1988 Audi 80 9.6 17.1
1988 Audi Quattro 80 9.1 16.7
1989 Audi Quattro 80 10.3 17.2
1992 Audi 80 9.7 17.5
1988 Audi 90 8.9 16.7
1988 Audi 90 Quattro 9.5 17.0
1991 Audi 90 Quattro 20V 9.4 16.9
1992 Audi 90 Quattro 8.2 16.3
1993 Audi 90 CS Quattro Sport 8.8 16.7
1992 Audi 100 8.4 16.5
1992 Audi 100 CS 9.6 17.2
1992 Audi 100 S 9.4 17.2
1993 Audi 100 S 8.9 17.0
1993 Audi 100 CS Quattro Wagon 11.2 18.0
1980 Audi 4000 11.5 N/A
1984 Audi 4000S Quattro 10.2 17.3
1985 Audi 4000S 10.3 17.4
1985 Audi 4000S Quattro 9.2 16.8
1980 Audi 5000 Turbo 9.1 17.0
1980 Audi 5000S Diesel 20.4 21.9
1981 Audi 5000S Diesel 20.5 N/A
1981 Audi 5000 Turbo 9.4 N/A
1983 Audi 5000S 10.8 17.8
1983 Audi 5000 Turbo 11.6 18.4
1984 Audi 5000S Turbo 10.5 17.5
1984 Audi 5000S Wagon 11.2 18.0
1985 Audi 5000S Turbo Quattro 8.3 16.4
1986 Audi 5000S 11.6 18.4
1986 Audi 5000 Turbo Quattro 8.2 16.1
1988 Audi 5000S Quattro 9.7 17.0
1995 Audi A6 9.2 16.9
1996 Audi A6 Quattro Wagon 10.1 17.5
1999 Audi A6 2.8 Quattro Wagon-9.1, n/a
1996 Audi A4 8.9 16.8
1997 Audi A8 Quattro 6.7 15.0
1998 Audi A4 Quattro 8.8 N/A
1998 Audi A6 Quattro 8.7 16.6
1999 Audi A4 1.8t Quattro 9.5 n/a
2003 Audi A4 3.0 Cabriolet 7.5 15.9
2003 Audi A4 Avant 3.0 Quattro 7.7 15.9
1994 Audi Cabriolet 9.7 17.1
1982 Audi Coupe 11.2 N/A
1983 Audi Coupe 11.2 18.1
1984 Audi Coupe GT 10.5 17.7
1985 Audi Coupe GT 9.0 16.6
2003 Audi Allroad 2.7t twin turbo 7.7 N/A
2003 Audi RS6 4.3 12.63 (R&T Online)
1992 Audi S4 6.1 14.9
1993 Audi S4 6.5 15.1
2000 Audi S4 5.5 14.1
2004 Audi S4 4.9 n/a
2001 Audi S8 5.8 14.4
2000 Audi TT Quattro Roadster 6.2 14.7
2003 Audi TT 1.8 Quattro 7.3 15.7
1990 Audi V8 9.3 17.0
1990 Audi V8 Quattro 9.3 16.9
1991 Audi V8 6.8 15.1
1993 Audi V8 Quattro 7.2 15.6
1982 Audi Quattro 8.2 16.2
1985 Audi Quattro Turbo 7.2 15.5
1990 Audi Quattro Coupe 8.8 16.5
1991 Audi Quattro 20 7.2 15.4
Aston Martin
1999 Aston Martin DB7 5.7 14.3
2000 Aston Martin DB7 Vantage 5.1 13.6
2002 Aston Martin DB7 Vantage Volante 5.0 13.4
2002 Aston Martin V-12 Vanquish 4.4 12.9
BMW
1971 BMW 1600 11.6 18.2
1968 BMW 2002 11.3 17.9
1983 BMW 318i 9.6 17.3
1984 BMW 318i 11.6 18.3
1990 BMW 318is 8.8 16.5
1991 BMW 318is 10.0 17.3
1992 BMW 318i 9.7 17.2
1994 BMW 318is 10.1 17.5
1995 BMW 318i 8.8 16.6
1995 BMW 318i Conv. 9.7 17.4
1995 BMW 318ti 8.9 16.6
1996 BMW 318ti 8.4 16.4
1977 BMW 320i 12.3 18.2
1980 BMW 320i 12.1 18.7
1980 BMW 320i Turbo 7.3 15.6
1984 BMW 325e 8.4 16.3
1985 BMW 325e 9.2 16.6
1986 BMW 325es 8.6 16.4
1987 BMW 325es 9.0 16.7
1988 BMW 325is 7.5 15.7
1988 BMW 325iX 7.9 15.9
1988 BMW 325i Conv. 7.7 15.7
1989 BMW 325i 7.5 15.5
1990 BMW 325i 7.8 16.0
1992 BMW 325i 7.8 15.8
1993 BMW 325i 8.4 16.5
1993 BMW 325is 7.4 15.7
1994 BMW 325i 7.4 15.5
1994 BMW 325is 7.2 15.9
1994 BMW 325i Conv. 7.3 15.9
1995 BMW 325i 7.7 16.0
1995 BMW 325i Conv. 9.1 16.9
1996 BMW 328i Sport 6.4 15.0
1998 BMW 328is 6.2 14.7
