Supra Vs 3000GT

Home  \  Asian Imports  \  Supra Vs 3000GT

Yeah this has to be a pretty damn good matchup. The Toyota Supra T Turbo vs the 3000GT VR-4. They both have twin turbos.Who would win either Stock Vs Stock or Modded vs Modded? Of course we're talking about where all cars fight on da 1/4 mile drag strip...

posted by  DSMer

Supra XT? AWD Supra? wtf? i think u have had enough blue for one lifetime.

posted by  Inygknok

:doh: I meant TT(like twinturbo) and I did'nt mean to say both AWD. Gosh I'm tired I must have been thinking I was talkinga bout a Celica.

posted by  DSMer

PHEW! ok, i was going to have to kill u for that one :P

nah but supra wins hands down. the GTO is a great car, but its way too heavy, even with AWD it only manages high 13's max, runs regular low 14's.

and the Supra.... well, no need to say anything. the name speaks for itself.

posted by  Inygknok

yep...im with you on that one

toyota supra tt for the stock race any way but if you can mod the mitsu' gto tt to a nice spec and get the weight to an absolute minimum, i see a good race coming

still i would rather own a toyota supra tt rather than a mitsu' gto tt

posted by  WeaponR

weight is a significant factor. Supra (http://research.cars.com/go/crp/features.jsp;jsessionid=IQL4MSFZNVINDLAZGJ KJXKY?destURL=features.jsp&year=1998&makeid=47&modelid=437&myid=4246&superT rim=&acode=USA80TOC131B0&logtype=7&aff=national) vs 3000 GT (http://research.cars.com/go/crp/features.jsp;jsessionid=KAB3KGDUIVMZVLAZGK WZXKY?destURL=features.jsp&year=1999&makeid=34&modelid=307&myid=1627&superT rim=&acode=USA90MIC041C0&logtype=7&aff=national)
Id say Supra hands down.

posted by  importluva

Hmm...yes I'd have to agree weight plays a significant factor but lets say these two were somewhat modded out. I can't exactly say the Supra would loose but I think that in a good run the GT stands a chance of beating the Supra. I always hear that Supras are scared of AWD cars :laughing: . But is'nt it somewhat true that an AWD car could bring half or 2/3rds the WHP of a FWD or a RWD to a track and still possibly win?

posted by  DSMer

many comparison tests have been done with the cars of their class, Supra, RX-7, 300ZX, 3KGT, Skyline, NSX, and the rest i cant think of right now (headache), but u know which ones i mean. Hands down, the NSX n RX-7 have the best handling of all, but in all of th comparisons, the 3kgt has been classified as the worst performer of the bunch.

its still a kick ass car, but it does lack alot. its AWD is focused mainly on the characteristics of a FWD too. u can pretty much also see how the 3kgt has lacked appearances in major competitions. last 3kgt i have seen was one that has been featured in a couple of magazines already, ill mention the owners once i find one of the mags later tonight (i promise), but if i remember right, its owned by a major store in Cali. for those of u who might have seen it, its got a demon camber in the rear wheels, and has a black/orange color scheme throughout the body and is estimated to put out around 500whp. its also an early model 3kgt with the late model bumpers and headlights with a huge ass I/C. its a very nice 3kgt, i would scan the pics when i find the mags, but i have no scanner, sorry :(

posted by  Inygknok

well said. :clap:

posted by  importluva

wow!

like import luva has already stated, Well Said :clap:

posted by  WeaponR

Supra will win.

a better match would be a Supra Twin Turbo vs an RX-7

posted by  soljahx

i would have thought so

the RX-7 will win if the track is 70% with turns though. i've read that car is exceptionaly good at turnin' and handlin' aint a big issue with it too

not sure about the quarter strip though, could go either way or could it not?

posted by  WeaponR

yeah i heard the RX-7 is good at handling too...but i think the Supra would win in the quarter mile because i had a chance to drive the RX-7 and i have a 94' Twin Turbo Supra....the Supra juss feels like it has more power lol...

posted by  soljahx

Why dont we look at the facts. There are atleast three factors i can think of. Hp, Torque, Weight.
1995 Rx-7 Turbo (http://edmunds.com/used/1995/mazda/rx7/2790/specs.html?tid=edmunds.u.price s.leftsidenav..6.Mazda*) vs 1995 Supra Turbo (http://edmunds.com/used/1995/toyota/supra/4317/specs.html?tid=edmunds.u.pr ices.leftsidenav..6.Toyota*). The turbo supra has 320hp, 315tq, weight is 3415lbs. The Rx-7 has only 255hp, 217tq, and weighs 2826lbs.
There is definitely a huge weight difference, but the two cars also differ in one more category. The supra is a 6-speed, while the Rx-7 is a 5-speed. Its a tough call, anyone have dynos of these two cars? The gearing can also make a big difference.

posted by  importluva

why don't we settle this on the track hey! some one load up Gran Turismo, buy these 2 cars, trick them out and take them in for 'machine tests' or a race :laughing:

on the serious side...any one own a RX-7 or a Supra and care to post a pic of the dyno sheet for us or just post in the numbers?

i think on the quarter mile strip, the Supra wins but on a track with a handfull of turns, the RX-7 wins. any one agree?
the gear ratios is that? think they play a part too i agree but then are you going to say that the driver matters too? i think it does but its not goin' to be a major factor

so, it looks like the 'big fat ass' GTO a.k.a 3000GT is out of the question then?

a big :thumbs: for the Supra. lets wait and see how it does against the RX-7!

posted by  WeaponR

actually, the RX-7 would win in a track with a handfull of tight turns, not just any turn. teh Supra can manage mid to high speed turns quite well, it's when it's in its lower gears that it really starts being a pain in the ass cuz of how strong it is. not to mention Inline engines have a high center of gravity, atleast those vertically set like in the Supra, while in the meantime, the Rotary in the RX-7 gives it a huge advantage cuz of the very reduced rotational mass and center of gravity.

but a track with not that many tight turns, the Supra would stand a very good chance of beating the RX-7..... i guess it would depend on wat track it is, n the conditions of the road.

Here (http://www.engine-power.com/toyota/supra_mk4tt.html) are the Supra ratios.

RX-7 (http://www.engine-power.com/mazda/rx-7.html) gear ratios.

But i agree, the RX-7 vs Supra battle would be the best of all, except if 2 equal drivers r used at the 1/4 mile, the Supra would win. its the track that would be extremely good to watch, both, one with many tight turns, and one with a medium or high average speed.

posted by  Inygknok

hmm what do you guys think about these match up's....

Supra Twin Turbo vs S2000
or
Supra Twin Turbo vs Subaru WRX Sti

posted by  soljahx

why don't you start two new threads, be better that way

the Supra vs the S2000 won't be much of a match up but the Supra vs WRX STi, i would love to see the response on that! i would still think the Supra would win no doubts! :thumbs:

posted by  WeaponR

The S2000, when equipped with a good driver, will dominate in auto-x events.
The facts (http://research.cars.com/go/crp/features.jsp;jsessionid=ZLT2EPFNOG3TZLAZGJ FJXKY?destURL=features.jsp&year=2004&makeid=18&modelid=4387&myid=5512&super Trim=&acode=USB40HOC051A0&logtype=7&aff=national) say it has 240 hp, 162 tq, @ 2835lbs. Again, there is a considerable weight difference. BUT, the supra simply has too much torque and hp for the s2000 to handle. S2000 will most definitely lose in the drag.

