| Author | Message | ||
| Mark (Study)
Member Username: Study Post Number: 843 Registered: 10-2001 |
This thread "360 beat by Vette" went to 244 post because... The replacement for the 360 in 2003 should have been Enzo. Mass production would have cut price in half and put it square against the Lambo. Instead ferrari took the safe path and made the Enzo all about being a financial intrument and collectors museum special. Ferrari has left all you die-hard Ferrari fans to fight for the next few years against the baby lambo and ford gt and new viper. Ferrari should have gave you the production Enzo and Ferrari would not be getting all these challenges and debates. Ferrari is not king of the road because Enzo was not the 360 replacement car. I wonder what the vote was in the board room? How many for making the Enzo a production car? How many for making the Enzo a "you can't have one" car. I would have liked to see that vote. Murcielago guys are the king of the street and the top of the line in production cars for 2003 2004. Ferrari "production models" are fantastic! but... Enzo should have replaced 360 in 04/05 now Ferrari has a hole in their exotic car gap amoung the masses of car fans. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 805 Registered: 3-2002 |
I know exactly what you are talking about. Yes anyone can rechip, drop in headers, and dual exhaust and have a world beater. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Member Username: Study Post Number: 842 Registered: 10-2001 |
Who cares about drag racing ? People that drive Ferraris...come in contact with others on our public roads. And when your are driving the King of cars, you will get 100's of chances on the road for little mini races, even if its just a quick stomp on the gas. The Track happens a few times a year. The street drag happens a few times everytime you take the car out. Ferrari should be about ignoring all these challenges because you know you would win. Instead ferrari has become...don't get into these races because you might lose. After spending $100,000's that can't be a happy mind-set. That's why drag racing comes up all the time? Or 0-60 times. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 797 Registered: 3-2002 |
You all need to go back to the subject matter. Who cares about drag racing ? | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1437 Registered: 1-2002 |
I mean, c'mon, seriously now... | ||
| allan fiedler (Allanlambo)
Intermediate Member Username: Allanlambo Post Number: 1007 Registered: 6-2002 |
Haha, we've slipped from Ferrari vs Corvette all the way to Ferrari vs truck, and argueing about it! | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1436 Registered: 1-2002 |
>>the Lightning handles great for a truck (who would have thought they could get 4700lbs truck to brake to a stop @ 130ft [Not that it matters but that is as good as the braking distance for a 308 GTS and nearly as good as a 512M's braking distance, << That brake distance comparison is moot; we're talking 355 v. snowplow, and not 308/512 v. snowplow. >>but like HP, braking isnt everything.]), but it will not keep up with a 355 on the road course without some work.<< okay, you're right, braking isn't "everything," but balance is. The fact that that 4700lbs you intend on sluggin' around is leveraged toward the front, not only means that the TRUCK will not be as balance under braking (since the rear will get REALLY light), but it'll also plow like a pig on turn in (since the MASS over the front wheels will overwork the tires, surpass their given slip angle, and make them understeer... that scrubs EVEN MORE speed!!!), and will exhibit a great deal of oversteer once you gas it at the apex (you know, since you got that ungodly amount of torque whipping around the equivelent weight of a piece of paper out back) So, lets see, the snowplow/tractor will have to brake longer and more progressivly, scrub even more speed for a clean turn in, scrub more speed to limit turn in understeer and will have to wait until it's 100% pointing forward before it can hit WOT. So, what do all those factors add up to...? I'll tell you: longer braking distance (since you'll need to apply it with more caution to keep the rear settled), slower turn in (understeer), longer track out and time pause b/w hitting the apex and WOT, with an overall result of a MUCH compromised lap time. Now, do you see how this CLEARLY illustrates( to you) that a stock lightening will not keep up w/ a 355? Plainly, it's im-f@@king-possible. And, before you tell me I'm full of it, here's a little anecdote for you: "this one time, at laguna seca," there was a lightening (all shiny and pretty; standing there like the omnipotent snowplow I knew it to be). But, you know what?Everyone got by him, well, under braking all day long, including yours truely (on, I lapped him... more than once), and you know where he ended up at the end of his 2nd session?? In the pit wall, for the very reasons I outlined above; i.e., the cars fundamentally flawed setup (i.e., lack of overall balance). | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 22 Registered: 9-2003 |
Dave I agree with what your saying, but the difference between the pinto, and the Lightning, the Lightning keeps up with the 355 in the quarter stock. The Pinto keeping up with a 355 in any aspect, your talking about one hell of a project. Like I said, beyond the quarter, absolutely, the Lightning handles great for a truck (who would have thought they could get 4700lbs truck to brake to a stop @ 130ft [Not that it matters but that is as good as the braking distance for a 308 GTS and nearly as good as a 512M's braking distance, but like HP, braking isnt everything.]), but it will not keep up with a 355 on the road course without some work. | ||