1999 BMW 328i 6.9 15.2
2001 BMW 330i 6.1 14.8
1979 BMW 528i 8.2 N/A
1982 BMW 528e 10.3 17.5
1983 BMW 533i 7.7 15.8
1985 BMW 524td 11.7 18.2
1986 BMW 524td 11.0 18.1
1986 BMW 535i 7.9 16.1
1989 BMW 535i 7.0 15.5
1990 BMW 525i 8.0 16.1
1990 BMW 535i 8.6 16.5
1991 BMW 525i 8.4 16.2
1992 BMW 525i 9.6 17.5
1993 BMW 525i Touring 10.0 17.8
1993 BMW 535i 8.2 16.3
2003 BMW 525i wagon-8.9, n/a
1993 BMW 540i 6.9 15.3
1994 BMW 530i 7.0 15.5
1994 BMW 530i Touring 8.9 16.7
1994 BMW 540i 7.9 16.0
1995 BMW 540i 6.2 14.8
1996 BMW 525i Touring 8.8 16.8
1996 BMW 540i Sport 5.8 14.4
1997 BMW 528i (auto) 7.5 15.8
1997 BMW 528i (manual) 6.8 15.3
2001 BMW 528i 7.8 16.1
1997 BMW 540i 6.2 14.6
1998 BMW 540i Sport 5.5 14.0
2001 BMW 540i (Automatic) 5.7 14.3
2001 BMW 540i 6-Speed 5.5 14.0
1977 BMW 630CSi 11.0 17.3
1983 BMW 633CSi 7.7 16.0
1985 BMW 635CSi 8.2 16.0
1987 BMW 635CSi 8.5 16.3
1988 BMW 635CSi 7.7 16.0
1980 BMW 733i (4spd) 8.4 16.6
1980 BMW 733i (Auto) 10.5 17.5
1982 BMW 745i 8.5 16.6
1986 BMW 735i 9.1 16.7
1987 BMW 735i 9.1 16.8
1988 BMW 735i 9.3 17.0
1988 BMW 750iL 6.5 14.8
1990 BMW 735i 10.3 17.4
1991 BMW 750iL 6.5 14.8
1993 BMW 740i 6.8 15.3
1993 BMW 750iL 7.7 15.8
1994 BMW 740iL 7.7 15.9
1994 BMW 750iL 7.7 15.9
1995 BMW 740i 8.4 16.6
1995 BMW 740iL 7.9 16.0
1995 BMW 750iL 6.3 14.8
1996 BMW 740i 7.7 15.9
1996 BMW 750iL 6.4 14.7
1999 BMW 750iL 7.3 15.5
1991 BMW 850i 7.4 15.6
1992 BMW 850i 7.3 15.6
2003 BMW 760il 5.7, n/a
1994 BMW 840Ci 7.4 15.6
1994 BMW 850CSi 5.8 14.1
1994 BMW 850i 6.3 14.9
1998 BMW M Roadster 5.1 13.7
2002 BMW M Roadster 4.5 13.1
1999 BMW M Coupe 5.4 13.8
1981 BMW M1 6.2 14.6
1987 BMW M3 8.1 16.1
1988 BMW M3 7.1 15.4
1995 BMW M3 6.2 14.6
1995 BMW M3 Lightweight 5.3 13.9
1996 BMW M3 Automatic 6.7 15.3
1996 BMW M3 Luxury 6.6 14.9
1998 BMW M3 Sedan 5.5 14.0
2001 BMW M3 Coupe (U.S.) 4.8 n/a
2001 BMW M3 Convertible (U.S.) 5.4 n/a
2002 BMW M3 4.7 13.4
1988 BMW M5 6.3 14.6
1991 BMW M5 6.5 14.9
1993 BMW M5 6.2 14.6
2001 BMW M5 4.7 13.2
2002 BMW M5 4.8 13.3
1988 BMW M6 7.0 15.5
1997 BMW Z3 2.8 6.2 14.7
2001 BMW Z8 4.6 13.0
2002 BMW Z8 4.5 12.8
2002 BMW X5 4.6is 6.5 15.1
2003 BMW X5 3.0i 8.1 16.2
2003 BMW Z4 3.0i 5.4 14.2
Buick
1974 Buick Apollo 250ci N/A 20.4
1974 Buick Apollo 350ci 9.5 18.0
1973 Buick Century GS 455ci 7.4 15.3
1980 Buick Century Limited 13.2 19.2
1983 Buick Century T Type 14.1 19.5
1975 Buick Electra 455ci 12.6 17.8
1985 Buick Electra T Type 11.4 18.0
1986 Buick
elfreaky70363
09-02-2005, 12:15 PM
i was pretty impressed up untill i read the last lil tidbit. i was wanting to know where the hell you get to test drive or rent those ferrari's you had listed. i can see it now, "would you like to add insurance to that rental sir?".
97civicturbo
10-11-2005, 05:27 AM
I don't know where you got the 1/4 time for the nissan 200sx ser but its wrong. I'll try to find the site where I found it so I can post.
