2010 V6 vs Mitsu 3000GT

[brAnd7onX]

Originally Posted by BackinBlackSS/RS

I like the way you Mustang drivers think. J/k

[CamaroBelarus]

Im exowner 3000gt sl, not vr4. Upgraded it to camaro v6. Sl no chance against v6 camaro. In its best condition it is 0-60 7,6 sec car vs 5,9-6 camaro. But vr4 was 5,4-5,6 and awd. It is heavy, as a tank, like camaro. So stock vr4 with 10 years age against new camaro MAY fail, but shouldnt Maybe some mods to camaro and on the highway....

[cmiller8006]

When my cobalt was stock I ran a almost stock vr4 and I was side by side and pulled a little on the top. My car stock for stock with a camaro ss, camaro would pull a car or car and a half 40 to 120 so camaro should win stock for stock.

[Cali_Camaro_SS]

ok first off I have a 94 Dodge Stealth Twin Turbo which is the same exact thing as the 3000gt VR4. Stock its a beast honestly, I now have a 2010 SS and i think it would be a good match but the camaro would win though. about the cobalt even the ss cobalt dont think it would be side by side unless it wasnt a vr4 or the driver was really bad. not to be putting you down just saying from expirence. both are very fun and very diff feeling from a TT to all muscle.

[alphaghost]

vr4 should beat v6 but thats if the tranny holds up

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by cmiller8006

When my cobalt was stock I ran a almost stock vr4 and I was side by side and pulled a little on the top. My car stock for stock with a camaro ss, camaro would pull a car or car and a half 40 to 120 so camaro should win stock for stock.

You must have found the worlds worst drivers.

[cmiller8006]

Originally Posted by a_Username

You must have found the worlds worst drivers.

Umm, 13.5 at 105 w/dr's

[coolman]

depends on the year and as said above if it has the twins or not. I had a 92 twin turbo R/t stealth which is the same as the vr-4. If I remember correctly as it was a long time ago, it only ran in the very low 14's. I know they upped the HP in 94 so that could get it just below 14. I do know it doesn't take much to make them a lot faster though.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by cmiller8006

Umm, 13.5 at 105 w/dr's

The average SS should be around 13 flat.

[cmiller8006]

Originally Posted by a_Username

The average SS should be around 13 flat.

Right with a 2.0 60 foot. My run was with a 2.2 60 foot.

[Gthompson]

I will always be an American muscle car guy, but the 3000GT was a great car for 10 or 15 years ago.

[VelocityC6]

Had a 1995 3000GT VR4 till 2005 when I sold it and bought a 2005 GTO. It was one of my favorite cars I've owned. With just a boost controller set to 14.5psi it ran 13.1@104

Top end wasn't all that great but 0-100 with the AWD it would move well back then.

[76z28]

Originally Posted by VelocityC6

Had a 1995 3000GT VR4 till 2005 when I sold it and bought a 2005 GTO. It was one of my favorite cars I've owned. With just a boost controller set to 14.5psi it ran 13.1@104

Top end wasn't all that great but 0-100 with the AWD it would move well back then.

my friends is set at 16 think that would help bring it to the 12s?

[VelocityC6]

Originally Posted by 76z28

my friends is set at 16 think that would help bring it to the 12s?

Depends, the stock 9b turbos are tiny and don't hold 16psi to redline. If the rest of the car is stock ie: fuel injectors/no ECU tune he'll be maxing out the stock fuel system and doing two things, overboosting the stock turbos shortening their life and 2) detonation will occur which as everyone knows spells disaster for a FI car. The stock fuel pump is also "maxed out" with the factory boost setting and would need an upgrade to run reliably at higher then stock boost settings.

I limited my VR4 to 14.5 till I upgraded the fuel system.....that led to bigger turbos, downpipe, etc etc etc..!!

Back when I had a VR4 ALOT of people were testing the limits and that led to learning what not to do. I played it safe. IMO he can hit 12's with a great launch, but 16psi will only be seen for a second and drop off quickly.