With the STi, things get a lot more interesting. Its amazing how different these two cars are. the STi's awd gives it considerable advantage from a stop, allowing it to pull insane 60' times and pull low 13s with a good driver. The specs read 300hp 300tq @ 3263lbs. I would say, from a stop, the STi will stay ahead til about 100mph, then get walked by the supra. From a roll, the STi will stay ahead for a little bit before getting walked by the supra.

posted by  importluva

IMO, the only car that can actually rival the Supra in ANY sort of competition is the Skyline. both of them have enough advantages to just end up in a bitch slapping contest between the drivers just to prove who won. in my opinion, those r the kings of their class in overall performance and superiority, hands down. third, IMO, the RX-7 due to its lightness and great manuverability advantages, then somehow some sort of close match between the Evo, Sti, and NSX (nsx being the slowest one, but it certainly does have the best handling out of the 3), then at the end the 300zx, n the 3kgt..... i wouldnt class the s2000 in the same category as the rest of these cars, atleast not in stock trim. maybe at the far end since it needs to get abused to actually TRY to keep up with the rest.

thats just my $.02

posted by  Inygknok

i would have to agree, only the nissan skyline can challenge the supra

posted by  WeaponR

A Yugo could challenge a Supra.
.
.

posted by  BavarianWheels

Oh get the hell outta here. A Skyline being the only thing to compete with a Supra? I think not. You guys speak of the Supra like its some god.. The average Supra can do what 12's high 11's (with a moderarate ammount of tuning) Lets face it everyone does'nt have the time, money, and patience to make a 10 second car. So assuming we are at the average 1/4th drag race. There are plenty of other cars that if tuned well enough could easily step in the Supras ass. S2K possibly being one of those, cause I've seen those things come off the factory doing 13's.

Lets be realistic, I've seen lots of people with supras, even ones that have deep pockets. Still they claim that their 1/4 mile times are somwhere between 11's and 12's. Sure the Supra can get lower but again the average person just aint capable of such things. Again importluva speaks of the AWD being walked once speeds reach 100+. I have no idea how you reach that conclusion and I've never seen it on da streets. Almost everytime on a 1/4th drag the AWD jumps and accelerates faster, and even after 100+ mph the RWD is still loosing, may be gaining, but "walking" I think not. Sometimes the facts don't mean anything more HP and TQ don't always mean you're gonna win. I've seen a CRX take down a Supra. Simply because the CRX is a hell of alot smaller and has a higher P2W Ratio....You guys are speaking of stock car, wich is no fun who races stock? Throw some variables into the mix, lets make this interesting..

posted by  DSMer

YEAH! lets make it more intresting guys!

btw, isn't yugo a european car? cos if it is, it's not welcome here, ONLY ASIAN IMPORTS ALLOWED :laughing: :thumbs:

posted by  WeaponR

Umm Iono... I think a Yugo is Euro so its welcome here its ok...

posted by  DSMer

we r talking about stock trim cars cuz thats wat the whole thread is about, stock trim cars of this class. just read the first few posts, its clear there.

sure, a modded crx can take down a Supra. in fact, any modded car can take down any other stock trim car.

money factors only depend on the person, cuz ive seen people spend $80,000 on their s2000's and honestly dont have much to claim to back it up..... while others spending less than half of that can claim more.

it all depends on how do u invest ur money and where and on wat, and how u r able to put it to good use. over here in PR we can tune any sort of car for extremely low amounts of money.

we have a saying, "Dale a un americano un carro y hace que baje 11 segundos con $20,000. Dale el mismo carro a un boricua y hace que baje 11 segundos diariamente con $5,000"

translation: Give an American a car and he will make it pull 11's with $20,000. Give the same car to a boricua and it will pull 11's daily with $5,000.

and its true, he has a 2jz in a 1986 corolla with quite a few mods (drag only car). it only cost him $7,000 to do the entire conversion, fluidyne radiator, single turbo set up, 10 point roll cage (maybe less, ill ask), huge intercooler, n lots more.

thing is, u dont always need to buy everything brand new. hell, i was offered a turbonetics t3/t4 turbo with only 2 1/4 mile races on it for $300, and its actual value was of over $1,000. sometimes, buying used parts is sooooooooo much cheaper n u get the same performance. im getting my new pistons treated and such, same with everything else, even re-upholstery and a new driveshaft, and it totals out in under $5,000.

final point, just read the whole money management thing :P

posted by  Inygknok

supra is my bet for both answers to the original question. more stock hp i believe and more mods available.

posted by  fyse0

Arghemm* Read the first post.. Yeah I started this I think I would know what this post is about... :wink2:. Um yeah irregaurdless to how much money you have, I said alot of cars are capable of pulling 10's but not everyone has the time and money. 11-10 is a big gap. 1 second may not seem like alot, but it is in the world of drag racing. Umm yeah the Supra that was taken down by the CRX was not stock. He claimed high high 11's and had the engine to back it. I'm just saying using the average potential of a car(because only magazines and dumb kids race stock cars)because thats what makes the race fun. Adding parts and tuning the car to race it. Sure all the facts could prove that a stock car would another stock, thats simple calculations no fun there. And thank you for pointing out that a modded car could walk a stock car, I really did'nt know that man.. :laughing:

I have no idea why you are telling me about money managment? N did you ever think that people who spend 80,000 on a car its probably there only or predomenant car. Not everyone has the time to make their daily driver into a full drag car with a roll cage(ever try putting some friends in the back seat of car with a rollcage?) $80,000 could easily be spent on an S2K with ICE,Suspension,Motor Upgrades,Interior,Paintjob,Wheels etc.. Not everyone wants a drag car. But some people do like cars that have go and show. If somone had $80,000 in the first place they could easily turn a car into a drag, its not that they don't manage their money its just they have other means than turning a $40,000 car into a shitty looking drag car. And maybe people like the security of buying things brand new or spending $10,000 on a paint job. Or buying $1600/piece Sparco seats or $3600 Turbos and Superchargers. Spending $5000 on an interior job. If they have the bugger pockets then speding $80,000 on a car is managing their money...

posted by  DSMer

aint this board only for asian imports? im sure it is

the yugo talk shoud go over in the european board and if you want to compare the yugo to the supra, take it in the general board....why bend the rules hey

posted by  WeaponR

then people who like spending alot of money on rims, and paintjobs, etc, shouldnt complain about having deep pockets then. many people could have deep pockets n still dont spend so much money on stuff like that. so the whole spending alot of money and time, it just depends on u, and u only.

u need to decide wat u wanna spend money on and how much, and how.

posted by  Inygknok

I don't see why he can't mention a European car. I certainly don't mind.

posted by  abless

Right.. I have no idea what you are talking about :screwy: . Yes so back on topic.

posted by  DSMer

i don't mind either but what i was tryin' to get him to realise was that over here, we're only tryin' to compare other japanese models to the Supra! :thumbs:

posted by  WeaponR

Again importluva speaks of the AWD being walked once speeds reach 100+. I have no idea how you reach that conclusion and I've never seen it on da streets. Almost everytime on a 1/4th drag the AWD jumps and accelerates faster, and even after 100+ mph the RWD is still loosing, may be gaining, but "walking" I think not.

That is fact, go and race an AWD car, at a safe place, and see for yourself. At 100mph, depending on the power of the car, that is about 1/4 mile, so you can't go to a drag strip to see it the AWD get walked.
But, hypothetically, if you take a stock Evo8 and a stock Nissan 350z with equal drivers, and race to 130mph. THe evo will get a good jump but will get walked after 100mph. Its just fact.

