Mustang driver states: "Z" needs NOS/Supercharger to run 13.8
This Nismo Z test car posts some very impressive acceleration numbers — 5.1 seconds to 60 mph, 13.6 seconds through the quarter-mile at 103 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=121814
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=121814
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
This Nismo Z test car posts some very impressive acceleration numbers — 5.1 seconds to 60 mph, 13.6 seconds through the quarter-mile at 103 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=121814
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=121814
You said this below arguing with others saying it wasn't a 13 sec car when you saw this.
Originally Posted by 2007-Z
Dunno and don't care really. I just know what I've read thus far and what I see here:
cp79shark ----------------------07 Nsmo 6spd 14.017@_97.83mph 2.152 60ft
That's a lot slower than the other Hr's for that low of a 60'. Even with a 1.95 60' that would only have been a time of about 13.6. You could argue DA, but look at the trap speed even. Under 98 is slower than the DE even. I guess time will tell.
Alberto: I don't know who mentioned you to anyone, I didn't see it. I have only been reading and posting in two threads there about GT Mustangs. I never even looked at the thread where that one guy was calling out 350Z's with 500+ HP. That's probably where someone mentioned you though. Look it over and see.
cp79shark ----------------------07 Nsmo 6spd 14.017@_97.83mph 2.152 60ft
That's a lot slower than the other Hr's for that low of a 60'. Even with a 1.95 60' that would only have been a time of about 13.6. You could argue DA, but look at the trap speed even. Under 98 is slower than the DE even. I guess time will tell.
Alberto: I don't know who mentioned you to anyone, I didn't see it. I have only been reading and posting in two threads there about GT Mustangs. I never even looked at the thread where that one guy was calling out 350Z's with 500+ HP. That's probably where someone mentioned you though. Look it over and see.
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
You said this below arguing with others saying it wasn't a 13 sec car when you saw this.
Originally Posted by 2007-Z
Dunno and don't care really. I just know what I've read thus far and what I see here:
cp79shark ----------------------07 Nsmo 6spd 14.017@_97.83mph 2.152 60ft
That's a lot slower than the other Hr's for that low of a 60'. Even with a 1.95 60' that would only have been a time of about 13.6. You could argue DA, but look at the trap speed even. Under 98 is slower than the DE even. I guess time will tell.
Alberto: I don't know who mentioned you to anyone, I didn't see it. I have only been reading and posting in two threads there about GT Mustangs. I never even looked at the thread where that one guy was calling out 350Z's with 500+ HP. That's probably where someone mentioned you though. Look it over and see.
cp79shark ----------------------07 Nsmo 6spd 14.017@_97.83mph 2.152 60ft
That's a lot slower than the other Hr's for that low of a 60'. Even with a 1.95 60' that would only have been a time of about 13.6. You could argue DA, but look at the trap speed even. Under 98 is slower than the DE even. I guess time will tell.
Alberto: I don't know who mentioned you to anyone, I didn't see it. I have only been reading and posting in two threads there about GT Mustangs. I never even looked at the thread where that one guy was calling out 350Z's with 500+ HP. That's probably where someone mentioned you though. Look it over and see.
Originally Posted by Gooey
how do you know edmunds didnt run that time with a 2.2 60'? Please no more assumptions.
I based my 13.6 off of the timeslip list in OUR forum which gives a 60'. Then I took .2 off the 60' which dropped it to 1.95. Still with me? Then I took .4 off the ET which is about normal for a .2 drop in 60'. That gave me a 13.600. Still with me? Then when I quoted that time in my last post I also pointed out that Edmunds got that same time. I didn't say anything about 60'. I never said anything about Edmunds in my original post where I said it would run a 13.6 either, did I?
It's no wonder why I have to argue all the time. Nobody here can f*cking read and always puts words into everyone's mouth.
Then when I show them where they f*cked up and actually started the whole thing for nothing, or showed them how they were wrong do they apologize? Hell no. I may be a hardass, but when I'm proven wrong I'll admit it and even apologize if it was my fault in the first place. I'd really like to meet some of you in real life. Come to Bradenton on Sunday, Please.
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
lol and don't you wonder why you are always in arguments in almost every thread you are in and no one seems to ever agree with YOU? lol.
Amazing.
Amazing.
So where's these times you claim to have? I don't see you anywhere on the list of time.
No, the people that agree with me just don't give a **** about you being wrong.
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
This Nismo Z test car posts some very impressive acceleration numbers — 5.1 seconds to 60 mph, 13.6 seconds through the quarter-mile at 103 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=121814
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=121814
Originally Posted by 2007-Z
You still talking? Good on the bench racing, bad on the real thing...
So where's these times you claim to have? I don't see you anywhere on the list of time.
No, the people that agree with me just don't give a **** about you being wrong.
So where's these times you claim to have? I don't see you anywhere on the list of time.
No, the people that agree with me just don't give a **** about you being wrong.
just thought i would point out that accoring to nissan, the nismo has the same Cd as the base, enthusiast and touring, the only model with a different drag is the gt which has a Cd of .29
Cd is a coefficient that relates frontal surface area and speed to give force.
the GT is lower because it has the aero kit standard. If you have the spoiler and the front lip its .29 as well.
The Nismo no doubt has more drag because it has more area, regardless of Cd.
the GT is lower because it has the aero kit standard. If you have the spoiler and the front lip its .29 as well.
The Nismo no doubt has more drag because it has more area, regardless of Cd.
Sooo, back to the Mustang crap.
So like I posted this tool hits me up on youtube talking crap. I replied to him and he has since been on youtube but didnt reply back saying he was interested in running me.
Instead he leaves this comment on my 50-150+mph video
My reply
He is an embarressment to car enthusiasts everywhere!
So like I posted this tool hits me up on youtube talking crap. I replied to him and he has since been on youtube but didnt reply back saying he was interested in running me.
Instead he leaves this comment on my 50-150+mph video
Originally Posted by toolwithadynosheet
This chump should try racing a real car.Seen his track videos what a joke!!
My reply
Thats why you are scared to race me, you didnt even get back to my message regarding setting up a run! Must feel big and bad to make comments like this and not back it up
Originally Posted by Alberto
Sooo, back to the Mustang crap.
So like I posted this tool hits me up on youtube talking crap. I replied to him and he has since been on youtube but didnt reply back saying he was interested in running me.
Instead he leaves this comment on my 50-150+mph video
My reply
He is an embarressment to car enthusiasts everywhere!
So like I posted this tool hits me up on youtube talking crap. I replied to him and he has since been on youtube but didnt reply back saying he was interested in running me.
Instead he leaves this comment on my 50-150+mph video
My reply
He is an embarressment to car enthusiasts everywhere!
J/k. TT>NA
Originally Posted by Gooey
ok tell me why edmunds trapped 103 and you only trapped 102. I guess the Nismo Z is faster than your car 
/thread
/thread
Well, I got a lower 1/4 with a lower trap AND it was my first trip ever to a track with my Z which made me a noob (Edmunds has people that do it for a living), so what does that say about your precious fugly riced out Nismo?
Also, if you know anything about drag racing, which I now highly doubt, you would know that trap speed is not ACTUAL speed. It's a calculated speed and it also varies. EVERYONE knows it can vary by a few mph from track to track. So in reality that Nismo might have been travelling at 101 mph and my Touring might have been travelling at 104 mph. You can't prove otherwise. Call me out on it, I'd love nothing more than to slam you with some hard facts on this. Better do a Google search before replying, LOL. Give it up. Game over. You lose.
