CSVT beats a G6 GTP, please!

This post is just down right retarded!

hey! I test drove an 06 G6 GTP with the 6 speed!

wow what a tourqie fast car, huuge 18 inch rims, with tons of tread, and I could still break loose in first and second!

was a nice car! to pricey for me tough!

I mentioned that I kept up with my dads automatic G6 GTP on the highway....

I have Intake / exhaust....

geez roger, are you still in Jr. High or what????

Originally posted by Rara:
geez roger, are you still in Jr. High or what????

What do you mean Brian

I posted this because I couldn't remember who uttered the statemen, thats all. It seems everytime I say something that puts Ford in an unfavorable light you bash what I have to say. I/we ALL know you work for Ford, who you know, blah, blah, blah, so lets stay on topic

Now, I'd be willing to bet GOOD money that a modded CSVT w/its 2.5L and exhaust and CAI will NOT beat the G6 GTP w/6 spd, thats all I'm saying

I'm not sure, but will I get banned for posting this or something?

Trying to figure out what the point of this is??

SVT 2.5
GTP 3.8 s/c'd correct??

soo to make it fair can we put a turbo on a csvt?

G6 GTO has a 3.9 NA V6 with a six speed.

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:
G6 GTP has a 3.9 NA V6 with a six speed.

Fixed

0 ok,

Soo lets put demons 3.0 against it?

Originally posted by SteedaSVTâ�??¢:
0 ok,

Soo lets put demons 3.0 against it?

Before this gets out of hand, let me just say this. I originally said the 3.5L Malibu had "some" power for what it was and I bet the G6 GTP w/ the 3.9L and 240 hp would be alot faster, fast enough to beat a slightly modded CSVT. Then someone came on here and said they beat one by a fender with his modded (exhaust/CAI) CSVT. Then I just stated in the recent car mag they post it runnin' a 14.4 @97 mph, so I called BS, just my .02 cents. Now as far as racing modded to modded cars, well, that can go on and on and this reminds me of the early days of the CEG when people actually came on here and said they'd smoke, SMOKE a GP GTP

Now as far as that would go, stock for stock, forget about it! Then they'd say, like you did Jason, that lets add a turbo or S/C-er to the CSVT and I say this to that, the GTP GP came stock with it and the CSVT didn't, but like I said, this can go on and on. Now to end it, a modded out GTP or Regal GS will SMOKE ANY CSVT IN THE CEG, period!!! Now when I say modded out, I'm talkin' to the level that Demon and Buckshot have done their cars. A well modded GP GTP/Regal GS runs 12's VERY easily and 11's are all around. I will also say this, I'd rather have the CSVT over the GTP/GS because the CSVT does everything well when heavily modded and those other cars do 2 things, go fast in a straight line and make great cruizers, thats about it

..love the regal gs..left in stock trim with some under hood mods is one of the greatest sleepers...and one of the most comfortable too

I know roger its ok....

Don't beat yourself up

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:

Originally posted by Rara:
geez roger, are you still in Jr. High or what????

What do you mean Brian I posted this because I couldn't remember who uttered the statemen, thats all. It seems everytime I say something that puts Ford in an unfavorable light you bash what I have to say. I/we ALL know you work for Ford, who you know, blah, blah, blah, so lets stay on topic Now, I'd be willing to bet GOOD money that a modded CSVT w/its 2.5L and exhaust and CAI will NOT beat the G6 GTP w/6 spd, thats all I'm saying I'm not sure, but will I get banned for posting this or something?

No, I was referencing the fact that you were getting all bent out of shape over what amounted to benchracing. Trust me, there is too much stuff that puts Ford in a bad light for me to get bent out of shape over it. . . . I'd never be able to fall asleep if that were the case, I'd be too pissed off all the time.

Every day i get in my car. I get pissed off that i still have a 2.5 under my hood slow!! And half of the folks in minvans pass me ha ha makes me wanna

Now y havn't i put a 3.0 under there yet?? hmm maybe this summer!!

Now who ever stated they beat 1 is an idoit!! Now if my memory serves me right i think i remmber this post. Wasn;t it in our region roger??

seriously..you get passed by minivans in your svt??? does it have the low output 2.5??

I really hope roger isnt getting betn out of shape from what I said... I dont know who else might have talked about a G6 GTP?

I did in another thread say that the automatic GTP is about on par with the SVT on the Highway. I stuck with my pops the whole time. From a dig was a bit different... especially considiering I wont launch hard.

Its a nice car either way, but I still dont like pontiac interiors. I think the SVT is way above it in quality.

Originally posted by tour96se:
seriously..you get passed by minivans in your svt??? does it have the low output 2.5??

all the time y?? tour calm ur self. i was kidding, i was merley agreeing with roger that new cars/suv's are just as fast as our cars our.

Originally posted by SteedaSVTâ�??¢:
Trying to figure out what the point of this is??

SVT 2.5
GTP 3.8 s/c'd correct??

soo to make it fair can we put a turbo on a csvt?

Yeah that's almost like trying to compare my '00 CSVT to my '05 GTO at the track - never ran either car, but I'm guessing low 15s vs high 12s. CSVT gets a few nods tho' - better feeling brakes and better seats for the long trips...and my /////Alpine system sounded better.

Originally posted by myfastse:

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:
G6 GTP has a 3.9 NA V6 with a six speed.

Fixed

Whoops! Poor typing skills. D'PH!...I mean D'OH!

I was interested in trying (not necessarily buying) the GTP (Hell, I'd take a GTO if it were in Canada, but that's an aside...). But if it costs as much as a Mustang GT, I know which one I'd take.

Originally posted by Pudmunkie:
I really hope roger isnt getting betn out of shape from what I said... I dont know who else might have talked about a G6 GTP?

I did in another thread say that the automatic GTP is about on par with the SVT on the Highway. I stuck with my pops the whole time. From a dig was a bit different... especially considiering I wont launch hard.

Its a nice car either way, but I still dont like pontiac interiors. I think the SVT is way above it in quality.

I guess I did get a "bit" carried away, but I think in the spring I may need to go and rent a Malibu w/ the 3.5L V6(200 hp) and invite someone with a CSVT to Ubly. Kinda like "Pinks" but w/o the pinkslip

I'm sure the "slushbox" robs some power, but I can't come to grips with it robbing THAT much to be even close. I mentioned earlier in the post about the perf world passing the CSVT by, you know what, the SRT-4, ION Redline, Cobalt SS and this new G6 GTP w/ 6 speed runs the same 1/4 mile ET/MPH as a stock 87' GN, man have times changed and changed for the good

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:

Originally posted by myfastse:

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:
G6 GTP has a 3.9 NA V6 with a six speed.

Fixed

Whoops! Poor typing skills. D'PH!...I mean D'OH!

I was interested in trying (not necessarily buying) the GTP (Hell, I'd take a GTO if it were in Canada, but that's an aside...). But if it costs as much as a Mustang GT, I know which one I'd take.

Don't know what a new 300hp Mustang GT can be bought for, but I paid $28,355.00 for my 400hp GTO

The wonders of GM, a boosted 4L and the best they can do is a mid 14 run.

Originally posted by DaJudge:

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:

Originally posted by myfastse:

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:
G6 GTP has a 3.9 NA V6 with a six speed.

Fixed

Whoops! Poor typing skills. D'PH!...I mean D'OH!

I was interested in trying (not necessarily buying) the GTP (Hell, I'd take a GTO if it were in Canada, but that's an aside...). But if it costs as much as a Mustang GT, I know which one I'd take.

Don't know what a new 300hp Mustang GT can be bought for, but I paid $28,355.00 for my 400hp GTO

Mustang (New Technology) GTO aka Camaro (Old Technology). By that, I would think and hope that they would be cheaper...

Originally posted by ODC:
The wonders of GM, a boosted 4L and the best they can do is a mid 14 run.

IT IS NOT BOOSTED FOLKS!

The new 3.9L V6 is a NA VVT pushrod engine producing 240-245HP/245TQ. It was designed to make a flat torque curve verses peak power & is used in several mid sized GM platforms. (mainly behind a slushbox) It has 90% of peak torque available from 1800rpm to redline. That's saying something for how it's tuned.

It's "spec'd" at roughly:
15.7 @ 95 in the 3800lb Impala (slushbox)
15.5 @ 96 in the 3600lb Malibu Maxx (slush)
15.3 @ 96 in the 3400lb Malibu (slush)
15.4 @ 95 in the 3400lb G6 (slush)
15.0 @ 97 in the 3300lb G6 (6-spd)

It's also used in many of GM's SUVs.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Mustang (New Technology) GTO aka Camaro (Old Technology). By that, I would think and hope that they would be cheaper...

GTO aka Holden Monaro

Camaro/Firebird aka dead and buried.

Also your logic is anything but. The GTO is one hell of a lot of car for under 30k. Too bad it doesn't come in sedan form or it would be a worthwhile car. It's too fat and heavy to be a good 2 door car. Then again the new Mustang is also fat & heavy as well.