I used the Evo and the Z in this example b/c their whp total is about equal. The evo puts down 225-240whp, the Z puts down 230-250whp. Therefore, the main differences must be the gearing, distribution of power, and AWD/RWD. The Z has superior gearing, top end power, and RWD to kill the evo at high speeds. Hell, even from a roll say 30mph, the Evo will soon get walked. Its just fact.

But if you take the STi vs 350z, even from a roll, the Z will have a hard time beating the STi. This is b/c of STi gearing, AWD headstart, wide powerband, and enormous hp/torque in the STi. The STi puts more power to the ground and is a 6-speed, unlike the Evo.

posted by  importluva

Interesting, but some 1/4rth's can reach 130mph. Even still the RWD car won't have enough space and or time to come back. Yeah ,race to 130mph, but there is no such class of racing(or at least I've never heard) its all quarter mile and if you can't walk a car in the quartermile then your car just aint better than the opposition(where I come from).

I understand the RWD at higher speeds but I've never seen any normal 10-second car pull faster than 140mph on a 1/4th. So again, I don't see it happening on a quarter mile and a quarter mile is what I was fererring to.

I'll completly disregaurd your last paragraph from that statment. No one cares if an STi can beat a Z33.... I mean what do they have like a 60HP and 1gear difference? Haha, not even cool man, not cool....

posted by  DSMer

Interesting, but some 1/4rth's can reach 130mph. Even still the RWD car won't have enough space and or time to come back. Yeah ,race to 130mph, but there is no such class of racing(or at least I've never heard) its all quarter mile and if you can't walk a car in the quartermile then your car just aint better than the opposition(where I come from).
Im not referring to any CLASS of racing, but simply helping you understand a fact

I understand the RWD at higher speeds but I've never seen any normal 10-second car pull faster than 140mph on a 1/4th. So again, I don't see it happening on a quarter mile and a quarter mile is what I was fererring to.
I dont give a damn about 1/4 mile traps, as i already stated. The cars i used in the comparison, which you should be familiar with, can not go that fast in the 1/4th stock, so dont even consider the 1/4 in this illustration.

I'll completly disregaurd your last paragraph from that statment. No one cares if an STi can beat a Z33
I was merely pointing out that all AWD cars are not weak, that AWD cars can hold up up top with the right amount of power, gearing, and power band.

.... I mean what do they have like a 60HP and 1gear difference? Haha, not even cool man, not cool....
WTF is a Z33? And no, the Z has 287hp, 280 something tq, so no, its not a pushover, and its a 6-speed

PS. you need to work on your spelling. proof read your posts more often.

posted by  importluva

YOU don't know what a Z33 is? Maybe you should be checking the facts. You ever heard of a S13 or 240SX? Z33 is another name for the 350Z(just letting you know). Anyways thats irrelevant and also my spelling, so long as you can understand it. This is'nt english man,get a grip partner..

Um yeah I'm considering all of them in 1/4rth becuase that is what cars are commonly judged on by speed not who can get to 130mph quickest. Thats not even a realistic thing I would come across, unless racing on the highway wich is something I would never do.

I don't care if you don't care about 1/4rths but everyone else seems to set that as a standard. You can judge a car by 130mph if you want, but that does'nt really mean anything. Again I said I fully understand the idea of an AWD loosing at high speeds but again I said 1/4 mile...No matter if the car pulls 10's or 15's.

posted by  DSMer

YOU don't know what a Z33 is? Maybe you should be checking the facts. You ever heard of a S13 or 240SX? Z33 is another name for the 350Z(just letting you know).
Thanks. I know what an S13/240sx is.

Again I said I fully understand the idea of an AWD loosing at high speeds but again I said 1/4 mile...No matter if the car pulls 10's or 15's.
Good, thats all i need to know.

posted by  importluva

I see we come to terms where we can agree.. :thumbs: *cough* 3000GT *cough* :wink2:

posted by  DSMer

:thumbs:

posted by  importluva

You know I never noticed but that damn DBZ avitar you have makes everything you post seem like you're angry.. Does'nt it?

posted by  DSMer

I never really thought about that. Thought the pic looked cool, so i stole it from another forum. But no anger here, just heated debate/discussion.

posted by  importluva

check OT for a vid of supra.

posted by  importluva

No anger here my subaru dwelling friend...

posted by  DSMer

i quite enjoyed readin' that Importluva and DSMer, pretty good!

the way the whole thing took off and then came back down to earth again. pretty damn well amazin'. i though it wasn't ever goin' to stop :laughing:

can i join in with the coughin' 3000GT thing DSMer? :wink2:

damn! that figure on the avitar is pretty angry, i just realised too :laughing: but you know what they say, nothin' is like what it seems to be on the outside :thumbs:

S14? thats the silvia right? i didn't know about the S13 :wink2: thanks guys! :thumbs:

posted by  WeaponR

Got my 1st close up look under the hood of a 3000GT VR4, and HOLY GAWD what a mess.
Supra wins hands down, weight to power ratio, regardless of the AWD GT.
Supra also wins "easier to work on"
The VR4, it's so packed under the hood I could hardly get my tiny hands anywhere. I can't imagine ever owning one and wanting to work on it myself. Maybe if the bloody engine wasn't transverse it'd be easier, but inline-6 is just a better balanced engine anyway
:mrgreen:

posted by  TanyasMkIISupra

Haha um your name shows otherwise buddy. Yeah they do have pretty tight engine bays but after you get a kit to relocate the battery and turn the intake into two sepearte leads instead of one lead with two heads the space clears up. I'm not really a fan of the VG.. err um I forget the numbers on the engine, but I would take a 3000GT over a supra anyday... It does'nt take but a few hours of mantime and a few grand to gets ome weight up out that bad boy and some more ponies to da wheels. :thumbs:

posted by  DSMer

My name shows different "buddy"? what is all that supposed to mean?

posted by  TanyasMkIISupra

He's lost!
.
.

posted by  BavarianWheels

i thought him being lost was old news :screwy:

posted by  Inygknok

Your another supra lover like Inyg over here. Your name shows that you're a Supra fanboi wich is why you're talkinga bout a VR-4 Engine bay. Hey the Supras is'nt exaclty the prettiest either... Best engine bay has to go to the S2K...IMO :)

posted by  DSMer

It's simply news to Tanya.
.
.

posted by  BavarianWheels

you guys missed understood me :oops:
I didn't mean it's engine bay is "ugly" just packed! And most Supras engine bays are not as packed as what I saw in the VR4. I actually like the VR4, I'm not biased because I own a Supra, lol The engine bay is very nice, but it's also very busy, and I imagine not easy to work on. I also prefer engines to sit the "right way" :mrgreen: and not transverse. Those are personal opnions. If an engine bay looks too empty or too busy, it kinda irks me, but at least if the engine bay is a little spacey, it's easy to work on.

posted by  TanyasMkIISupra

shes right... i love my car's engine bay. its got enough space all around so u can get ur hands into hard to reach spots. its pretty much a very straightforward space to work in without feeling that it's empty, cuz theres enough stuff in it in the right spots to make it look like a happy city made in sim city :P. the only drawback from the supra is that it's a long engine bay, so u have to move around alot if ur a short person, im just lucky for being 6'4", so i can pretty much lean over the entire engine and just have to move around if i really need to get into a more comfortable position, but thats it really.

posted by  Inygknok

http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/auto3/9907AUCTBM.html

hmm 13.44 in the 1/4 beats supras and 300zx's all day long(yes this is second gens, first gens run 13.7) just because your seeing some guys babying a 12 year old sports car doesnt mean it doesnt run fast.

you guys need to inform yourself this sounds like a ricer forum. Do your homework before you talk :)

And 350z's only beat Evos in crazy world or when they shut down

you also need to learn about gearing and dont over exaggerate awd train loss.

i mean a 3000gt will do 160mph... if your logic worked it wouldnt go over 120

there are no "real" drag 3000gt's that ive ever heard of or seen. Supra's dump 100's of thousands into their drag programs(titan, mvp ring a bell?) so no there are no 3000gts's in the 9's.

posted by  JimmyJJ

I wasnt going to post anything... but what ever... :D

my friend joe... has stock 94 vr4 with just K&N intake ... (is stock since you cant find a car without it... lol) he ran a 13.01 @ 105 mph... its all about knowing how to drive an awd car... EVO, STI, or VR4/Stealth RT TT, just drop the clutch at 6K+ and you will smoke anything off the line! Highway pulls... well thats a different story... but we are talking about 1/4s :D


D.