Patrick
10-11-2005, 04:09 PM
i have links to two sites that provide almost the exact same numbers...one of them is a bit larger
US3R!!!11one
10-11-2005, 04:27 PM
Seems pretty accurate to me. Good find.
95CIVICUS
11-03-2005, 02:10 AM
I have one to add.
Elanor:
1967 Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra GT500
427ci V8 w/ 6 speed,
(0-60) 2.8
(1/4 mile) 5.6
This bitch is scary. at last check she was pushing 873 horsepower with 988 of torque
She screams loud, And I love it.
Scared the hell outta me the first time drove it after i finished her.
Patrick
11-03-2005, 11:10 AM
nothing that isnt in the NHRA runs a 5.6 1/4 mile time. 873hp is Nothing, especially in a full bodied car. ive seen fully built chassis cars, with carbon fiber bodies and over 1000 hp, only run in the 6s...like the NHRA pro stock category...
:eek:
Forty04
11-03-2005, 11:15 AM
ORIGINAL: 94 Civic Ex
I have one to add.
Elanor:
1967 Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra GT500
427ci V8 w/ 6 speed,
(0-60) 2.8
(1/4 mile) 5.6
This bitch is scary. at last check she was pushing 873 horsepower with 988 of torque
She screams loud, And I love it.
Scared the hell outta me the first time drove it after i finished her.
Thats it, i'm breakin it out... [sm=bs.gif]
Pics and Timeslips would be awesome!
andryuha
11-04-2005, 01:07 PM
Also, I noticed that time for '90 525i is much faster than '92 525i which is completely wrong. The M20 motor in a '90 was factory rated at 165hp/160tq - that car runs slower than 17sec 1/4mile. the '92 and up features the M50 motor which is rated at 192hp/185tq and runs 16sec 1/4 mile
Patrick
11-04-2005, 01:15 PM
hmm..ive been to a few webpages that all give the same info. im guessing that they have tested different trannies, and just didnt specify which ones.
andryuha
11-04-2005, 02:34 PM
ORIGINAL: Patrick
hmm..ive been to a few webpages that all give the same info. im guessing that they have tested different trannies, and just didnt specify which ones.
I know, but I'm just talking from personal experience. 535 btw runs in mid 15s
Patrick
11-04-2005, 02:41 PM
for instance, with the new clutch and gearbox, my 5 series has gotten slower, technically. the mph is better, but now it wont get off the line...[:@]
Honda_man
11-04-2005, 02:42 PM
good job man... but uh.. who cares what a 1980 buick skylark can do in the 1/4 mile? lol naw, man just givin u ****
LEVIII
11-05-2005, 01:53 AM
ORIGINAL: 94 Civic Ex
I have one to add.
Elanor:
1967 Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra GT500
427ci V8 w/ 6 speed,
(0-60) 2.8
(1/4 mile) 5.6
This bitch is scary. at last check she was pushing 873 horsepower with 988 of torque
She screams loud, And I love it.
Scared the hell outta me the first time drove it after i finished her.
No guys, its elanor from gone in 60. Didnt you know that car runs most of that 1/4 time in the air after the convenient wreck on the bridge...........
Duh!
Cutt
12-28-2005, 05:49 PM
Good find I enjoyed reading it
drbyers
12-28-2005, 06:39 PM
WHAT!!? No Yugo Convertible times!!!???
I demand a recount!
neon_killer
01-06-2006, 08:03 PM
i have one its not much 1989 civic Si 0-60 in 8.59sec. thats all i have so far
sickcivic07
01-31-2006, 04:45 PM
Anybody know what a 2000 Chevy silverado short bed reg. cab with a 5.3 will run? My friend has one and he says it can take my civic. He has a comp. tuner and flowmasters and a k & n air filter.
polo708
01-31-2006, 07:50 PM
probably a low 15... they are pretty quick.
gtpjim
02-20-2006, 03:34 PM
yeah my friend had an 02 gmc sierra reg cab swb with the 4.8 in it, with a tune/intake/full exhaust and headers he was running mid 14's on street tires, i ran almost an identical truck with slicks at the track and he ran 14.2's.
Jim
Patrick
02-20-2006, 03:38 PM
there is an older guy at my home track that took his stock 2wd RC 5.3 chevy to the track just to show his young grandson what drag racing was like..and while there, he paid to make a pass..well, it ran well enough that he started modding..haha..last time that i saw him, he had changed the gears, headerback exhaust, ram air..TB, some valve/head work...and he was in the high 13s, all while still getting very good mileage!
gtpjim
02-20-2006, 03:41 PM
yeah i know a guy that's putting 6.0L heads with long tubes and a whipple kit(etc) on his...Z71 lol, that sucker is gonna be an awesome off or onroad machine hehe.
Jim
hondajoe77
04-04-2006, 09:45 PM
1992 prelude 4ws runs 13.9 not 15.9 or just mine does.
hondajoe77
04-04-2006, 09:46 PM
ORIGINAL: hondajoe77
1992 prelude 4ws runs 13.9 not 15.9 or just mine does.
