Foxy
Posts: 17189
Score: 2012
Joined: 3/23/2005
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Kingston UK, but living in Athens, GREECE
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: The Hedgehog
quote:
ORIGINAL: Foxy
A 2.0 NA ricer with induction kit, manifold, decat, 70mm system and a program (300whp NA at 8000rpm) would take the SS easily and be more reliable. What's more it would still do 25mpg, how's the camaro SS on fuel? I admit it wouldn't look as good (subjective, but the Camaro is a good looking car, no doubt) and it wouldn't make such a nice noise either, but 410hp (no doubt at the fly as well, probably only making 340rwhp) from a 6.2l is shameful. The only thing that saves it is that a brooklyn hobo can afford to own one. Muscle cars...great to look at, but what a waste of fuel.
Comparing stock to modded? How about the same mods on the Camaro. Turbo modded car to N/A being more reliable, LOL.
Talking about gas mileage on performance cars just SHOULDN'T be done, I am sure LB's Porsche GT3 isn't the best on gas (no offense LB, just trying to think of anyone on the boards with a performance orientated vehicle), the Prius and VW TDI's are awesome on gas, I would recommend those.
What stats are you looking at for the Camaro, the older ones? I thought the newer ones had around 550 HP.
Around here the ricers are way way cheaper than the used Camaros, the Camaros don't run very cheap around here, but maybe it's location.
Camaro SS is available with 350, 370 and 410hp from what I can tell by looking, but I may be wrong. The ZL1 has 570 I think.
Yes, comparing stock to modded, and I haven't added a turbo, NA against NA. Put the same mods on the Camaro, it would still be behind, too much weight compared to the gains offered by bolt ons without forced induction, 10hp is a 4% difference to me, its a 2% difference to the camaro). If you start talking forced induction, then that's another story. The point being, and I'll say it again, 410hp from a 6l is pretty poor. They could have put a turbo on a 3l v6 and got a much better result (for example), but yes, I realise it wouldn't then be a v8 muscle car. I'm just thinking of the wasted resources to be honest.
I may have exaggerated how cheap they are, but they are a lot of car for the money, no doubt.
Bottom line, no matter what factoids I've got wrong, I will never be convinced that 6l engines is a better way to go than high output small 2l 4 bangers.
I bet LB's car gets better gas mileage in town than the Camaro SS. You say it shouldn't be talked about because american performance cars are all 8l+. This is not necessary, is my whole point, so fuel economy is absolutely relevant when it's like DOUBLE for the same performance!!
Basically, I have two words for you... Lotus and Exige, the absolute polar opposite of a muscle car.
_____________________________
So, you got a smartphone. You now have virtually unlimited access to the collective acquired knowledge of the entire human race in the palm of your hand, and you use it to... play Angry Birds while sitting on the toilet. Way to go!
Hide Signatures
|
Search This Thread
Printable Version
All Forums >> RC Cars, Buggies, Trucks, Tanks and more >> Off Topic Forum - Cars, Trucks, Buggies and more >> RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230 
RE: Hyundai vs. Mercedes C230 - 
One day I will own a decent car that some people actually have positive feedback about. But with 120k miles on it and still running like a champ, I've only replaced one CV axle since I've owned it from 57k miles. Good in my book.
).
