0-60???
Senior Member
Joined: 12-29-05
Posts: 1,457
Likes: 0
From: Niceville, Florida
well i cut a 2.0 on stock perellis but the reason i didnt do so well on DRs is because one i launched too high two it wasnt my local track (wasnt used to it yet) three from the water box to the 1/8th was all new track not very sticky yet four it was cold.
LT1 F-bodys aren't as bad as mustang GT's lol. I ran a consistant 13.6 at 105 with my LT1 camaro with little done to it . Most GT's were running 14.80's -15.1 back when i bought it in 96 .
Senior Member
Joined: 07-09-06
Posts: 7,451
Likes: 0
From: PA
Ok guys, i currently own a 98 auto ls1 camaro, and im getting tired of them problems im having, and was thinking of a cobalt ss sc, Now i test drove one before, and it actually felt fast to me, but i think it mightve been stage 2. But i see all these videos of cobalts ss sc and they seem like it takes 7 seconds to get to 60. Like this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVK6c...eature=related
DO they really take a whole 7 seconds to get to sixty? Cuz i see them next to 350z and mustangs all the time, but both other cars have quicker bottom end. Do the cobalts just have really good top end to make up for the sluggish bottom end? It seems like the beginning of 2nd is what kills it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVK6c...eature=related
DO they really take a whole 7 seconds to get to sixty? Cuz i see them next to 350z and mustangs all the time, but both other cars have quicker bottom end. Do the cobalts just have really good top end to make up for the sluggish bottom end? It seems like the beginning of 2nd is what kills it.
Senior Member
Joined: 12-29-05
Posts: 1,457
Likes: 0
From: Niceville, Florida
yeah compared to the non PI head stang they were decent. but compared to LS1s they are quite slow. and a 99 up GT would run with em. granted they stopped putting LT1s in the camaros and TAs after 97.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post