They are both more grand touring coupes then muscle cars and are most DEFINITELY NOT sports cars.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:

Originally posted by DaJudge:

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:

Originally posted by myfastse:

Originally posted by Phil Rohtla:
G6 GTP has a 3.9 NA V6 with a six speed.

Fixed

Whoops! Poor typing skills. D'PH!...I mean D'OH!

I was interested in trying (not necessarily buying) the GTP (Hell, I'd take a GTO if it were in Canada, but that's an aside...). But if it costs as much as a Mustang GT, I know which one I'd take.

Don't know what a new 300hp Mustang GT can be bought for, but I paid $28,355.00 for my 400hp GTO

Mustang (New Technology) GTO aka Camaro (Old Technology). By that, I would think and hope that they would be cheaper...

Don't know much about the Vette powered Aussie GTO do you?

http://www.pontiac.com/gto/index.jsp

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Mustang (New Technology) GTO aka Camaro (Old Technology). By that, I would think and hope that they would be cheaper...

GTO aka Holden Monaro

Camaro/Firebird aka dead and buried.

Also your logic is anything but. The GTO is one hell of a lot of car for under 30k. Too bad it doesn't come in sedan form or it would be a worthwhile car. It's too fat and heavy to be a good 2 door car. Then again the new Mustang is also fat & heavy as well.

They are both more grand touring coupes then muscle cars and are most DEFINITELY NOT sports cars.

True...I sure do miss my CSVT's 4 doors and bigger trunk. The GTO has about twice as much rear leg room, but getting to the rear is the thing. And it is fat [around 3,900 lbs]...but a '05 and '06 slushboxed GTO is factory rated at 4.6 [0-60] and 13.0 [1/4] and the manual is rated a tad slower at 4.7 [0-60] and 13.1 [1/4]

I doubt that there's much out there that can outrun these tubs, for the money. A few mods [can't wait till I replace the heads and cam] really wake up the LS2. A lot are spraying and supercharging their GTOs, but mine's going to be all-motor. The 3,900lbs is no match for the 6.0 liter V-8

The old standby rule. If you don't want to or can't make it ligher then just throw obscene amounts of power at it.

I prefer lighter and nimbler myself.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The old standby rule. If you don't want to or can't make it ligher then just throw obscene amounts of power at it.

I prefer lighter and nimbler myself.

I'm going for at least 450 whp - all motor

My CSVT did feel more nimble, but I'm guessing that it would weigh in within 100lbs of the Mustang's 3,500lbs and within 500lbs of my GTO.

The GTO doesn't seem to take up anymore room in my garage than my CSVT did.

With DRs, heads, cam and tune, I figure the GTO will be a 11 second car.

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:

I guess I did get a "bit" carried away, but I think in the spring I may need to go and rent a Malibu w/ the 3.5L V6(200 hp) and invite someone with a CSVT to Ubly. Kinda like "Pinks" but w/o the pinkslip I'm sure the "slushbox" robs some power, but I can't come to grips with it robbing THAT much to be even close. I mentioned earlier in the post about the perf world passing the CSVT by, you know what, the SRT-4, ION Redline, Cobalt SS and this new G6 GTP w/ 6 speed runs the same 1/4 mile ET/MPH as a stock 87' GN, man have times changed and changed for the good

Well I dont know if you're catching what im saying. The GTP took me from a stop, it pulled away due to its low end grunt. On the highway (60-70+) its relativley even field.

I hear you, so your saying on a roll the cars are pretty much the same then, right

One thing I know about GM car is the "fun govenor" and thats also holding the G6 GTP back in that area. My thing is this, in the 1/4 mile, the G6 GTP w/ 6 speed beats the CSVT by an acre. I don't know where those stats came from, but my C&D says 14.4 @97 mph for the G6 GTP w/6spd. Also, I can't believe the Malibu weighs 3800

Imagine if that car was on diet, say about 400lbs.

Now as far as the GTO, we arent' comparing the GTO and CSVT again are we

Given both cars, I'd take the GTO 100 out of 100 times and twice on Sunday. 400 hp, FOUR HUNDRED foot pounds of torque, 6 spd and RWD, did I miss something....oh yeah, mods, lots of them!

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The old standby rule. If you don't want to or can't make it ligher then just throw obscene amounts of power at it.

I prefer lighter and nimbler myself.

Somebody mentioned me???

I prefer more boost with moderate weight increase!!

Lots of fatty torque for a 3300 (estimated) lb contour.

Quote:

I hear you, so your saying on a roll the cars are pretty much the same then, right

Yes. I am.

Originally posted by Pudmunkie:

Quote:

I hear you, so your saying on a roll the cars are pretty much the same then, right

Yes. I am.

you guys are insane..your not even comparing apples to apples here..your talking about a car with a 23k dollar,2.5l 200hp..to a 29k dollar,3.9l 245hp..of course its not going to beat it in a straight line...your also over looking what the mission on the csvt was...to make a car that did everything well,get off the straight line bs..show me a car in the csvt's class that can handle like it? certainly not the g6 gt,which would be closer to the tours class.....after all thats the tours strong point,not straight line

Originally posted by DaJudge:
My CSVT did feel more nimble, but I'm guessing that it would weigh in within 100lbs of the Mustang's 3,500lbs and within 500lbs of my GTO.

My SVT weighs about 3000lbs.

Not exactly a "lightweight" but it's really tossable with the good suspension bits. FWD does suck though.

Also the lighter weight makes the little 3L feel pretty lively.

Originally posted by tour96se:

Originally posted by Pudmunkie:

Quote:

I hear you, so your saying on a roll the cars are pretty much the same then, right

Yes. I am.

you guys are insane..your not even comparing apples to apples here..your talking about a car with a 23k dollar,2.5l 200hp..to a 29k dollar,3.9l 245hp..of course its not going to beat it in a straight line...your also over looking what the mission on the csvt was...to make a car that did everything well,get off the straight line bs..show me a car in the csvt's class that can handle like it? certainly not the g6 gt,which would be closer to the tours class.....after all thats the tours strong point,not straight line

in 2000 could the Grand am beat a CSVT in a straight line...no.

End of this discussion.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by DaJudge:
My CSVT did feel more nimble, but I'm guessing that it would weigh in within 100lbs of the Mustang's 3,500lbs and within 500lbs of my GTO.

My SVT weighs about 3000lbs. Not exactly a "lightweight" but it's really tossable with the good suspension bits. FWD does suck though.

Also the lighter weight makes the little 3L feel pretty lively.

Don't know what your whp is, but your ET is a good testament as to how lively your CSVT is.

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
I hear you, so your saying on a roll the cars are pretty much the same then, right One thing I know about GM car is the "fun govenor" and thats also holding the G6 GTP back in that area. My thing is this, in the 1/4 mile, the G6 GTP w/ 6 speed beats the CSVT by an acre. I don't know where those stats came from, but my C&D says 14.4 @97 mph for the G6 GTP w/6spd. Also, I can't believe the Malibu weighs 3800 Imagine if that car was on diet, say about 400lbs.

Now as far as the GTO, we arent' comparing the GTO and CSVT again are we Given both cars, I'd take the GTO 100 out of 100 times and twice on Sunday. 400 hp, FOUR HUNDRED foot pounds of torque, 6 spd and RWD, did I miss something....oh yeah, mods, lots of them!

Yeah, it's neat. I've seen GTO owners w/ less mods than me [CAI and DRs] run 12.6s and 12.7s - and break into the 11s w/o forced induction or nitrous, w/ just heads, cam, full exhaust and tune.

The best part, I paid less than 4k more for my GTO [$28,3xx vs $24,4xx], 6 years after I bought my CSVT.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Too bad it doesn't come in sedan form or it would be a worthwhile car.

It does GM-USA is just to f'en stupid to bring it over!

Roger...of course the perf world is leavin the CSVT behind. The CSVT died 5 years ago!

Wow, that sedan is sex. I'd buy it.

I think im gonna go on the Topaz owners forum and tell them that the G6 GTP is faster than there topaz's

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Too bad it doesn't come in sedan form or it would be a worthwhile car.

It does GM-USA is just to f'en stupid to bring it over!

I know it does "outside the states."

There are many sweet sedans OUTSIDE the states.

The typical society of sheep here just does not get the sport sedan and wagon market at all. It's a damn shame and a painful burden for the few enlightened individuals hindered by it.

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:
Roger...of course the perf world is leavin the CSVT behind. The CSVT died 5 years ago!

What I mean is this, back in the late 90's, what could match the CSVT for around the price, not much, but with all the advancements, ALOT of cars have gone well ahead, thats all. Think about it, look at whats out there now in the SCC market, it wasn't like that 5 years ago, too bad

Quote:

show me a car in the csvt's class that can handle like it?

SRT-4 and in addition to handling,==================LSD, turbo, Viper seats, front mount intercooler, mods from the factory w/ warrenty, 17" wheels, GREAT brakes and lets not forget the clincher, its a little over $20K, cheaper than the CSVT was 5 years ago!

