Racing Stories

[Fedorov91 0]

I know that some people are going to say street racing is bad etc... whatever.

When someone pulls up next to me at a light and they wanna race, then I'll usually go for it unless there's traffic or an area with lots of cops.

Today I raced a SVT Lightning, well raced probably isn't the right word, more like me having a nice view of his taillights :( But I knew that I was going to lose, just did it for the hell of it. I actually got a pretty good launch and was ahead of him for a second or two lol, then I guess that Supercharger kicked in and it went ZOOM! past me... yea, it was still fun though. Then the other night as I was driving home from a buddies house a guy in a Cadillac CTS wanted to go and I beat him, that was cool (those are a V8 right?) then later at a light some dude in a Miata was revving his little engine and well... by the time I looked back he was just a few dots in my mirror. poor guy

Some other cars Ive raced off the top of my head are: (not including Riced out Civics, Neons, Escorts, etc. lol)

V6 Mustangs (beat those every time)

V8 Mustangs (I've actually beat a couple before, dont kno how, they must not kno how to drive or something lol)

Cobra (LOST)

Firebird (Lost pretty badly)

V8 Camaro - early 90's model (usually it's a tie with those, pretty even)

Thunderbird SuperCoupe (lost)

Probe (won)

WRX - not STi (won)

BMW 325i (won)

and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I know my car can't hang with most of the muscle car boys but I still love it. I'd like to turbo it in the future and start taking it to the track; if I had it around 350-400HP and could maybe run a 12 sec 1/4 mile with it I'd be REALLY happy :D but I'm a poor college student so it's going to have to stay stock for now. ;)

[all-star 0]

what kinda car do you got?

[Fedorov91 0]

03 Eclipse GT

[Chadd 916]

I never lost a race in my V6 Fiero. Then again, nobody had a $100K car in my home town that wanted to race me.

[dix0r 0]

i've never raced.

i've been chased though :]

[asdfa 0]

Today I raced a SVT Lightning, well raced probably isn't the right word, more like me having a nice view of his taillights :( But I knew that I was going to lose, just did it for the hell of it. I actually got a pretty good launch and was ahead of him for a second or two lol, then I guess that Supercharger kicked in and it went ZOOM! past me... yea, it was still fun though. Then the other night as I was driving home from a buddies house a guy in a Cadillac CTS wanted to go and I beat him, that was cool (those are a V8 right?)

damn, beaten by a truck ;)

i think the CTS is a v6, but if you raced a CTS-V and won, then mad props are in order, those things have v8's that push 400 hp. sounds like you are a cop's worst nightmare :D

unfortunately, i'm too young to drive <_<

[hip check 0]

superchargers don't have lag.

[Jbone 0]

What about the Ram SRT-10? Thats a truck and it probaly could beat a Porsche.

[tokes 0]

superchargers don't have lag.

ahaha, that's funny.

Ever driven a Centrifugally supercharged car (Vortech, Procharger, Paxton, ETC) before? Boost builds linearly with RPM's. RPM's increase, boost increases. You don't hit peak boost till right at redline. A turbocharger makes full boost a LOT sooner than redline, so you tell me which one has lag.

[J-Shera 0]

Ive also driven in cars with shitty turbos that take for ever to spool up, the lag is terrible and been in cars with superchargers were the power is instant and theres a hell of alot of it to.

[Cavs019 708]

I raced some idiot in a civic si today and absolutely blew his doors off. He thought it would be cool to try to pass me on a two lane road on a double yellow, almost killing himself in the process.

[Vishi05 0]

What mods if any do you have?

[Cavs019 708]

i have none, a bone stock 2003 1.8t quattro a4

[Vishi05 0]

I was asking about the original guy.. but I would imagine the Audi is pretty quick with the turbo.

[Fedorov91 0]

My Mods? Im stock for now Next summer I plan on doing Intake/Headers/Exhaust. Nothing major, but should add about 30-40HP plus it'll sound really nice. I need to save money for school and help pay for my car + insurance or else I'd do more to it.

Lots of people dont like the 3rd gen Eclipses because they think they are slow but actually a 2nd Gen GSX vs. a 3rd gen Eclipse GT is a pretty even race. They are both 210 HP stock, depends on the driver too of course. Some people try to say that the 3rd gens are a lot heavier too, I looked it up and it's about 100 lbs heavier <_<

It would have been nice if they made mine in AWD though. Lately there has actually been some good aftermarket stuff come out for the 3rd generation Eclipses. This company RIPP Mods makes a Supercharger for my car that brings it pretty close to 400HP. Only problem is that it costs about $6500 for the kit alone and plus you need to do some other upgrades along with it (Limited Slip Differential, Headers, Suspension etc.) so you're looking at close to $10K total.

http://rippmods.com/products/products_list...3&productId=134

Then this other company, Forced Induction Auto Sports http://www.fiautosports.com/3g.html makes a reliable turbo kit for the V6 which brings it to about 350HP at 8.5psi and costs around $3500. Plus if you ever wanted to, you can bulid up your engine and run higher boost.