OR DID LAST TIME I WAS AT THE TRACK>:D
2002civicLX2002
07-02-2006, 04:37 PM
the 5.3 is a good engine. my dad has one and it will do 0-60 10 secs. but it also has u chip, exhaust, new intake new ignition new fuel injectors and a few custom mods that i wont say.
77 Monte Carlo
07-29-2006, 01:11 AM
10.70 QTR MI IN 77 MONTE CARLO 454
15.45 QTR MI IN 85 CRX, DUNNO WHAT KINDA ENGINE ITS GOT MAYBE A 4 CYL??? ITS ORIGINAL I THINK AND STOCK I DONT KNOW MUCH ABOUT IMPORTS IM NEW TO HONDAS, I JUS ALWAYS WANTED A CRX AND NOW I GOT ONE!!!! :) IM SO HAPPY
stefo
12-20-2006, 01:21 PM
no way an ex civic sedan runs 10.5 and a lx civic sedan runs 9.4..... 0-60... and i know in my civic ex sedan i hit 60 much much soner then 10 seconds around 8 seconds and im just rolling with an intake filter... (2000 model 5 speed) and it weights less then a 2 dr teg ls... bc when i open the door it says how much it weighs on teh side and i compaired it and the teg weights about 150 pounds more... so...
speed_demon
01-25-2007, 07:21 AM
If you guys want to go fast why buy a car? My wreck rebuild 98 VTR1000 (stock engine) turned a 11.09 standing 1/4. I turned a 10.53 1/4 on a buddies 2000 929RR after the second pass. I think I could have done better but he stopped letting me ride it when I beat his 10.71. Cars are slow and in my opinion only for transportation. The fastest car I've ever driven was my 78 Camaro 383/350turbo/411posi built to the ceiling. It doesn't even come close to a slow sport bike. Just be happy you guys are driving reliable cars with good mpg. Don't ruin it by modding them out.
Forty04
01-25-2007, 12:12 PM
ORIGINAL: speed_demon
If you guys want to go fast why buy a car? My wreck rebuild 98 VTR1000 (stock engine) turned a 11.09 standing 1/4. I turned a 10.53 1/4 on a buddies 2000 929RR after the second pass. I think I could have done better but he stopped letting me ride it when I beat his 10.71. Cars are slow and in my opinion only for transportation. The fastest car I've ever driven was my 78 Camaro 383/350turbo/411posi built to the ceiling. It doesn't even come close to a slow sport bike. Just be happy you guys are driving reliable cars with good mpg. Don't ruin it by modding them out.
First of all, not all of us mod cars to try and be the fastest vehicle out there.
Second of all, a car can be almost as reliable as stock if modded properly.
Third, I've seen many a well tuned car walk right on past GSXR1000's
speed_demon
01-29-2007, 05:39 AM
ORIGINAL: Forty04
First of all, not all of us mod cars to try and be the fastest vehicle out there.
Second of all, a car can be almost as reliable as stock if modded properly.
Third, I've seen many a well tuned car walk right on past GSXR1000's
First I never said you ALL try to mod your cars to be the fastest.
Second, name me mods that enhance performance and don't reduce reliability.
Thirdly, what do you mean by a "well tuned" car. What mods, what make, what model, what year? I think your bias toward cars has led you to a statement full of ****. A new stock gsxr 1000 will run a 9.9 second 1/4 mile and 186mph (because of a speed limiter imposed by europe and japan). The oldest gsxr 1000 will do a 10.5 second 1/4 mile. And both will run forever if taken care of. The fastest street legal cars at the drags run low 13's and few are naturanlly aspirated most of which are running high boost turbos or nitrous. Do you know how much more power and traction it takes for a car to go from 13's to 10's? The last time I was at the drags I raced a modded out Viper and kicked its ass. My low-11 second bike is one of the slow ones too. A GSXR is of the very fastest. I find you post comical. I see you're an admin for the forum so I assume my reply will be modifed or deleted.
I tell you what. I just picked up a multiple basket case 88 Katana 1100 for $600. With only $100 more invested to get it running I'll bet it and my car its faster than your civic. From the info I can gather your car will run low 16's if your lucky and my POS Katana will probably run mid-10's.
Smokem
01-29-2007, 07:29 AM
Why are you trying to compare apples and oranges, dude? Bikes are bikes, Power to weight and all that sh!t. What are you trying to prove that shouldn't already be fairly common knowledge? It's like if I said put 5 five people on your bike and lets drag. You lose! I used to race bikes on the ice and snow against snow mobiles with no special equipment and respectably lose. Once in a while some a$$hole would run his mouth and my response would be to take it to the streets in July and see how you do with your snowmobile against my 750. Same deal . Keeping it all fun is what it's all about. Don't get caught up in the anonymity of this medium and say sh!t to people or about people that you wouldn't be saying or doing face to face. You know what you got and what it's capable of, right? Why get in a pissing contest when all that does it get you wet!
