Spanked a ricer....with pics!
05-16-2004, 11:42 PM
#22
TECH Senior Member
Wait a minute, is this kid trying to tell us that his Cavalier with a 3.4L V-6 is going to own Fox Body Mustangs? 
Think again kid, the 3.4L is a turd of a motor, and there are plenty of foxes well past the 11s.
Welcome to the official slowest thread on LS1tech...
Think again kid, the 3.4L is a turd of a motor, and there are plenty of foxes well past the 11s.Welcome to the official slowest thread on LS1tech...
05-17-2004, 05:52 PM
#24
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by OneMeanZ
My 1995 3.4L Camaro got beat by a piece of **** Neon! HAHAHA! I didn't think it was funny at the time though
05-17-2004, 06:23 PM
#25
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Greenville,Ohio
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by enisguy
Wait a minute, is this kid trying to tell us that his Cavalier with a 3.4L V-6 is going to own Fox Body Mustangs? Think again kid, the 3.4L is a turd of a motor, and there are plenty of foxes well past the 11s.
Welcome to the official slowest thread on LS1tech...
Think again kid, the 3.4L is a turd of a motor, and there are plenty of foxes well past the 11s.Welcome to the official slowest thread on LS1tech...
Thirdly, who said I was going to go race heavily modded stangs? I didn't.
Don't put words in my mouth.
and who you calling kid?
Last edited by Rice-Eater; 05-17-2004 at 06:36 PM.
05-17-2004, 06:38 PM
#26
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Greenville,Ohio
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by enisguy
Lmao, the day I got beat in 'vert 3.4L Camaro by a 4-banger riced out Accord was the day I decided I needed an LT1.
05-17-2004, 07:56 PM
#27
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by Rice-Eater
appearntly you haven't seen the video on kazaa of the LT1 getting its *** handed to it by a Dodge caravan with a turbo 2.2 liter.
I will give it to you though, the DOHC 3.4L on 10psi will be pretty quick in the Cavalier body. I apologize for the misunderstanding, but you definitely don't want to disrespect the LT1s.
05-17-2004, 08:04 PM
#28
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Greenville,Ohio
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by enisguy
Apparently you haven't seen various videos of LT1s running 8 and 9-second quartermiles.
I will give it to you though, the DOHC 3.4L on 10psi will be pretty quick in the Cavalier body. I apologize for the misunderstanding, but you definitely don't want to disrespect the LT1s.
I will give it to you though, the DOHC 3.4L on 10psi will be pretty quick in the Cavalier body. I apologize for the misunderstanding, but you definitely don't want to disrespect the LT1s.
I didn't mean to disrespect anyone. Just meant to point out that anythings possible. No hard feelings man
05-17-2004, 08:49 PM
#30
TECH Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cornwall, NY
Posts: 3,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by enisguy
Wait a minute, is this kid trying to tell us that his Cavalier with a 3.4L V-6 is going to own Fox Body Mustangs? Think again kid, the 3.4L is a turd of a motor, and there are plenty of foxes well past the 11s.
Think again kid, the 3.4L is a turd of a motor, and there are plenty of foxes well past the 11s.
Originally Posted by enisguy
Welcome to the official slowest thread on LS1tech...
05-17-2004, 09:10 PM
#33
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by MillaTK
well, since 78 I think it was, all the stangs have been "fox body" stangs. Even the new ones have the "fox body" I am pretty sure...
05-17-2004, 09:19 PM
#35
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by MillaTK
I dont know, I thought they were still considered fox bodies... maybe they are both? Im too lazy to look it up...
05-17-2004, 09:40 PM
#36
TECH Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cornwall, NY
Posts: 3,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok, here is one link...
http://www.fordheritage.com/mustang/media/1990.html#94
They used like the same chassis, and called it fox 4 I think. I dont know. Prolly not considered the same thing as the other fox bodies, but still fox. and yes, 79-83 were foxes as well. I guess I got confused on the use of "fox" in the newer cars?
http://www.fordheritage.com/mustang/media/1990.html#94
They used like the same chassis, and called it fox 4 I think. I dont know. Prolly not considered the same thing as the other fox bodies, but still fox. and yes, 79-83 were foxes as well. I guess I got confused on the use of "fox" in the newer cars?
05-18-2004, 10:47 AM
#39
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brandon, FL
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My last car was a 93 cavalier z24 with the 3.1. While it wasnt fast, it was quick enough to lay the smack down on the local rice. With just a K&N filter, I ran 16.2 @ 83 in a 3 speed auto.
But yeah, my TA is a HUGE step up from the cavy
But yeah, my TA is a HUGE step up from the cavy
