Notices
Drag Strip From the staging lanes to the finish line, this is the spot for on-track drag racing discussion.
View Poll Results: S2000 Vs. Ws6 T/A
S2000 will whoop the Domestic
4
6.78%
T/A will whoop the Honda
50
84.75%
Evil Jose is my favorite
5
8.47%
Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll

S2000 Vs. WS6 T/A

Thread Tools
 
Old Mar 11, 2003 | 06:24 PM
  #11  
Jkan2001's Avatar
Jkan2001
S2000 Pilot
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,457
Likes: 0
From: 9000 RPMS
Default

trans am easy...i beat a stock s2k a while back on 10 psi but i got pulled like a jimmAy by a i/e LS1 T/A the other night. It won't even be a race....the S2000 only dynos like 200 whp stock and weighs 2800 pounds, the hp to weight ratio tells the story, not to mention how much more torque the ls1 puts out.
Reply
Old Mar 11, 2003 | 07:56 PM
  #12  
MrFatbooty's Avatar
MrFatbooty
Wannabe yuppie
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI
Default

The S2000 isn't a great car for drag racing. Stock ones have trouble breaking into the 13's, one with i/h/e is not going to run a 12.5. Additionally you would need a full 1/4 mile for the S2000 to catch up the the Firebird as it would get killed off the line. Badly.

The guy with the S2000 needs to sell it for not appreciating its amazing chassis and be banished to an '87 Mustang with a cigarette-burned interior.

He's definitely talking out of his ass about that dyno.
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 05:38 AM
  #13  
Jkan2001's Avatar
Jkan2001
S2000 Pilot
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,457
Likes: 0
From: 9000 RPMS
Default

Originally posted by MrFatBooty
The S2000 isn't a great car for drag racing. Stock ones have trouble breaking into the 13's, one with i/h/e is not going to run a 12.5. Additionally you would need a full 1/4 mile for the S2000 to catch up the the Firebird as it would get killed off the line. Badly.

The guy with the S2000 needs to sell it for not appreciating its amazing chassis and be banished to an '87 Mustang with a cigarette-burned interior.

He's definitely talking out of his ass about that dyno.

I agree about the s2k having a great chassis but it would toast a firebird pretty easily....we're talking about the WS6 not the V6 firebird
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 05:51 AM
  #14  
crucial Si's Avatar
crucial Si
Banned
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,220
Likes: 0
Default

who give a flying ****
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 09:27 AM
  #15  
Jkan2001's Avatar
Jkan2001
S2000 Pilot
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,457
Likes: 0
From: 9000 RPMS
Default

Originally posted by crucial Si
who give a flying ****

obviously you...cause you posted in this thread
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 12:34 PM
  #16  
02gtstang's Avatar
02gtstang
Yeah its quick;)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: illinois
Default

T/A will win, end of story.
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 05:40 PM
  #17  
fastball's Avatar
fastball
A little chin music
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, Ohio - Rock 'n Roll capitol of the World
Default

I agree with MFB totally. The T/A will leave an S2k in the dust on a straight line, but if the guy doesn't appreciate the chasis (or know how to use it), he's just wasting a beautiful machine. Now, a WS6 T/A weighs much more, so on the track or in the slalom, the S2K has a definite edge. My opinion is that these are two cars which excell at what they are meant to do: the S2K is a touring roadster that does everything very well. A total balance. The Bird on the other hand, is just meant to light the tires and have a really nasty engine note. Other than that, the brakes are inadequate for the weight and power, a solid beam rear axle is from like 1920, the clutch requres brute force to engage, and rowing the gears is a better work out than five sets of curls at your local Ballys. In my opinion, it's a chore to drive a muscle car, while it is absolutely enjoyable to drive a roadster. But, hey, to each his own.
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 07:18 PM
  #18  
MrFatbooty's Avatar
MrFatbooty
Wannabe yuppie
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI
Default

Originally posted by Jkan2001
I agree about the s2k having a great chassis but it would toast a firebird pretty easily....we're talking about the WS6 not the V6 firebird
Um, you mean the Firebird would toast it easily?

I said that if you had a long enough track the S2000 would eventually catch up to the Firebird, not that it would walk past it.
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 07:49 PM
  #19  
rick's Avatar
rick
not noob?
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,613
Likes: 0
Default Re: S2000 Vs. WS6 T/A

Originally posted by Black5OHFox
Ok there are these two guys here at work that both say their cars are fast. First guy is the one who owns the s-2000. ok all he has done to it is intake exaust, and some APexI fuel to air computer, or something like that. Now he had it dynoed and it saw 230 rwhp. now he says that will run and estimated 12.5 1/4 now, the second guy has the T/A and i am not sure what he has done to it, but he ran a 12.92 a couple of weeks ago. Now my question to you all is who will win, when in fact these two guys will race?

IHE 230rwhp? = ~270crank? :eh:

i don't think so. and 230rwhp isn't enough to run 12.5 in the 1/4mi with 2800lbs.

S54 M Coupe with 270rwhp and 3100lbs (including driver and full tank) runs 13.5. fastest i've seen in 13.3 at 105mph

S2000 even with 230rwhp wont get 12.5 in the 1/4mi unless the road had a downhill grade of 5
Reply
Old Mar 12, 2003 | 10:58 PM
  #20  
MrFatbooty's Avatar
MrFatbooty
Wannabe yuppie
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI
Default

Best I've seen out of a stock S2k was a 13.9. Boltons aren't gonna drop the time by 1.4 seconds, no way no how.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:40 AM.