| Lawrence Coppari (Lawrence)
Member Username: Lawrence Post Number: 778 Registered: 4-2002 |
Can't believe some of you. There is no possibility that the truck will keep up with a 355 on a road course. Well maybe if you put Schumacher in the truck and my grandmother in the 355. | ||
| Dave White (Dwhite)
Junior Member Username: Dwhite Post Number: 124 Registered: 5-2003 |
I'm not sure what the point is from both Paul and Tom. So an F150 can beat(maybe, who cares) a 355, in a drag race. Guys a pinto can beat a 355 or an F150 with the right motor in it. When did ferrari start to participate in the NHRA. I once heard a heavyweight boxer could beat a flyweight, everytime, who would have guessed. Mark, that is what they have been doing since the old man needed to make money to support his racing ventures. If you want a race car go buy one and try and live with it on the street. Don't but a 355, it sounds like you will not be able to live with the shame. I am not a person who is blind to what else is out there, but I laugh when people want to race my 308 at a stoplight, I tell them they will destroy me. Wasn't the reason I bought it anyway. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1434 Registered: 1-2002 |
>>On the track, I would say a 355 wouldnt shake the truck loose.<< Yah, you're right, newman, the 355 would have a hard time losing the truck, since the lightening would be rammed up the 355's a$$ after missing it's brake zone (or is it parachute deployment???) into the 1st turn. Get real, and stop bench racing just to have a "provocative" perspective. Check you pupils norman, are they diallated? Jon, skippy is next year (jan / feb), because I need to do it on a weekend, and then I need to rent a racer for a couple days to get over the "provisional" hump (still looking for an affordable racer to rent --don't want to blow too much on someone elses car). BTW: Saw a radical for sale (fully sorted w/ spares), and am tempted, so I might go in half w/ another track junkie. Run it in CSR/DSR, maybe? Although those classes seem to be dominated by the stohr DSR chassis'. Thoughts? ps: you want to get a NASCAR mini truck? Have you looked at the CSR/DSR racers (mini LMP cars), and radical now has a US hq. They look like fun!!!! | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 952 Registered: 6-2002 |
"On the track, I would say a 355 wouldn't shake the truck loose." Are you MAD?! Have you EVER been on a track? No F-ING WAY! An F355 would loose a truck on the way into pit lane. Also, I've seen a stock F40 run an 11.78 (don't recall trap speed) on street tyres, with a soft launch. F40 is a nutter-crazy Ferrari. It makes 478hp from the factory for god's sake! In 2600lbs of car! I mean, come on!!! The F40 can be 'hoped up' as well to around 650bhp pretty safely. I would love to see an LM spec F40 lighting it's tyres in 3rd gear at half track (good for a chuckle!) | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 21 Registered: 9-2003 |
355 will beat a lightning stock for stock in about every area. The Lightning would hold up pretty well till about 60 and then its all 355 from there. What really hurts its higher end is the fact its only a SOHC (and naturally it being a truck its a wind block). As far as the GNX and the Grand National are concerned, Allan, nobody compared it to the 355 in any way. I dont see why they would. Its just a lowly 16 year old G-body.  I will mention both cars are rated 0-60 in 4.7 seconds. Again, like the Lightning... beyond 60 its all 355. | ||
| allan fiedler (Allanlambo)
Member Username: Allanlambo Post Number: 994 Registered: 6-2002 |
Also, a Stock GNX or a Lightning maybe able to give a 355 a run for its money from a dead stop, but on a roll, as evidenced by the 355 much higher trap speed in the 1/4, the 355 will beat either of them. | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Intermediate Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 1059 Registered: 8-2001 |
You know it's getting bad when Allan is defending a Ferrari's performance. Jon | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 221 Registered: 2-2003 |
I agree with allen. Ford Lightnings have no chance with a 355 on the track and little on a drag strip. | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Intermediate Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 1058 Registered: 8-2001 |
Newman, On the track, I would say a 355 wouldn't shake the truck loose. Based on your wisdom I'll be sure to give the Lightening a point by next time he is on my tail at the track! Look folks ...the Scooby and the Evo might be close to a 360 or 355 maybe even getting a win now and then at the track but a 4700 pound Lightening!!!! You guys are F*cking dreaming in la la land. Have you guys ever even been on a track!! That is the dumbest ass statement in this thread yet. I run my 355 Challenge frequently against NASCAR Trucks that have ZZ4 crate motors that make about the same horsepower and have more torque as the Lightening and these trucks weigh 2600 DRY WEIGHT! And yes...properly driven at high speed tracks they are quicker than my 355 Challenge but by a second or two at most and dead even at smaller tracks. Now you're going to tell me that a 4700 pound truck (F150 Lightening) with about the same hp as these mini NASCAR trucks I run with are going to keep up with a stock 355 on a RACE TRACK with dinky single piston calipers on the rear. You guys are off your rocker. And before you call me one of those close minded Ferrari types, I have owned 2 vette's, 1 Mustang, and am in the process of acquiring a bona fide NASCAR Craftsman race truck to have fun with. At a drag strip the F150L will leave about any F car for dead save an F40/F50/Enzo but at the track that porker is dead meat against anything this side of a 355. Regards, Jon | ||