I don't think the SRT-4 is in the same class as a CSVT, IF we are going into SCCs than the MSprotege would be above the CSVT in handling too, they can be had now for less than $20k.

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:

Quote:

show me a car in the csvt's class that can handle like it?

SRT-4 and in addition to handling,==================LSD, turbo, Viper seats, front mount intercooler, mods from the factory w/ warrenty, 17" wheels, GREAT brakes and lets not forget the clincher, its a little over $20K, cheaper than the CSVT was 5 years ago!

Whatever. It has never handled in the CSVT's class!
It whipped us in straight line acceleration, stock on stock though.
It has not had the build quality of a CSVT...in most cases anyway.
It hasn't got the cargo room or the visibility out all windows.
I like the interior well enough on the SRT-4 but the SVT is definitely better.
The engine on the SVT is a better engine because it is similar in size, naturally aspirated it made 90% of the power that the SRT4 was rated at. Or conversely the SRT4 made 225 HP with a turbo.

It is cheaper than the CSVT, but then again you got less in the refinement category.
There are things in the CSVT that could have easily been done better though.

A F'in Neon??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

What a joke, Cool car way to small and i thought it handled like a peice of [censored]!

Fast in a straight line.

i've never heard of the srt handling well out of the box,sure with the proper suspension it can be made better...

You guys must not remember the good 'ol days of Neons entering into competitive racing. The Neon is actually a very capable handler. Always has been. Perhaps not always up to CSVT standards, but I'm sure the ACR package approached the levels coming from the CSVT, if not bettered them.

Here's some racing history for the Neon... SCCA

Well ya....modified is a different story, and the car is a lot lighter and smaller. Once a good tuned suspension is thrown on it then its good.

We have to compare stock for stock and with the exception of power and price, the SRT was behind the already OLD CSVT.

HAULT! The build quality is better, can you say dash warpage, syncros, diffs, black paint chipping, moonroof motors, etc. IMO both cars are going to have "some" issues, so thats nill and void IMO

Now lets talk about price! My car stickered for $23.5K and with factoring in inflation, what would that put the 2000 CSVT up to right now. Let me say this again, I liked my old car, alot, but IMO the SRT-4 IS in the same catagory and is a better perf, turbo or not. I don't like this "well, its got a turbo and the CSVT doesn't", it is what it is, period! Its like if my Aunt had nuts, she'd be my Uncle

Comparing base models, sure, the Contour is a nicer ride, but when you look at the perf versions, most enthusists will look past some things to get to perf, especially when its available at the dealership, what a concept

Lets look at it like this then, $24K for the CSVT back in 2000 and about $21K for the 2005 SRT-4, what could you have done with the extra $3K you saved on the SRT-4....

-mod that suspension to outperform the CSVT
-upgrade to a stage 1 package

I'm theres other things I'm missing because I'm not into that car, but you get the point, I hope

Another thing is this, the base Mazdaspeed 6 is a little over $28K, or about $4K more than the CSVT and NOW we're talking bargain, substance and exclusivity!!!

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
HAULT! The build quality is better, can you say dash warpage, syncros, diffs, black paint chipping, moonroof motors, etc. IMO both cars are going to have "some" issues, so thats nill and void IMO Now lets talk about price! My car stickered for $23.5K and with factoring in inflation, what would that put the 2000 CSVT up to right now. Let me say this again, I liked my old car, alot, but IMO the SRT-4 IS in the same catagory and is a better perf, turbo or not. I don't like this "well, its got a turbo and the CSVT doesn't", it is what it is, period! Its like if my Aunt had nuts, she'd be my Uncle Comparing base models, sure, the Contour is a nicer ride, but when you look at the perf versions, most enthusists will look past some things to get to perf, especially when its available at the dealership, what a concept Lets look at it like this then, $24K for the CSVT back in 2000 and about $21K for the 2005 SRT-4, what could you have done with the extra $3K you saved on the SRT-4....

-mod that suspension to outperform the CSVT
-upgrade to a stage 1 package

I'm theres other things I'm missing because I'm not into that car, but you get the point, I hope Another thing is this, the base Mazdaspeed 6 is a little over $28K, or about $4K more than the CSVT and NOW we're talking bargain, substance and exclusivity!!!

And if I had a point, it was that the 2000 $24,4xx.xx CSVT served me very well, but when I had a chance to buy a 2005 $28,3xx.xx GTO it was a no brainer. A 13.0 sec car right off of the showroom floor, and more power, with just a few basic mods, made cheaper and easier than I could have ever gotten out of my CSVT

When I started thinking about how a Saturn Ion just might be able to walk me, I knew it was time to start lookin' for a replacement

Quote:

When I started thinking about how a Saturn Ion just might be able to walk me, I knew it was time to start lookin' for a replacement

Looks like your got out while the getting was good because those cars smoke the CSVT too

Someone over on our Crossfire forum posted a link for the upcoming Sky (

) and there was more than a couple guys over there putting down 230 hp to the front wheels

Personally I'd take the Cobalt SS over the ION Redline and you know what, even though the Saturn is plastic, its still 150 lbs heavier, why

BTW, I'm sorry if I offended anyone with the "smoke the CSVT comment"

BTW, I love benchracing, it makes the winter time alot more fun

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:

Quote:

When I started thinking about how a Saturn Ion just might be able to walk me, I knew it was time to start lookin' for a replacement

Looks like your got out while the getting was good because those cars smoke the CSVT too Someone over on our Crossfire forum posted a link for the upcoming Sky ( ) and there was more than a couple guys over there putting down 230 hp to the front wheels Personally I'd take the Cobalt SS over the ION Redline and you know what, even though the Saturn is plastic, its still 150 lbs heavier, why BTW, I'm sorry if I offended anyone with the "smoke the CSVT comment" BTW, I love benchracing, it makes the winter time alot more fun

Yeah, I'm sorry too. No real offense intended. The CSVT was the best car I've owned so far. It did everything well. Did some things even better than my GTO, but I'll address that problem the first time I do a brake job on the GTO. I'll be a happy guy if my GTO proves to be as trouble-free as my CSVT was.

the ion is heavier because its longer than the cobalt

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
HAULT! The build quality is better, can you say dash warpage, syncros, diffs, black paint chipping, moonroof motors, etc. IMO both cars are going to have "some" issues, so thats nill and void IMO Now lets talk about price! My car stickered for $23.5K and with factoring in inflation, what would that put the 2000 CSVT up to right now. Let me say this again, I liked my old car, alot, but IMO the SRT-4 IS in the same catagory and is a better perf, turbo or not. I don't like this "well, its got a turbo and the CSVT doesn't", it is what it is, period! Its like if my Aunt had nuts, she'd be my Uncle Comparing base models, sure, the Contour is a nicer ride, but when you look at the perf versions, most enthusists will look past some things to get to perf, especially when its available at the dealership, what a concept Lets look at it like this then, $24K for the CSVT back in 2000 and about $21K for the 2005 SRT-4, what could you have done with the extra $3K you saved on the SRT-4....

-mod that suspension to outperform the CSVT
-upgrade to a stage 1 package

I'm theres other things I'm missing because I'm not into that car, but you get the point, I hope Another thing is this, the base Mazdaspeed 6 is a little over $28K, or about $4K more than the CSVT and NOW we're talking bargain, substance and exclusivity!!!

Uhhh Yeah! I can say the build quality is better because the fit and finish is/was better when new. The design of the dash pad, glue, or whatever is a long-term durability issue, not a new car issue. I can't argue that it isn't flawed.
As far as your "Hault" (:D spelled Halt by the way), no YOU HALT! You tell me I can't say anything about the lack of a turbo or not lack of a turbo...yada yada yada.
Well aren't you doing the same thing by comparing a 3-5 year old contour with dash warp to a brand new SRT that has no dash warp? Well don't use a double standard.

It is the as-new delivered condition that you must compare.
It is certainly fine to illustrate that the CSVT made 200 HP with NO TURBO five fuggin years before the SRT-4 even came out! IT is certainly fine to point out that two engines that were relatively the same displacement put out similar power only that it took a turbo for the SRT4 to hit only 12% more power. You do the math. And yes, we know what happens when you turn up the boost, but you were talking stock to stock right?

As new condition, the CSVT DID have better fit and finish and build quality than the SRT4. It had a better designed layout for the interior as well. It handled better out of the box 5 years before than the SRT4 did. It is a bit bigger car and has better ride manners too. So SVT got better ride and handling out of their package than SRT did with their lighter/smaller car. Yes, I know that the dodges do well in racing with a race suspension but again, you were arguing stock to stock.

The SRT4's reliability hasn't been winning it any awards either.
It is the SRT4s bang for the buck pricing and performance that makes it a clear performance winner, everything else is debateable or fixable.

So in the end, don't bring up the individual flaws of a 10 year old drivetrain design and compare to a 4 year old drivetrain design that hasn't had the time to prove itself, and say that the latter is superior.