SMOKEM
speed_demon
01-29-2007, 07:57 AM
ORIGINAL: Smokem
Why are you trying to compare apples and oranges, dude? Bikes are bikes, Power to weight and all that sh!t. What are you trying to prove that shouldn't already be fairly common knowledge? It's like if I said put 5 five people on your bike and lets drag. You lose! I used to race bikes on the ice and snow against snow mobiles with no special equipment and respectably lose. Once in a while some a$$hole would run his mouth and my response would be to take it to the streets in July and see how you do with your snowmobile against my 750. Same deal . Keeping it all fun is what it's all about. Don't get caught up in the anonymity of this medium and say sh!t to people or about people that you wouldn't be saying or doing face to face. You know what you got and what it's capable of, right? Why get in a pissing contest when all that does it get you wet!
SMOKEM
I didn't compare "apples and oranges". I simply said of you want to go fast in the 1/4 mile its much cheaper and easier on a bike. The following post said a car is faster than the fastest bike out if "well tuned". I was just defending my post and informing the poster of his error.
Smokem
01-29-2007, 10:01 AM
Point taken. Members of this site are very proud, and rightfully so, of their individual accomplishments with their rides. Alot of effort has been put forth getting their Civics both looking great and performing great ( in relative terms ) so sometimes you might rub someone the wrong way pointing out what they may already know. That was my point, made or not.
I read and mostly laugh but sometimes I just feel compelled to comment. It's all good though, kept in its place.
Dont say it cant be done, dont say it hasn't been done. It has been done. Bikes vs Cars you are looking at 2 totally different spectrums of the automotive industry. Bikes may have better power to weight, may get better milage, may be cheaper to go fast on..............but my car has heat, it keeps me dry when it's raining, plus IMO bikes dont have anything that sets them apart from eachother.......to me they all look the same.
Dont say it cant be done, dont say it hasn't been done. It has been done. Bikes vs Cars you are looking at 2 totally different spectrums of the automotive industry. Bikes may have better power to weight, may get better milage, may be cheaper to go fast on..............but my car has heat, it keeps me dry when it's raining, plus IMO bikes dont have anything that sets them apart from eachother.......to me they all look the same.
If you have the money though, it'd be easier and cheaper to get a civic as an economy car, and a honda cbr 1000 as a drag bike. Then you have a car that has heat and a top when its raining, and when the weather is nice a fast vehicle.
Marty
01-29-2007, 01:00 PM
But why not have your cake and eat it too? Haver a super fast car you can drive daily. I for one am a power nut and feel neglected if I dont drive atleast a high 13 second car on a daily basis. Some people are different and I understand that but I will take every car I have/get and make it get to that point or better.
speed_demon
01-29-2007, 04:45 PM
ORIGINAL: Smokem
Point taken. Members of this site are very proud, and rightfully so, of their individual accomplishments with their rides. Alot of effort has been put forth getting their Civics both looking great and performing great ( in relative terms ) so sometimes you might rub someone the wrong way pointing out what they may already know. That was my point, made or not.
I read and mostly laugh but sometimes I just feel compelled to comment. It's all good though, kept in its place.
SMOKEM
Yeah I agree. I tend to type what I'm thinking and here on a Civic forum I'm sure some probably took it the wrong way. I just thought the previous was a bold statement and I couldn't very well keep my mouth shut. I have a Civic. It was cheap and it has turned into one of the best cars I've ever owned. I just don't think this is what they were designed to do.
The reason I commented in the this thread about bikes is because I've been around motors and mechanics my entire life and know how horsepower is made and how much it costs. I see cars all the time where the owner has dumped tons of money into an import and the result is blown head gaskets and/or disappointing performance numbers. When you ask someone what their car can do in the 1/4 mile or top speed or rwhp they usually exagerate wildly. Bikers do it too. My question is why kid yourself? $40k+ MIGHT get you into the 12's and be somewhat reliable in a car but $8k WILL get you into the 9's (if you are a capable rider) on a bike. The age old question "how to go fast for cheap?" has yet to answered with a car but has by reatively cheap motorcycles. If you want to go really fast you probably can't afford to in a car. Plus you guys don't know how it feels to have so much power to weight. Shifting out of 1st gear at 92-98mph is typical. The new 600's have a 16.5k redline. A 2001 Honda CBR929RR worth about $4000 will do 185mph indicated (probably 175mph actual) and can pull a low-10 second quarter with the right rider and its considered very slow and underpowered by todays standards.
Now that I have said my peace I will pray to the Civic gods for by blasphemy.
Ben
01-29-2007, 05:29 PM
ORIGINAL: Marty
But why not have your cake and eat it too? Haver a super fast car you can drive daily. I for one am a power nut and feel neglected if I dont drive atleast a high 13 second car on a daily basis. Some people are different and I understand that but I will take every car I have/get and make it get to that point or better.
