fastest car for 10-12k.....

[batmang]

Originally posted by: bootymac
MK4 VW 1.8T + GIAC-X software = all you need

blahahhha. (i have an 03' 1,8t, its fun.)

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: AdamK47 3DS

Your experience is with the old 3rd gens. Those rattle like crazy and most are greatly underpowered. Mine especially so since I didn't feel like putting all the screws back in after replacing the heater core. The 4th gens dominated the Mustangs in every year the generation was produced.

that was when GM was trying to save the things...

GM's thought process
'mustang is outselling us'
'hey, it has more power'
'oh, power, we can do something about that'

mustang still outsold them.

GM doesn't get it.

mustang is an icon.

camaro is not.

it's really as simple as that.

 

[AdamK47]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: AdamK47 3DS

Your experience is with the old 3rd gens. Those rattle like crazy and most are greatly underpowered. Mine especially so since I didn't feel like putting all the screws back in after replacing the heater core. The 4th gens dominated the Mustangs in every year the generation was produced.

that was when GM was trying to save the things...

GM's thought process
'mustang is outselling us'
'hey, it has more power'
'oh, power, we can do something about that'

mustang still outsold them.

GM doesn't get it.

mustang is an icon.

camaro is not.

it's really as simple as that.

I'm not going for the bait.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
mustang still outsold them.

GM doesn't get it.

mustang is an icon.

camaro is not.

it's really as simple as that.

The Mustang outsold the Camaro for one reason: The V6 cars.

The 4th Gen F-bodys were great sportscars, better than the Mustangs. But every review mentioned how they were not comfortable to drive every day, how the suspension was overly stiff, how the car was harder to see out of, etc. What GM didn't get was that most "Pony Cars" are bought by people who want the V6 model, a good-looking commuter car that has reasonable power and is comfortable to drive everyday to work and to the grocery store on weekends, etc.

Ford realised that the people who were leaving the cars stock didn't care about the last little bits of handling or acceleration. The average Mustang GT owner didn't care if the Camaro was faster. They cared that the Mustang was reasonably fast, stylish, and still useful as an only car. The owners that wanted ultimate performance would go aftermarlet anyway and modify the cars. Ford realised the Mustang was about the broader appeal and that's why it survived.

ZV

 

[melchoir]

You will be very hard pressed to find a faster car than an LS1 within that price range.
For those who don't know any better, the Z28, Trans Am, Camaro SS, and Trans Am WS6 cars all have the exact same engines. The differences are almost purely cosmetic. (There are suspension options that come on the SS/WS6 varient, doesn't help for Drag Racing though)

A stock LS1 based car will run between a high 12, and a mid 13 pass in the 1/4, usually trapping between 104-109mph.

These cars also respond extremely well to bolt-on modifications.

For the money, there's no doubt. You get an American V8 that spanks Mustangs as well as imports. An LS1 based F-body will dominate all but the 03/04 SVT Cobra and the new GT500 from Ford. The 03/04 Mach 1s (Same 4 valve motor as the Cobra of the same year, sans the Supercharger) are actually a pretty good race for a stock LS1, but usually a little slower. The restyled GTs (05/06/07) cannot keep up with a stock 98-2002 LS1.

A Mach 1 or 03/04 Cobra is also no where near that price point. Most are $20k+

Perhaps I'm biased, I own an LS1 based Trans Am.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: melchoir
An LS1 based F-body will dominate all but the 03/04 SVT Cobra and the new GT500 from Ford. The 03/04 Mach 1s (Same 4 valve motor as the Cobra of the same year, sans the Supercharger) are actually a pretty good race for a stock LS1, but usually a little slower. The restyled GTs (05/06/07) cannot keep up with a stock 98-2002 LS1.

Interesting that the Mach 1 is a "good race", but the faster Cobra (and much faster GT500) are "dominated" by the LS1. Also, since a brand new '05+ GT will outrun a Mach 1 it's strange that you think the Mach 1 will give a better showing compared to an LS1.

The GT500 has been turning low 12's stock.