Would you say your car is maxed out Warmonger? The reason I is because you seemed to take great offense to the comparison between the CSVT and SRT-4. Don't take offense to this as you've been a huge help to many here in the CEG, but why don't we just compare both cars modded out, like yours and those SRT-4's that run well into the 12's. My point is this, give the car its due, its cheap, unrefined (to some thats a good thing and wanted) and has the goods from the git go! Atleast the SRT-4 guys learned from ALL the mistakes that SVT made and even addressed their own problems, like the lack of the LSD on the 03' and then putting it in all 04's and on, smart, very smart. Did I mention the factory aftermarket parts available too. Must be nice to be able to do that instead of getting a turbo kit from half way across the country, a trans upgrade from another part of the country, Euro suspension kits from another and so on and so on. Not everyone, myself especially, likes to "Frankenstein" their cars together with the hopes it all works together, especially with NO R&D! Also, to be clear, I enjoyed my 5+ years in the CSVT, but I'm going to apply what I learned with it on my next car, thats for sure!

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
Would you say your car is maxed out Warmonger? The reason I is because you seemed to take great offense to the comparison between the CSVT and SRT-4. Don't take offense to this as you've been a huge help to many here in the CEG, but why don't we just compare both cars modded out, like yours and those SRT-4's that run well into the 12's. My point is this, give the car its due, its cheap, unrefined (to some thats a good thing and wanted) and has the goods from the git go! Atleast the SRT-4 guys learned from ALL the mistakes that SVT made and even addressed their own problems, like the lack of the LSD on the 03' and then putting it in all 04's and on, smart, very smart. Did I mention the factory aftermarket parts available too. Must be nice to be able to do that instead of getting a turbo kit from half way across the country, a trans upgrade from another part of the country, Euro suspension kits from another and so on and so on. Not everyone, myself especially, likes to "Frankenstein" their cars together with the hopes it all works together, especially with NO R&D! Also, to be clear, I enjoyed my 5+ years in the CSVT, but I'm going to apply what I learned with it on my next car, thats for sure!

Actually, I wasn't offended before. I was trying to change way of thinking on the subject, not tell you that it is wrong to respect the SRT4. The SRT4 is a good car.
However, I do not believe it is better than the CSVT. I think that it was targeted at a different age group and for its purpose it has succeeded well. The whole comparison is usually foolish anyway because they were never direct competition in the market.
The mentality that "the SRT4 kills the contour" is what I'm talking about, because it simply doesn't.
Now, on to my car:
No, I don't think my car is anywhere near close to maxed out. I run a very porkish CSVT because I like my creature comforts. I have extra sound deadening material in the car to make it quiet on the highway. I run a large resonator and twin mufflers along with a catalytic converter. I have 150 pounds of extra stereo equipment and little things in the car. I'm running a heavier rim than I need to as a cost cutting method to getting better traction with bigger tires.
My car is more a science of refined bang for the buck.
My engine is capable of 400-475 crank HP as it sits right now. I run it less.
The transmission is fine and the suspension is a good compromise between all out race and road manners. It has been designed around a street sleeper with weekend track jaunts in mind, nothing more.

With my enginuity and experience I can create a contour that is much more potent and more than a match for a comparable import car. That hasn't been my goal.

BTW, very very few street daily driven SRT4s see 12s, even highly modded. Granted, there are more faster SRT4s than contours by far, but one is a perf. sedan versus a factory street rod. Those cars are easier to get into the twelves because of their weight, mods and suspension design. The suspension tuning was for better straight line acceleration, and now you can fathom why the CSVT was a better twisty road handler, stock for stock, and why the SRT4 is superior for drag racing.

I like to hold on to my money and I like my car to last. However, I feel confident that even with its present weight disadvantage, I could get it into the 12s with a simple wheel and tire choice swap...at a cost of around $800 I'd say.

So take that how you want to take it. I believe my car is better because it suits my needs better than an SR4.

Oh, and I guarantee you I can walk most any SRT4 I come across. I've met one guy who has one that will embarass me if he were a good driver though! His car was beautifull. As it should be after sinking $35K dollars into it!

I think you'll find that being resourcefull and coming up with an extremely powerfull car through your own creativity...wherever you resource the parts from is far more satisfying than buying stuff off the shelf thats already been figured out. Well, it is for me anyway.
If I wanted cheap power I'd be driving an evo today...I almost was.

Instead I'm driving a Volvo and a CSVT.
Those Honda Geeks out there, you think they started out with off the shelf stuff almost 15 years ago?
No, they took an econobox that NO ONE thought could even get out of its own way and changed the world of big block domestics Forever! They started off like we did except that they were even more original.
They are the reason that the Factory built an SRT4 and 10 years of aftermarket R&D is why you can buy all your stuff you are looking forward to buying.
I'm doing that for my CSVT, building the collection of data that will make this car fun to build for years into the future. You'll be seeing cheap contours all hollowed out at the drag strip before long with some godawfull big 3L turbo stuck in the front and a roll cage, with a curb weight of probably 2400 pounds and running insane times.
There'll be some young punk running one who tells some guy with a BMW 3 series how much better his gutted 12s contour is too.....

mark my words on that one.

Yeah, but the car is still loud, ugly, and cheap feeling. I didn't like the way it handled at all. It was made just to go from point a to b really fast....and maybe break down along the way.

All is good War

BTW, if someone bought their CSVT brand new its VERY easy to spend that $35K to get their car to run well too, something to consider

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
HAULT! The build quality is better, can you say dash warpage,

Dash Warp???? Maybe get a 98 csvt

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
All is good War BTW, if someone bought their CSVT brand new its VERY easy to spend that $35K to get their car to run well too, something to consider

Yeah, I suppose, but I knew this guy on a personal level because he was stationed at Ft. Hood with me. He should have been thinking about retirement

I mean I watched him take his car from $20K new, add about $8K for rims and little mods and such, then drop 3-4 grand on the higher stages that dodge sold for it, then change his mind on the rims and realize what I was telling him about his heads, intake and turbine being a bet small for the power he wanted to make.
He then went and dropped $35K on top of that over about a 4 month period. When it was done, hand ported heads, intakes, larger turbo, all polished, I mean everything was bling and chromed or carbon fiber. It looked great.

Funny, he was still no faster in first or second gear than I was being limited by traction, but after that

So having $50-$60K into a car if you include the purchase price... for a neon....well,you see where I'm going with that. I like the neon but I don't like it that much.

A contour like DemonSVTs that is selectively modded for performance and with a specific weight reduction plans is really the way to go. With some deliberate suspension changes for drag racing, more weight reduction and a $100 shot of nitrous, he'd be running 12's all day long..and all night!

I fully believe that the duratec motor is far superior to the Dodge SRT-4 motor. People say it doesn't take well to mods....bullsh|t! It is just that mods have been relatively few and far between because the car is a sedan, it has a tightly packaged engine bay so people don't want to work on it, and consequently the ones out there are expensive.
The motor is phenomenal for what you can do to it. Have you seen what a simple 75shot of nitrous on a stock motor will do?? And the motor handles it like nothing, no problem? Wow. If anyone asked me the way to go on this car, I'd say moderate 3L with a good nitrous kit tuned it. It is soooo cheap to make power that way.

Imagine buying a 98 or 99 Contour GL 5spd for about $1200 bucks right now. Now add $600 for a 3L. Then lets assume for good luck that the tranny is good, and we add in a LSD forks, clutch, and little mods, $1500.
So far that is $3300.
Now you run a $1000 nitrous kit with about a 100 shot.
You run an off-road exhaust, 2.25" duals with headers, $700.
You gut everything out of the car... Free.
You put in a Roll cage, $1000 unless you do it yourself
Finally, Two 15" steely rims with drag radials or slicks, $400-$500
Add $500 for an XCAL2 and a good tune.

By my total that is $7000 total. I promise you that it will run like a bat out of hell, stock suspension and all. Demon pulled a car with a 13.4 on drag radials. A car like this could pull much lower, probably in capable of low 12's if the axles hold....and they probably will hold if you keep reducing the mass of the car and therefore the shock.
You'll need some poly roll restrictors, little things, and that is of course doing all the labor yourself.
You can only go up from there.
Just think, what if you got a blown contour from grandma for Free??

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
All is good War BTW, if someone bought their CSVT brand new its VERY easy to spend that $35K to get their car to run well too, something to consider

Yeah, I'm sure that's happened more than once. I spent right at $32k, doing all the labor myself, for just a very very basic mods. When I did a mod I did it right, but I never even considered doing major mods like a new block, forced induction, differentials, HP flywheels, showstopping audio, etc...

For around a total investment of $32k I'll be able to get at least 450 hp at the wheels of my new GTO, with *all motor* mods like heads, cam, LTs, cat-back, CAI...might even have enough left over to buy a new shifter.

Pretty good price for a new car that's capable of 11's.

