GM Selling off part of car collection...yes Fiero's included
Moderator: Series8217
-
- Posts: 623
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:30 am
GM Selling off part of car collection...yes Fiero's included
2 of them,
1984 Fiero GT 2+2
1987 Fiero GT Convertible
http://jalopnik.com/5113113/gm-to-aucti ... ate-museum
1984 Fiero GT 2+2
1987 Fiero GT Convertible
http://jalopnik.com/5113113/gm-to-aucti ... ate-museum
Fuck you Shaun , one day those little boys will talk and when they do you will get yours.
-
- cant get enough of this site!
- Posts: 3289
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:37 pm
- Series8217
- 1988 Fiero Track Car
- Posts: 5989
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:47 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
-
- Posts: 1010
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:19 am
- Location: The Peoples Republic of Kalefornya
- Contact:
Why would you want that stuff?p8ntman442 wrote:Let me know when the turbo goes up next.
Or a 0 mile W41.
Look whats also there.
Fiero Goodwrench Race!!!!
I don't know why people got all ball hungry over the W41. It really isn't that spectacular. There are plenty of better engines.
88GT 3.4 DOHC Turbo
Gooch wrote:Way to go douche. You are like a one-man, fiero-destroying machine.
Incorrect. The W41 was introduced the same year as the 210hp 3.4 DOHC (1991).befarrer wrote:For the year it was introduced, it had more horsepower than all of GM's V6 offerings
For it's year it was a good engine, despite it's smoothness and reliability issues. But the past 17-18 years have presented far more superior powerplants.
88GT 3.4 DOHC Turbo
Gooch wrote:Way to go douche. You are like a one-man, fiero-destroying machine.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15629
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
-
- cant get enough of this site!
- Posts: 3289
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:37 pm
why because a w41 calais will whoop a dohc fiero on the autox track any day of the year. PERIOD.
why.. because 190/4 > 210/6
AAron this is a challange, find me another 4 cyl engine 1991 or earlier making 190 hp NA less than 2.5L.
I will Wait.
why.. because 190/4 > 210/6
AAron this is a challange, find me another 4 cyl engine 1991 or earlier making 190 hp NA less than 2.5L.
I will Wait.
"I wanna make a porno starring us. Well, not just us, also these two foreign bitches."
How is 190 split between 4 cylinders better than 210 between 6? The 6 cylinder makes much more low, and mid-range torque. It'd be far better on the AutoX track from a pure drivetrain standpoint. I can't say for the entire car, but we aren't talking about cars, we're talking engines.
Why does it have to be earlier than 1991? We're not in 1991. We're in 2008. S2000 bitch.
Why does it have to be earlier than 1991? We're not in 1991. We're in 2008. S2000 bitch.
88GT 3.4 DOHC Turbo
Gooch wrote:Way to go douche. You are like a one-man, fiero-destroying machine.
-
- cant get enough of this site!
- Posts: 3289
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:37 pm
specific output is greater therefore its a better engineered system. Thats why 190/4 is important.Aaron wrote:How is 190 split between 4 cylinders better than 210 between 6? The 6 cylinder makes much more low, and mid-range torque. It'd be far better on the AutoX track from a pure drivetrain standpoint. I can't say for the entire car, but we aren't talking about cars, we're talking engines.
Why does it have to be earlier than 1991? We're not in 1991. We're in 2008. S2000 bitch.
We are talking cars, I said give me a 0 mile w41, you said why and I said a stock 91 w41 would beat a engine swapped fiero in an autox any day.
why earlier than 1991, because asshat, thats when the engine was released. how many years later did the s2000 come out?
now go fine a 4 cyl NA motor made before 1995 (last year the quad 4 was made) that made more than 190 in less than 2.5l.
we'll all be getting dumber as you respond, so please just post the answer not some bullshit like your previous post.
"I wanna make a porno starring us. Well, not just us, also these two foreign bitches."
-
- cant get enough of this site!
- Posts: 3289
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:37 pm
So it's better engineered. That doesn't matter. So you have a quick 2.3l car. A fast 7.0l car is still faster. Talk specific output all day long, the only time it matters is in displacement limited classes. I could find you a better engineered engine in a heartbeat. But if it doesn't have a better power curve, then it's useless. All specific output does, is increase octane demand, reduce reliability, and reduce durability.p8ntman442 wrote: specific output is greater therefore its a better engineered system. Thats why 190/4 is important.
We are talking cars, I said give me a 0 mile w41, you said why and I said a stock 91 w41 would beat a engine swapped fiero in an autox any day.
why earlier than 1991, because asshat, thats when the engine was released. how many years later did the s2000 come out?
now go fine a 4 cyl NA motor made before 1995 (last year the quad 4 was made) that made more than 190 in less than 2.5l.
So since you're talking enigne-swapped Fieros, what about a purpose built, tube frame, 3.4 DOHC car. Now your calais isn't so fast. The same car, and the 3.4 is the better engine. Although the added weight would hurt it, the 100lbs isn't anything compared to the huge midrange advantage. I didn't used to agree. After driving AutoX, with an engine not optimized for it in the least, though still a shitload better than the W41, I realize. A 3800 would have whipped my ass hard. But my specific output is higher OMGZ!!!!
Why do you want a 17, 18 year old engine? Why use old technology, when current technology is better? You're ragging on the Fiero, well, in 1988, it wasn't all that bad. But we're not in 1988, so why use 1988 technology?
Why limit me to 1995? And why does it have to be N/A? You're imposing restrictions just to try and make the W41 look halfway decent. Sure, nearly 20 years ago it was. But today, it's fucking ancient, unreliable, and under-performing. It would get destroyed in any competitive racing class, unless the limitations were before 1991, N/A, under 2.5l, and God knows whatever else you have to dream of.
88GT 3.4 DOHC Turbo
Gooch wrote:Way to go douche. You are like a one-man, fiero-destroying machine.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15629
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
-
- cant get enough of this site!
- Posts: 3289
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:37 pm
Not AutoX. There are plenty of better cars. I'd go class it out, but I'm too lazy.The Dark Side of Will wrote: Actually, in the classes in which it competes, the Achieva still cleans up.
We're not in "That year."p8ntman442 wrote:Will, Championships mean nothing, I mean the 91 W41 only took 6 of the 9 firehawk championship races that year. Stupid POS.
how many did the fiero take in 1988?
88GT 3.4 DOHC Turbo
Gooch wrote:Way to go douche. You are like a one-man, fiero-destroying machine.
-
- Peer Mediator
- Posts: 15629
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:13 pm
- Location: In the darkness, where fear and knowing are one
- Contact:
Don't count on it.Aaron wrote:Not AutoX.The Dark Side of Will wrote: Actually, in the classes in which it competes, the Achieva still cleans up.
You're too lazy to use your head, from which stems being too lazy to look up what the car's competition is. Old =/= slow. The principles that make a chassis handle well or poorly haven't changed.
By your reasoning, a Ferrari 250 is a really shitty car.