Be patient with me (Noob)

[ncmalko1]

I just bought the recent Road and Track and according to them, 85% of cars made today are faster then a stock GN. Is this because of technology or are GN's not really fast? They rated cars with a zero to sixty column. I am of the understanding that stock GN's did a 5.7 (0 to 60). That's slower then an Acura TL, any Audi made, any BMW made, a freaking Chevy Malibu, any Mustang made, similar to a damn Honda Accord, any Infiniti, any Lexus, a Nissan Altima, a damn Saturn Sky, a Subaru Impreza.

EXPLAIN

 

[dgoodhue]

I just bought the recent Road and Track and according to them, 85% of cars made today are faster then a stock GN. Is this because of technology or are GN's not really fast? They rated cars with a zero to sixty column. I am of the understanding that stock GN's did a 5.7 (0 to 60).

Its definately not 85% of cars made today, but it might be 85% of the car R&T tests. IMO 1/4 is a better judge of speed, but a stock GN isn't going to fare that well either in today vehicles.

GN ran low 14's, some broke into the high 13's. In 1986 & 1987, the only cars running 13's were exotics. Stock Corvette were running low 14's. As you noted quicker V6 Sedan can run low 14's. So yes technology has helped todays vehicles.

The real magic about GN's is they way respond to mods. For minimal money one can get them to run 12's with simple mods with out touching the turbo. In the 80's their was no production car that you could buy that could do that. GN weren't that expensive either with sticker price starting at 15K, in today dollars that is probably 25-27k. Throw on bigger turbo, and few other supporting mods and you have have a car that run 11's. They may not be top dog in terms of responding to mods, but turbo regals still fair pretty well when modded when compared to today vehicles.

 

[sixgun86gn]

You're F'n kidding right?

The last GN was made over 20 years ago....pull your head out. You can't possibly be that stupid to think a 20 yr old car is going to remain the fastest stock car on the planet.

You want a car thats faster than a stock GN,then go buy a gay ass Honda if you want.

 

[VictoryTrans86]

I agree w/ the above statement.....dude, its a friggin 20+ year old car. OF COURSE cars now will be faster. If not, technology advancement has hit a serious plateau. You can't compare ANY 2008 car w/ ANY 80's car. A more accurate comparison would be a 1987 BMW or Audi or Mustang or Honda or any of that crap. Most V6's now make more power than V8 "musclecars" in the 80's. I understand you don't know much by the "noob" moniker, but this has to be one of the most asinine, idiotic things I've read in my life...just sayin....

 

[ncmalko1]

Jesus, relax dude. All I'm saying is that, comparatively, GN's aren't really that fast now-a-days. I mean if a 2008 Nissan Altima is doing 5.7, technology has exploded. I said be patient. I just didn't realize.

 

[VictoryTrans86]

lol...didn't mean to come off harsh. It's just a stupid question, and of course we'll take offense to it...your on TB.com

Ha, I just realized your an Eagles fan. Giants fan here man....now I hate you even more What's the over/under on McNabb being on IR by week 6??

 

[ncmalko1]

Chill VictoryTrans. My point was I didn't realize that a freakin p.o.s. nissan Altima would give me work. I just wasn't up to date on 2008 zero to sixty times.

I'm sure there is a topic I could speak of that you know little about. Should I insinuate how stupid you are?

 

[ncmalko1]

You know I never really hated Giants fans. I spend all my time hating Dallas. There's something we have in common. It is too bad about McNabb. When he is healthy he is a top 5 QB in the NFL. Congrats on that SB too!

 

[VictoryTrans86]

I didn't say you were stupid, just your question. And as I recall everyone that responded to you had a similar opinion as me. So if your butt hurt about it, pull out your little notepad and write up some trivia questions for us....

 

[VictoryTrans86]

lol...no hard feelings man. I'm just ribbin ya a little bit. McNabb WAS a top 5 QB when healthy, circa 2004 IMO. But thats for another time and another thread. Thanks about the SB man....its a great feeling when 30 other teams are rooting for you

 

[1BADWE4T]

Don't forget that those 0-60 times back in '87 were on those puny stock tires, traction was a problem.

 

[SS_Sean]

1986-87 was a long time ago, and cars have come a long way. It's an apples to oranges comparison. For what they were, they were the best...

 

[notacarlo]

"work"

I don't think you will have a problem with any of the cars you listed. We are geared to put power down all the way through the throttle. Look where the new cars make power and compare the TORQUE.

The cars tested in the magazines are notorious for being delivered to them "stripped"....even the GN back in the day. Go get an altima and put your foot down at 55, then do it in a GN. All questions will be answered.

 

[notacarlo]

The WRX and EVO are a different story as they are performance cars. The Honda accord is not a performance car. Even the Cobalt is a nasty little car. Some of these new vehicles are the "new" GN of the day. Ours just has HERITAGE.

 

[usetaboost]

AND STYLE PLUS they just look cool

 

[turbofish38]

In context you could always put together a list of cars that the GN could beat back in 1987. Lots of Muscle Cars on that list IIRC. Does that mean a Acura TL is better than a 440-6 Pack or LS6 Chevelle? :tongue:

 

[Just a Six??]

In context you could always put together a list of cars that the GN could beat back in 1987. Lots of Muscle Cars on that list IIRC. Does that mean a Acura TL is better than a 440-6 Pack or LS6 Chevelle? :tongue:

Exactly!! I'll take the SLOW AZZED Cuda over the Evo Anyday!!!

 

[BLACK6PACK]

There's been a lot of advancement in the last 10 years. Let alone 20. My brother's LT1 camaro could barely run 14.0 100% stock, and its a 1997 car. The new v6 slated for the camaro is supposed to put out 300 hp. The caddy v6 is rated at over 275 hp. Actually a lot of the latest technology in the last 3-5 years has seen the greatest advancement ie direct injection, vvt etc.

 

[whitehot1]

If i were the driver of a new honda i wouldn't count on a 86 or 87 GN i ran up against on the street being stock and maybe slower. :tongue:

 

[notacarlo]

yeah....what is this "stock" thing everyone keeps talking about?