I see what you're saying, but I wouldn't want a 13 second street car, because i'd never drive it that fast on the street. I'd only go that fast on a track, and on a day I can run it on a track, I can run a CBR-1000:D
matts
01-29-2007, 08:56 PM
mr. demon....bikes pound for pound are the best thing you can spend your money on if you want to go fast. but i would MUCH rather go 180 in a car than a bike. at that speed pebbles become mountains and i like having 4 tires and a steel shell around me vs. open air and relying on a helmet and hopes and dreams to keep me safe. cars can be made to be just as fast as bikes, but yes, it does take LOTS of money. a car also has a much smaller learning curve for going fastthan a bike. you have a wreck in a car and you have a bad day, have a wreck on a bike and your day has gone to hell in a handbasket. i've had friends get severly hurt, some get paralyzed, and some even killed because of bikes. not because they're bad riders, but because of everyone else on the road.
and you said that street legal cars only go low 13s. that's the statement that really caught my eye and made me chuckle. there are SEVERAL...FACTORY cars that go lower than 13s. new Z06 for instance...11s easily....straight off the showroom. bikes can't help to be fast. you strap a 100hp motor on a frame, seat, and 2 wheels weighing a few hundred pounds and it's hard NOT tobe it fast.
like stated bikes are bikes and cars are cars. each have their own purposes and each havetheir ownplace in their respective circles. but those 2 circles do cross paths and there are cars that will hang with bikes. so bikes are superior most of the time in the performance department, butthat's not 100% accurate all the time
Forty04
01-30-2007, 08:51 AM
ORIGINAL: speed_demon
ORIGINAL: Smokem
Point taken. Members of this site are very proud, and rightfully so, of their individual accomplishments with their rides. Alot of effort has been put forth getting their Civics both looking great and performing great ( in relative terms ) so sometimes you might rub someone the wrong way pointing out what they may already know. That was my point, made or not.
I read and mostly laugh but sometimes I just feel compelled to comment. It's all good though, kept in its place.
SMOKEM
Yeah I agree. I tend to type what I'm thinking and here on a Civic forum I'm sure some probably took it the wrong way. I just thought the previous was a bold statement and I couldn't very well keep my mouth shut. I have a Civic. It was cheap and it has turned into one of the best cars I've ever owned. I just don't think this is what they were designed to do.
The reason I commented in the this thread about bikes is because I've been around motors and mechanics my entire life and know how horsepower is made and how much it costs. I see cars all the time where the owner has dumped tons of money into an import and the result is blown head gaskets and/or disappointing performance numbers. When you ask someone what their car can do in the 1/4 mile or top speed or rwhp they usually exagerate wildly. Bikers do it too. My question is why kid yourself? $40k+ MIGHT get you into the 12's and be somewhat reliable in a car but $8k WILL get you into the 9's (if you are a capable rider) on a bike. The age old question "how to go fast for cheap?" has yet to answered with a car but has by reatively cheap motorcycles. If you want to go really fast you probably can't afford to in a car. Plus you guys don't know how it feels to have so much power to weight. Shifting out of 1st gear at 92-98mph is typical. The new 600's have a 16.5k redline. A 2001 Honda CBR929RR worth about $4000 will do 185mph indicated (probably 175mph actual) and can pull a low-10 second quarter with the right rider and its considered very slow and underpowered by todays standards.
Now that I have said my peace I will pray to the Civic gods for by blasphemy.
wow....ignorance truly is bliss isn't it?
97dxcoupe
02-14-2007, 10:28 PM
how come u dont have the 0-60 and 1/4 for a 97 dx coupe
Forty04
02-15-2007, 07:59 AM
ORIGINAL: 97dxcoupe