| allan fiedler (Allanlambo)
Member Username: Allanlambo Post Number: 992 Registered: 6-2002 |
Man, i go on a quick trip and all of a sudden people are talking about Ford Lightnings beating F40's in the 1/4? Come on people, lets get real, it will never happen. Now we're talking about Lightnings running with a 355 on a race course? Give me a break, not a chance. | ||
| Jaime T. Ferraris are sex on wheels (Chevarri)
Junior Member Username: Chevarri Post Number: 183 Registered: 1-2003 |
"I guess you could say ferrari isnt too concerned about the HP race, they are comfy and feel they have nothing to prove." To the contrary Newman, well at least IMO. Ppl and mags are always comparing a cars stats to Ferrari. If my car is quicker than a Ferrari, and can beat it in a straight line, then that means Im "better"(I use the term loosely) than a Ferrari. What do ppl compare a Vette to? A Ferrari. What do ppl compare a Porsche to? A Ferrari, and what do ppl compare a Lambo too, yup Ferrari. In a sense your "ringer" isn't much of a fighter if its getting beat. Do I think Ferraris living of a name plate, yes I do. Do I think they should be concerned about how much HP and how fast their cars go? Yes of course they should, the competition isn't sitting on their hands any more. They are out for blood and they are coming out swinging. Will the Enzo be relagated to also-ran when the Carrera V10 comes out? Based on reports its better in a lot of ways, and is half the price and just might dethrone the current king. Guess what the mags and everyone else will compare it too? Enzo. | ||
| jeff ryerson (Atheyg)
Member Username: Atheyg Post Number: 484 Registered: 8-2002 |
Read up on Ferrari road car history, Ferraris have seldom been the fastest, the 65 275 Ferrari had a top speed of 150, the XKE that sold for 40% less went 160 and the 60% less 65 427 Corvette was faster than both. Few Ferrari regular production sports cars have been the fastest of their time, the Daytona,Boxer and TR are it, Ferrari has never really gotten into the pissing contest of trying to be the fastest sports car. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 639 Registered: 9-2002 |
very true Paul. What kind of money would you have to dump into a Ferrari to get the same hp gain...probbably enough to buy the F150 I bet. Heritage counts for nothing in a race,ethier you win or you lose,thats it. I love Ferrari,but the performance of the cars as to compared to what is out there, is not up the the price they charge for the car. | ||
| Newman (Newman)
Intermediate Member Username: Newman Post Number: 1326 Registered: 12-2001 |
Nathan, something else to remember is the north american car makers have something to prove and are hard at work to build a reputation for performance. Ferrari is riding on its reputation and will continue to sell cars if they never increase HP again. I guess you could say ferrari isnt too concerned about the HP race, they are comfy and feel they have nothing to prove. | ||
| Newman (Newman)
Intermediate Member Username: Newman Post Number: 1325 Registered: 12-2001 |
Im not sure about what they had in 87 but the lightning goes way back when they ran the cobra 351 engine, a GT40 equipped engine making it a good performer and it probably cost under 15K as well, a far cry from ferrari prices. I think part of the arguement on this thread is the cost of ferraris vs performance not just performance stock vs stock. Could you justify being shamed in a 360 or whatever ferrari, even a 550 if the guy in the lightning spent 1/2 hour installing the smaller supercharger driven pulley and a performance chip in the pcm then proceeded to whip your butt? Your response being "your TRUCK isnt stock so its not fair." The pulley kit is $300cdn and the chip $320cdn. That puts the HP over 400 and torque who knows where. I still like ferraris but dont be blinded buy the ferrari mystique. | ||
| Newman (Newman)
Intermediate Member Username: Newman Post Number: 1324 Registered: 12-2001 |
I didnt think an F40 would do 11's with Hp in the 400's but it is lighter. The Mach1 comment is from a 360 owner i know who also owns an 03 mach1...automatic to boot. They are quick but of course the cobra at 390 supercharged HP is a tad faster and a 360 cant compete on the street which is where these cars are designed to be driven. I have to accept the fact that my weenie 308 is not competitive these days against any muscle car as well as alot of ricers. I love the looks of the car, the sound and how it handles and the fact that it is a ferrari but im forced to live with the fact that it isnt a rocket and Im torn between selling it and buying a C5 or get the power up to a respectable level, then it would be perfect. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 20 Registered: 9-2003 |
