Camaro Chief Engineer on the LSA ZL1 vs 2013 5.8L GT500
02-05-2012, 12:37 PM
#181
BOSS APPROVED!
02-05-2012, 01:50 PM
#183
I know LOL, so many people make that same damn mistake and I just don't get how it happens. I'd understand it more if the letters were right next to each other on the keyboard but they're not.
It is spelled exactly how it sounds too LOL.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
It is spelled exactly how it sounds too LOL.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Last edited by LS1LT1; 02-06-2012 at 01:55 AM.
02-06-2012, 01:57 AM
#188
02-06-2012, 05:17 PM
#190
TECH Senior Member
i know what i've beaten, and what i've lost to. what i also know, is that my 83 stang stock never lost to a stock camaro of that era. my 89 gt stock never lost to a camaro of that era stock. once modified, neither of them lost to similarily modified camaros.
the difference between people like me, and a lot of you younger guys that think that the 90's camaros are all the ****, is that i've been there and done it.
i have an open enough mind to accept when there's a better car out there(the vette for example),
02-06-2012, 07:00 PM
#191
TECH Resident
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dude just stop right there. You came here to troll and start ****, thats all your posts are.
Cool story bro. Why are you talking about 15-16 second cars from the 80s?
Im pretty sure(hope) no one on here thinks that "90s Camaros" are "the ****". We are owners/fans of them because of the bang for the buck value.
Pretty much all of your posts show otherwise... If a Mustang loses, then some kind of excuses are brought up.
Cool story bro. Why are you talking about 15-16 second cars from the 80s?
Im pretty sure(hope) no one on here thinks that "90s Camaros" are "the ****". We are owners/fans of them because of the bang for the buck value.
Pretty much all of your posts show otherwise... If a Mustang loses, then some kind of excuses are brought up.
as for mustang losing excuses? not really. but if that's what you wanna think, good on ya.
02-08-2012, 05:05 PM
#192
The late '60s Camaro big blocks never beat any of the Mustang offerings (and sometimes vice versa as well of course)?
The '67/'68 Z28s were faster than any small block Mustang up until that point (things changed a bit for 1969 (Boss 302, Mach 1 351 etc.) of course).
The 1974 Trans Am SD455 didn't beat the 1974 Mustang (Pinto?) IIs?
The 1978 Camaro Z28 didn't own the 1978 Mustang?
I love Camaros/Firebirds AND Mustangs but no, the '90s were NOT the first time that this happened.
02-08-2012, 07:07 PM
#194
TECH Resident
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you sure?
The late '60s Camaro big blocks never beat any of the Mustang offerings (and sometimes vice versa as well of course)?
The '67/'68 Z28s were faster than any small block Mustang up until that point (things changed a bit for 1969 (Boss 302, Mach 1 351 etc.) of course).
The 1974 Trans Am SD455 didn't beat the 1974 Mustang (Pinto?) IIs?
The 1978 Camaro Z28 didn't own the 1978 Mustang?
I love Camaros/Firebirds AND Mustangs but no, the '90s were NOT the first time that this happened.
The late '60s Camaro big blocks never beat any of the Mustang offerings (and sometimes vice versa as well of course)?
The '67/'68 Z28s were faster than any small block Mustang up until that point (things changed a bit for 1969 (Boss 302, Mach 1 351 etc.) of course).
The 1974 Trans Am SD455 didn't beat the 1974 Mustang (Pinto?) IIs?
The 1978 Camaro Z28 didn't own the 1978 Mustang?
I love Camaros/Firebirds AND Mustangs but no, the '90s were NOT the first time that this happened.
the only way a 60's camaro beat a 60's mustang was to go to a bigger engine. then ford'd put something bigger in the mustang, and be right on top again.
in the 70's example you give, a sd firebird is in no way a camaro. it was still powered by a true torquemonster back then. 70's pinto-stangs were agonizingly slow, as were the camaros.
are you talking the 350 vs a 4 or 6 cylinder? or the 302? or the 305 vs one of them? the 305 that was rated at a whopping 145hp. at the flywheel. but then the 302 only had 139.
oh yea......also note what irun11s said.