ZV

 

[50cent1228]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
any civic dx with super-sized muffler

yup sirr

 

[melchoir]

Interesting that the Mach 1 is a "good race", but the faster Cobra (and much faster GT500) are "dominated" by the LS1. Also, since a brand new '05+ GT will outrun a Mach 1 it's strange that you think the Mach 1 will give a better showing compared to an LS1.

The GT500 has been turning low 12's stock.

If you read properly, I wrote:

An LS1 based F-body will dominate all but the 03/04 SVT Cobra and the new GT500 from Ford.

Now, this implies that the GT500, and 03/04 Cobras are faster than the LS1 based F-body.

Also, since a brand new '05+ GT will outrun a Mach 1 it's strange that you think the Mach 1 will give a better showing compared to an LS1.

Whomever told you this, was simply lying to you. The 4 valve Mach 1 is still faster than the 3 Valve 05+ GTs. I'm sorry that you've been lied to.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: buzzsaw13
I always had a thing for the 90-96 300ZX

Originally posted by: railer
I like those z's too....but they're almost like a collectors item. Mad cash even for a 91 TT.
Supra TT's are the same way. Crazy expensize.... :/

....and not the iroc-z either......

my Z

another pic of my Z

WTF is in the background of pic 2?

It's an old fort in Sandy Hook, NJ. There was a base there built right after the Civil War.

Aerial view, have fun

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Fill in the blank:

used ______

I'd say just about anything can be had for $10K if you get something old enough.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: melchoir

Interesting that the Mach 1 is a "good race", but the faster Cobra (and much faster GT500) are "dominated" by the LS1. Also, since a brand new '05+ GT will outrun a Mach 1 it's strange that you think the Mach 1 will give a better showing compared to an LS1.

The GT500 has been turning low 12's stock.

If you read properly, I wrote:

An LS1 based F-body will dominate all but the 03/04 SVT Cobra and the new GT500 from Ford.

Now, this implies that the GT500, and 03/04 Cobras are faster than the LS1 based F-body.

Also, since a brand new '05+ GT will outrun a Mach 1 it's strange that you think the Mach 1 will give a better showing compared to an LS1.

Whomever told you this, was simply lying to you. The 4 valve Mach 1 is still faster than the 3 Valve 05+ GTs. I'm sorry that you've been lied to.

Apologies, I missed the "but" in the original post regarding the cobras.

As far as the Mach 1, I've generally seen 0-60 times in the low 5 second range. Road and Track clocked an '05 GT at 4.9 seconds 0-60. Given testing variances, at worst the '05 and '06 GT is dead even with the Mach 1 (which it should be given that it has essentially an identical torque/hp curve with the exception of more HP and torque staying on at higher RPM for the '05 and '06 GT). No-one told me, I was simply able to compare numbers. You know, 5.3 is slower than 4.9...

Mach 1 acceleration link

'05 GT acceleration times

ZV

 

[melchoir]

0-60 isn't everything, 0-60 in the 1/4th really doesn't mean squat. There's plenty of room left between 60 and the rest of the 1/4th to "play catch up".

I'm not trying to bash anyone. But I actually go to the track, and I actually race. I've seen stock Mach 1s, and Stock 05+ GTs race.

Not only that, but I've raced both and the outcome is as I've explained. It goes in this order. LS1 > Mach 1 > GT.

To toss more into the fire, the LS1 Camaro has been put to 12.8 (z28) and 12.9 (SS) second passes, stock, by a Mustang magazine. (Sting a little?)

http://www.stangbangers.com/01Bullitt_Article2c.jpg

All this does is further prove my point. For the price that the OP is requesting, a LS1 is the best bet.

 

[MikeMike]

how did we forget about the GMC Syclone and Typhoon?

fast, awd, and well, ones an suv.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: melchoir
0-60 isn't everything, 0-60 in the 1/4th really doesn't mean squat. There's plenty of room left between 60 and the rest of the 1/4th to "play catch up".

Wrong.

The closer you are to the starting line, the more important acceleration is.