Problem with this car is, you can make it fast but it costs a lot of money. I'm still kind of new to all this stuff and just trying to learn more. I would also like to own a GSX in the future too. Then I would have 2 Eclipses B)

[QandA 0]

I love when I'm driving on the highway and these little 1995 Civic's with their hardcore exhausts and NAS stickers think their all that and try to pass me to be cool. I drive my parents Tundra and it's got a few aftermarkert parts on it and let's just say that the Civic learns it's lesson.

[Miserable 6]

Do the guys driving the Mustang GT's know you're racing?

There is no way you're beating a Mustang GT with a stock Eclipse GT. I've smoked at least 4 Eclipses in my GT without any problem at all. There is also no way you're beating any V8 Camaro's other then the toned down rally sports from the 90's. The Mustang GT has problems with the V8 Camaro. Actually, I can't really see you beating a V6 Mustang every time either. They are pretty similar in power. You'll probably have an advantage in weight but still you've had to run into a V6 driver who has a little extra and knows how to run his car.

[tokes 0]

Do the guys driving the Mustang GT's know you're racing?

There is no way you're beating a Mustang GT with a stock Eclipse GT. I've smoked at least 4 Eclipses in my GT without any problem at all. There is also no way you're beating any V8 Camaro's other then the toned down rally sports from the 90's. The Mustang GT has problems with the V8 Camaro. Actually, I can't really see you beating a V6 Mustang every time either. They are pretty similar in power. You'll probably have an advantage in weight but still you've had to run into a V6 driver who has a little extra and knows how to run his car.

If he thinks intake and exhaust will net him 40 horsepower, let him be :P

[hip check 0]

Ever driven a Centrifugally supercharged car (Vortech, Procharger, Paxton, ETC) before? Boost builds linearly with RPM's. RPM's increase, boost increases. You don't hit peak boost till right at redline. A turbocharger makes full boost a LOT sooner than redline, so you tell me which one has lag.

Yes, the Vortech. The turbo has lag. Supercharger boost builds linear to RPM, true, but it's there from idle. Turbos come on strong once they've spooled up, thus the lag.

My point was that there is no 'kicking in' of the supercharger, like a turbo or shot of NO2... it just boosts the whole time - yes, in a linear fashion, lower PSI at lower RPM. The end result may be greater performance out of a turbo, but there is no disputing which one has lag.

Now with twin-turbos, or some crazy dual-vane set-up, the lag is minimized, hence the advantage (no lag) of a SC is slim - if any.

Now, just a question: Why would a WRC car run a turbo, and a Top Fuel dragster, for example, run a supercharger? (Aside from governing regulations, class rules, etc.)

[JR Boucicaut 3789]

I smell BS...sorry, man, I just don't think those guys knew you were racing...

[Miserable 6]

If he thinks intake and exhaust will net him 40 horsepower, let him be  :P

lol. I don't want to kill him but man; racing a stock Eclipse is almost as bad as racing a civic with a huge fin and a coffee can muffler. I turned down an Eclipse the other day because it's not worth the ticket if I get caught, and they usually get blown away at that line before there is really a race to be had. I hate when someone pulls up next to me revving up in a car that I can beat on a tricycle. I never race them but I bet when they pull away ahead of me a bit they think that they just beat a GT even though I took my foot off of the gas at about 2000 RPMs and continued on my way as normal. Every once in a while I'll let them get about 5 car lengths ahead of me and then floor it and blow their doors off just to remind them that they shouldn't race in mommy's Accord. :P

[Fedorov91 0]

Lol, see what I'm saying.. my poor Eclipse gets no respect anywhere :(

To clear a few things up, if you look at what I said about the Mustang GT... I said "I dont kno how, they must not kno how to drive or something"

it doesnt make any sense but thats how it was. One time was against this chick (see was pretty cute actually) in a black GT with Pink trim around the letters and stuff and the other time was against a car full of mexicans (if that makes it any better lol) but trust me, they were def. racing. The one time I lost to one wasn't that bad either, I wasnt more than 2 car lengths behind the guy so it's not like he smoked me.

As for what tokes said, I said headers along with those too. I know that the exhaust/intake MIGHT add 10HP combined, if that. The headers Im getting dyno'ed at 26HP on a untuned GT. So add those all up and it should be at least 30HP right?

My friend has a 91 Camaro RS and it's pretty even when we run. Then some guy at Western has a RS on some big ugly @ss chrome rims and he raced me one time and I got a good launch on him and slowly pulled away.

Im not making any of this up. I just dont see why you have such a hard time believing me. Anyway, what do you guys drive?