You've gotta remember, though, your comparing a brand new vehicle (car or truck) to a 16 year old car. Ford did not have a 13 second F150 back in 1987. The F40, however, was busy clashing with the 959 for the title of best overall performing car in the world, before ford had even thought about SVT or putting the 351 in the first Lightning. Now IMHO it would deffinatly be discouraging to get beat by a pickup modded or not in any exotic. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 19 Registered: 9-2003 |
Newman I agree with everything you said accept the Lightning beating an F40. A modded Lightning will deffinatly do the trick (but as fun as it is to think about, you know how the old modded vs stock thing goes, its really not fair to the other car) But stock the Lightning with a good driver might run low 13's on stock rubbers, thats in the right conditions. With 465 lbs feet of torque its extremely difficult to get any traction with nothing but a light bed riding over the rear tires. DR's one of my buddies on SVTperformance that has a Lightning knocked 7 tenths of a second off of his E/T. He ran high 12's. With that said though, comparing quarter mile times (even though the F40's knack is in much more than the straight line) the F40 still runs mid to high 11's and does 0-60 in under 4 seconds. That would most certainly put the F40 well ahead of a stock Lightning by atleast a second to a second and a half. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 635 Registered: 9-2002 |
Newman..You and I both know the truth. Some people on this board refuse to beleive it. | ||
| Newman (Newman)
Intermediate Member Username: Newman Post Number: 1323 Registered: 12-2001 |
Yes andrew, spank an F40. A stock 03 mach1 will keep with a 360 6 speed up to 100mph which is pretty much the 1/4 mile and they are only 300hp, its the torque that makes the difference and the lightning has loads more HP and torque thanks to the supercharger in a light short box truck. I dont know what an F40 will do in the 1/4 but a lightning is in the 12's so on the street, the F40 would see the truck's tail lights because they need time to get up to speed. On the track, I would say a 355 wouldnt shake the truck loose. Bottom line is you would be embarassed if your ferrari lost to a pickup, heritage or not the guy in the buick or F150 will pee his pants after he spanks your ass. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 18 Registered: 9-2003 |
Ralph I just realized I didnt get to answer your Callaway TT question. I'm pretty sure by 1990 Callaway had progressed beyond the GNX. | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Intermediate Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 1387 Registered: 10-2001 |
Spank an F40 with a pick up ? Even if it has 500hp it wont touch an F40.Not even a 360 on a track. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 16 Registered: 9-2003 |
Ralph: Yes that true, 87 was the only year they produced the GNX. They produced the Grand National from 81 to 87, but they didnt get really fast until Buick introduced the intercooler setups. The 85's and older, which I think Ernesto may have seen were very unefficient. The turbo's were up against the firewall, there was no intercooler, they blew head gaskets like mad, I think they were carberated too... The 86'es and 87's had Sequential Fuel Injection, they moved the Turbo's closer to the front of the car so it could suck in more air (I also think it had something to do with the intercooler setup as well), intercoolers and fuel injection deffinatly played a major role in the success of the Grand National in its final hour. As far as Callaway is concenred... Well in my books it kind of all goes for aftermarket tuners. I dont see them as truely being stock. They're tuner stock yes, but they're not truely factory stock anymore in my book. The only difference between me modifying my car, and Steve Saleen building an S281 out of a Mustang GT is the fact he provides a warrenty with his work, and he has the ability to slap his last name on the car and charge 15 thousand over what its actually worth. I respect some aftermarket tuners, Callaway produced alot of nice vehicles, Lingenfelter, Hennesey, Roush, all nice... but really cant be concidered factory stock. Thats just my view on it though. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 776 Registered: 3-2002 |
I am NOT comparing the 360 Modena in ANY way here. Tom: the Fiero should have been the Fiero GT when it was introduced. Not a 4cyl automatic that was really an economy car. GM REALLY dropped the ball on that one. Not the first time and not the last. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 775 Registered: 3-2002 |
Nathan: I assume that by 1989/1990 with the introduction of the 6-speed and other modifications; the stock TT Callaway took care of the stock GNX. However I think the GNX was gone by then ? So it is really not a fair comparison. The Sledgehammer was a one-off test car. I understand that car was purchased by a German Collector. | ||
| A.Tonokaboni (Senna1994)
Junior Member Username: Senna1994 Post Number: 136 Registered: 9-2002 |
Damn these are some pretty funny pics of Lambo Man. Why the knock on Rolex's, the Stainless Steel watches are not flashy. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 632 Registered: 9-2002 |
So I guess some of you are finaly seeing the point of the thread. There are plenty of cars out there(and trucks,for that matter) that will beat a Ferrari. And for 150k cheaper to boot. No you don't have the looks,and yes I would like to be behined the wheel of a Ferrari anyday of the week over those cars if I had the choice. But you just have to watch out who and what you race. Never underestimate the car in the next lane. You could be looking at tail lights before you even shift out of second gear. Ferrari is tops in my book, but to me the 360 should have been the Stradale in the first place. Now that IS a Ferrari!! | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 15 Registered: 9-2003 |
