What is the frontal area and cd of the CTS-V and GTO? if you can't answer that you probably shouldn't be calling them boats.... People ASSUME things incorrectly quite often. Audi has a sedan that is MORE aero than a C5 coupe. Most people from looking at it would never figure that to be the case.

I don't think this guy is looking for a car that will tdo 200mph all day everyday. Let's be serious who the **** can ever do that on a highway in the US? He's probably wanting something for quick blasts from 55-120 or so. That's really all that can be done without winding up dead or in jail all the time.

The original poster should CLARIFY what he wants.

If what I figure the posters wants is correct I'll stand by what I said originally. Any gen III/IV powered CAR or an 03/04 Cobra would be great. If you get a GENIII/IV powered car then get your inches up and/or put a POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT BLOWER on it. It will feel like a big block and go like hell on the highway.

BTW: I checked on Viper insurance when I was 24. AAA and State Farm both wanted around $4,500 per year for a first gen GTS coupe.

 

If you want a built car the cheapest way to get into one is buy one that is already done up. I agree with the reg. C5 or Z06 with a forged 346 and a poweradder would be a 700hp beast.

 

[QUOTE=Cheatin' Chad]What is the frontal area and cd of the CTS-V and GTO? if you can't answer that you probably shouldn't be calling them boats.... People ASSUME things incorrectly quite often. Audi has a sedan that is MORE aero than a C5 coupe. Most people from looking at it would never figure that to be the case.

QUOTE]


CHAD, im not gonna sit down and waste my time at work abliging your demands that in order for me to call a cts v or a gto a boat that i must give you the frontal area and cd of both vehicals....let me simplify it for you leave the physics out for a second and use this thing called common sense the "frontal area" as you like to say on a ctsv is greater than (>) that of the c5...just by looking at that you can clearly see. now let me bring the phsyics back and throw one your way...how bout you give me the coefficient of drag created by that of the ctsv doing a constant velocity of 130 vs. that of the coefficient of drag at the same given velocity only using the c5....then not only that but you might want to consider the direction patterns of wind resistance and down force generated at the point of acceleration until both cars become unstable due to the decreasing of the coefficient of friction which is at the point where that equals 0 you lose control of the car. i garentee you the ctsv not only doesnt produce as much down force and also has a great frontal area causing a wind dam but it also becomes unstable at a given velocity faster then that of the c5. if you need the formuals plz pm me and i will aquire them in my spare time for you to work with

 

[QUOTE=YellowMonster87]

 

Your reply is ignorant at best.An attempt at misdirection is a clear sign of a mentally frustrated opponent.You cannot accurately use common sense in matters of science as "common sense" ,as you put it, is often incorrect.

EXAMPLE: If you apply Lye (Sodium hydroxide:NaOH) to a moist part of your skin a chemical burn will occur. The "common sense" approach would be to wash it off with something cool and soothing like water. Water will make this chemical burn worse not better.It would be contrary to "common sense" to pour something acidic in nature ,such as Vinegar, to stop this burn but that IS the best course of action.

You could have simply answered my question to prove your point. You did not/could not. Therefore your information is garbage.

Present your case with facts instead of baseless trash and people will gladly consider your opinions. Just spout off at the mouth or keyboard with no information to back up your claims and people will think you a simp.

It's up to you as to how you are perceived.

If you wish to continue arguing with me as to whether you are an idiot or not please take it to PM as it will clutter this already straying thread.

Thanks!

[QUOTE=ls1charged]
The oft used term of an ignorant follower....

Thinking that someone has accomplished something great when all they did was steer around an honest question is in my opinion the sign of a truly weak mind. Hope that works out for you....

 

you can get a 2001 z-28 with less than 50,000 miles for about $16,000....and if your budget is around $40,000 that leaves you with $24,000 for mods!!!! you can build a supra slaying beast with that amount and just think all the money you would be saving on your car insurance versus buying a vette/viper

 

I just sold my 98 z28 for $10K with 58K miles on the clock so you can find ls1's pretty cheap out there nowadays.

 

[QUOTE=Cheatin' Chad]Your reply is ignorant at best.An attempt at misdirection is a clear sign of a mentally frustrated opponent.You cannot accurately use common sense in matters of science as "common sense" ,as you put it, is often incorrect.

EXAMPLE: If you apply Lye (Sodium hydroxide:NaOH) to a moist part of your skin a chemical burn will occur. The "common sense" approach would be to wash it off with something cool and soothing like water. Water will make this chemical burn worse not better.It would be contrary to "common sense" to pour something acidic in nature ,such as Vinegar, to stop this burn but that IS the best course of action.

You could have simply answered my question to prove your point. You did not/could not. Therefore your information is garbage.

Present your case with facts instead of baseless trash and people will gladly consider your opinions. Just spout off at the mouth or keyboard with no information to back up your claims and people will think you a simp.

It's up to you as to how you are perceived.

If you wish to continue arguing with me as to whether you are an idiot or not please take it to PM as it will clutter this already straying thread.

Thanks!


hahaha couldnt resist!

 

i just have one thought about this whole thread:

he wants a "highway queen" - something with power all over that's great for high speed runs.

so the question is, if he wanted something for the track, would he want a "drag queen"?

just a thought. "i want a drag QUEEN" would have been a interesting thread title.

 

I want to interject in the pissing match about drag. This was of interest to me...

Cd of some cars (and a brick):
Brick 2.1
H2 .56
2006 Z06 .34
LT1 Camaro .34
Caprice Classic .34
CTS-V .31
2006 C5 .29

Cd doesn't factor in frontal area, that is the CdA, which I didn't look up.

But what matters at speed is stability which is a matter of front and rear lift. I don't have these numbers for the cars above. I do have some numbers. The vehicles I saw on the list that generated the most rear downforce were a Dodge powerwagon and a 911 Carrera.

Regardless there is no reason to be driving that fast on the highway.

Brian

 

leave it to you Choco

 

lol u wanna intern with me? you'll find your mind wandering into the brink of lunacy quite a bit. if you've noticed, my posts are usually more logical at night.

it's this daytime boredom and repitition...i'm going insane.

still though, i thought it was a good observation

 

haha, it was a good observation

 

Im not going to argue the whol aero-dynamics issue about the ctsv, but I just cant see getting one if your looking for a highway queen. You can get a C5 for cheaper than the ctsv and its much lighter, so the ctsv shouldnt be an option unless he wants to spend more money on a car thats as fast as a stock C5.

 

i was basically trying to break up the arguing with a crappy joke...

did i succeed?

 

haha, it was good timing. LS1techers all need to meet up somewhere and have a beer

 

This sounds like something that you'd be interested in

https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...8&page=1&pp=20

 

oh i'm game...next year when i'm old enough to legally drink at a bar

unless it's a house party

 

holy $^!* that car is AWESOME. like, nasty awesome. man, it's times like that i wish i had a manual. damn combination of a stop-and-go commute and laziness...

now THAT's a highway queen...and a drag queen

 

i thought you sold the 3.4l to get a m6??