Originally posted by warmonger:

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
All is good War BTW, if someone bought their CSVT brand new its VERY easy to spend that $35K to get their car to run well too, something to consider

Imagine buying a 98 or 99 Contour GL 5spd for about $1200 bucks right now. Now add $600 for a 3L. Then lets assume for good luck that the tranny is good, and we add in a LSD forks, clutch, and little mods, $1500.
So far that is $3300.
Now you run a $1000 nitrous kit with about a 100 shot.
You run an off-road exhaust, 2.25" duals with headers, $700.
You gut everything out of the car... Free.
You put in a Roll cage, $1000 unless you do it yourself
Finally, Two 15" steely rims with drag radials or slicks, $400-$500
Add $500 for an XCAL2 and a good tune.

By my total that is $7000 total. I promise you that it will run like a bat out of hell, stock suspension and all. Demon pulled a car with a 13.4 on drag radials. A car like this could pull much lower, probably in capable of low 12's if the axles hold....and they probably will hold if you keep reducing the mass of the car and therefore the shock.
You'll need some poly roll restrictors, little things, and that is of course doing all the labor yourself.
You can only go up from there.
Just think, what if you got a blown contour from grandma for Free??

$7,000.00 for a low 12's Contour sounds too good to be true...probably a car that no one in this group has ever built.

we'll know if i win the lotto, Ill commission warmonger to build the budget beater that runs 12s. Along with my RWD 5.0 contour, and my AWD xtype contour

Haha, no you won't. That sounds too much like work...you can gut it and prep it.

If I touch it then you'd have to pay me and for that kind of money you can just buy a faster car. lol!

Originally posted by DaJudge:
$7,000.00 for a low 12's Contour sounds too good to be true...probably a car that no one in this group has ever built.

True. The reason for this in my eyes...

Why would I spend $7000-10000 just to make a FWD drag car???

If I am going to build a project car there is no way on God's green earth that I would chose any POS FWD platform. What a waste of money. PERIOD!

Why do I mod my car then if it's FWD. That is simple. It is a 4 door daily driven family car!

I have a low 13 second 5 person car capable of roughly 1G and stopping in less then 120 feet. (soon to be better) It also gets 22/29 MPG which is better then it came rated at new. Modify within reason.

BTW Tom with a nitrous setup I would be deep into the 12's easily. I'm just a 40 shot away from 12's right now. Axles willing.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by DaJudge:
$7,000.00 for a low 12's Contour sounds too good to be true...probably a car that no one in this group has ever built.

True. The reason for this in my eyes...

Why would I spend $7000-10000 just to make a FWD drag car???

If I am going to build a project car there is no way on God's green earth that I would chose any POS FWD platform. What a waste of money. PERIOD!

Why do I mod my car then if it's FWD. That is simple. It is a 4 door daily driven family car! I have a low 13 second 5 person car capable of roughly 1G and stopping in less then 120 feet. (soon to be better) It also gets 22/29 MPG which is better then it came rated at new. Modify within reason.

BTW Tom with a nitrous setup I would be deep into the 12's easily. I'm just a 40 shot away from 12's right now. Axles willing.

I agree with you about the gutted fwd drag car concept, but I'd stay away from the nitrous if I were you. It already appears that you've got an all-round performance car that was done right [all motor]...that can also double-duty as a people hauler and grocery getter.

I guess I was just getting tired of my Contour and was itchin' for a faster car that I wouldn't have to spend thousands just to make it quick enough to walk a soccer mom in her v-6 Nissan Altima.

I chose a 2005 GTO [less than 50 miles on it] this time because it walks Mustang GTs, stock for stock [stock for stock it spanks the new SRT 6.1 Charger, but I spent 28k and they'll need to fork over 40k or more], and with a few easy mods it'll run in the 11's for less money than the 2006 GTO that was right next to mine on the dealer's lot.

I'm only getting 23-24 mpg, highway.

Oh well...

Originally posted by DaJudge:

I'm only getting 23-24 mpg, highway.

Oh well...

beating me ;p

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Why would I spend $7000-10000 just to make a FWD drag car???

If I am going to build a project car there is no way on God's green earth that I would chose any POS FWD platform. What a waste of money. PERIOD!

Just because it CAN be done. Same reason there are 7 second front drive hondas out there right now.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Why do I mod my car then if it's FWD. That is simple. It is a 4 door daily driven family car! I have a low 13 second 5 person car capable of roughly 1G and stopping in less then 120 feet. (soon to be better) It also gets 22/29 MPG which is better then it came rated at new. Modify within reason.

This similar to my belief. I'm positive with just drag radials I can hit high 12s, putting me effectively where I should be in the whole drag race hierarchy on here instead of an upstart like you talking smack to me the whole year I'm in Iraq.

BTW, you do know I have a command directive not to race cars while being in flight school right? No flight students are allowed to risk their precious arses.

Trying to figure a way around that one right now, but I don't see any way.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

BTW Tom with a nitrous setup I would be deep into the 12's easily. I'm just a 40 shot away from 12's right now. Axles willing.

I realize that it will give you the power and thats why I said that. Don't you think I was being supportive enough...?

Originally posted by warmonger:
I realize that it will give you the power and thats why I said that. Don't you think I was being supportive enough...?

That's all I need, you as my athletic supporter.

Racing is a sport right.

Do you think 23lbs is enough power??? Haha

Greg

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by warmonger:
I realize that it will give you the power and thats why I said that. Don't you think I was being supportive enough...?

That's all I need, you as my athletic supporter.

Racing is a sport right.

Wheres that smilie with the middle finger again?????

Originally posted by warmonger:
Wheres that smilie with the middle finger again?????

Be careful what you ask for...

you guys need to take it to the track, its funny to watch you two,like two old men who've been friends since youth...kinda like grumpy old men

Originally posted by warmonger:

It is the as-new delivered condition that you must compare.
It is certainly fine to illustrate that the CSVT made 200 HP with NO TURBO five fuggin years before the SRT-4 even came out! IT is certainly fine to point out that two engines that were relatively the same displacement put out similar power only that it took a turbo for the SRT4 to hit only 12% more power. You do the math. And yes, we know what happens when you turn up the boost, but you were talking stock to stock right?

I just saw one thing in here I think needs clarification. The SRT-4 makes 230hp to the CSVTs 200hp, so yea, thats 15% more power on the same displacement. Not terribly impressive for boost. But, a big factor thats gotta be considered is torque. The SRT-4 makes 250ft/lbs, and at a very early rpm compared to the Duratec's 165ft/lbs somewhere north of 5500rpm. So, the SRT-4s got the torque department by just over 50%. That, is very signifigant. I dunno what SRT-4s run at your local tracks, but I've seen more than a couple turn 12s at all three of the tracks I've frequented, NYIRP, ESTA, and NE Dragway. NE Dragway had 5+ on a Friday night test and tune doing 12s, and that track BLOWS, traction wise. I never had trouble getting 2.2 60 foots until I ran there, where the best I could do was a 2.4. So, they are out there, and they are fast. Stock for stock the SRT-4 murders the CSVT in a straight line.

That being said, I'm with everyone else on the refinment of the rest of the CSVT. The handling is still above par for almost any car in its pricerange even today, and the braking is Phenominal. (You ought to go from a GM with TERRIBLE brakes to something like the SVT, I feel like I can stop in about half the distance as before.) The interior is nicer, its more practical, etc.

Now, the G6GTP is a lot like a modern day CSVT in a lot of ways. Powerful, advanced technology NA v6. Above average handling. Refined, not to bold styling. Nice interior. Now, whoever thinks a relatively stock CSVT can hang with the G6GTP is on crack. My modded Grand Am was good for about a 15.2-15.1, and my new stock CSVT can stay with it from a roll, but can't dream about launching like it. A G6GTP smokes the CSVT from a launch, or a roll, no doubt. Shoot, the new G6GTP should give a v8 powered GPGXP a run for its money. That 3.9 liter is pretty de-tuned as well. The original HP and TQ numbers were closer to 270, but they calmed it down some because it threatend the GP so much. Stupid thing, IMO, but thats marketing for ya.

Gosh, bench racing sure is fun.

Quote:

So having $50-$60K into a car if you include the purchase price... for a neon....well,you see where I'm going with that. I like the neon but I don't like it that much.

Understatement of the year

Originally posted by acammer:
Powerful, advanced technology NA v6. Above average handling. Refined, not to bold styling.

Pushrods are in NO WAY "advanced technology" slick. It does have VVT on it's Single Underhead Cam but other then that it's simple old school technology.

Also it's power rating is nothing to brag about.

It has a 3.9L engine (57-60% larger then the SVT) and makes only 240HP. (~20% more power) It does have a significant advantage in torque (+75 peak or ~40%) but no @$%#@)! shock there because it displaces 57-60% more cubic inches respectively. Considering the huge displacement advantage and the fact the engine design is well over a decade newer the output sucks in comparisson. Quite badly actually. (heck look at any of the current 3.5L DOHC offerings

)

Then to top that off it gets poor fuel efficiency. (18/26) It takes that large an engine to produce so little power and it gets terrible mileage to boot. What a waste of an engine design team.