Ralph, yeah 87 was the year Calloway got embarassed by the GNX. We lived in detroit back when they were running those tests... The GNX was stock, and the C4 it was running against had to have 247 parts changed to keep up with the GNX (and they still tried to call the vette stock *rolls eyes*) Of course in 1988 Callaway came out with that Sledge Hammer vette that had close to 900hp, so thats probably why it walked all over the GNX at that point. Anyway this video isnt the Calloway, but there are a couple passes made by the GNX... Gives you an idea of exactly how quick it was in comparison to those slug L98's. http://www.gnttype.org/avtest/gnxvsvette.ram | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 14 Registered: 9-2003 |
Ernesto, The GNX trapped 104 (So I find it very hard to beleive it traps its topspeed "barely over 100") and ran in the low 13's it did 0-60 under 5 seconds. The only thing holding it back was the fact it was electronically limited to 124mph... Had to have been one of the top 5 fastest production cars in the world at the time. What was there, the Testerosa, 959, F40, Countach... That was about all that could really beat it stock for stock. There was nothing in America that could beat it, there was deffinatly nothing in Japan that could beat it back then. Dad beat a 944 turbo with only a ram air and performance chip on the intersate, right after he got it, to 130mph. Those 944 turbos werent supposed to be slouches themselves at the time. Maybe your thinking of the pre-intercooled GN's 85 and older that could barely muster high 15's. To give you an idea of how powerful that engine was... The 1989 Turbo Trans-Am that used the Buick LC2 was the first car to ever pace the Indy 500 without modification. It did 0-60 in 4.6 seconds and was capable of pulling high 12's with drag radials, it also had a topspeed of over 160mph. Funny thing about the 89 Turbo T/A with the Buick V6, as TNN said when they were doing a tribute to the firebird last year, "The only V6 Trans-Am ever produced is also the fastest Trans-Am ever produced." GM was esspecially disgusted when it was walking over its newly developed ZR-1. | ||
| Ralph Koslin (Ralfabco)
Member Username: Ralfabco Post Number: 774 Registered: 3-2002 |
Did the Callaway TT Corvette give the GNX a run for the money ? I think they were neck and neck ? Later Callaway TT's would smoke the GNX. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1731 Registered: 2-2001 |
Guys, the GN had a top speed of barely over 100mph. I used to see them get beat all the time in street races... Ernesto | ||
| Jaime T. Ferraris are sex on wheels (Chevarri)
Junior Member Username: Chevarri Post Number: 180 Registered: 1-2003 |
For those who dont know the GN/X got axed by GM because it was better than the Corvette of the time. It beat the Corvette in accel in speed, and this was a big no no from Chevy, in essence the car was too good for its own good  The GN is also considered to be the last American Muscle Car. | ||
| billy zissis (89tr)
Member Username: 89tr Post Number: 289 Registered: 4-2001 |
If it's not about horsepower as you all say 9but I really don't believe) would you buy a new Ferrari if it was rated at 200hp? I think you'd crack up laughing. Of course a MAJOR part of it has to do with horsepower-it always has. Even now people, even Ferrari enthusiasts look down on the 80-82 308-it only has 205hp. This will not stop me from buying another 308, which I will-I still regret selling my 80 gtsi to this day. But guys come on its a Ferrari-how many of you (if you will ever admit it) really actually go into your Ferrari and say wow this is heritage and history? I don't. Of course there is beauty in their lines and I admire that very much but it was the fact that the car stood out amongst all others in a parking lot that made it special. I am not a Ferrari hater but personally I expect more from a marque like Ferrari. And the fact that i did lose to a buick 4 door regal did make me feel like crap. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 12 Registered: 9-2003 |
Well I wont argue with you andrew, ferrari would take the cake, nothing catches your eye like that bright ferrari red does. Though my Cobra runs mid 12's stock, I'd deffiantly rather be behind the wheel of a 360. But as far as the Buick is concerned anyone who knows anything about automobiles would deffinatly recognize a GNX as well. With only 547 built and it being the fastest production car to come out of North America in the 1980's. The LC2 turbo 6 in the Grand National is also what the Buick engines used in CART were based on which had a very victorious run up until 1996 when IRL and CART split. Buick won the right to use the "Grand National" name in 1981 when there regal model won the Nascar Grand National Championship. Also the Grand National is the only V6 to ever win a NHRA Prostock race (and it nearly took the championship as well) After that though NHRA decided that the only engines that were allowed to participate in an NHRA event had to be Big Block V8's (hmm I wonder why? This came into effect after 1986). Anyway, Its no ferrari, but to say there's no haritage there would not be true. | ||
| Andrew (Mrrou)
Member Username: Mrrou Post Number: 519 Registered: 3-2002 |