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/auto3/9907AUCTBM.html

hmm 13.44 in the 1/4 beats supras and 300zx's all day long(yes this is second gens, first gens run 13.7) just because your seeing some guys babying a 12 year old sports car doesnt mean it doesnt run fast.

you guys need to inform yourself this sounds like a ricer forum. Do your homework before you talk :)

Hmm. If we really are ricers, then you are not much better than us. You seem to like to mag race, so stfu already.

And 350z's only beat Evos in crazy world or when they shut down

From a roll, driver's race but edge does go to the Z (stock for stock)

you also need to learn about gearing and dont over exaggerate awd train loss

Who the hell are you referring to? AWD trannys in general have upto 20% drivetrain loss, but it depends on the car...

i mean a 3000gt will do 160mph... if your logic worked it wouldnt go over 120

Sorry if you don't believe, but AWD cars are best off the line, they lose a lot of oomph from a roll b/c AWD sucks at speed. Sure they can reach 160mph no problem, but a lot slower than similarly powered FWD and RWD cars.

Now troll, i suggest you go back to wherever you came from. Get lost.

posted by  importluva

A Stock Supra Twin Turbo should never be able to beat a 3000GT on a drag. Its a "close" race but Supra should loose everytime if the GTO driver can do just that. `95 Supra Twin Turbo Drag Runs (http://neon.atsweb.net/supra/stock_supra.html)

And I don't care about you importluva and your "mag raced" opinions. I specifacally stated at the start of this forum 1/4rth mile runs, No from a roll crap or up to 130. And you of all people should not be talking about "mag raced" opinions. These are all facts that word you love so much. With equal drivers the Supra would loose to the 3000GT by about 1 second or less.

posted by  DSMer

VW RAbbit kills Supra on Highway:
right click---save as (http://home.comcast.net/~16v/T16_Rgis_Supra.mpeg)

VR4 killing 911 Turbo Porsche
right click---save as (http://www.alteredatmosphere.com/Videos/99VR4ATNOPI.mpeg)

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

yes... stock vs stock a supra will lose in a 1/4 race vs a vr4/rt tt. It will not be by a lot, but it will lose... (and yes I have seen it... and yes I have driven both!) now lets move on to the next subject... :banghead:

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

heh, thats really odd, ive seen WAY better numbers from stock supras than those 13.9's. one guy with a standard one, bone stock, except for bigger rims, could run 13.6's all day long (i knew the old man personally, as well as his wife), havent seen him in 7 months though. one of the customers down at the speed shop could pull 13.4's with just a nice set of tires, but not drag radials, had nuthin on the car besides a new radio.

posted by  Inygknok

I beleive that guy hat some 13.6's, even still you gotta be in the low 13.3's to beat a 3000GT. Its one of those races where the cars will be front bumper to bumper. The GTO might win by a headlight.


GTO would launch in 1st jump hella faster than the Supra would still be experiencing some wheel spin and launch .200-.500 seconds later...

The GTO will have allready entered 2nd gear while the Supra is in 1st still and the time it takes for the GTO to gear to second the Supra catches up a second more

The Supra enters 2nd then 3rd gear and the GTO is at about 3rd and the Supra gains a few more each time the GTO shifts..

They've pass the 1/8th marking and because the GTO is almost maxed out in RPMS it has to shift to 4th while the Supra can stay in 3rd and catch up

Cars are about equal race is almost over the Supra now in 3rd has to shift up to 4rth or face the dangers of over revving.

Right here the Supra drops being just a minscule of a second as the 4rth gear on the GTO opens up and the GTO takes the win Supra comes right behind..

The Supra with its 6 gears allows it to go through them quicker but because the GTO has 5 it has more room in each gear and the GTO will gain everytime the Supra shifts(vice versa). By the time the Supra catches up it wil be beyond Maxed out in gears so the driver must shift, there fore causing the GTO to slightly move up.

I've seen a race like this and it looks like the cars are like battling in tiny steps as they shift gears. Good race between them two really comes down to the drives ability to shift correctly.

posted by  DSMer

heh sorry I called you out on "facts"... I know you didnt like proven wrong.

the cars are fast, faster than even a 350z

sorry "mag" races are much more credible then some schlub on a internet forum going "oh i crush Evo's all over"...

posted by  JimmyJJ

someone should just buy both cars in stock trim, and just test them out, cuz this is gonna keep up like the damn evo vs sti thing, its never gonna end and its gona come back and forth from "skills of drivers" to "power-to-weight" to "gears". so i think we should just drop it.

posted by  Inygknok

No there is no disagreance. The GTO would beat the Supra, the facts have shown so. No need for arguing.



Yes and imporluva this has been bothering me for a while. You say you like to "check the facts". When magazines are just that.. They don't sell magainzes with bogus facts and opinions. No one would buy the crap, so you can't deny somones "mag" race opinion, because I think the people in the magazines (whom drive,test, and review cars for a living) know their shit.

A hell of alot better than most of these internet sites out here. I'd trust an opinion from Car&Driver over JD&Power ANYDAY...

posted by  DSMer

I agree with DSMer

a supra vs a 3000GT would be impressive at the end of the day its getting perfect shifts to delieve the outcome. apparently most drag races are determined by the drivers ablity to know when to change gears :thumbs:

Of course this doesnt apply to a 50BHP car vs a 275bhp car :screwy: but that is besides the point

posted by  Lukaz

just want to point something out... at the drag strip... there is no need for 4th gear with the VR4/RT TT... 1st takes you to about 40-45mph, 2nd to about 80-85, 3rd to 115-120... 4th well... there are no stock vr4 trapping anything near 120! hell even 110!!

**NOTE** the GTO 94+ is also a 6 speed... 91-93 they are 5 speed

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

Look chump, what have you proven? That a few drivers made one run in a car and thus established what that car will do for everyone? When did i say i "crush Evo's all over"? Stop pulling shit out of your ass. "The cars"? Wtf is that? Which cars?

posted by  importluva

one run? wrong again, they ran multiple runs. Honestly learn about cars and how that review was done.

That 13.44 run wasnt a fluke, thats what that cars runs when driven correctly and in top shape.

cars = 3000gt vr4's and ill toss Supra's in there

and yes your car is a Z33 :) heh sorry couldnt resist

But to finish this discussion...

Although all these cars are very similar(3000gt, Supra, 300zx(aka Z32), RX7)

YES STOCK/STOCK A 2ND GEN(94-99) 3000GT VR4 IS FASTER THAN A LATE MODEL TT SUPRA! PERIOD.