In other words, if you put down 300 hp in the first 1/8th mile and 100 hp in the last 1/8th mile, you will run a much faster time than if you put down 100 hp in the first half, then 300 hp in the second half.

The 1/4 mile is mostly won or lost in the first 60 feet. I've run a 13 flat and a 15, with no difference other than the launch. 0-60 mph is very important for 1/4 times.

 

[melchoir]

1/8th is mostly won or lost in the first 60, 1/4 is usually the first 330. But you'd be suprised. A lot of races are lost on the top end. Some cars might make more power, but not launch as hard as another car.. While the launch gives the holeshot and 60', the last half can make a big difference, ESPECIALLY on FI cars. I could out 60' a pullied + bolt on 03/04 SVT cobra no problem. And with my current setup, he'd come wizzing by before the end of the 1/4. The 1/8th would be much closer.

60 foot, and 1/8th is largely based on traction. The other half of the track involves the horsepower.

I've never run anything slower than a 13 second pass, currently enjoying the 12s, working my way down.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: melchoir
To toss more into the fire, the LS1 Camaro has been put to 12.8 (z28) and 12.9 (SS) second passes, stock, by a Mustang magazine. (Sting a little?)

Considering that I've already posted in this thread about how the 4th gen F-bodies were superior sportscars, no, it really doesn't sting.

I'm just going with what I've seen from the numbers. The reviews of the '05 and '06 Mustang GT pretty much all say that it's essentially the same performance as the Mach 1 was. Since they've driven both, I'm inclined to believe them. The power curves for both engines are essentially the same.

I haven't been to a dragstrip. It's not racing.

ZV

 

[Sukhoi]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Sukhoi

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: buzzsaw13
I always had a thing for the 90-96 300ZX

Originally posted by: railer
I like those z's too....but they're almost like a collectors item. Mad cash even for a 91 TT.
Supra TT's are the same way. Crazy expensize.... :/

....and not the iroc-z either......

my Z

another pic of my Z

WTF is in the background of pic 2?

It's an old fort in Sandy Hook, NJ. There was a base there built right after the Civil War.

Aerial view, have fun

Ah, cool. It sure looks strange in the car pic.

 

[exdeath]

An older 'vette? Should be able to get a '97 C5 for around $15k, It'll have some miles on it though.

345 HP, ~3200 lbs and LS1s are cheap and easy to mod.

And nobody can really argue that the Corvette isn't a fast and well balanced car all around.

Also a MR2 Turbo with the 3S-GTE turbo engine should be a cheap and fun car to work on. The aftermarket community for the MR2 and the 3S-GTE is just as big and cheap as the foxes. You can get about 300+HP out of a stock 3S-GTE with pocket change, and upwards of 700 HP with a built long block out of that little 2.0L.

For something original, stuff that 3S-GTE into a 5S-FE Camry and make people scratch their heads.

 

[exdeath]

Originally posted by: melchoir

Interesting that the Mach 1 is a "good race", but the faster Cobra (and much faster GT500) are "dominated" by the LS1. Also, since a brand new '05+ GT will outrun a Mach 1 it's strange that you think the Mach 1 will give a better showing compared to an LS1.

The GT500 has been turning low 12's stock.

If you read properly, I wrote:

An LS1 based F-body will dominate all but the 03/04 SVT Cobra and the new GT500 from Ford.

Now, this implies that the GT500, and 03/04 Cobras are faster than the LS1 based F-body.

Also, since a brand new '05+ GT will outrun a Mach 1 it's strange that you think the Mach 1 will give a better showing compared to an LS1.

Whomever told you this, was simply lying to you. The 4 valve Mach 1 is still faster than the 3 Valve 05+ GTs. I'm sorry that you've been lied to.

With the 4,000lb weight and reportedly weaker internals (generic cracked rods instead of the Manley H beams), it seems the GT500 won't have the same potential as the 03/04 Terminator's despite the bigger 5.4L engine, at least not with the stock block like the 03/04. But then again you can always get a 1500 HP capable MMR shortblock in either 4.6L or 5.4L for either car.