Guys ferrari is not about horsepower.. its about a heritage..about racing..While Horsepower is important..Ferrari's have always been able to do more with what melee horsepower they have then supercars with hundreds more horsepower..all this is, is a big ego game. If Im driving a nice ferrari and I pull along side of a new Civic Htsi or whatever with like 700horsepower..there should be a mutuel line of respect..while the civic has more horsepower, the ferrari does better with what it has..and seriously..who is going to notice a supped up honda..or even a buick at a red light..with a ferrari right next to it? no one i know andrew | ||
| Newman (Newman)
Intermediate Member Username: Newman Post Number: 1322 Registered: 12-2001 |
It gets worse...try racing against a 2003 lightning pickup in a 355 or even better, the 2005 with the 500hp 5.4 dohc supercharged engine. You could probably spank an F40 in a new F150 lightning not to mention give alot of ferraris heartburn on a track. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 11 Registered: 9-2003 |
Like I said, its an aquired taste with it being a G-body. I grew up around em though, with dad having a Grand National, so thats probably why I see more in it than others do sometimes. http://www.buickpower.com/gnx.htm http://www.fast-autos.net/buick/gnx.html (edit: Oh ironically in that first link I posted about the GNX... on the right hand side there are a few links, if you click on Buick videos and page down to the right hand corner it has those 2 Buicks Vs a Viper. Granted the GN's are modified for so that takes some of the luster out of it. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6590 Registered: 8-2002 |
Nathan, can you post a picture...? i'm curious... | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 10 Registered: 9-2003 |
Pat, yes Iv seen that video. I think those were just GN's though, none the less the GNX and plain GN (nothing plain about the Grand National) both had the LC2's, so they both sport equivlent potential. That was one hell of a video. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 9 Registered: 9-2003 |
TIMN... Now you know how the 2003 Cobra/2000 Cobra R guys feel. "Those cars are only good in the straight line." | ||
| Pat Pasqualini (Enzo)
Intermediate Member Username: Enzo Post Number: 1041 Registered: 2-2002 |
The Buick GNX ahhhh I have a video of 2 of them going at it with a Viper in the middle. Lets just say the camera had to look back at the viper. | ||
| Nathan Edward Kreegar (Nathan_kreegar)
New member Username: Nathan_kreegar Post Number: 8 Registered: 9-2003 |
DES, its an aquired taste, but I think the Buick GNX looks better than alot of exotics out there today. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
Intermediate Member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 1088 Registered: 4-2002 |
The first year of S7 production was the race cars. This year the factory is concentrating on the road cars. Production is not number limited, but is continuing until Steve Saleen thinks A) he's got something better, or B) demand dries up. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Member Username: Study Post Number: 833 Registered: 10-2001 |
Saleen S7 How many did they make? Are making? I saw one in Detroit, it looks too low to use on the street? I thought it was pretty much a track only car insted of Exotic. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
Intermediate Member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 1084 Registered: 4-2002 |
"The corvette is a failuar in the snob catagory." Any car that is made in the 10K+ units/year range fails the snob catagory. "America needs a Good exotic sports car." Saleen S7--mid engined, $350 big ones, looks the part, and has won some races. Viper is a SuperCar. Vette is a SportsCar. What America really needs is an American F1 team! | ||
| Mark (Study)
Member Username: Study Post Number: 826 Registered: 10-2001 |
Tom-"corvette is still a solid performer no matter how you look at it" The corvette is a failuar in the snob catagory. "America can't build an Exotic." I can't wait for the Ford GT America needs a Good exotic sports car. Viper almost did it. Ford might finally give us a car that is tops with Lambo and Ferrari, but made in America. Its about time | ||
| Tom RM (Tgitom)
Junior Member Username: Tgitom Post Number: 181 Registered: 8-2002 |
Billy, Im sure you know the Elise is coming stateside, so Lotus is still in the game. A car totally true to Chapmans philosophy. Plus in the press release Lotus has plans of an all New Esprit! as of now they say within a few years...Lets hope it stays that way and gets here.....back on track corvette is still a solid performer no matter how you look at it | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Intermediate Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 1355 Registered: 10-2001 |
This thread is funny. Allan , news flash for you and Top Gear , the Gallardo is a 2003 car vs 1999 cars... If it didnt beat the 360/996 TT , then Lambo would be pretty weak. | ||
| Dr. J C928 (Attitude928)
Junior Member Username: Attitude928 Post Number: 85 Registered: 11-2002 |
Unfortunately, the Buick was also more reliable. | ||
| Jaime T. Ferraris are sex on wheels (Chevarri)
Junior Member Username: Chevarri Post Number: 177 Registered: 1-2003 |
