wait, what does small rims have to do with quarter-mile times? Assuming equal tire widths, wouldn't the small, lightweight rims be better for acceleration?

Again ricers miss the point because they don't anything about real cars. 14" Bias refers to the tires. They were very small by todays standards. Basically they would be equal to a p195 75 14. Now try hooking up 375 hp with 3.55 or better rear axle. You spend most of your 0-60 spinning your tires, trying to get traction. A sub 7 sec 0-60 in that situation is considered very good. Put real tires on the Camaro and things change dramaticly. You now see near 6 sec flat 0-60. And quarter mile times in the low 14's - high 13's. Your ricemobile just got its 240 hp ass kicked in the quarter by that "crapmaro".

We won't even mention what some real musclecars can do. Try racing a well tuned 1969 340 Dart. All you will see will be taillights that actually look nice. Feeling lucky? Try racing a 440 6bbl or a hemi car. They may even waste their gas on you when they are finished laughing at your ricemobile.

Believe it or not, there's more to life than the quarter. There is no single 'greatest' car around..and if you want to challenge this guy when he's in his car (rice, you call it?) on his course, he may take you up on it...but I have a feeling your hemi may lose..

..and yes, I do know Tim O'Neil..I didn't just do a google search.

 

[N8Magic]

The Altima achieves a 0-60 in 5.9.

Since when, and on what planet?

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: N8Magic

The Altima achieves a 0-60 in 5.9.

Since when, and on what planet?

6.3 here

5.9 with a 14.4 quarter

 

[LikeLinus]

Motorweek is where i saw the 5.9#. Also i think car and driver had a 6.0-6.2

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Iron Woode
Again ricers miss the point because they don't anything about real cars. 14" Bias refers to the tires. They were very small by todays standards. Basically they would be equal to a p195 75 14. Now try hooking up 375 hp with 3.55 or better rear axle. You spend most of your 0-60 spinning your tires, trying to get traction. A sub 7 sec 0-60 in that situation is considered very good. Put real tires on the Camaro and things change dramaticly. You now see near 6 sec flat 0-60. And quarter mile times in the low 14's - high 13's. Your ricemobile just got its 240 hp ass kicked in the quarter by that "crapmaro".

We won't even mention what some real musclecars can do. Try racing a well tuned 1969 340 Dart. All you will see will be taillights that actually look nice. Feeling lucky? Try racing a 440 6bbl or a hemi car. They may even waste their gas on you when they are finished laughing at your ricemobile.

Since you seem to enjoy making asinine comparisons, I can play the same game. Your sweet 375hp camaro with good tires gets similar times to a ricemobile G35 coupe with 95 less horsepower - which has a better interior/exterior (subjective) and has quite a few more amenities.

You continue to compare your big displacement crapmobiles to teeny econocar ricemobiles.

 

[Adul]

<I don't like the owners of most of the new Altimas. They're almost as bad as the Suburu people >>

a testiment to the ignorance that runs rampent in this forum.

 

[Lithium381]

i like the standard colors of the tail lights as well


rice is okay......if they are happy that way it's fine, take YOUR car and YOU race them? nope, just sit here and defend a car you dont' have......whatever guys....