[tokes 0]

Ever driven a Centrifugally supercharged car (Vortech, Procharger, Paxton, ETC) before? Boost builds linearly with RPM's. RPM's increase, boost increases. You don't hit peak boost till right at redline. A turbocharger makes full boost a LOT sooner than redline, so you tell me which one has lag.

Yes, the Vortech. The turbo has lag. Supercharger boost builds linear to RPM, true, but it's there from idle. Turbos come on strong once they've spooled up, thus the lag.

My point was that there is no 'kicking in' of the supercharger, like a turbo or shot of NO2... it just boosts the whole time - yes, in a linear fashion, lower PSI at lower RPM. The end result may be greater performance out of a turbo, but there is no disputing which one has lag.

Now with twin-turbos, or some crazy dual-vane set-up, the lag is minimized, hence the advantage (no lag) of a SC is slim - if any.

Now, just a question: Why would a WRC car run a turbo, and a Top Fuel dragster, for example, run a supercharger? (Aside from governing regulations, class rules, etc.)

The reason WRC cars run turbochargers is because they produce a much more broad powerband (IE less lag, more low end power) than a supercharger, are easier on engine parts, and more consistent. With a blower you deal with belt slip in a serpentine setup, or you deal with shredding and throwing belts on a cogged setup. With a turbocharger you can instantly vary the boost inside the car for whatever reason, with a blower you're limited based on the pulley you have installed. Lots of drawbacks to blowers.

The reason they don't run blowers on top fuel cars is because the NHRA and IHRA have outlawed them. They outlawed them because they had all invested so much in their supercharged setups that if they allowed turbochargers the blower cars would instantly become second class, and whittle down the field of cars even further. Aside from that, they could also say the tire and suspension technology just isn't there to handle the amount of power a turbocharged setup could produce, which is somewhat viable. If you don't think turbochargers make faster drag cars, go look at NMRA SSO, or Pro-5.0. In SSO turbo cars are limited to 360 cubic inches, while blower cars can go as high as 440. Turbo cars are limited to a blower with a 91.5MM inducer, while blower cars can go 100+ MM, not to mention the turbo cars are 200 pounds heavier. Even with all these restrictions, the turbo cars are STILL mopping up in both classes.

I helped put together the motor for a friend of mine's car (359" windsor, afr heads, vic jr. intake, CSU 750 holley, non-intercooled Vortech YS-trim) and I've driven it a lot and there is NO WAY it makes boost off idle. Even with the race gas pullies (8" crank/3" blower which makes 22-24 psi when it doesn't slip) it still takes to about 2800-3000 before it starts making some positive boost. There was an article in MM&FF a month or two ago, comparing a couple blowers and a twin turbo kit. The turbos were making more boost than the centrifugal from the moment the test started untill about 5500 RPM's, when the T-trim made a little bit more boost, but still less power. I should rephrase what I said, boost builds with RPM's on a centrifugal car but the curve is much more parabolic than linear.

Twin turbo setups are not destined to spool quicker than single turbo setups, as most twin turbo setups are not sequential setups. Sure, if you compare a single large frame turbocharger with a 1.52 A/R exhaust housing and G-trim turbine wheel to a pair of T3's with .36 A/R housing, the twins are going to spool much faster, but for similar power outputs there is virtually no difference in lag when you select the proper exhaust housings and wheels.

[Vapor 0]

Mustang GTs are slow. Elicpses are slower. Mustang GTs have some promise though, they have a nice sized engine, but they make so little power for a v8. There handling is... eh. At least the 2005 mustangs (at least the cobras) have improved handeling and they are pretty quick

[Miserable 6]

I'm going to say that I believe you beat 2 Mustangs but I don't believe they were GTs. Many people re-badge their Mustangs with GT and cobra logos as well as switch bumpers and hoods. As I look out in the parking lot of my apartment complex there are 3 Mustangs. One is my GT which is a stock body except for wheels. The others are a GT with a Saleen hood and cobra bumpers but it's still badged as a GT and a stock 6 with a GT hood and rear bumper and an aftermarket dual exhaust badged as a GT. I know this is a 6 because I've watched the guy add the mods over time and it doesn't have fog lights. Like I said, you could easily give a V6 a run so perhaps these were V6's re-badged. The early 90's stangs had GT on the bumper skirt but the later style didn't so people would just make the 6's look like GT's to save $. You can even order a V6 from the factory with the GT hood. The easiest way to tell is most of the "fakes" don't have fog lights.

Also the RS is the slowest of the 90's Camaros, I think they are pushing 190 HP or close to that. Do I believe you beat a 14 year old car that has similar HP but is a lot heavier and probably not as tuned as it could be? Sure I'll give you that.

Vapor, get a clue.

Also, there is no 2005 Cobra. Ford isn't releasing an SVT version of the Mustang until 2007 and they may do away with the cobra name but that's just a rumor.