how come u dont have the 0-60 and 1/4 for a 97 dx coupe
It hasn't finished running the quarter mile yet... :D
Just playin, its about the same as the 96 HX's/DX's
okynot43
06-16-2007, 04:33 PM
i went to the same site again, and they've updated the list, with a lot more newer model times...so, here it is:
Year Make & Model (0-60) (1/4 Mile)
Acura
1997 Acura 2.2CL 8.9 16.7
2002 Acura 3.2CL Type S 6.8 15.0
1996 Acura 3.2TL 8.1 16.4
1999 Acura 3.2TL 7.4 15.7
2002 Acura 3.2TL Type S 6.2 14.8
2003Acura3.2CL Type-S 6.5 14.9
1986 Acura Integra RS 9.3 17.0
1986 Acura Integra LS 8.8 16.5
1989 Acura Integra LS 9.3 17.1
1990 Acura Integra 3-Dr GS 9.2 16.8
1990 Acura Integra GS 8.9 16.6
1992 Acura Integra GS-R 6.8 15.4
1993 Acura Integra GS-R 6.5 15.2
1994 Acura Integra GS-R 7.1 15.5
1994 Acura Integra LS 7.6 16.0
1996 Acura Integra GS-R 7.1 15.5
1996 Acura Integra SE 7.9 16.1
1997 Acura Integra Type R 6.5 14.7
1986 Acura Legend 8.1 16.2
1986 Acura Legend Sedan 8.1 16.4
1987 Acura Legend Coupe L 7.7 16.0
1988 Acura Legend Coupe L 9.6 17.2
1990 Acura Legend Coupe 9.0 17.0
1991 Acura Legend Coupe 8.8 16.7
1991 Acura Legend LS 7.9 16.1
1991 Acura Legend Sedan 8.3 16.2
1991 Acura Legend Sedan LS 8.1 16.1
1992 Acura Legend LS 7.9 16.1
1993 Acura Legend Coupe 7.5 15.9
1993 Acura Legend Coupe LS 7.3 15.7
1993 Acura Legend LS 6.7 15.4
1991 Acura NSX 5.8 14.4
1992 Acura NSX 5.6 13.9
1993 Acura NSX 5.6 13.9
1994 Acura NSX 5.3 13.6
1996 Acura NSX 5.2 13.8
1996 Acura NSX-T 5.8 14.3
1997 Acura NSX-T 4.8 13.3
2001 Acura NSX V6 4.5 12.9 (C&D TV 2001)
2002 Acura NSX 4.8 13.4
2002 Acura RSX Type S 6.1 14.8
2003 Acura RSX Type S 6.7 15.1
2005 Acura RSX-S 6.4 14.9 (C&D (http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/11118/acura-rsx-type-s.html) Sept. '05)
1996 Acura SLX Premium Pkg. 11.1 18.1
2004 Acura TL 6.3 14.8
2004 Acura TL 6 speed 6.0 14.44
2004 Acura TL A Spec 5.7 14.25
2004 Acura TSX 7.5 15.9 (est)
1992 Acura Vigor GS 8.6 16.6
1992 Acura Vigor LS 8.7 16.7
1988 Audi 80 9.6 17.1
1988 Audi Quattro 80 9.1 16.7
1989 Audi Quattro 80 10.3 17.2
1992 Audi 80 9.7 17.5
1988 Audi 90 8.9 16.7
1988 Audi 90 Quattro 9.5 17.0
1991 Audi 90 Quattro 20V 9.4 16.9
1992 Audi 90 Quattro 8.2 16.3
1993 Audi 90 CS Quattro Sport 8.8 16.7
1992 Audi 100 8.4 16.5
1992 Audi 100 CS 9.6 17.2
1992 Audi 100 S 9.4 17.2
1993 Audi 100 S 8.9 17.0
1993 Audi 100 CS Quattro Wagon 11.2 18.0
1980 Audi 4000 11.5 N/A
1984 Audi 4000S Quattro 10.2 17.3
1985 Audi 4000S 10.3 17.4
1985 Audi 4000S Quattro 9.2 16.8
1980 Audi 5000 Turbo 9.1 17.0
1980 Audi 5000S Diesel 20.4 21.9
1981 Audi 5000S Diesel 20.5 N/A
1981 Audi 5000 Turbo 9.4 N/A
1983 Audi 5000S 10.8 17.8
1983 Audi 5000 Turbo 11.6 18.4
1984 Audi 5000S Turbo 10.5 17.5
1984 Audi 5000S Wagon 11.2 18.0
1985 Audi 5000S Turbo Quattro 8.3 16.4
1986 Audi 5000S 11.6 18.4
1986 Audi 5000 Turbo Quattro 8.2 16.1
1988 Audi 5000S Quattro 9.7 17.0
1995 Audi A6 9.2 16.9
1996 Audi A6 Quattro Wagon 10.1 17.5
1999 Audi A6 2.8Quattro Wagon-9.1, n/a
1996 Audi A4 8.9 16.8
1997 Audi A8 Quattro 6.7 15.0
1998 Audi A4 Quattro 8.8 N/A
1998 Audi A6 Quattro 8.7 16.6
1999 Audi A4 1.8t Quattro 9.5 n/a
2003AudiA4 3.0 Cabriolet 7.5 15.9
2003AudiA4 Avant 3.0 Quattro 7.7 15.9
1994 Audi Cabriolet 9.7 17.1
1982 Audi Coupe 11.2 N/A
1983 Audi Coupe 11.2 18.1
1984 Audi Coupe GT 10.5 17.7
1985 Audi Coupe GT 9.0 16.6
2003 Audi Allroad 2.7t twin turbo 7.7 N/A
2006 Audi RS 4 Quattro 4.8 13.3 (C&D Sept '05)
2007 Audi RS 4 Quattro 4.6 13.2 (C&D (http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/11333/road-test-review-2007-audi-rs-4-quattro.html) Sept '06)
2003 Audi RS6 4.3 12.63 (R&T Online)
1992 Audi S4 6.1 14.9
1993 Audi S4 6.5 15.1
2000 Audi S4 5.5 14.1
2004 Audi S4 4.9 n/a
2001 Audi S8 5.8 14.4
2000 Audi TT Quattro Roadster 6.2 14.7
2003AudiTT 1.8 Quattro 7.3 15.7
1990 Audi V8 9.3 17.0
1990 Audi V8 Quattro 9.3 16.9
1991 Audi V8 6.8 15.1
1993 Audi V8 Quattro 7.2 15.6
1982 Audi Quattro 8.2 16.2
1985 Audi Quattro Turbo 7.2 15.5
1990 Audi Quattro Coupe 8.8 16.5
1991 Audi Quattro 20 7.2 15.4
1971 BMW 1600 11.6 18.2
1968 BMW 2002 11.3 17.9
1983 BMW 318i 9.6 17.3
1984 BMW 318i 11.6 18.3