Hell the new Hemi engine is rated the same and it's behind a slushbox. It also makes over a hundred more HP & TQ and is nearly 2 liters larger.
The engine is nothing special at all.

The handling of the G6 is nothing to write home about either. It has the typical GM body roll and vague steering & handling feel. It is better then the General typical builds into a car but it was definitely designed by the typical GM "lesofa" makers.
I will glady admit it is light years better then the steaming POS it replaced though. I do agree with you on that part.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by warmonger:
Wheres that smilie with the middle finger again?????

Be careful what you ask for...

Well, seems like you've been receiving them for quite some time!

Care to take a guess as to why? lol

Originally posted by tour96se:
you guys need to take it to the track, its funny to watch you two,like two old men who've been friends since youth...kinda like grumpy old men

I'm in practice for when I get old so I can be the coolest and grumpiest!

Demon is already there though...........

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by acammer:
Powerful, advanced technology NA v6. Above average handling. Refined, not to bold styling.

Pushrods are in NO WAY "advanced technology" slick. It does have VVT on it's Single Underhead Cam but other then that it's simple old school technology.

Also it's power rating is nothing to brag about.

It has a 3.9L engine (57-60% larger then the SVT) and makes only 240HP. (~20% more power) It does have a significant advantage in torque (+75 peak or ~40%) but no @$%#@)! shock there because it displaces 57-60% more cubic inches respectively. Considering the huge displacement advantage and the fact the engine design is well over a decade newer the output sucks in comparisson. Quite badly actually. (heck look at any of the current 3.5L DOHC offerings )

Then to top that off it gets poor fuel efficiency. (18/26) It takes that large an engine to produce so little power and it gets terrible mileage to boot. What a waste of an engine design team.
Hell the new Hemi engine is rated the same and it's behind a slushbox. It also makes over a hundred more HP & TQ and is nearly 2 liters larger.
The engine is nothing special at all.

The handling of the G6 is nothing to write home about either. It has the typical GM body roll and vague steering & handling feel. It is better then the General typical builds into a car but it was definitely designed by the typical GM "lesofa" makers.
I will glady admit it is light years better then the steaming POS it replaced though. I do agree with you on that part.

Yeah, but this is where I think Ford has dug themselves a hole that they can't get out of. They thought too far ahead for their own good, thinking high-tech small engines were the way to go. For example, the new Mustang GT is 100hp short of the GTO's 400hp, but they're rated at the same fuel economy, but the Mustang owner's only hope is to invest in a nitrous set-up, supercharger, etc...if he plans on spanking a stock GM with a NA'd LS2...a CSVT just might need a good shot of nitrous as the easiest way to handle a Nissan Altima, etc. Or even look at the last year model of the Cobra. Smaller lighter car, supercharged, but it's almost dead even with the stock GTO, but the Cobra isn't nearly as easy to drive, with a lot more to go wrong and a cluttered mess of an engine bay to deal with.

that's funny that a gm owner is calling a ford engine bay a mess to work on....lol...at least half the motor isn't pushed halfway under the dash...and have you actually looked at an '03-'04 cobra under the hood...the supercharger sits ON TOP of the engine,and doesn't clutter up the engine bay at all....and a stock cobra will beat your gto stock for stock...and $200 in mods and it will kill your gto(put the same $200 in your gto and see what it gets you)nowhere near what it will get the cobra...

funny thing is your talking about the'05 mustang as if its weak or something...you do realize it runs neck and neck with the 350 hp(04)gto,both run mid 13's stock and pretty much a drivers race....and it isn't that far behind your '05 gto....and it wouldn't take forced induction to gain a couple of tenths to run neck and neck with you...

and then you why not compare comparable year altima to the csvt...the new body altima didn't come out until after '01 when the svt was no longer made....so comparing a car that is a couple years newer is ridiculous...but if you compare a '00 altima to a '00 altima therer is no comparision,the tour would probably be on top in any catagory...

and i don't think demon was trying to say that pushrod engines were bad,just that they are nothing new...the ls1 and ls2 are great engines,but i think he was reffering to the gm v6....

Yes, it sits on top of the motor, the smallish 4.6 motor that has the same overall outer deminsions of a 460 cid big block!!...and the stock supercharged Cobra won't beat a '05-'06 GTO. Tie, maybe. The slush-boxed GTO is factory rated at 4.6 (0-60) and 13.0 (1/4 mile). About the exact same numbers. And why $200.00? For a SC pulley that the Cobra needs to begin with? With a tune, after the pulley swap, it'd be closer to maybe $600.00? What about real mods that would apply to both cars? Modding the Cobra might cost twice as much? My brother's '03 GT will spank mine...but he's spent around $13k on his mods.

The '05 GT is a lighter car, but it's still half a second slower in the 1/4. And with my basic mods, it'd take more than these basic mods for the GT to dip deep into the 12's

I know of 1 '05 GT that runs 12.6s with my mods, PLUS he had to add DRs, micro-tune, TB and UDP

...and I'm still going to put heads and a cam in, just because it's such a simple task...I'll keep mine all-motor.

And on the Altima I'm comparing v6 against v6

And I'm just asking myself about Ford's reasoning behind small motors vs big motors. I don't know that high-tech is a better way to go when it comes to muscle cars...and from what I've been hearing, the muscle car is back in Detroit, and you can bet that the new Challenger, Camaro, etc will be throw backs to the BIG v8. Ford will be the one that's probably going to be all by itself with the OHC small displacement approach...to me, that should be left to imports from Mazda, Nissan, Honda, etc...not Detroit muscle.

actually you are wrong about the '03 cobra needing a tune and other things...a simple pulley swap is all that is required,nothing else....ok take your gto and an '03 cobra....put a cai,and full exhaust on both...the cobra will be faster,then add in a less than $200 pulley and it is no contest.....use your all motor excuse all you want,but facts are facts and it would be more cost efficient to mod the cobra and it will be faster period...and for your information,there are 05 gt's in the 12's with nothing more than bolt ons and a tune...

and as far as the altima...you are still comparing a motor that wasn't even available in comparable year altima to the csvt...compare a '00 to a '00 and like i said there is no comparison...your trying to compare a car built a few years later,which i would hope to god would beat a csvt...

and as far as your comment that ford has put itself in a hole it can't get out of...please explain yourself....the mustang outsells any competition it may have,so i don't see how that is a bad thing...and they keep the research and development as well as trying new things...the new mustangs 3 valve motor is making as much hp as earlier 4valve motors..a step in the right direction imo...

and your comments on detroit muscle...well you do realize that the shelby gt500 will be out this year right...and that's with 450 or more hp,which will spank your gto,charger srt8,etc.....and then you bring up the camaro which is no longer even built(hopefully gm learned that a great motor in a pos car will only take you so far)...and when it does come back out(if at all)who knows what the mustang or svt mustang will be packing under the hood...so your comments are pure speculation at best...

Actually the right thing to do is check the tune when you do the swap...yes?

And if you stick to just basic mods that favor the SC, yes, it might be a difference of a 1/0th or 3/10th, but do real gains with heads and cam(s) etc...not the same story...you'd probably be out twice the $ for the same hp...and the LS2 would do it easily, the Cobra would be a much bigger job.

12 sec '05 GTs with bolt-ons and a tune, yes, I've already mentioned that. I've seen '05-'06 GTO's get deep into the 12's with NO bolt-ons, just street legal DRs.

No contest with the Altima, I agree, as long as you go with 4cyl vs 6cyl, but not a 6 vs a 6. That's like making a SE Contour take on a CSVT.

Sells numbers mean nothing. Is that why I and others bought a CSVT, because it was a sales champ? And not the best step, imo, because they up the price and throw a supercharger on the small motor (which is the size of a 460cid) to get their hp and times equal to their rivals.

Yes, the 450hp Shelby

For $10k more than a GTO like mine? LOL! Many GTO owners are already going FI, via the Maggie (the Shelby will be FI?)...but the GTos are making around 600hp...at the wheels...for that extra $10k!!!

And the Camaro is coming out (hide and see). If the Mustangs aren't packing FI, they'll never come close to the bigger engines. FYI, word has it that the stock NA GTO will probably be packing that good ol' 450hp, w/o FI of course.

...and I do honestly wish everybody a happy and safe Christmas/Holiday

if SALES numbers mean nothing then please explain to me why the camaro was axed...

why would i hide form the new camaro

i hope they build a new camaro,i think it would be great for the muscle car wars,i also hope dodge builds the challenger as well....i am a performance car fan,if there was no competition,then ford wouldn't have any reason to improve the mustang...but then again the mustang has always been there,even when gm and dodge abandoned building anything to compete...

and what in the world are you talking about,you say something about a csvt,then a supercharger on a small motor what in the world do those 2 things have to do with each other???

YOU are trying to compare a couple of years newer car(csvt vs. altima)whats the point????i would hope a few years newer sport sedan would pack more power...but like i said compare similiar model year vehicles...take any other 6cyl. sport sedan from 98-00 and the csvt holds up quite well...

what is your hang up with the f/i against n/a....who really cares if a motor has forced induction or is n/a????i don't see the big deal....hell there are 4 bangers out there making more hp than your beloved gto...and plenty that will spank your gto as well....what difference does it make if it does it with all motor or with f/i....