Billy actually understands something some ppl dont, he got beat by a Buick in his 355! It doesnt matter if his 355 looks stunning, and is(stunning) in a lot of categories, but he still got beat by a Buick! Jeff, did buy your 328 just as an image car? Ralph, The LS1 and LS6 is a different motor all together from previous GM/Chevy V-8s. The "standard" SBC had been used from 1955 to 1996. The LS1 was introduced in 97, and was different from the LT1, TPI(shutter), and basic 350. A notable change was the firing order, all aluminum block, and head that were revamped, fuel delivery changes, and combustion chamber changes as well. These are just some of the changes in the LS1. The LS6 however has more engineer time, but was introduced in the late 60s. What late 60s, thats not new one bit! The LS6 was reintroduced(due to heritage/name sake) in 2000 with the Corvette. Changes to the LS6 are higher red line to 6500r which is due to a higher lift/duration cam, other changes include improved block casting, "breathing crankshaft" with lower-mass balancer, reduced tolerance main bearings(which even has 6 bolt mains!) revamped pistons, new cylinder heads and casting with a 10.5:1 CR, upgraded valve springs, higher flowing manifold, and higher flowing injectors. The Vette is also a low emissioms vehicle as well, not bad for an "archaic" and "low tech" engine. If youd like to learn more about the LS6 you can go here. http://www.idavette.net/hib/ls6/page2.htm and here http://www.camaro-ss.com/ls6data.html | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 631 Registered: 9-2002 |
WAAAAHOOOOO!!! Some body else sees the light!!! Halilooooooya!!! Mark Good post | ||
| Will 575 (Willh)
Member Username: Willh Post Number: 252 Registered: 3-2003 |
I take some comfort from the 770 odd posts on the bikini thread. Apparently, Ferrari guys like to post and look at pictures of girls in bathing suits a lot more than they like to sit around arguing "mine's bigger." | ||
| billy zissis (89tr)
Member Username: 89tr Post Number: 286 Registered: 4-2001 |
Well Mark that is the problem. Enzo must be rolling in his grave- he would never want to be outdone by anyone. The name Ferrari will always sell. Put that name on a KIA and it will sell. They already have that prestige. The problem is that they are allowing themselves to be second class to all these other vehicles. A mercedes 8cylinder pushing 500 hp and torque, come on now. I expect alot better from Ferrari. And its a shame they are targeting this crowd of people cause most of those cars go to waste. Cannot count the timeless times I went to these Ferrari club shows and they are patting themselves on the back for winning 1st place when their car has less than a 1000miles and it's over 10 years old. Makes me sick to my stomach. All followers from the other automakers do not do this be it porsche, lambo lotus, NSX-whatever. Now the NSX is a completely other thread but they need to catch up as well-290hp. That is why swales have dipped next to nothing. I am so upset that Lotus is bowing out but there must be a bunch of Mickey Mouses running that department as well. Colin Chapman is really turning in his grave. Sorry for the rambling I just had to vent out had a bad day today | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Advanced Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 3413 Registered: 6-2001 |
What the hell is with everyone saying the corvette is a "striaght line" or "stoplight drag racer"?? Its not. | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 218 Registered: 2-2003 |
Mark, Sad but true. In my opinion the exotic car market is about dead there all making cookie cutter cars now. Cookie cutter cars are going to take over just imagine what cars will be like 10 years from now. Its really sad. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Member Username: Study Post Number: 824 Registered: 10-2001 |
Rolex Marketing 101 What does it mean to sell a watch that has nothing to do with telling time? Or the worlds best sports car that is not worried about being the fastest? There is nothing wrong with Ferrari. There is something wrong with You. I think Ferrari sat down sometime after the 512tr and F40 as 355's rolled off the assembly line�.. and they thought about where the company should go next? Maybe too many stories about rich dentist in Australia killing themselves with cars they could afford (F40) but not talented enough to drive at the limits, and cars like the F1 at 240mph�.. and Ferrari came to the smart conclusion that the company would package heritage and comfort and go after Doctors, Dentist, Lawyers and call this group demographic "the Rich Country-Club Gentlemen's league". Maybe the cars wouldn't be so outrageous looking or hard to climb into. The new 360, 465, 550 can get lost in a parking lot full of cars�. You can use them as a daily drive without attracting un-wanted attention to your success and wealth in life. They will haul some golf clubs. We can only make 5,000 cars a year. We have to decide who we want to target them towards. These people are not going to race a civic or Evo or Vette at a red light. This league of extraordinary gentlemen is looking for a trophy more then a race car or attention-getter. You know who comes to a web site like F-chat? Race guys, tech guys, wild exotic car lovers�. But lots of people that own Ferrari don't come here. They are not such car enthusiast. Some but not the majority. So on f-chat the Lotus, Lambo and Vette are getting some people wondering what's wrong with Ferrari. Nothing is wrong with Ferrari. They have a mission statement- with only 5000 cars a year we will go after the real Ferrari guys. We will pad the seats, and make the cars easier to get in-and-out of, we will build a luxury sports car for our luxury gentlemen