The Ultimate Turbocharged Car

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Feb 18, 2003 | 06:31 PM

#31

Hofbrau

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally posted by ArbnWRX
The GT3 is even better but not legal in the US. An AWD GT3 is my dream car.

....Now where did I put that $150,000

I didn't think the GT3 was AWD only rear, right?

Feb 20, 2003 | 04:35 PM

#32

Sites5

Guest

Posts: n/a

Lingenfelter Corvette

No one likes the 2001 Lingenfelter 427 Corvette twin-turbo? Or the 2000 Lingenfelter Corvette 650 Twin-Turbo? Just thought that I would put my two cents in.

http://www.fast-autos.net/lingenfelt...lter427tt.html

2001 Lingenfelter 427 Corvette Twin-Turbo Specifications

General Information
Price: $165,000
Miles Per Gallon: 15/24 mpg
Curb Weight: 3340 lbs
Layout: Front-Engine/RWD
Transmission: 5-Speed Automatic
Engine
Type: Twin-Turbo V8
Displacement: 7007 cc
Horsepower: 802 bhp @ 4600 rpm
Torque: 866 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
Redline: 6500 rpm
Performance
0-60 mph: 1.97 sec
0-100 mph: 4.33 sec
Quarter Mile: 8.93 sec @ 153 mph
Skidpad: 1.01g
Top Speed: 240 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 108 ft
Slalom Speed: 69.7 mph

2000 model
General Information
Price: $113,000
Miles Per Gallon: 5/31 mpg
Curb Weight: 3330 lbs
Layout: Front-Engine/RWD
Transmission: 6-Speed Manual
Engine
Type: Twin-Turbo V8
Displacement: 5670 cc
Horsepower: 650 bhp @ 5800 rpm
Torque: 600 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm
Redline: 6400 rpm
Performance
0-60 mph: 3.3 sec
0-100 mph: 6.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 10.8 sec @ 133.5 mph
Skidpad: .94g
Top Speed: 226 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 111 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.8 mph

Last edited by Sites5; Feb 20, 2003 at 04:38 PM.

Feb 20, 2003 | 04:46 PM

#33

Sites5

Guest

Posts: n/a

Lingebfelter

Better in all ways perfomance wise then the bugatti. And a hell of alot cheaper. And who cares about the top speed being 12mph less. When you smoke the bugatti off the line there is no looking back. Just fond memories.

Attached Thumbnails

Feb 20, 2003 | 06:55 PM

#34

beaverboy

Guest

Posts: n/a

...[edit] nevermind [edit]...

Feb 20, 2003 | 07:59 PM

#35

pbchief2

VIP Member

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 2,070

From: Kalifornia

Car Info: 1995 Impreza L

mercedes S600

Feb 21, 2003 | 04:39 PM

#36

ralliart

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally posted by detroitwrx
959
It is not as fast as the current 911TT but it is still illigal to drive in the US and is oh so cool looking.

are you sure thats correct? I had the pleasure of driving the 959 in France a few years back and i thought it was the fastest porsche besides the GT3....I know it kills its rival the F50 ferrari in 0-60 but im not sure on the times.... correct me if im wrong, but im pretty sure the 959 would beat the 911 turbo..... the 959 is TT watercooled Cf body that weighs less then the 911 and i think has the same if not more power.

just curious....not trying to prove you wrong or anything.

and i dont know anything about the penoz RM-roadster but i think it is the fastest production car in the world..... 0-60 in 2.3 and does the quarter in 9 flat..... and costs only 250K compared to the 1.22 the bugatti is

Feb 21, 2003 | 07:58 PM

#37

pbchief2

VIP Member

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 2,070

From: Kalifornia

Car Info: 1995 Impreza L

Just For information the specs on the 959

0-60 mph: 3.7 sec
0-100 mph: 8.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.8 sec @ 123 mph
Skidpad: .96g
Top Speed: 190 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 117 ft
Slalom Speed: 69.3 mph

Its rival the f40

0-60 mph: 3.8 sec
0-100 mph: 8.0 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.8 sec @ 124 mph
Skidpad: .94g
Top Speed: 201 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 122 ft
Slalom Speed: 68.3 mph

And the f50 for comparison

0-60 mph: 3.3 sec
0-100 mph: 6.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.2 sec @ 129 mph
Skidpad: .--g
Top Speed: 236 mph

And the porshe turbo

0-60 mph: 3.8 sec
0-100 mph: 9.2 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.4 sec @ 115.6 mph
Skidpad: .96g
Top Speed: 192 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 119 ft
Slalom Speed: 67.8 mph

And just for fun the enzo

0-60 mph: 3.6 sec
0-100 mph: 6.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.0 sec @ --- mph
Skidpad: .--g
Top Speed: 217 mph

Last edited by pbchief2; Feb 21, 2003 at 08:12 PM.

Mar 1, 2003 | 12:17 PM

#38

rohde88

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally posted by Red4.6GT
GT40 is supercharged not turbocharged.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/g...cept_specs.asp

eh technically speaking super charging is actually super-turbo charging, but whos counting?

Ron

Mar 2, 2003 | 12:06 PM

#39

beaverboy

Guest

Posts: n/a

Umm.. NO

Technically speaking a turbocharger uses a turbine to compress the intake air. Only a centrifugal supercharger uses a turbine, while roots style and rotary style superchargers use vanes and rotors. The GT40 used a roots style, which has no likeness to a turbocharger in any respects.

"super-turbo" charging is a bastardization of terms.

Mar 2, 2003 | 01:45 PM

#40

rohde88

Guest

Posts: n/a

ok, my fault, I was confusing turbosupercharging=turbocharging, and not vice versa. The vane type superchager isnt what you mean right? lobes? vane superchargers were for small engines...

Ron

Mar 3, 2003 | 05:49 AM

#41

beaverboy

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

ok, my fault, I was confusing turbosupercharging=turbocharging

Ahhhhhh.. sorry about that. I gotcha now!

Quote:

The vane type superchager isnt what you mean right? lobes?

Yes, the lobes! My bad! Checks and balances eh?

Mar 3, 2003 | 09:15 AM

#42

rohde88

Guest

Posts: n/a

well, we'll keep each other honest.

you going to the Dragon in May?

Ron

Mar 6, 2003 | 11:49 PM

#43

snabb-skit

Guest

Posts: n/a

Speaking of super-turbocharging...
Lancia Delta S4 would be an incredible car to drive...0-62MPH in 2.7 seconds(short ratio 'box)-2100 lbs.-One of the monsters from "Group B"-turbo & supercharged...super for low end under 3500RPM then turbo for top!!!
An incredible feat of engineering by Claudio Lombardi & Abarth...