 

[Garet Jax]

A bike.

 

[tboo]

Is this going to be your only car? If so consider the northern climate you live in. Its not fun driving in snow with a high power rwd car.

 

[thedarkwolf]

Originally posted by: exdeath
An older 'vette? Should be able to get a '97 C5 for around $15k, It'll have some miles on it though.

345 HP, ~3200 lbs and LS1s are cheap and easy to mod.

And nobody can really argue that the Corvette isn't a fast and well balanced car all around.

Also a MR2 Turbo with the 3S-GTE turbo engine should be a cheap and fun car to work on. The aftermarket community for the MR2 and the 3S-GTE is just as big and cheap as the foxes. You can get about 300+HP out of a stock 3S-GTE with pocket change, and upwards of 700 HP with a built long block out of that little 2.0L.

For something original, stuff that 3S-GTE into a 5S-FE Camry and make people scratch their heads.

Yeah MR2 turbos "should" be cheap but they aren't. When I can even find one which isn't often they are usually $6k or more usually MORE and have 150k+ miles on them and this is for 91s. The newer they get the more insane the prices get plus they just look like a royal PITA to work on. I have seen a one or two pop up for $3500-$4000 but they made the 150k mile ones look really nice . See lots of non-turbos for $6k or more though. I guess it depends on what you call cheap though.

 

[exdeath]

Originally posted by: thedarkwolf

Originally posted by: exdeath
An older 'vette? Should be able to get a '97 C5 for around $15k, It'll have some miles on it though.

345 HP, ~3200 lbs and LS1s are cheap and easy to mod.

And nobody can really argue that the Corvette isn't a fast and well balanced car all around.

Also a MR2 Turbo with the 3S-GTE turbo engine should be a cheap and fun car to work on. The aftermarket community for the MR2 and the 3S-GTE is just as big and cheap as the foxes. You can get about 300+HP out of a stock 3S-GTE with pocket change, and upwards of 700 HP with a built long block out of that little 2.0L.

For something original, stuff that 3S-GTE into a 5S-FE Camry and make people scratch their heads.

Yeah MR2 turbos "should" be cheap but they aren't. When I can even find one which isn't often they are usually $6k or more usually MORE and have 150k+ miles on them and this is for 91s. The newer they get the more insane the prices get plus they just look like a royal PITA to work on. I have seen a one or two pop up for $3500-$4000 but they made the 150k mile ones look really nice . See lots of non-turbos for $6k or more though. I guess it depends on what you call cheap though.

Can always get a non turbo and get a JDM gen 2 3sgte engine + tranny for $1,500 good for 225 HP stock. The gen 3 engines are like $2,500+, but the gen 3 only has the advantage in stock form. After basic mods, they are identical.

My favorite config for that engine is stroked to 2.2L with oversized intake valves and stock size exhaust valves with a cam and turbine wheel profile that basically constricts the exhaust in front of the turbo and opens it up behind so you get high exhaust port velocities at low RPMs so the exhaust gas has more momentum to get that turbo spooling on the bottom end. That nets ~400 HP/400 FT lbs. Gives up the higher peak horsepower numbers you see due to less high RPM breathing, but you have 250+ ft-lbs torque starting 2500 RPM instead of 100 ft-lbs and an overall flatter curve which is better for a street car than maximizing peaks. Then run a spearco air/water intercooler directly between the turbo outlet and the throttle for instant throttle response (instead of compressing 6 feet of plumbing first). Anyway... Im rambling...

By cheap I was keeping it in the 12k range of the OP so '$6k or more' qualifies ^_^

 

[thedarkwolf]

Yeah but the non-turbo MR2s are usually $6k or more here too . I know he said under $12k but the idea of paying $6k -$8k for a early 90s toyota with way over 100k miles on it that books for $2k-$4k bothers me.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
How about a 90's AWD turbo talon/eclipse like this one that owned a z06?

The DSM Turbo AWD cars were crazy fast true. but most were ragged out hard to faind a nice one anymore.