My S4 FC M/T N/A VS 98 Lexus SC300 A/T N/A
05-08-09, 02:50 PM
#26
Insane Burning Diarrhea
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Noo Yawk City / San Diego
Posts: 1,796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Realist is a better term. I ride in a stock GSL SE. My car is slow as ***** but it's fun as hell. Yes, I new civic si or a scion tc would burn it. But it's a fun car.
The guy you're trying to defend got butthurt when his car got called slow and posted some **** about disrespecting the rx7. A N/a rx7 is slow but it'll last forever pending you don't wreck it while doing something stupid.
The guy you're trying to defend got butthurt when his car got called slow and posted some **** about disrespecting the rx7. A N/a rx7 is slow but it'll last forever pending you don't wreck it while doing something stupid.
05-08-09, 10:06 PM
#27
Actin Like I'm Drunk
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Charleston, South Carolina
Posts: 1,663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dude, A stock N/a FC will run 16's in the quarter mile
A stock GSL SE is faster and that car wasn't all that fast. here.
I'll just name some random cars
(taken from another forum)
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...d.php?t=231495
A stock GSL SE is faster and that car wasn't all that fast. here.
I'll just name some random cars
(taken from another forum)
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...d.php?t=231495
1986 Mazda RX-7 GXL 8.5 16.5
1987 Mazda RX-7 Turbo 6.6 15.2
1988 Mazda RX-7 Conv. 9.7 17.5
1989 Mazda RX-7 GTU 8.5 16.5
1989 Mazda RX-7 Turbo 6.7 15.1
1990 Mazda RX-7 GTU 8.6 16.7
1991 Mazda RX-7 Conv. 8.8 16.7
1990 Isuzu Impulse 9.2 16.8
1986 Honda CRX Si 8.7 16.7
1988 Honda CRX Si 8.2 16.4
1991 Honda CRX Si 8.7 16.5
1989 Ford Taurus SHO 6.6 15.2
1988 Ford Probe GT 7.3 15.6
1990 Ford Probe GT 7.6 16.0
1984 Ford Mustang SVO 7.9 15.8
1985 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 14.9 (C&D, Jan. 85)
1987 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 14.4 (Automobile, April 87)
1988 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 15.0 (MT Jan '88)
1989 Ford Mustang GT 5.0l Manual 6.2 14.8 (MT Jan '89)
1990 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 6.4 14.9
1987 Chrysler LeBaron 8.8 16.8
1989 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS 7.2 15.8
1971 Datsun 240Z N/A 17.1
1972 Datsun 240Z 9.0 16.3
1974 Datsun 260Z 9.9 16.7
1983 Datsun 280ZX 9.4 16.9
1987 Mazda RX-7 Turbo 6.6 15.2
1988 Mazda RX-7 Conv. 9.7 17.5
1989 Mazda RX-7 GTU 8.5 16.5
1989 Mazda RX-7 Turbo 6.7 15.1
1990 Mazda RX-7 GTU 8.6 16.7
1991 Mazda RX-7 Conv. 8.8 16.7
1990 Isuzu Impulse 9.2 16.8
1986 Honda CRX Si 8.7 16.7
1988 Honda CRX Si 8.2 16.4
1991 Honda CRX Si 8.7 16.5
1989 Ford Taurus SHO 6.6 15.2
1988 Ford Probe GT 7.3 15.6
1990 Ford Probe GT 7.6 16.0
1984 Ford Mustang SVO 7.9 15.8
1985 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 14.9 (C&D, Jan. 85)
1987 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 14.4 (Automobile, April 87)
1988 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 15.0 (MT Jan '88)
1989 Ford Mustang GT 5.0l Manual 6.2 14.8 (MT Jan '89)
1990 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 6.4 14.9
1987 Chrysler LeBaron 8.8 16.8
1989 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS 7.2 15.8
1971 Datsun 240Z N/A 17.1
1972 Datsun 240Z 9.0 16.3
1974 Datsun 260Z 9.9 16.7
1983 Datsun 280ZX 9.4 16.9
05-09-09, 12:25 AM
#29
Actin Like I'm Drunk
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Charleston, South Carolina
Posts: 1,663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The N/a FC only got 10 more hp than the GSL SE but got an added 300 lbs. The only thing the base FC has on a GSL SE is a better suspension.
05-09-09, 05:59 AM
#30
Full Member
jshiz, first of all that time sheet you posted is not very accurate due to the fact that it says the s4 and s5 run the same times and theres no way that's possible. and also there are only like 5 cars on the second list that are comparable to the 7 and they all have very similar times. its rediculous to compare a 1.3l to a 5.0 and even still it wasn't much slower!
05-09-09, 10:50 PM
#34
'87 TII rx7
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Santa Ana, Southern Cali
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have a N/A fc s4 with a K&N intake and apexi duals. raced a '08 civic Si. i lost but i wasnt smoked. i have hopes for my 7 
felix what grounds did u clean exactly cause im experiencing the hesitation also
felix what grounds did u clean exactly cause im experiencing the hesitation also
Last edited by xxifearixx; 05-09-09 at 10:53 PM.
05-10-09, 11:23 AM
#36
05-12-09, 10:02 AM
#37
My S5 NA used to be considerably faster than any first gen, including the GSL-SE (all of them on stock intake manifold\carbs and stock efi on teh GSL-SE). A popular mod to the 1st gen (back home) was a RB intake manifold, and carb.
There was no contest when racing a properly modified 1st gen on my S5 NA, they would put the hurting on me, and it wasn't even funny
05-12-09, 10:06 AM
#38
Removing the 5&6th port sleeves, and BLOCKING the ports with JB weld would take tons and tons of that crap; besides, if the ports were in fact blocked, your engine would have a hard time reaching anything above 7K rpms (or so)
05-12-09, 11:01 AM
#39
Actin Like I'm Drunk
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Charleston, South Carolina
Posts: 1,663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you raced a NA FC?
My S5 NA used to be considerably faster than any first gen, including the GSL-SE (all of them on stock intake manifold\carbs and stock efi on teh GSL-SE). A popular mod to the 1st gen (back home) was a RB intake manifold, and carb.
There was no contest when racing a properly modified 1st gen on my S5 NA, they would put the hurting on me, and it wasn't even funny
My S5 NA used to be considerably faster than any first gen, including the GSL-SE (all of them on stock intake manifold\carbs and stock efi on teh GSL-SE). A popular mod to the 1st gen (back home) was a RB intake manifold, and carb.
There was no contest when racing a properly modified 1st gen on my S5 NA, they would put the hurting on me, and it wasn't even funny
06-02-09, 09:03 PM
#41
Bongolio
One tube would work and removing the aux ports,sleeves and actuators are not hard and actually did a great job for a race engine i built a long time ago...Car made great power above 4k rpm's but had little low end power.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post