A FIRST GEN(91-93) VR4 IS A TIE

AND YES A Japanese GTO MR is even faster than the 2nd gen(runs a 13.0)

case closed

posted by  JimmyJJ

WTF? 1st gear to 45mph? Thats probably gotta be the silliest thing i've ever heard. Even if your car could do 45 in 1st you would short shift to reduce wheelspin. Riding up to 45mph in 1st at a drag race would most likely not only decrease your time but possibly cost you the race. Aslo you would launch at about 5-6k so you would most likley have to reach a shift point into 2nd before 45MPH.

Seems to me like you are giving me redline shift, which is not always good for your car or your cars speed when drag racing. Sometimes the optimum shift range for each gear should prove sufficient so you don't risk eating any teeth off the syncros in your tranny. And if you don't have any, well more power to yah keep on red line shifting.

posted by  DSMer

look man, ive argued my case throughout this thread, so im not going to comment anymore. ill rest my case.

posted by  importluva

Sorry importluva, even I have to agree with him on this one. Hes got you with proven evidence. All you have is say so.. Those test were done by reputable magazines and they are not just any drivers.

I think you are resting your case cause you've been beat :2cents: .

posted by  DSMer

March of 1993 Road and Track results: http://www.mkiv.com/publications/road&track/2_94/rt294_10.jpg
specs of cars at that time: http://www.mkiv.com/publications/road&track/2_94/rt294_08.jpg


August 1993 Road and Track, Supra hangs out with the big boys: http://www.mkiv.com/publications/road&track/8_93/rt893_04.jpg


April 1994 Road and track, 3kgt isnt even here: http://www.mkiv.com/publications/road&track/4_94/0100_09.jpg


1998 Road and track Supra review: http://www.mkiv.com/publications/road&track/sports>cars1998/r&t_1998_4.jp g


March 1994 Car and Driver: http://www.mkiv.com/publications/car&driver/3_93/6-cd3-93.jpg

November 1993 Sport Auto (in french): http://www.mkiv.com/publications/other/sport_autos/2/sport_auto4.jpg

December 1999 Car Craft (this one is for laughs): http://www.mkiv.com/publications/other/know_your_enemy/cc1299_04.jpg

No name given on this magazine nor date (disappointing numbers, very different from the rest): http://www.mkiv.com/publications/other/other/supra_cr.jpg


ill let all of that do the talking

posted by  Inygknok

what ever... I rest my case also... there is no sence in trying to beat a dead horse with a stick! :banghead:

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

im sorry i don't consider magazine tests as the final word on a car's capabilities. i think i have argued enough in this thread, it's time for a break.

posted by  importluva

AMEN :thumbs:

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

so first its all about power-to-weight ratios, then its not, then its about the gears, then its just about RWD vs AWD vs ur mother on her period, then its not, then its just about pure power, then its just about shifting, then its just about magazine tests, then its not.


i thought my girlfriends were bipolar but u guys really take the piss :banghead:

posted by  Inygknok

hey inygknok...

http://www.ianai.net/jokes/forumpix/ponchomo.jpg

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :wink2:

posted by  importluva

:doh: i got a movie on my computer thet shows a tuned up supra on a dyno thet gives somthing like 960 hp and more then 900 nm of torque

i mean like its a monstar or somthing !!!

960 hp on a car like this !!!!

how do a thing like this goes from 0-60 ??

3 - 4 seconds ??

posted by  ILdriver

OI!!! ur just jealous that us hispanic people are loved by women everywhere.......... even though my friends keep calling me a man whore n it pisses me off.... still.... BLOW ME :P :D :fu:

posted by  Inygknok

960hp in a street car? It would be a pig to drive. All it would do is fry its tyres.
As for who is faster... Supra would beat a 3000GT as there a tank.

posted by  57ock

Its funny how you just openly say that without any fact. That makes it your opinion, and opinions are like but holes... everyone has them, and we don't need to see yours cause we allready know what one looks like.

"Err.. um dat der 30,000Gt is a amor military car.. uhh so the super wens!"
Pfft..

Inygknok no one cares about your man whorish qualities...keep it in yer pants. Or you and imporluva can get a room :laughing: .

posted by  DSMer

Oh for the love of all that is holy!!!!

http://www.ianai.net/jokes/forumpix/threadwontdie.jpg


Oh please 500lbs diffence in the cars... both are f*ck*ng tanks... and stop talking out of your @$$. stock vs stock the 3000GT VR4/Stealth RT TT will win the race... everyone knows it... supra owners know it.. 3kgt owners know... but looks like you still dont!

can someone close this thread... its getting to that point of no return... :banghead:

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

500 pounds......... yea sure..... almost nothing, right sundown?

posted by  Inygknok

lol yeah its nothing... god forbit if the supra had that much weight it would never move! Hey I had a supra... and know what they can do... I got friends with MKIV turbos and I see what they can do... and trust me the stock one cant beat a stock vr4 at a 1/4 mile! face it... you love your supra too damn much that you are blind and cant see it... like I said before... mod that supra and it will kill vr4... but not stock! now learn to live with it...

si te lo tengo que decir en español tambíen te lo digo! :read:

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

you all are :screwy:

:mrgreen:

posted by  importluva

nah, en ingles basta, no me lo tienes que decir en español :P

and yes importluva, we are all krazy, hence why i just enjoy seeing these guys get all worked up over nuthin. i think the kiddies are having too much candy :P (yes, im lowering myself to their level cuz they cant seem to keep up with the more mature users).

posted by  Inygknok

Id get more pu SS y in a TT supra than a VR-4 anyday. :hi:



Who gives a sh1t what will smoke what.... VR-4 has always been shadowed by every TT car (rx-7, supra, *300zx*, skyline¿). I think vr-4's are ugly but hey... you like what you like. :thumbs:

posted by  jzxTT

hey guys, are u talking the 2 dr 3.0lt v6 tt mitsy?

i wont bother with which i think would win cos it's already been covered. just wanna say I also think the gto is ugly as sin. but it does shift balls in standard trim! bottom end power is enough for me to lose it on a test drive in a real big way and still sell the bloody thing!

over here in nz (we get the jap imports as allways), they came out with 330hp out the box and responde real well to pod and pipe upgrades!
gimme a supra anyday though over the gto!

I gotta give back the M5 next week and as i need a decent sized 4 door family car with guts, I'm buying a 98 galant vr-4 to ferry the wife and kid round in. 2.5 TT v6 with 275hp out the box, before turbo housing gets cut back and new compressor and turbines go in.

wish me luck!

posted by  Unlicensed

damn an M5..... i wish i could afford a beast like that.....

i hate u :fu:


:P :D

posted by  Inygknok

:drool: dont hate! I wish I could too! :doh: the M5 aint mine it's the company car while the salesmanager is overseas. It has been a nice few weeks though :laughing: I will be driving the evo6 while I'm waiting for the galant vr-4 to arrive from japan :thumbs:

if the manager gets sacked or dies though....... :hi: i get the M5 back :wink2:

posted by  Unlicensed

first of all, you wouldnt get any...no matter what car you drove...

second, if you learn how to read the thread is called Supra Vs 3000GT... so we do care who would smoke who!

third a GTO MR will beat even the mighty Skyline GTR in a quater race... so its no shadow... stock vs stock the gto (vr4) is one mean car... start modding and the race could go any which way...

and finally you may thing the GTO is ugly... to each its own... but let me tell you, your damn honda (acura) is F* uglier!!!

