Notices
Automotive Discussion Automotive talk that is not technical can be posted here. Posts must address the general population.

S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

Thread Tools
 
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 08:44 AM
  #101  
01NFRs2k's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
01NFRs2k has disabled reputation
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

I love how people can make general statements like modded srt-4>modded s2k... if you want a car with a cheap interior, looks like ass, fwd, get an srt-4... there's a lot more to a car than straight-line power which is about the only thing an srt-4 is good for
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 10:22 AM
  #102  
Nic's Avatar
Nic
Patron
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,706
Likes: 0
From: Chesterfield
Nic Nic Nic Nic Nic Nic Nic Nic Nic Nic Nic
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

Originally Posted by BLACKTURBOS2K
Thats funny But I bet its not funny when a stock s2k beats you
Originally Posted by Flite
I've beat many a Mustang in my S2000 and I think the Mustang made quite a bit more torque than the S, like twice as much at least....just a thought.
Please, oh PLEASE DO, show me ANY stock S2000 in the country that has put up better 1/4 mile numbers than my STOCK 2002 Mustang GT.
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 10:30 AM
  #103  
Bandit's Avatar
Who's this guy?
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,034
Likes: 0
From: Chesapeake
Bandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond reputeBandit has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

you guys are funny...
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 11:32 AM
  #104  
Ws64u2try's Avatar
Registered Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
From: Richmond
Ws64u2try has disabled reputation
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

I ran 12.35 with 310 hp.. and 307 lb/ft of torque
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 11:33 AM
  #105  
Mr.2's Avatar
i probably hate you
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,559
Likes: 0
From: Denzel, WA
Mr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these partsMr.2 is infamous around these parts
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

my penis is bigger than all of yours.
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 11:48 AM
  #106  
jester's Avatar
sexy party!
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,093
Likes: 0
From: 757
jester jester jester jester jester jester jester jester jester jester jester
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

Originally Posted by Jason300zxTT
Now he may be a cocky fucker on a net but he has EVERY right to be. He has the sickest S2K around the NoVA area possibly one of the sickest in the US. Some respect should be giving to him considering he did everything to his car except tuning on his own.
I dunno, I think his car is nice and thats cool that he built it up and everything. But honestly, I really don't care much for people acting like an elitist asshole just because of what they have. I think myself and many others would have a lot more respect if he was slightly more humble instead of trying to think he's better than everyone becuase of a car. In my eyes, having a turbo S2K isn't an excuse to be a cocky fucker, sorry. But that's just me.
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 12:08 PM
  #107  
leolo007's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 0
From: Philly
leolo007 leolo007 leolo007 leolo007 leolo007 leolo007 leolo007 leolo007 leolo007
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

Originally Posted by jester
I dunno, I think his car is nice and thats cool that he built it up and everything. But honestly, I really don't care much for people acting like an elitist asshole just because of what they have. I think myself and many others would have a lot more respect if he was slightly more humble instead of trying to think he's better than everyone becuase of a car. In my eyes, having a turbo S2K isn't an excuse to be a cocky fucker, sorry. But that's just me.


couldnt have said it better.
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 12:40 PM
  #108  
gyl's Avatar
gyl
Registered Member
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
From: norfolk
gyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these partsgyl is infamous around these parts
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

Originally Posted by Jason300zxTT
Sorry thats right i forget V8's are the sickest thing and anything with less displacement dosent compare. Look dick head. He has 4 less clyd then you and ALOT less weight. Get your head out of the v8 gods ass and admit your wrong. His s2k makes over 430 to the wheels that means he has a 500hp S2K flywheel. Thats like your fucking v8's making 1000 or 900whp. same concept. He is making ALOT of power for a 4 clyd enough to walk your Z06's oh wait thats prob to modern for you. Its enough power to walk your 500hp 1967-75 muscle cars. Now eat a dick and give credit where credit is due.

umm wrong...a 900-1000 hp v8 run's well into the 8's....that is 6-5 seconds faster than stock...a huge gain.so you tell me how a 450-500 hp s2000 only getting a gain of 2 seconds over stock is the same?how about learn something before you post.and if you wanna talk about what i drive....i have 2 stangs...one is a extremely high hp car.that's how i know your little comparison doesn't work here bud.
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 01:00 PM
  #109  
Flite's Avatar
HHIC
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 19,087
Likes: 0
Flite Flite Flite Flite Flite Flite Flite Flite Flite Flite Flite
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

Originally Posted by Digger70chall
modded SRT-4 >>>> modded s2k
And with that statement you've lost all credibility. Go drive a modded SRT4, and then drive a STOCK S2000. Drive them like real cars too. Hit the brakes, have some fun in the rain, put them through some autoX times....tell me which one is more fun and which one is a better car. I have...

Originally Posted by Nic
Please, oh PLEASE DO, show me ANY stock S2000 in the country that has put up better 1/4 mile numbers than my STOCK 2002 Mustang GT.
If you'll read the rest of my posts you'll see where I said "just as every stock S2000 isn't a slow high 14 second car...every stock Mustang GT is NOT a mid 13 second car. I've seen plenty...in fact the vast majority of stock GTs run low 14s...even mid 14. I ran 14 flat and a best of 13.87. That will beat ALMOST every stock mustang GT I've ever seen.


Also, don't think that his S2000 is the fastest one around...there are a few in the 600hp range and I know of at least one thats in the 700 range. Will it run 6s? nope. Will it be incredibly fun to drive? Yep....what else matters? It's all about what you consider fun, S2000s are one of the funnest cars that money can buy. Thats the bottom line.

(on a side note) that guy is kind of arrogant and might have gotten a warmer welcome if he was a little more humble, I'm not saying I like the guy....just his car.
Old Nov 2, 2004 | 01:14 PM
  #110  
Woodrow's Avatar
Slow as Shit
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,172
Likes: 0
From: Short Pump
Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow Woodrow
Default Re: S2K beat in hp/liter production engine = SSC AERO

Originally Posted by Flite
If you'll read the rest of my posts you'll see where I said "just as every stock S2000 isn't a slow high 14 second car...every stock Mustang GT is NOT a mid 13 second car. I've seen plenty...in fact the vast majority of stock GTs run low 14s...even mid 14. I ran 14 flat and a best of 13.87. That will beat ALMOST every stock mustang GT I've ever seen.
Maybe you should learn to read the entire thread. Nic wasn't talking directly to you. He was talking about this comment.
Thats funny But I bet its not funny when a stock s2k beats you
he just used your comment about torque as well.

Not to mention a vast majority of them DO run 13's stock. Hate to break it to ya, but the average is 13.7-14.1 You will see a few mid 14's out of the autos. Then again I have also seen 14.2's in an auto as well.

As for the whole 436 whp running 11.9 w/ 2800 pounds, is really pathetic. There have been 3300 pound mustangs with less than 320 rwhp running 11.5's and Many other heavier cars running those times with less hp. He may be proud of his car and he should be. Lets not mistake this as him being God because that time,hp,weight excludes him from being anywhere close to that.



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:37 PM.