1990 BMW 318is 8.8 16.5
1991 BMW 318is 10.0 17.3
1992 BMW 318i 9.7 17.2
1994 BMW 318is 10.1 17.5
1995 BMW 318i 8.8 16.6
1995 BMW 318i Conv. 9.7 17.4
1995 BMW 318ti 8.9 16.6
1996 BMW 318ti 8.4 16.4
1977 BMW 320i 12.3 18.2
1980 BMW 320i 12.1 18.7
1980 BMW 320i Turbo 7.3 15.6
1984 BMW 325e 8.4 16.3
1985 BMW 325e 9.2 16.6
1986 BMW 325es 8.6 16.4
1987 BMW 325es 9.0 16.7
1988 BMW 325is 7.5 15.7
1988 BMW 325iX 7.9 15.9
1988 BMW 325i Conv. 7.7 15.7
1989 BMW 325i 7.5 15.5
1990 BMW 325i 7.8 16.0
1992 BMW 325i 7.8 15.8
1993 BMW 325i 8.4 16.5
1993 BMW 325is 7.4 15.7
1994 BMW 325i 7.4 15.5
1994 BMW 325is 7.2 15.9
1994 BMW 325i Conv. 7.3 15.9
1995 BMW 325i 7.7 16.0
1995 BMW 325i Conv. 9.1 16.9
1996 BMW 328i Sport 6.4 15.0
1998 BMW 328is 6.2 14.7
1999 BMW 328i 6.9 15.2
2001 BMW 330i 6.1 14.8
2007 BMW 335i 4.9 13.6 (C&D (http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/11733/2007-bmw-335i-coupe.html) Nov '06)
2007 BMW 335i 4.8 13.3 (E (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=117669)dmunds.com (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=117669))
1979 BMW 528i 8.2 N/A
1982 BMW 528e 10.3 17.5
1983 BMW 533i 7.7 15.8
1985 BMW 524td 11.7 18.2
1986 BMW 524td 11.0 18.1
1986 BMW 535i 7.9 16.1
1989 BMW 535i 7.0 15.5
1990 BMW 525i 8.0 16.1
1990 BMW 535i 8.6 16.5
1991 BMW 525i 8.4 16.2
1992 BMW 525i 9.6 17.5
1993 BMW 525i Touring 10.0 17.8
1993 BMW 535i 8.2 16.3
2003 BMW 525i wagon-8.9, n/a
1993 BMW 540i 6.9 15.3
1994 BMW 530i 7.0 15.5
1994 BMW 530i Touring 8.9 16.7
1994 BMW 540i 7.9 16.0
1995 BMW 540i 6.2 14.8
1996 BMW 525i Touring 8.8 16.8
1996 BMW 540i Sport 5.8 14.4
1997 BMW 528i (auto) 7.5 15.8
1997 BMW 528i (manual) 6.8 15.3
2001 BMW 528i 7.8 16.1
1997 BMW 540i 6.2 14.6
1998 BMW 540i Sport 5.5 14.0
2001 BMW 540i (Automatic) 5.7 14.3
2001 BMW 540i 6-Speed 5.5 14.0
1977 BMW 630CSi 11.0 17.3
1983 BMW 633CSi 7.7 16.0
1985 BMW 635CSi 8.2 16.0
1987 BMW 635CSi 8.5 16.3
1988 BMW 635CSi 7.7 16.0
1980 BMW 733i (4spd) 8.4 16.6
1980 BMW 733i (Auto) 10.5 17.5
1982 BMW 745i 8.5 16.6
1986 BMW 735i 9.1 16.7
1987 BMW 735i 9.1 16.8
1988 BMW 735i 9.3 17.0
1988 BMW
phsballer123
06-29-2007, 05:04 PM
i know you did not rent all those lol!! i did a research paper on cars and times like that and i used that same info a few years back
okynot43
07-07-2007, 06:00 AM
haha...I wish I could've driven all those cars...haha..
I would be a happy man..
xD
civicmaster
09-02-2007, 05:35 PM
slow as ****ttttt
just like every civic out there
BX_Civic
09-02-2007, 05:43 PM
Civicmaster,
Get off our site you damn punk, you make camaro owners look bad..
Come to 10475 and ill be sure to have someone hand you your ass on the track or on the street you sucker
ser27
01-15-2008, 12:14 PM
im doin 9.0 0-60 in my 1994 altima all day long and i dont have a track around me to see 1/4 time ill find one tho
SuzukiGhostRider
02-24-2008, 08:49 PM
Yeah, LEVIII couldn't be more full of crap than he currently is. Itwas this site (http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/asian-cars/30595-all-cars-all-years-0-60-1-4mile-time.html) he got his list from. Why do people have to lie just to try to be cool online? I happened across this site doing research, saw that bs post at the beginning of this topic and HAD to register just to call the guy a liar.
SovXietday
02-25-2008, 07:51 AM
ORIGINAL: SuzukiGhostRider
Yeah, LEVIII couldn't be more full of crap than he currently is. Itwas this site (http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/asian-cars/30595-all-cars-all-years-0-60-1-4mile-time.html) he got his list from. Why do people have to lie just to try to be cool online? I happened across this site doing research, saw that bs post at the beginning of this topic and HAD to register just to call the guy a liar.
So, you went through all of that trouble just to register and call the guy a liar when you could have just gone through a lot less trouble to read the last line of his post? Or heck, even the post after which hinted at his last line? You're an idiot, he said he was kidding and posted the site at the bottom of his post. Congratulations, you fail.