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

If you think his Acura is ugly I don't know what you find pretty. Thats probably one of the better looking Integras I've seen that has'nt been disgraced with some bodykit. I feel stupid for calling it shitty, thats a very nice car :thumbs: .

I'm waiting to get my AWD chassis so I can get it painted Mercedes silver. I wonder what paint code that is...

posted by  DSMer

Supra wins. all the way...
why you ask? cuz i know.

posted by  soljahx

nice ride! but bruv? you gotta get some wheels for that in a hurry!

slam it on deep dish and flare it! gonna look heavy :thumbs:

posted by  Unlicensed

You're exclimation points really hurt. OUcH~ :banghead: . bottom line. Stop getting so pus sy hurt because I dont like your GTO, learn how to take a joke. The skyline is ugly too. So what, what I think should'nt bother you. Back on topic* The supra is a far superior machine than the 3000gt ever was. And im not the only one that thinks so obviously. You do have a nice car, but I would never buy a 3000gt. as far as you not likeing mine, who gives a sh1t, you dont have to like my car because Im the one who drives it every day and is satisfied. Im gonna ignore your mild ignorance, you dont know me nevertheless about my sex life. 3000gt Is a fast car.... I just dont like it.
BTW Thank you DSMer.... truce :thumbs:

posted by  jzxTT

LOL


LOL, man... look who is getting pu$$y hurt here... to be honest I dont give a sh!t if you dont like my car at all... hell my car is not for everyone... if it was... everyone would driving a 3kgt. as far as the skyline... I agree... its ugly... but its a far more superior machine than the supra. and I also agree, the supra has a lot more potential power than a 3kgt... but we are talking about stock form here... because of its awd set up... a vr4 will beat a supra any day of the week, if driven right! yes, if driven right... it really comes down to the driver... those number that keep getting posted about 3kgt on magz are from drivers that dont know how to launch an awd car!

I seen it too many times... hey in fact, I'm sure DSMer can agree with this one... when you first drive an awd car... you tend to drive it like a FWD or RWD car... its only until you learn the car that you can realized that by slipping/dropping the clutch at higher rpms the car is not going to fish tail and its not going to stay there spinning its tires!

In fact... check out the Evo numbers... when it first came out people where hitting low 16s, high 14s... with the car... now that they know how to launch it... they are cutting 2 to 1.5 off their times...

I seen guys that had had a vr4 forever... and when they race it... they slip the clutch at 3-3.5k rmps... yeah you are always going to get your ass kick if you drive it like that.... but drop that clutch at 5-6k hey even redline! I bet you can take care of 95% of all the car out there on the streets....

Perhaps you guys may think I dont know what I'm talking about... and to be honest... I dont really care... some of you guys dont even know what a street race really is... hmm, maybe soljahx, since he is from philly... but at the philly street races... the VR4 is king... I have been there... sometimes not with my car (and I say this before you F*cker say well your car is modded man!) with my friends semi stock vr4 (gutted pre-cats, testpipe, and manual boost controller set at 15 psi) and he kills anything at the night races!, supras, cobras, 300zx, civics, accords, mustangs, camaros, firebirds, you name it... it goes down! in fact we have giving cars 1-2 cars head start and they still go down... yeah! you guys think I'm full of sh!t what ever!

In fact... most cars after watching us race will back down... cuz they dont want to look bad... many times we have ended racing each other or our friends...(also vr4s) just cuz everyone else pu$$y out! the best line I hear one night was this guy setting up the races said "You pu$$ies think you are fast! come and race this guy!!!" we waited almost 5 mins and everyone lined up behind us all scared... including this white cobra that had been killing cars all night... it got to the point that it was getting late... no one was doing sh!t so my boy (also in vr4) stepped up... just so we can get things moving again.... by the way we did ended up racing the cobra and we beat his ass too!

you see a lot of you guys had watched F&F way too many times and think that just cuz paul can beat a ferrari in a movie with a supra, the supra is king... lol yeah think what ever you want... live in you small little supra world... its pointless to keep posting stuff in this thread... since it looks like everyone here is a bit :screwy:

Once again... I thinkt he supra is a great car... hell with the money... those things can dyno 1000hp and are really mean f*cking cars! hell from a roll a supra can beat mustangs, vr4s, and pretty much anything in its path... its truelly a great car... but stop thinking its the only great car out there... and once again... a stock supra will fall to a stock vr4 from a STOP because the vr4 can come out of the hole a hell of a lot faster!... I'm not saying it will be a kill... but it will be pretty damn close... but it would be like at least .5 sec difference... but in the drag racing would... .5 is a long time!

:2cents:

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

on a side note... a stock EVO can run and hang a stock VR4... so in theory.. it can beat a supra... which I think this the reason why this thread got started!

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

5 seconds difference?? On qt.mile time? roflmao. So the 3000gt (stock) is a ~13 second car and the supra is a ~18 sec car. :laughing: My integra would'nt even be 5 seconds slower than your 3000gt. Ya 3000gt might be able to beat a supra in qt mile but IMO (which does'nt really matter) supra is better. I had a choice between a 3000gt and a 300zx and I took the Z, tuned it to ~600rwhp and sold it. Horsepower isn't really a big deal to me, I pay more attention to quality which is why I think the supra is better and why I bought an acura. And I'm satisfied. I now have 17,000 to spend on whatever I want (*save for an evo/Sti). But ya 3000gt is one of the fastest cars in US.

posted by  jzxTT

First of all... I said POINT FIVE... ( .5) I never said a supra will run 18s on a quater... that would be silly!

once again... you can tune anything to be fast... you forgot the "STOCK" part didnt you...

hey more power to you for buying your honda... I'm sure its nice and all... but its just not the car for me...

and either choice between the evo/sti is good... I like both cars... but I personally would pick the sti... (since the evo is not an MR)


PS: like i said... you can pay and tune anything to be fast... right click save as... I sure DSMer would like this vid...

http://forum.vwsport.com/dload.php?action=download&id=2962&sid=7a4c47b5d5c8 3db0ba405eb541b5cdf6

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

jzx, you need to cut down your sig man, its too ****ing big! :banghead: :banghead: :cussing:

posted by  importluva

Hey jzxTT
just notice the Z in your sig... it wasnt there before... was that yours? what mods... looks pretty bad ass... and are those AV3s?

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

Yes It was mine. It was an awsome car. Here is the list of Mods:
Jim Wolf ECU
3" Brullen Exhaust
Dual Apexi filters
HKS EVC4
HKS Super AFR
JWT Wild Cams
JUN Valve Springs
Port and Polished Heads
Match Ported Intake
Greddy 2.0mm Metal Head Gaskets
Greddy TDO5-16G Turbo Kit
Jun Adjustable Cam Sprockets
Crower Rods
Arias .20 Over Pistons
Primespeed Front Mount Intercooler with Powdercoated Piping
Primespeed Fuel Rail Mod
Primespeed 3" Test Pipes
PowerTrain Aluminum One Piece Driveshaft
Apexi Skyline Fuel Pump with -8 Lines
Malory Fuel Press Regulator
SX Fuel Filter
Autometer Mini Shift Light
Greddy Oil Catch Can
Howe Radiator with Nismo thermostat
720cc Injectors controlled by JWT 720cc program and AFR
HKS Spark Amplifier with #7 plugs
Mueller Double Disc Clutch
KAZZ Rear End
Complete Nismo Rear End Bushings and Sub-Frame Bushings
SGP Throttle Body Pipes
Front and Rear Chromed Strut Tower Braces
Stillen A-ARMS
Stillen Sway Bars
Stillen Adjustable Tension Rods
Stillen Hicas Eliminator
Stillen Rear Camber Kit
Stillen Stage 2 Brake Kit
Stillen Oil Cooler
Stillen Lower Radiator Aluminum Pipe
Stillen SMZ body kit with SMZ panel and GTZ-R front bumper
Kaminari Rear Spoiler
Greddy Turbo Timer
Numerous Greddy Gauges
TEIN HA Coilovers
Clear Corners
Brushed Aluminum Interior
D Speed Clear Sidemarkers
18" VOLK RACING AV3 Wheels
Nitto 555 Tires 235/40/18 Front 275/35/18 Rear
Techtom 100
Navan Shiftknob
99 Fairlady Tailights
Carbon Fiber Fan Shroud and Throttle Cover
Racelogic Adjustable Traction Control.

posted by  jzxTT

all of this in a world where the drivetrain of AWD cars dont break by being launched at 6k rpms.

where 4g63's with AWD and around just 221 hp run as fast as their high tech brother the EVO, even with more weight and that much less power. both bonestock.....

all this in a world where all of a sudden 500 pounds of difference in weight doesnt matter at all.

all of this in a world where if its a RWD, it will automatically fish tail if launched at just 4k rpms. hell, my mechanic has a 2jz in his little 86 corolla and he never gets tired of launching it at 5k-6krpms and it doesnt fish tail.


oh btw, i agree that the r34 is fairly ugly, but i like the r33. actually, i like the rear of the r34 and the front of the r33. would be awesome to combine both, just like alot of people do with their 240sx's and sylvias, which look really damn nice.

posted by  Inygknok

one word... WOW... pretty sick man... why did you sell her? and only 20K sounds like thats at least a 60K car right there....

and on a side note... I knew they were AV3s... I f*cking love them... (its what I have in my car)

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

He showed me 20k cash and I melted...$$ :drool: $$

posted by  jzxTT

sh!t breaks I never said its bullet proof... hey you have to pay to play!



remember that 6k launch we keep talking about...



well a vr4 is 500 heavier but it can still woop on a supra... so yes it doesnt matter!




its all about the driver... first time I drop the clutch at 4k in my supra it f*cking fished tail like a b!tch (yeah I had a supra, 89, maroon, t-top, non-turbo) first time I did the same thing to my friends s2000 same thing happen... you just need the practice to control it...



wow the only thing we both agree... kind of freaky!

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

yeah I bet that was a nice sight... but I woulnt have sold her... unless I really need the money...

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

That thing hogged soo much gas. And was too powerful for me, I dont have enough skill to handle that kind of car so I had to sell it. Plus I got offered 20k so I took it. So i bought an integra. small, reliable, light, good on gas*, decent look, why not. put 3k into it and im happy. :smoke:

posted by  jzxTT

yea sundown, very freaky about the whole skyline thing.....

anyhow, i remember too when i first got my supra last year. i kept trying to launch it at 3k rpms and the damn thing just wouldnt listen to me, she just wanted to go sideways and mess with me. now i can do it just fine, but her alignment is also a bit off. apparently the previous owner screwed up big time putting in the new suspension n broke something. i cant remember wat it was that my cousin told me, as im no expert with suspensions. so her rear camber angle is messed up (she eats the insides of her rear tires really fast). same goes for the front tires, but those dont wear out that fast, but it almost cost me my life once (the 130mph tire blow, ill try to cut down the video to the last scene and upload it somewhere, i just dont have any hosting space thats not master crap angelfire or geocities).


im gonna keep disagreeing with the 500 pounds thing, so im just gonna agree to disagree.

jzxtt, too bad u had to give up ur old car :(

posted by  Inygknok

:mrgreen: its cool...

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

Hmmm? launching an almost 2 tonne awd gto at full revs? :screwy: I'd pay (not alot) to go see that. Just for the laughs :laughing: "whats that burning smell?"

Are your gto's only 220hp? really? they came out 330hp stock over here. what is the power output of your evo's?

posted by  Unlicensed

Im pretty sure he has a twin turbo gto with ~320bhp (stock), and im almost posotive that the evo has ~280hp. dont quote me on the evo tho. :ticking:

posted by  jzxTT

the 3kgt (gto) came in 3 trims... base FWD (220 hp), sl FWD (220hp) and vr4 AWD TT (320 hp 2nd gen).

you want to see an awd launch... right click and save as... Matt (http://www.dynamicracing.com/racing_movies/matt-dynamicracing.com-11.009-1 28.75.mpeg)

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

I was browing the supraforum and I came across this vid...

its not a bad vid... but the guys in the vr4 sound over excited... guess it was their first supra win... anyway here it goes... right click... save as

http://www.supramovies.com/videos/3000gt_vs_supra.mpeg

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

A stock EVO would demolish a VR-4.

Evo = low 13s
VR-4 = lucky sometimes to see high 13s, most run low 14s

Handling, well, hopefully that's a given.

posted by  thunderbird1100

lol what ever... lucky high 13s hahaha thats a good one... demolish a vr4... thats another good line right here...

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

My friend runs 13.4 in his 92 vr-4 bone stock. :ticking:

posted by  jzxTT

and my friend J. runs 13.01 in this 94 (with just a manual boost controller set to 3 psi more than stock)

my friend Vinnie runs 13.4 bone stock

and I ran 13.4 boosting at 4 psi (without the new turbos, injectors, fuel pump, boost-a-pump, udp and full exhaust including cats and pre-cats and some othe crap I didnt had a the time).

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

Oh well, seems like just another 3kGT lover gone bad again. Making me pull out the power/weight ratios to prove my point.

Evo lays down 235-240awhp which let's just say is 285 crank hp.

Let's do an Evo and Evo RS.

Evo RS = 3175lbs/285hp = 11.14lbs/hp
Evo base = 3263lbs/285hp = 11.45lb/hp
Evo base w/sunroof = 3321lbs/285hp = 11.65lbs/hp

Now for the 94 VR-4.

'94 VR-4 = 3760lbs/320hp = 11.75lbs/hp

1g VR-4 is even slower with less power.

Thus proving the VR-4 is slower than the EVO. And I don't believe anyone on the internet ever saying their VR-4 does mid 13s stock. Because I've seen them run at the track umteen times and never break 13.8s/13.7s. Modded? Well I hope you run mid 13s modded.

Let's do my 300zxtt for fun.

'92 300zxtt 3533lbs/300hp = 11.78lbs/hp

Now my car is faster down the strip. WHY? RWD is always the better choice for the dragstrip. AWD has no top end and bogs down after the 60'. I remember lining up against two 3kGT VR-4's (both 2g one coupe one convertible) both beat me to the 60' but almost right after that I passed them and continued on to widen the gap on to win by 3-5 tenths. The Convertible ran 14.3x on that pass and I ran a worse of 13.86. I ran my best pass later that night. The coupe VR-4 which did a 14.0x and I did a 13.62. My 300zxtt is also bone stock BTW.

posted by  thunderbird1100

lol, i cant help it. i just HAVE to do this!

1995 Toyota Supra TT:
Curb Weight: 3215lbs
Horsepower: 320
Torque: 315lb/ft

this means 10.05lb/hp


take THAT!!! both of u!! :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

posted by  Inygknok

That 3215 curb weight must be without the engine. Because TT mk4 Supras run 3500+lbs. Newsflash : 95 TT Supra = twice as much $ as our 300zxtt and VR-4. I could beat a TT mk4 Supra with one $50 mod, and still my car costs many thousands less.

posted by  thunderbird1100

ehhhhh no. its my version that weighs that much (targa version weighs a bit more). the 98 TT is supposedly a bit heavier, but i havent found any info proving this, but its certainly not 400 pounds of difference. supposedly, the 98 version is a bit heavier cuz the 6spd manual trans was returned since it could finally pass emissions.

http://www.mkiv.com/specifications/product_Information_book_93/product_info .htm
go there for all the information and comparisons.


EDIT: remember that saying, "You get what you pay for"?
:thumbs:

EDIT #2: the VR-4 is also cheaper than the 300zx TT.

posted by  Inygknok

:banghead: the problem is that if you dont know how to drive your car... you are def going to get bad times... I'm not auguring the numbers you posted... but let me assure you I have seen bone stock vr4s run 13 flat... its all about how you drive... I seen a vr4 with 50K worth of mods run a 14.1 just cuz the guy didnt know how to drive...

yes RWD is a hell of a lot better for drag racing... and top end... but the issue here is if a bone stock vr4 can run mid 13s and the answer is yes... you just have to drive it like you stole the thing... :D (the key to getting good times in a vr4 is all in the launch... yes a supra or 300zx or what ever will catch it up top... thats why learning to launch an awd car is so import for drag racing...)

now can a vr4 be modded to be a beast... yes... I know people that walk all over modded Supras, Vipers and 911 turbos from a stop or roll...

On a side note... the vr4 is a grand tour car... it was never design to be a drag car... many of you could figure this out just by looking at how much the car weights... but never the less... dont underestimate this car.... most of us modded ones... look stock! :D

Perhaps its time for me to buy my RX-7 and show you guys what a true sport car can do...

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

right click, save as blah, blah, blah (http://www.comesearchfind.com/rx7/havoc_vs_rx7.avi)

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

Eh, no. The mk4 TT Supras all weighed somewhere in the nieghborhood of 3400-3500lbs ( I know they dont weigh anything close to 3200lbs...they are very heavy big cars like the 300zxtt). The targa top doesn't add 300lbs to the mix and a Targa top mk4 Supra TT DOES weigh a little over 3500lbs. You are probably posting the weight of an N/A Supra.

Ok I just went back and checked you site...Yes, you did post the weight of the N/A model and not the TT model.

posted by  thunderbird1100

I never said mid 13s isnt impossible...just they NEVER EVER run that. To get the launch right to run a mid 13 in it you will ruin the tranny in the vr-4. I've seen that guy who runs 13.9s in his try and do a better higher rpm launch and his tranny dropped out. Unless you have a stronger tranny, I can't see anyone pulling mid 13s in a stock VR-4 for more than one run. The tranny will eventually drop out the car if done repeatedly. Other than weight that's the main weak-point of the VR-4. Has a weak AWD tranny. Fastest Stock 300zxtt i've seen did 13.4s. Bottom line is you put the same driver in the Evo/Vr-4/300zxtt it will go like this....

1st - Evo
2nd - 300zxtt
3rd - VR4

I've always preached the Vr-4 was a touring car and not a sports car. Which is obvious by it's weight as you said.

posted by  thunderbird1100

the guy under my sig name has done way over 200 track passes dropping his clutch at redline!

Only until last month he had tranny problem... but he turn around and put another one back in...

you would be surprise on how strong these trannies are... but I do have to say the sycros suck a$$!!!

Most people are afraid to do a 5k+ drop on these cars... and most dont do it... but if you want fast times... its the only way... remember you have to pay to play... i never said they are bullet proof!

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

I actually hear the 1g trannies are just a heap but the 2g trannies are a little bit better but like you said the synchros are junk.

posted by  thunderbird1100

ok, i think this is where i jump in and say my favorite anti-DSM line.......




GO CRANKWALK!!!!


:D:D :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

posted by  Inygknok

not all first gen trannies... only those with the 18 spline... 91s and half of 92s... they have a problem with transaxle and transfer assemblies... it was then fixed the other half of 92s and so on... in other words... a 91 VR4 owner would think twice before dropping that clutch at 5K+ rpms... while one in 93+ will just laugh about it... but please note... they are still not bullet proof, they are just stronger and can withstand more abuse from us :D

To this date I think Matt (the guy under my sig) is the only guy that I know that has broken a 25 spline tranny... :D all he said was... it was about time!!! then slapped the other one on...

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

hahaha thats a good one...


but just between us...

Are 3000GT/Stealth's considered DSM's?

No, the 3S's are not DSM's. All DSM's were made in the DSM plant in Normal, Ill. All 3S's were assembeled in Mitsubishi 's Nagoya, Japan plant. From the DSM FAQ: DSM - Diamond Star Motors A joint effort by Mitsubishi (three diamonds) and the Chrysler Corporation (penta-star) to build some of the most incredible automobiles in the world. The (following) vehicles were produced, the Eagle Talon, Mitsubishi Eclipse, and Plymouth Laser. DSM cars (were all) assembled in Normal, Illinois.

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

Just for reference on a Dyno Dynamics Dyno at Vishnu
Stock: WRX=155whp, EVO=190whp, STI=218 whp

posted by  Orange_240

All dynos vary, and sometimes 30-50whp differences arent uncommon. SCC got 235awhp from their EVO. 175awhp from their WRX and something around 250awhp for their STi.

posted by  thunderbird1100

If you get a dyno reading that 30-50WHP off, something is seriously wrong an that Dyno needs to be re-tuned.. Although its common to have a slight difference between dynos 30-50WHP is unacceptable. More like 10-15WHP.

posted by  DSMer

ill just laugh about a 25 or a 18 spline breakin cause they didnt go with the 300m from mark williams hehe

posted by  twinturbo3000

A lot of dynos vary. SCC just went around to 7 different dynos and got anything from around 10xwhp-17xwhp with their Ranger.

posted by  thunderbird1100

http://www.neochaos.de/forumemo/energizerthread.jpg

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

rofl! oi, u bad boy. stop fooling around and go get ready to cook my lunch tomorrow :P

posted by  Inygknok

hahaha good one... but I'm not DSMer... :mrgreen:

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

i know, he does my dinner and laundry :P

posted by  Inygknok

If anyone ever calls you fat say...."you know why im fat? Because every time I f*ck your mother she makes me sandwitches". :orglaugh:

posted by  jzxTT

To end this quarrel, I say neither wins........but i do say.........GO TOYOTA SOARER!!!!!!!!!!

posted by  20BRotaryTT

let me tell you all here the truth and let this end okay..3000GT wins over supra because ive owned them before and i know it okay. the supra loses and falls behind while gt awd take advantage and lauch while supra is still burning rubber. gt produces 315 at just 2500 so weight is carried off faster than supra. get it okay. the end :thumbs:

posted by  3kgt owner

bah! 3000gt's are fat ass cars. then again so is the supra...but still. Would never own one.

posted by  Low Impedance

the 3000gt doesnt make 315 at 2500!

posted by  CarEXPERT

Im new to this car stuff. Can someone explain to me what AWD is? And why manual > auto? Thx

posted by  iknownothing

Just For the record... You can do weight reductions, alone, on a stock vr4 3000gt and run low 12's high elevens.... Show me a stock supra that can do that? Modded... You can change the turbos, intercooler, and some other things and get huge gains from 320 stock to 600hp easy!! 3000gts beat supras all day.. I see it every day.

This guy   05 Aug 2012 00:59

Your Message