Yeah

Mustang was there with 215hp, lookin' at the tailend of the 270hp LT-1...and there with 265hp, lookin' at the exhaust of the LS-1

Quote:

"and what in the world are you talking about,you say something about a csvt,then a supercharger on a small motor what in the world do those 2 things have to do with each other???"

Everything. Like I've always said about Ford...small motors and FI to keep up with NA rivals, be it factory Mustangs, or modded CSVTs. Small motors seem to be Ford's brain-child, nobody elses.

Okay, same for same:

Ford's evolved Fusion vs the new Altima? Still a total whomp? Oh well...

And I'm just discussing approach

IS Ford's MODERN approach the BEST approach? I say no because to better or tie the rivals, they HAVE to FI their motors...but if you want to talk FI, then yes, GM owners can do that too, then, well, the HP difference is just that much more loppsided than it already was. Size matters

Me, I just prefer NA'n my 6.0 and getting more whp than my brother's Kenne Bell'd 4.6, for less $...and a LOT less clutter, and not nearly the stress to the internals that his engine is surely experiencing.

We're each making our own points for what we prefer, so I vote that it's a draw.

And as far as the ricers go...LMAO. I wouldn't own one of those stripped, entry level modded cars, even if you gave it to me. Real and dependable mods to real nice and option-loaded cars, I say.

i guess we both agree to disagree...

i will say however it has been entertaining disagreeing with you...alot of times people get their panties in a bunch...uts nice to argue with someone and keep it civil lol..

and i was reffering to the couple of years there when the camaro was axed...gm had nothing for performance besides the corvette

I love the new Mustang GT - but I hope Chevy comes out with a Camaro that looks like the concept, and has an LS2 6 speed combo, for the same price as the GT. Ford needs some stiff competition in this area forcing them to further develop the mustang's powertrain.

IMO the modular engine has been a good idea for Ford, at least in 4.6L form. But Instead of the 5.4 Ford should have developed their 351ci block along the lines of what GM and Mopar have done, and stuffed that in their trucks. Instead they have an engine family that is displacement chalenged and cannot match the output of the competition without FI.

Unless and until Ford comes out with a true competitor to the LS series and Hemi engines, they should at least Bore out the Modular blocks - take the 4.6 to a 5.0, take the 5.4 to a 6.2, and take full advantage of the OHC head layout on those engines. 300 HP from the 4.6 is nothing to get excited about.

Originally posted by akrump47:
I love the new Mustang GT - but I hope Chevy comes out with a Camaro that looks like the concept, and has an LS2 6 speed combo, for the same price as the GT. Ford needs some stiff competition in this area forcing them to further develop the mustang's powertrain.

IMO the modular engine has been a good idea for Ford, at least in 4.6L form. But Instead of the 5.4 Ford should have developed their 351ci block along the lines of what GM and Mopar have done, and stuffed that in their trucks. Instead they have an engine family that is displacement chalenged and cannot match the output of the competition without FI.

Unless and until Ford comes out with a true competitor to the LS series and Hemi engines, they should at least Bore out the Modular blocks - take the 4.6 to a 5.0, take the 5.4 to a 6.2, and take full advantage of the OHC head layout on those engines. 300 HP from the 4.6 is nothing to get excited about.

I hope that Ford decides to dust-off an old 351ci for one of their "Legend Series"

That'd be killer.

Originally posted by chrisilversvt:
i guess we both agree to disagree... i will say however it has been entertaining disagreeing with you...alot of times people get their panties in a bunch...uts nice to argue with someone and keep it civil lol..

and i was reffering to the couple of years there when the camaro was axed...gm had nothing for performance besides the corvette

I'll be the first to admit that my GTO is a great lookin' car, but I'll also admit that the new Mustang looks maybe even better. I've even owned 4 performance Mustangs over the years (and the CSVT), so there's something there to like. I've also owned my fair share of fast GM cars, but the GTO is just me getting back to GM after being a Ford follower, basically, for the last 20 years. I just appreciate the big v8s and how easy it is to get big hp and torque numbers from them.

And I guess the reason I went Ford was because I didn't like the layout of the F-bodies, even tho' they were almost always faster for less money than Ford's best. The new GTO [and hopefully the new Camaro/Firebird] is a different story tho'.

The new GTO's have agreat power...other than that, the exterior looks like a fricken grand am. Thats all a lot of people see them as, a HB grand am. they could have made that car look awesome, but they really failed on that. I'm also disappointed with the look of the new chargers. Of the 3 major companies, ford is the only 1 that didn't bring back an old discontinued model and made their current model look like the old school one.

Originally posted by posthuman63t:
The new GTO's have agreat power...other than that, the exterior looks like a fricken grand am. Thats all a lot of people see them as, a HB grand am. they could have made that car look awesome, but they really failed on that. I'm also disappointed with the look of the new chargers. Of the 3 major companies, ford is the only 1 that didn't bring back an old discontinued model and made their current model look like the old school one.

Sorry but you're an assclown. The interior looks NOTHING LIKE A GRAND AM or any other run of the mill GM interior - my bet - you've never seen one in person. The seats, dash, radio, gauges, etc. - ALL quality and not the cheap standard sh!t GM's usually throws in all it's cars. Even the Corvette interior blows with that sad excuse for a sound system it comes with

In the GTO you will not find the good old AC Delco electronics and craptastic radio you find in EVERY GM car - it has a Blaupunkt CD player and fabulous seats. Get a clue.

i love the GTO interior. it's the exterior that disappointed me.

Originally posted by MxRacer:
i love the GTO interior. it's the exterior that disappointed me.

I hear that alot and yes it is pretty bland outside - but not bad. The 06's with the hood scoops and different bumpers helped the look a lot.

I still think GM should have made the GTO look like this:

Originally posted by posthuman63t:
The new GTO's have agreat power...other than that, the exterior looks like a fricken grand am. Thats all a lot of people see them as, a HB grand am. they could have made that car look awesome, but they really failed on that. I'm also disappointed with the look of the new chargers. Of the 3 major companies, ford is the only 1 that didn't bring back an old discontinued model and made their current model look like the old school one.

Ford got the look right, GTO wasn't going for retro, Charger wasn't going for retro, Challenger and Camaro will be going for retro, next GTO will be a little of both. Ford is the only one that hasn't got the most important thing right (imo) from the factory, for a muscle car...the HP and Torque numbers. They force the aftermarket to do that for them, just so they can bring themselves up to the others.

Ford could have made the Mustang GT a torque monster that really *scraims* when you punch it, but they blew it.

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by MxRacer:
i love the GTO interior. it's the exterior that disappointed me.

I hear that alot and yes it is pretty bland outside - but not bad. The 06's with the hood scoops and different bumpers helped the look a lot.

My '05 has the scoops, dual exhaust and improved brakes, from the factory.

For starters, Ford should give the 4.6 engine another 50HP from the factory. Beyond that, the GT500 proves that the gigantic 5.4 DOHC can fit in the engine bay. It will be interesting to see what ford does after GM and Mopar make their moves. The paralells with 1965 are almost unreal.

you all forget that the mustang was never a muscle car, but a pony car.

Originally posted by elraido:
you all forget that the mustang was never a muscle car, but a pony car.

,,good point that i'm surprised didnt come up earlier..although it was a muscle car at one point,with cobra jet,boss,and mach models..its original intention was pony car..

In todays world, the Mustang is a muscle car, seeing that its RWD. The GTO styling grew on me, but the interior is awesome, perid

The debate on pushrod vs. DOHC will be ongoing but the facts are this, GM makes their power N/A and Ford leans towards FI in their perf cars, either way, they both make good power and its a good problem to have...do I want a 6.0L N/A w/ 400 hp or a 5.4L, blown w/ 475 hp. With the aftermarket being what it is, theres always a way to stay ahead of your competition and thats what its all about, isn't it! I'm glad to see Mopar getting back into this, the old, good ol' days are back again. Combine that with the growing SCC market and you can't pick a wrong car, well, maybe in my case

(nah, I like my car actually, but wish I'd taken the SRT-6 for a ride for the hell of it, oh well)

The 03'-04' Cobra is an awesome car for modding, considering you can spend about $600 for a pulley, SCT and CAI and put down about 430 hp to the wheels and thats w/o an exhaust system, awesome! That being said though, do the same thing to the GTO and expect well over 450 hp. Add a Vortech to the mix, well=======================

D/C needs to offer a manual for the srt models....i'm not sure on the logic of only offering auto's to your performance line..kinda like the v8 sho??..

Originally posted by tour96se:
D/C needs to offer a manual for the srt models....i'm not sure on the logic of only offering auto's to your performance line..kinda like the v8 sho??..

Yes, a manual would be nice, and from what I hear, a nice 6-speed is in the works. However, that slushbox is pretty nice to have when you need to do spontaneous smoky burnouts and not have to worry about damaging a clutch.

