CutlassRacer

Man whats up with that AR built LT1 Camaro in the new CHP??? The times are not impressive at all.

11.3:1 Compression, 4200 Converter, 396 CID, ROLLER CAM. Low 12s on the motor, mid 10s with a 200 shot!!!! COME ON!!

We had a 95 Bird for a shop car that would almost run those motor numbers with STOCK CAM!!

CutlassRacer

Aww come on, I know at least one other person thinks this is a slow car <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

mattf2

I'm not impressed w/ alot of magazine cars.

GeorgeC

396cid stroker LT1 with a big converter that only runs low 12's? That thing is either a turd or weighs 4500lbs. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

what a TURD!!!

75% of magazine 4th-gens I see do not impress me. They are either slow for their list of mods, or have no track times. Dyno-queen magazine cars really do not impress me.

I'd rather have my car than most of the ones I've seen.

-Tony

INURDRMZ

Iam pretty impressed with the 4th gen on the cover of the May issue of GMHTP. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
I have my reasons <img border="0" alt="[pimp]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_pimp.gif" />

Stenod

iTrader: (1)

I have seen this car run and it has WAY more potential than what the magazine says, It only made 2 nitrous passes! It was a for sure 9 second car! Not to mention, it is one of the cleanest i have seen.

Expect to see this car again in CHP, but next time i can guarantee it's numbers will be FAR more impressive for a 3700lbs car!!

Stenod

<small>[ February 11, 2003, 08:15 PM: Message edited by: BLACK02SS ]</small>

Villain281H

iTrader: (5)

Hell I'd be embarassed if my car ran those #s without juice with all that work done to it! And I'm in the high 11s with less cubes compression, gear, convertor, and a solid non-roller cam <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

Nick D'Agostino

Ok lets clear the air. Firstly I am the owner of that car. It ran 10.66@128mph at a 10.5:1 Air/Fuel ratio, pretty fat if you ask me.

It didn't weigh 4500lbs, but it did weigh 3900lbs. Full interior, 230lb driver, and a cage will do that.

I work about 60 hours a week, so I never really got the car sorted out to its full potential. I'm certain that it could have run high 9's without any trouble, but I never got it back out to the track.

I shot the car for the magazine for two reasons. Firstly it is a very clean car, and secondly it performs far better than the average enthusiast. At no point did anyone state that it was the baddest car in the land, nor was it stated that you have to have the quickest car to get in a magazine.

Not all magazine cars are ***** out fast, but on the same token not all cars that are ***** out fast are magazine worthy. I have seen a lot of people very proud of their 9 and 10 second cars, that are down right disgusting inside.

My only reason for posting is to defend my car, and to say that it does deserve a spot in print. As a magazine photographer, I have seen cars that are much slower or not nearly as clean make print. So I hardly think that my car deserves to be put down here. All though I did put it in a magazine, so I suppose this was to be expected.

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

Did it really only run 10.66 @ 128 with a 396ci solid roller and a 200 shot? I can understand the heavy raceweight, but a 200 shot?

I'm at 3626 lbs raceweight and ran 10.67 @ 129 on motor alone, and I can't imagine my engine making similar power with a solid roller 396ci with a 200 shot.

Oh, and my car IS magazine worthy <img border="0" alt="[pimp]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_pimp.gif" />

Please don't turn out like Hunkins and put a photo of your car on every other page ~cough~ ~Thunderchicken~ ~cough~ <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

Tony

Toxic Texan

Very subtle Tony. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

GeorgeC

I've cleaned up some of my wiring and hack job stuff in my engine compartment for this year...

I'm hoping to get a magazine feature possibly, but I'll need to repaint my beat up hood first. I guess I should get started on that. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

I think I can get my car magazine quality with a little more work.

Silvr98z28

Boy, you guys are brutal.
A fellow member gets in a magazine your supposed to say congratulations.
Nick, don't mind these guys they dont have much etiquette and if you saw the way most of them live you would see that their FAST rat boxes match the rat boxes that they live in.
BTW I thought it was a nice spread.

Coach 02 A3 Z/28

iTrader: (10)

Congrats Nick. <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />

Nice Hot Rod. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" />

Coach

JS

iTrader: (4)

I agree,Give the guy a chance..
My "Hawk From Hell" April 99 High Perf. Pontiac ran 10.80's@126 at a race weight of 3883lbs.I drove the car to the SS Camaro/Impalooza in Atlanta,Firehawk meet in Ohio,T/A Nats all back in 98...

Chris P. was there with some babe with BIG HOOTERS,She was a hottie <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

Anywho it had A/C,PS,FULL interior and every option u could get for the car including the road race susp. option.

Was it the quickest or fastest LT1?
No but I loved it and it was a street car...

IMHO my setup was petty unique for 1997
Jay Fisher built me a 383 w/DFI and a 2 stage 150 shot tuned by Dale Cherry.It would inject 75 off the line and then turn on the extra 75 in 2nd gear for the whole 150.

I got a best of 10.59@128 out of the car in -1500 DA's and a 200 shot,then sold it like a dope for a woman <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />

Nick take your time and keep plugging away.
Your setup is real impressive...

JS

<small>[ February 12, 2003, 10:27 AM: Message edited by: JS ]</small>

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

Nice spread!!!

I have read Nick's post about his NA performance over at www.camaroz28.com and I know he has not been happy about it since Daren W's setup goes like flat 11's with the same stuff from the same shop.

So don't dog the owner of the car alrighty?

Black Sunshine/ 00SS

iTrader: (1)

Nick, congrats on the layout. The car looks GREAT!! I have seen the car in person, and it is very clean. Any 10 sec street car is impressive to me.

I got an idea for one of your future project layouts, how about a daily driven 9 sec car? Looks sweet too. <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />

Nick D'Agostino

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Nine Ball:
<strong> Did it really only run 10.66 @ 128 with a 396ci solid roller and a 200 shot? I can understand the heavy raceweight, but a 200 shot?

</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is a hydraulic roller cam, and it is only a 562/562, 234/242, 110 lobe sep cam. Not exactly an aggressive monster of a cam there.

The car was intended to be a mid 10 street car and it was just that. Nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks for all of the other compliments guys

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

I just got the magazine, your car looks great!!!

Is that a BMR decal on the car?

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

I haven't seen the car, but I'm sure it looks excellent. And, don't get me wrong, a 10-second anything is a fast car. I was just questioning that if a full 200 shot was really used to run those times. I could see a 150 shot possibly, but I'd think a 200 shot would run much quicker. But, I'm sure there might be a ton of other variables that we aren't considering here.

congrats on owning a 10-second clean F-body. I'll just remain confused about the potential vs the ET and leave it at that.

-Tony <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />