NationStates Jolt Archive

And can it beat this? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yI5xLNeNDO8

Honestly, I'm amazed that something this small (1/10 scale) can travel as fast as a full size car. And from what I've been able to learn, it's pretty state of the art (LiPo batteries, brushless motor, shaft drive 4wd, composite parts). I've been out of the R/C racing scene for a few years (actually, about 10, IIRC), but this just makes me want to get back into it. :D

I drive a '67 VW Bus...so...not so fast...

I drive a '96 Hyundai accent, and its falling apart, lol...

At about three in the morning, when the Interstate was almost carless, I drove nonstop with my foot on the gas for fun from Gulfport to Biloxi and i got up to a little over a Hundred, lol...

So, slow as hell, lol...

I drive a 97 Toyota Camry with over 220K miles, going fast is not something I'm willing to attempt. :p

I don't own a car. I can go real fast on my bike though. :)

I'd be willing to be that my 93 Subaru Loyale can go faster than it with a adult male passenger.

I don't think I'd want to push my car past 120km/h... and even then I wouldn't keep it that fast for long.

My car has a bullbar though, so it is worth it :)

I have a bike, and my legs.

Edit: Dammit, beaten by Sovietstan...

My car could do 0-100km/h in 7 seconds, though that wasn't what it was built for.

Then I killed it. :(

07 Civic Si- Tops out at 141

1990 Volvo 740 Turbo tops out at 112

1995 T-bird ( Chipped to remove limiter ) tops out around 140.

Lebaron ( sold to get T-bird ), idk.

I drive a '67 VW Bus...so...not so fast...

Dude, I want a VW Bus... With an efficient engine, at least. I've always wanted a Bus.

I got my vantage up to about 150mph on the german autobahn once.
Then i got scared and lifted my foor of the gas :)

The cars I have now? I've had the Serena MPV up to 180KmH. and the Hilux will only manage about 120KmH before it starts wobbling, it's an OLD HIGH and HEAVY piece of underpowered 4X4 :D

My previous cars I have had included an MGF convertible, I've been up to 190KmH and had to brake for a corner, it could have managed 210+ easily enough in a straight line with no corners around :P The old Honda Prelude (1987 2L twin carb) managed 190KmH but I had to ease off the gas cause it was getting light on the tail and starting to handle funny, more downforce at the rear would have been good.

Dude, I want a VW Bus... With an efficient engine, at least. I've always wanted a Bus.

I live in the SF Bay Area, so it's a little like driving a tourist attraction...

I live in the SF Bay Area, so it's a little like driving a tourist attraction...

Cool. I want a Bus because it fits me, personality-wise, my looks, and my interests. It just fits. It's one of those things that you feel you need because it really is such a good fit with who you are --- a very personal car.

Currently, I'm hoping to make it to the petrol station before it (and the country) runs out of fuel, so I'm not sure it'd make it to 100 before dying.

is this straight line facing downhill?

And can it beat this? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yI5xLNeNDO8

yeah baby!:p

Never tried taking my current car as fast as it can go, although to be honest the high 90s I've taken it to without trying is probably near the limit. It's only got a 1.4...

the video keeps saying its not available... stupid internets :mad:

but i drive an '06 peugeot 307cc, which isn't that fast. its a diesel, too. so 0-60 is about 9 seconds at best, but it does have a lot of torque so once its going its pretty nippy

fastest i've gotten it is 120mph, which was a bit scary tbh


edit:
Dude, I want a VW Bus... With an efficient engine, at least. I've always wanted a Bus.

me too!

Just over 200 mph...

provided that straight line is pointed straight down and long enough to reach terminal velocity.:p

My pickup will only go about 102 before the speed limiter kicks in. Though why the hell they set it at 102 is beyond me.

My pickup will only go about 102 before the speed limiter kicks in. Though why the hell they set it at 102 is beyond me.

because 103 would just be stupid?



My car can hit about 120 at its best. Currently, I'm driving on a donut, so I can push it to 60 for short periods of time.

2004 Mazda RX-8 Max speed 149 mph The engine redlines at 9-10k RPMs hehe

My pickup will only go about 102 before the speed limiter kicks in. Though why the hell they set it at 102 is beyond me.

I was going to suggest that it's a more obvious figure in kph, as these things normally are when they seem random in mph, but, having converted that, it's just as random in metric. :p

I'm not someone who cares about my car being faster or better than other people's but considering I spent quite a lot of money on it not very long ago, I'd expect it to go faster than a bloody remote control car.

And it doesn't :mad:

I can run 15MPH in a straight line. For lesss then a minute :p.

My pickup will only go about 102 before the speed limiter kicks in. Though why the hell they set it at 102 is beyond me.
Idk, my Thunderbird was limited at 107 before I took the limiter off, why they did 107 I have NO idea.

Just over 200 mph...

provided that straight line is pointed straight down and long enough to reach terminal velocity.:p


bugger, beaten to this joke.... :D

Fastest I ever pushed my car was around 130mph. And that was terrifying. And since then the old car hasn't much been the same.

I occasionally drive my dad's Vauxhall Vectra 2.2 but I've never tried to go over 100 because my dad would kill me...

the video keeps saying its not available... stupid internets :mad:

but i drive an '06 peugeot 307cc, which isn't that fast. its a diesel, too. so 0-60 is about 9 seconds at best, but it does have a lot of torque so once its going its pretty nippy

fastest i've gotten it is 120mph, which was a bit scary tbh


edit:


me too!

If the one in the OP doesn't work, try this one: http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=134.4%20mph%20in%20r%2Fc%20car&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv#

Whenever I'm in danger of going faster than 170 km/h (105mph) it feels like it's going to fall apart. So 170 km/h it is.

88 miles per hour, and it only takes 1.21 gigawatts...

I don't drive now, but I used to have a Mk. 3 Ford Capri V6. It was a great car. If you treated it right it would do about 130mph I think, though the most I ever did was 110mph. If I get a car again now though I'd get a Mercedes 240D (W115 chassis style). Not fast, but utterly immortal :)

Now that we've examined how fast your car can go, I have to ask this question: How high can your car jump, and can it beat this?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yy-w1rXQPJE

As far as my answer, I've never tried to jump anything with my truck, so I'm pretty sure it can't beat that R/C buggy.

1993 custom built Mustang cobra, fastest car I've ever had.

quarter mile in 11.25, top speed about 160 mph.

average zero to sixty time is 3.2 seconds.

Fast enough.

Anything more than 100 mph is a waste for a production vehicle intended for consumer use.

Fast enough.

Anything more than 100 mph is a waste for a production vehicle intended for consumer use.

You obviously dont know how to have any fun.

You obviously dont know how to have any fun.

Obviously. 'Cause the only way to have fun is by revving engines.:rolleyes:

Seems to me that if "vroom" is the only way to have fun, it signals a deficiency of some kind. But hey, vroom away. I'm not stopping you.

My squad car can make about 135.

My personal can make about 150.

I just put in for a turbocharged Mustang GT that they picked up in a drug bust, but no one in the department has tested that top speed yet, but if I get it, I will...

I'll keep you updated.

The most scared I've ever been is when a friend of mine had a hired Fiat Punto up to 110mph on the M4. She said we were 'making up time' because there was bad traffic around Manchester.

The official top speed of my Fiesta is 129mph, but you can usually get a bit more out of it than that, so I might have a shot at keeping up with it.

Obviously. 'Cause the only way to have fun is by revving engines.:rolleyes:

Seems to me that if "vroom" is the only way to have fun, it signals a deficiency of some kind. But hey, vroom away. I'm not stopping you.Yes, because if it's something you don't enjoy, it must be deficient in some way.

Yes, because if it's something you don't enjoy, it must be deficient in some way.

Look, I'm sorry you can't read the word "ONLY" in my posts, but that's no reason to go off like a wet bottle rocket about it.

The fact that speeding IS wasteful and stupid outside of a legitimate racing context is what you're up against, not my opinions.

Look, I'm sorry you can't read the word "ONLY" in my posts, but that's no reason to go off like a wet bottle rocket about it.

The fact that speeding IS wasteful and stupid outside of a legitimate racing context is what you're up against, not my opinions.
You assumed 'only.'

Autobahn anyone?

my only car is a trolley or a pullman, but for streight lines, there was this thing called a rocket sled once upon a time.

=^^=
.../\...

Look, I'm sorry you can't read the word "ONLY" in my posts, but that's no reason to go off like a wet bottle rocket about it.

The fact that speeding IS wasteful and stupid outside of a legitimate racing context is what you're up against, not my opinions.

Who cares if its stupid? It's still fun.

Watching your speedo blast up to 150 is awesome.

88 miles per hour, and it only takes 1.21 gigawatts...

*titters* :p

The fact that speeding IS wasteful and stupid

This accuratly describes about 1/3 of all of my activities. Yet i still live and still have plenty of resouces remaining. Go figure.

My car could do 0-100km/h in 7 seconds, though that wasn't what it was built for.

Then I killed it. :(

The Clio? What happened to it?

0-100 km/h I've never timed.

I've had it up to 210 km/h on the open road.

Edit: My car is a Peugeot 306.

The Clio? What happened to it?
Queensland Raceway Turn 2 claimed another victim. Lost the back, overcompensated, back came round the other way and I went arse first into the gravel. Up to that point, it was all my fault.

Then god decided I wasn't having a bad enough day and made the tire dig into the gravel, flipping the car and rolling it twice.

Yay learning experiences...

Queensland Raceway Turn 2 claimed another victim. Lost the back, overcompensated, back came round the other way and I went arse first into the gravel. Up to that point, it was all my fault.

Then god decided I wasn't having a bad enough day and made the tire dig into the gravel, flipping the car and rolling it twice.

Yay learning experiences...

Bugger! :eek: :(

Queensland Raceway Turn 2 claimed another victim. Lost the back, overcompensated, back came round the other way and I went arse first into the gravel. Up to that point, it was all my fault.

Then god decided I wasn't having a bad enough day and made the tire dig into the gravel, flipping the car and rolling it twice.

Yay learning experiences...

See, if you raced R/C instead of full size cars, you'd still have your car. :p

Truthfully though, sorry to hear about your car.

You assumed 'only.'

Autobahn anyone?

Are you terminally thick? What I said was "if that's the ONLY way you can have fun...". My preference for the production car as a mode of transportation and not a racing vehicle doesn't matter. The fact remains that nobody needs a 500hp engine for daily personal transportation.

This accuratly describes about 1/3 of all of my activities. Yet i still live and still have plenty of resouces remaining. Go figure.

Yes, because it's all about you, isn't it? So long as you can get your rocks off in a wasteful manner, nobody else matters. This is basically the same attitude that pervades the minds of those who enjoy graffiti and vandalism. I'm not equating the two mindsets, but they're not far apart.

Queensland Raceway Turn 2 claimed another victim. Lost the back, overcompensated, back came round the other way and I went arse first into the gravel. Up to that point, it was all my fault.

Then god decided I wasn't having a bad enough day and made the tire dig into the gravel, flipping the car and rolling it twice.

Yay learning experiences...

Yay indeed -- were you hurt? And kudos for racing on an actual track.

Yay indeed -- were you hurt?
Not physically. :p All I got was a bit of glass as the windows shattered and cut me on my wrist.

And kudos for racing on an actual track.
Well, fact of the matter is that once you get a car of a certain quality, its capabilities basically exceed the public road system. It's still fun to drive around, and the Clio's overtaking and cornering abilities were much appreciated, but you don't get to really stress the chassis on public roads. They simply don't allow these sorts of speeds. So the track was the only option.

Problem with that is that the car isn't insured when you go there.

Yes, because it's all about you, isn't it? So long as you can get your rocks off in a wasteful manner, nobody else matters. This is basically the same attitude that pervades the minds of those who enjoy graffiti and vandalism. I'm not equating the two mindsets, but they're not far apart.

OK Cowboy time to climb down off that high horse your on. Who went and elected you as Grand High Inquisitor of whats considered wasting resources. If i pay for a gallon of gas and do nothing but doughnuts in my front yard are you going to come arrest me for my crimes against humanity? Your being absurd.

Are you terminally thick? What I said was "if that's the ONLY way you can have fun...". My preference for the production car as a mode of transportation and not a racing vehicle doesn't matter. The fact remains that nobody needs a 500hp engine for daily personal transportation.

Yes, because it's all about you, isn't it? So long as you can get your rocks off in a wasteful manner, nobody else matters. This is basically the same attitude that pervades the minds of those who enjoy graffiti and vandalism. I'm not equating the two mindsets, but they're not far apart.You might want to watch the insults.

Yes, I understand what you said, but you simply assumed 'only' as if that proves something. No one in this thread said it was their only way of having fun.

What people want and what people need are two vastly different things, and I don't think I've met anyone that only buys what they need. Not only that, but please show me where anyone said a 500hp engine was necessary for daily transportation? There are people who own jet skis, boats, small aircraft and don't need them for daily use. Does that make them deficient because they own a vehicle for recreational purposes? Why would a 500hp engine in a car be any different?

Well, my Ford Windstar's speedometer features speeds up to 120 miles per hour, so I'm guessing at least that. Not that I'd ever take it that fast. (Fastest I've ever gone in it was 80... and I got a speeding ticket for my stupidity too.)

OK Cowboy time to climb down off that high horse your on. Who went and elected you as Grand High Inquisitor of whats considered wasting resources. If i pay for a gallon of gas and do nothing but doughnuts in my front yard are you going to come arrest me for my crimes against humanity? Your being absurd.

Well, considering that millions of people in the Niger Delta are suffering human rights abuses and the side-effects of massive environmental degradation, the people of Aceh are denied autonomy, and the people of Iraq have had their government destabilized (with tremendous conflict ensuing) and their resources stolen, you could try and be a little more considerate.

My truck tops out (limiter) at 98 mph. But it weighs 7500lbs and still does 0-60 in about 8 secs.

Well, considering that millions of people in the Niger Delta are suffering human rights abuses and the side-effects of massive environmental degradation, the people of Aceh are denied autonomy, and the people of Iraq have had their government destabilized (with tremendous conflict ensuing) and their resources stolen, you could try and be a little more considerate.

Ummm....who is "stealing" Iraq's resources? Also, a destablized government seems to me a lot better than one that really wasn't a government at all and just a complete dictatorship.

Ummm....who is "stealing" Iraq's resources? Also, a destablized government seems to me a lot better than one that really wasn't a government at all and just a complete dictatorship.

Mainly US corporations.

I for one would rather live in a government where I just had to avoid talking bad about one guy rather than talking about my religion/ethnicity. The Iraq of today is far more dangerous and paradoxically less free than under Saddam. I mean sure, you can say Saddam sucks. But if you say anything bad about another sect/ethnicity, you had better watch out.

By the way, your last little bit isn't logical. A complete dictatorship is a form of government, a rather efficient one to be honest.

A complete dictatorship is a form of government, a rather efficient one to be honest.

Especially from the dictators point of view...

OK Cowboy time to climb down off that high horse your on. Who went and elected you as Grand High Inquisitor of whats considered wasting resources. If i pay for a gallon of gas and do nothing but doughnuts in my front yard are you going to come arrest me for my crimes against humanity? Your being absurd.

Nice hyperbole -- talk about absurd. If you can point out where I said anyone should be arrested, or anything like that, I'll gladly retract and apologize. Until then, how's about sticking to what I actually type, k?

A waste is easily recognizable. If you can't see that, you're part of the problem. Callous disregard for non-renewable resources is part of what's gotten us into this mess. By all means, do your doughnuts.

You might want to watch the insults.

Looking back at my posts, I can see that I may need to clarify what I mean when I talk about the addiction to horsepower.

If you honestly thought that "are you terminally thick" is an insult, I apologize, but you're going to need MUCH thicker skin than that to survive long in NSG.

Yes, I understand what you said, but you simply assumed 'only' as if that proves something. No one in this thread said it was their only way of having fun.

Just like I never said it should be outlawed. See how easy it is to actually read the thread before posting? I said it was stupid. Major difference.

What people want and what people need are two vastly different things, and I don't think I've met anyone that only buys what they need. Not only that, but please show me where anyone said a 500hp engine was necessary for daily transportation?

Nobody here did. The Big Three US automakers have, however. They have resurrected long- and deservedly-dead cars like the Mustang, the Charger and the like. Huge engines with no practical transportation value. If the rumors are true and GM is potentially headed for bankruptcy, I will mourn the loss of jobs, but to have not seen the writing on the wall and acted on in instead of producing SUVs and muscle car engines is just plain stupid.

There are people who own jet skis, boats, small aircraft and don't need them for daily use. Does that make them deficient because they own a vehicle for recreational purposes? Why would a 500hp engine in a car be any different?

The Jet-ski, while supremely annoying, is at least a dedicated-purpose vehicle you most likely couldn't use every day unless your work required quick water mobility. Small aircraft, especially in very remote areas, are again, dedicated-purpose transportation.

Look, I don't know how hard it is for you to look out on to the freeway every day and see someone commuting alone in a Suburban or a Mustang, but it's not that hard here. That's the point I'm getting at. Most people don't own a big-engine car as a part-time hobby/toy. They buy it for the perceived transferral of its imagined status, and they drive it to work. Every day. At 12 miles per gallon or worse.

Again, not criminal. Wasteful. Irresponsible. Stupid.

I know my point of view is unpopular, and I don't really care. I'm not here to convince anyone, and I don't think anyone could be convinced no matter who was trying. I don't begrudge anyone their "toys" -- but I'll certainly express my opinion as to how ridiculous they are. My opinion is not worth even the cost of the electrons conveying it, but I post it in order to express that not everyone is addicted to the throttle on land, sea and air, and "how fast" is a question that is mostly unnecessary except for those cases when it is critical (the aforementioned emergency vehicles) and in those cases where many parts of society feel they can only buy their individuality (commuting with a Hummer) or a few parts of society who express their individuality in terms of revolutions per minute (legitimate racers/enthusiasts).

This thread is getting exciting.

To put things into perspective, I have a 4x4 for farm work, a van (2L petrol with one hell of a high final drive ratio) as a enconomical means of transportation of lots of stuff.

AND I currently have a 1978 sports car (Fairlady Z, japanese, google it) that I'm not decided yet on whether to go for a 5+ litre twin turbo 600Hp Holden V8, or a RB30DET inline six 3 litre single turbo 650Hp motor.

Either way I'm planning on a 2 to 3 year build time quite a considerable amount of cash for Aero kits and modifications, street legal racing slicks and fuel consumption in the range of 5 mpg.

Just cause I can and I have the testosterone to want it.


Most US cars seem to run on 89 octane, I'm looking at running boost levels with CR levels requiring 98 octane premium gas.


FUN!

I love how this thread has gotten off the topic of comparing the abilities of your car to that of an R/C car, and gotten on multiple topics including Iraq and whether someone NEEDS to go fast/have a powerful engine/resources. :(

Looking back at my posts, I can see that I may need to clarify what I mean when I talk about the addiction to horsepower.

Just like I never said it should be outlawed. See how easy it is to actually read the thread before posting? I said it was stupid. Major difference.This is where we snagged up. I agree it is idiotic to commute everyday in something that gets 12 mpg. But you're original quote said:

Fast enough.

Anything more than 100 mph is a waste for a production vehicle intended for consumer use.Which is a vague statement in itself. What is 'consumer use?' Does buying a car solely for recreational purposes and not commuting in it qualify? Not only that, what does the top off of 100mph have to do with anything? My old Honda got around 35mpg on average and it topped out over 100, not that I regularly drove it that fast, but it was possible.

I agree, commuting in a gas guzzler isn't terribly intelligent. However, a lot of people are stuck with these cars. They have terrible trade in values and it's simply more economic to keep it than buy a new fuel efficient model. I'm in a situation like that myself. The only reliable car I have is a '98 Mustang. I'm leaving the country in a few months for two+ years and buying another more fuel efficient car just doesn't make sense.

If you honestly thought that "are you terminally thick" is an insult, I apologize, but you're going to need MUCH thicker skin than that to survive long in NSG.First off, if you look at my join date, you'd see I've been here for over five years. I think I'm surviving just fine. Second, the point isn't whether or not it's all that insulting, it's whether or not it was necessary. It wasn't.

My car gets the shakes at 60 mph unfortunately.

How much of an idiot do you have to be to ever care how fast your car is in a straight line?

How much of an idiot do you have to be to ever care how fast your car is in a straight line?

Some people are interested in that sort of thing; just because you're not doesn't make them idiots.

Anyway, I drive a BMW 750iL, and I've heard claims of people taking them up to around 170 MPH. Not something I'd do myself, though.

I can typically get a little over 20 miles per gallon out of it; not bad for a V12. :)

How much of an idiot do you have to be to ever care how fast your car is in a straight line?

If you don't know how fast your car is in a straight line, how will you be able to compare it to this? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yI5xLNeNDO8

Oh, it's fast enough, but how many clowns will that tiny thing fit? 3? 4 tops? :p

Oh, it's fast enough, but how many clowns will that tiny thing fit? 3? 4 tops? :p

It depends. Are we talking about regular clowns, or midget clowns?

Well, my girlfriend's car, which I use for tracks, only can do 195 mph in the sixth gear, limited by the transmission and the rev limiter. Really 190 is the max one would go. Theoretically it could do 200-208, however that would take dangerous redlining and an unrealistically long track. With a transmission change, 220 wouldn't be a problem. It was a conscious choice: the lower you set your gears, the better you accelerate, but the lower your top speed. So IMHO even setting it for 190 wasn't too wise.

But, despite that low top speed, it will violently rape any of these stupid 210-220 mph "muscle saloons" from US or Germany on any track or road, as long as there's at least one corner per mile.

Top speed isn't a big deal, if a deal at all - it's easy to modify by changing the transmission. All about the top gear ratio.

I imagine I can go over 100 but I don't really care to find out around here. I wanted to go 90+ once and I got tagged at 76 and I had a hefty fine and points to deal with so I think I'll stay under 75 for now.

Well, my girlfriend's car, which I use for tracks, only can do 195 mph in the sixth gear, limited by the transmission and the rev limiter. Really 190 is the max one would go. Theoretically it could do 200-208, however that would take dangerous redlining and an unrealistically long track. With a transmission change, 220 wouldn't be a problem. It was a conscious choice: the lower you set your gears, the better you accelerate, but the lower your top speed. So IMHO even setting it for 190 wasn't too wise.

But, despite that low top speed, it will violently rape any of these stupid 210-220 mph "muscle saloons" from US or Germany on any track or road, as long as there's at least one corner per mile.

Top speed isn't a big deal, if a deal at all - it's easy to modify by changing the transmission. All about the top gear ratio.


Corners are over rated, which is why I drag race. With an actual 10 second car.

Corners are over rated, which is why I drag race. With an actual 10 second car.

Wow. Talk about disposables. :p

Don't you think you should buy something with a longer life expectancy?

I don't own a car. I can go real fast on my bike though. :)

How fast?

How fast?

If the cliff is high enough, terminal velocity. :)

If the cliff is high enough, terminal velocity. :)

A velocity presumably named for its effect on a non-parachuted cyclist.

Which is a vague statement in itself. What is 'consumer use?' Does buying a car solely for recreational purposes and not commuting in it qualify? Not only that, what does the top off of 100mph have to do with anything? My old Honda got around 35mpg on average and it topped out over 100, not that I regularly drove it that fast, but it was possible.

What's the point of having a production street legal vehicle that can do 100 mph or better was my point. I phrased the point badly, I see that now.

I agree, commuting in a gas guzzler isn't terribly intelligent. However, a lot of people are stuck with these cars. They have terrible trade in values and it's simply more economic to keep it than buy a new fuel efficient model. I'm in a situation like that myself. The only reliable car I have is a '98 Mustang. I'm leaving the country in a few months for two+ years and buying another more fuel efficient car just doesn't make sense.

Sorry, but a 1998 Mustang as a trade-in should net you enough to buy a reasonable used 4-cylinder with excellent mileage in the low to mid 30s. I'm not seeing the problem.

First off, if you look at my join date, you'd see I've been here for over five years. I think I'm surviving just fine. Second, the point isn't whether or not it's all that insulting, it's whether or not it was necessary. It wasn't.

Your opinion. I say it was a legitimate question. Not like it matters.

If the cliff is high enough, terminal velocity. :)

-9.8 m/s^2, baby. And all on no gas whatsoever!

uhh... 134 mph is about 215 km/h... so no. I drive a 18-years-old VW Polo (1049 cc, 33 kW), and the top speed I've touched is about 165 km/h (I love German Autobahnen!). Fully loaded (3 people+lots of luggage), and about 20 km/h more that the listed top speed.
Anyway I wouldn't trust to launch the Polo to top speed with a lighter load because of the risk of losing grip.

Anyway the future of cars is the good old electric motor. Iirc, the first car in history to reach 100 km/h had an electric motor!

Corners are over rated, which is why I drag race. With an actual 10 second car. That means... It's not funny!

I reached 180 on a city to city travel. I was in a hurry, and it was 3 am, so it was an empty highway.

Oh, it's a Mitsubishi Lancer. It's painted red so it can go faster.

A little over a hundred mph for sure, and I still had about 3 000 rpms to redline.

I reached 180 on a city to city travel. I was in a hurry, and it was 3 am, so it was an empty highway.

Oh, it's a Mitsubishi Lancer. It's painted red so it can go faster.
180mph, you sure? On a non-Evo, non-Ralliart one?
Which specifically model was that, and which transmission type?

The transmissions of the standard Lancer normally don't have the gear ratio to allow for 180mph...

180mph, you sure? On a non-Evo, non-Ralliart one?
Which specifically model was that, and which transmission type?

The transmissions of the standard Lancer normally don't have the gear ratio to allow for 180mph...

Oh.

kph.

180 kph.

And no, it's not Evolution, not Rally.

Don't ask me about a transmission, I'm a standard female who can change a tire, but not have an idea about the transmission type of my car.

c.

Ah, I see. It's just that even the standard Lancer is a pretty capable machine, and with some tuning 180mph for it is a little over the top, but just a little.

I only have a bike[1995 Suzuki GSXR750], and i've taken it to 360kph on a country road once.

What did you use to measure the speed?

What did you use to measure the speed?

the speedometer >.>

But the machine can only do 275km/h untuned... Isn't the speedometer marked up to only 300km/h?
Or is it one with the digital speedo?
What tuning did you do?

But the machine can only do 275km/h untuned... Isn't the speedometer marked up to only 300km/h?
Or is it one with the digital speedo?
What tuning did you do?


I'm not the first owner of the bike, so i'm not sure what kinds of work it had done on it engine wise, but the speedo [lol] is digital

Corners are over rated, which is why I drag race. With an actual 10 second car.
Drag racing is short attention spanners who like to pretend they're race car drivers. Cars have steering wheels for a reason.

I'm not the first owner of the bike, so i'm not sure what kinds of work it had done on it engine wise, but the speedo [lol] is digital
That's one hell of an engine work and complete transmission replacement, to make it run 360km/h. I can't believe it wouldn't command a good premium, probably doubling or tripling the bike's price at least.
And a bike going 360km/h is really a serious machine.

Sorry, but a 1998 Mustang as a trade-in should net you enough to buy a reasonable used 4-cylinder with excellent mileage in the low to mid 30s. I'm not seeing the problem.Considering you've told me in this thread to actually read your posts (which I have), I find it surprising that you can't seem to read mine. The key to my dilemma isn't, could I get any trade in value, it's: why would I trade in my car when I'm leaving the country for at least two and a half years?


Your opinion. I say it was a legitimate question. Not like it matters.Fine, if it was a legitimate question, what was its purpose? From what I can see, it had no purpose other than for you to assume some air of superiority while chastising me for supposedly not reading the thread.

You notice, any thread can get into an argument about the subject.

You notice, any thread can get into an argument about the subject.

No they can't! :mad:


:p

You notice, any thread can get into an argument about the subject.That's the beauty of NS General. I think it's a requirement that each thread must have an argument. Just making quota is all.

It depends. Are we talking about regular clowns, or midget clowns?

Doesn't matter. Clown volume is inversely proportional to clown humor. In fact, as midget clowns(normally as funny or funnier than full-sized clowns) are not quite as funny looking getting out of tiny cars as extraordinarily tall or fat clowns, a small car would probably hold LESS midget clowns. *nod*

Doesn't matter. Clown volume is inversely proportional to clown humor. In fact, as midget clowns(normally as funny or funnier than full-sized clowns) are not quite as funny looking getting out of tiny cars as extraordinarily tall or fat clowns, a small car would probably hold LESS midget clowns. *nod*

While ont he topic of clowns... are there any drag racing clowns?

Surely there must be a niche for clowns doing 10 second runs seated bacwards in a car lookign like something out of "who framed roger rabbit"

Drag racing is short attention spanners who like to pretend they're race car drivers. Cars have steering wheels for a reason.


Shows how much you know, sure I race in Top, its no Funny or Doorjams, but a 10 second 1/4 mile is pretty fast, and its a blast.

My car is pretty easy to keep going, but some of the huge fast cars are very hard to keep under control.

Drag racing is all about reaction time and dialing your car in.

And its not like its a bunch of rednecks either, my Couger has a good 28,000 dolllars in it. and it only has one seat and no interior :)

Considering you've told me in this thread to actually read your posts (which I have), I find it surprising that you can't seem to read mine. The key to my dilemma isn't, could I get any trade in value, it's: why would I trade in my car when I'm leaving the country for at least two and a half years?

Because storing one car is much the same as storing another? Or were you planning to sell the Mustang and get a more efficient car upon your return?

Fine, if it was a legitimate question, what was its purpose? From what I can see, it had no purpose other than for you to assume some air of superiority while chastising me for supposedly not reading the thread.

It's purpose was to ask if you were terminally thick. It seemed a rational question to ask given that you distilled from my post only what you wanted to see.

If you assumed any feelings of inferiority, I had nothing whatsoever to do with it. No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.

That's one hell of an engine work and complete transmission replacement, to make it run 360km/h. I can't believe it wouldn't command a good premium, probably doubling or tripling the bike's price at least.
And a bike going 360km/h is really a serious machine.

Oh I assure you, it did cost quite a bit. The previous owner was a squadmate in Grozny who lost his foot and wouldn't be able to ride it anymore, so he sold it to me.