Another thing, every one of the new Chevy and Pontiac FWD V8s come with an automatic. It's just a trend right now.

The 03/04 Cobras ARE a nice modder car, but I'd rather have a GTO. Put a radical cam in and upgrade the heads, and your ready to go. Plenty of power. Don't get me wrong, both are fast cars, I just prefer NA.

I can't wait for that Challenger though...

***UPDATE*** The car mags have this thing runnin' anywhere from 14.4 to 15.0, come one already

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
***UPDATE*** The car mags have this thing runnin' anywhere from 14.4 to 15.0, come one already

14.4 = Can drive, launch, etc
15.0 = Why didn't we test the automatic version, I can't drive stick for crap!?

Even at a 15.0 (Which definetly is some crappy driving or a messed up car) that'll still beat a stock CSVT.

Who the [censored] cares the car is ugly!!!!

Only bart simpson has one.

Originally posted by SteedaSVTâ�??¢:
Who the [censored] cares the car is ugly!!!!

Only bart simpson has one.

Not a GTP, but whatever!

I don't know, I think it looks pretty good. Definitely better than the Plastiacs of yesteryear. I'd also expect a 6 year newer car to beat a CSVT by now.

Originally posted by warmonger:
I don't know, I think it looks pretty good. Definitely better than the Plastiacs of yesteryear. I'd also expect a 6 year newer car to beat a CSVT by now.

THANK YOU! Everyone involved in this thread please read and understand the above text!

Roger I have no idea why you started this thread!

You seem to like to bash the contour...of course new cars are gonna come out and be able to beat our cars! Who would have thought that the auto industry is trying to make better cars!

Quote:

You seem to like to bash the contour...

"Seem", ah its all in the wording Pete

I'm not bashing, but its tiring hearing people talk about beating this and beating that, you yourself said you could take my car and that was with your old motor, see what I'm sayin'

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:

Quote:

You seem to like to bash the contour...

but its tiring hearing people talk about beating this and beating that

Keep in mind, this is contour dot org and we do like to talk the tours up... Seems pretty simple to me

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:

Quote:

You seem to like to bash the contour...

"Seem", ah its all in the wording Pete I'm not bashing, but its tiring hearing people talk about beating this and beating that, you yourself said you could take my car and that was with your old motor, see what I'm sayin'

I have raced a TON of cars from a roll...and 1/4 mile times don't mean a whole lot. Besides you are driving so I have the advantage there!

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:

Quote:

You seem to like to bash the contour...

"Seem", ah its all in the wording Pete I'm not bashing, but its tiring hearing people talk about beating this and beating that, you yourself said you could take my car and that was with your old motor, see what I'm sayin'

I have raced a TON of cars from a roll...and 1/4 mile times don't mean a whole lot. Besides you are driving so I have the advantage there!

Originally posted by SteedaSVTâ�??¢:
Who the [censored] cares the car is ugly!!!!

Only bart simpson has one.

True, it's not nearly as sweet lookin' as the '05 GTO

I actually love the rep I have behind the wheel, haven't heard that one before

I wish I had more fingers to count how many diffs and clutches I blew in my car though, that would come in handy

On a side note, I actually wanna "run" a CSVT or regular Tour w/ a N/A 3.0L, let me know when your ready Pete

i love the looks of the new GTO. i wasnt around in the 60s but they say the GTO wasnt considered a "hot looking" car back then. it was supposed to be subtle and sleeperish. that's what the new ones does as well. isnt the GTO interior a carry over from the Holdens? it would explain why it doesnt have the typical GM garbage interior.

i personally love all the new retro look cars and the ones using the old names. except for the [censored] impala

i love the srt8, the mustang, the charger and i think the challenger and camaro will be very nice additions to "wars." if GM doesnt make that new camaro really nice then i think it will only sell to camaro enthusiasts, only to be axed again.

Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
I actually love the rep I have behind the wheel, haven't heard that one before I wish I had more fingers to count how many diffs and clutches I blew in my car though, that would come in handy

On a side note, I actually wanna "run" a CSVT or regular Tour w/ a N/A 3.0L, let me know when your ready Pete

Give me a few weeks

Originally posted by svt4stv:
i love the looks of the new GTO. i wasnt around in the 60s but they say the GTO wasnt considered a "hot looking" car back then. it was supposed to be subtle and sleeperish. that's what the new ones does as well. isnt the GTO interior a carry over from the Holdens? it would explain why it doesnt have the typical GM garbage interior.

i personally love all the new retro look cars and the ones using the old names. except for the [censored] impala i love the srt8, the mustang, the charger and i think the challenger and camaro will be very nice additions to "wars." if GM doesnt make that new camaro really nice then i think it will only sell to camaro enthusiasts, only to be axed again.

Yes, the GTO is a Holden...so is the Camaro [or will be], just a different model.

Originally posted by DaJudge:

Originally posted by svt4stv:
i love the looks of the new GTO. i wasnt around in the 60s but they say the GTO wasnt considered a "hot looking" car back then. it was supposed to be subtle and sleeperish. that's what the new ones does as well. isnt the GTO interior a carry over from the Holdens? it would explain why it doesnt have the typical GM garbage interior.

i personally love all the new retro look cars and the ones using the old names. except for the [censored] impala i love the srt8, the mustang, the charger and i think the challenger and camaro will be very nice additions to "wars." if GM doesnt make that new camaro really nice then i think it will only sell to camaro enthusiasts, only to be axed again.

Yes, the GTO is a Holden...so is the Camaro [or will be], just a different model.

I thought the next GTO was going to built here

i know the GTO is a Holden (Monaro?). im just saying that i believe read somewhere that they kept the Holden interior. does the Holden have the LS2 motor? or a different one?

what car is the Camara going to be based on?
too bad they dont bring over that badass 4door (Commodore?)

THAT should be the [censored] impala! not that hideous thing they came up with!

I agree 100% about the Commadore being the Impala SS

The holden actually DOESN'T get the LS2 and the Aussies are PISSED!

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:
The holden actually DOESN'T get the LS2 and the Aussies are PISSED!

Do they install the LS2s down there?

If so, I would be pissed if I was the guy building/installing the LS2s in the GTOs, but I couldn't buy one!

I'm pretty sure that the Aussies only get V6s. Don't they get a turbo-V6 instead of the eight?

Originally posted by MadMerc97:
I'm pretty sure that the Aussies only get V6s. Don't they get a turbo-V6 instead of the eight?

They have an optional I-6 turbo.

This is the CV8Z....very hot. I wish you could get a moonroof on the GTO.

The more I research these cars the more I think I could see myself in one in the coming years.

you can add a moonroof to anything.

i know id put one in if i bought a gto. (if i had any money leftover

Originally posted by svt4stv:
i know the GTO is a Holden (Monaro?). im just saying that i believe read somewhere that they kept the Holden interior. does the Holden have the LS2 motor? or a different one?

what car is the Camara going to be based on?
too bad they dont bring over that badass 4door (Commodore?) THAT should be the [censored] impala! not that hideous thing they came up with!

400hp LS2...and the Camaro is going to be based on the Commodore platform.

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:
The holden actually DOESN'T get the LS2 and the Aussies are PISSED!

Where did you get that? Seems like I remember seeing one of their older LS1 Monaros having more HP than my 6.0 400hp LS2

Don't see why their newer models wouldn't have the 6.0 by now.

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:

Originally posted by MadMerc97:
I'm pretty sure that the Aussies only get V6s. Don't they get a turbo-V6 instead of the eight?

They have an optional I-6 turbo.

This is the CV8Z....very hot. I wish you could get a moonroof on the GTO.

The more I research these cars the more I think I could see myself in one in the coming years.

"5.7 litre high output Gen III V8 engine"

Originally posted by DaJudge:

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:

Originally posted by MadMerc97:
I'm pretty sure that the Aussies only get V6s. Don't they get a turbo-V6 instead of the eight?

They have an optional I-6 turbo.

This is the CV8Z....very hot. I wish you could get a moonroof on the GTO.

The more I research these cars the more I think I could see myself in one in the coming years.

"5.7 litre high output Gen III V8 engine"

Yeah the 5.7liter....the LS1...not the LS2

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:

Originally posted by DaJudge:

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoâ�??¢:

Originally posted by MadMerc97:
I'm pretty sure that the Aussies only get V6s. Don't they get a turbo-V6 instead of the eight?

They have an optional I-6 turbo.

This is the CV8Z....very hot. I wish you could get a moonroof on the GTO.

The more I research these cars the more I think I could see myself in one in the coming years.

"5.7 litre high output Gen III V8 engine"

Yeah the 5.7liter....the LS1...not the LS2

Yeah, never said that a 5.7 LS1 was a 6.0 LS2...I should know. I said that their 5.7s were rated at more HP than my 6.0 LS2. Said that I assumed they had the 6.0 by now, seeing that they already had the 5.7

I hope the next GTO gets that new sweet 6.2