customers. We can see the Ferrari Challenge race series not doing so well. We tried in the early 90's to be a race company for the race car fans�.but that didn't really work. We will stick to making racing statements like the Enzo but it is just a wift of flavor to remind people that we could DO IT if the market for Diablo like spaceship wild cars was out there. But its not the 80's anymore, and the field is getting competitive. We have to be careful and really know our true business or we could get killed real fast. Baby Lambo can have the "Boy-Racer" crowd. Viper can win the HP wars and the torque turf. If you want to go fast and light�corner like-on-rails buy a Lotus and do some cheap mods. (sad time for Esprit to go out of production). And if you are the stop-light drag-racer by a good old American Vette. Ferrari is now in the image business� and our image says "success". We are not in the speed business. "Been there done that" and have matured (just like our customer base) As I said, the problem is not Ferrari's new 460. The problem is the boy racer that comes to F-chat and wishes the 360 didn't blend in with the luxury Japanese cars in a parking lot at any up-scale office building. (relatively speaking compaired to a 512tr) | ||
| Frodo (Sparkytheclown)
New member Username: Sparkytheclown Post Number: 3 Registered: 9-2003 |
 | ||
| Corey Feldman (Meatballs_4)
New member Username: Meatballs_4 Post Number: 5 Registered: 9-2003 |
That's awesome, I think i'm sold on the Lotus, all I have to do is go test drive one now. | ||
| billy zissis (89tr)
Member Username: 89tr Post Number: 285 Registered: 4-2001 |
Corey I have a 99 sport350. All I can say is WOW. I have done a few mods and this car really flies. I used a friend's Gtech (whatever they are called) 5-60mph(because I will not do standing start launch) in 3.6 and the 1/4 in 11.9 It is an easy car to live with-very good on gas too-if you don't step on it which is hard to do-but the the hardest thing is getting in and out of it; the seating position is way too low-you are literally sitting on the ground while the door sill is up to your waist. The new interior is a major plus as it doesn't feel so confined anymore. It doesn't sound like a Ferrari though more like an old muscle car, but one push on the gas and GRAB ON. | ||
| Corey Feldman (Meatballs_4)
New member Username: Meatballs_4 Post Number: 4 Registered: 9-2003 |
Billy, what year Lotus do you have? I used to own a nsx, it was a great car but I really want to try Lotus. I'm thinking about getting a 1998 or up with the newer interior. | ||
| billy zissis (89tr)
Member Username: 89tr Post Number: 284 Registered: 4-2001 |
But DES I still lost to 4 door Buick. How depressing? And we were at it till 120mph. Wouldn't have happened in the Lotus. Good thing I wasn't driving the NSX--man I would have been torn a new a**hole. | ||
| Frodo (Sparkytheclown)
New member Username: Sparkytheclown Post Number: 2 Registered: 9-2003 |
 Paul Walker: Can we beat these stangs, bro? Allanlambo: Unleash the nos! | ||
| Jordan Witherspoon (Jordan747_400)
Intermediate Member Username: Jordan747_400 Post Number: 2014 Registered: 12-2002 |
Jeeesus you guys, who cares who is faster, slower, or better looking? They are all fast in their own right. That, and we all have our own opinions about cars...weather we build hot rods or drive classic Ferraris. There is no "faster" car or "better" marque. None is superior, just different. Its all personal opinion...which cars we like for our own individual reasons. Am I the only person that sees that? While it may be fun to debate once in a while, some of you guys are just getting out of hand. Just remember that everybody has their own opinion and just respect it as they should yours. I, myself, learned that in 1st grade. Now, that being said...Ferraris are the best | ||
| allan fiedler (Allanlambo)
Member Username: Allanlambo Post Number: 990 Registered: 6-2002 |
As for Rolex's, i happen to love them. Not all are gaudy, like my Stainless Yachtmaster which i wear daily. Great watches, and ive never lost a dime on one yet. | ||
| allan fiedler (Allanlambo)
Member Username: Allanlambo Post Number: 989 Registered: 6-2002 |
I put about 8,000 miles on my Lotus. As for Lambo trying to beat Ferrari real hard, doesnt look they have to try too much. Look pretty easy to me, the way Z06's, Vipers, Porsches, Lotus etc hand them their ass! | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Advanced Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 3412 Registered: 6-2001 |
There is actually a point to buying a ferrari. The general consensus is that its more exciting and fun to drive than a corvette. Is a rolex more fun to wear than a sieko?? Rolexes are for flaunting wealth and i think that people who buy them either have alot of money to toss around, gjust want to flaunt wealth, or both. I'll stick with my $75 casio because it never has to be wound, has a timer, a chrono with 30 lap splits AND if i lose it or its stolen, its an excuse for me to get the $300 polar heart rate monitor ive been wanting. getting back to the topic, ithink billy sums it up perfectly. Its a ferrari, it should be faster than cars that cost so much less. lambo, audi actually, seems to realize this. Also their new car, the lemans quattro has a win turbo V10 with 610hp. Do you think ferrari will have an answer to this? | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6580 Registered: 8-2002 |
Billy, NOS or no NOS, cost, performance WHATEVER - no Buick will EVER look like a Ferrari. |