I have owned two cars. The two are 10 years apart but they have the same engine, which is slow. (F22 in my 91 Accord, F23 VTEC in my 2001 Accord) My first fast car will be an NSX. I have been saying this for two years now and I will not change my mind !
rover metro s 1.1litre rover metro s, got 110 out of it on private land. im now driving a 1.9 turbo diesel golf and it wont go over 90 ><
I'm about two weeks off being able to drive and I'm about to invest in my first car. Shame I can't get anything nice but I guess it's fair considering risk is directly proportionate to age. My Dad has owned a decent amount of nice cars though, a few worth mentioning; Skyline R33 GTR V Spec in 'midnight purple' with ~650BHP Lotus Exige in black Lotus Elise in dark blue Caterham Super 7 x2, one red and one green/yellow Mazda RX7 Jap Import in Castrol colours, white/green/red Fastest out of the lot was the Skyline. I remember doing close to 180MPH down the motorway at 6AM in the morning on the way to a show. My dad just had acceleration fuelled nitrous fit for a laugh and wanted to see how well it ran.
The screaming wife might be an issue, though. There's a video of a Volvo 850 with that engine in it running alongside another car at highway speeds. When the driver of the volvo drops a gear and punches it, there's 4-wheel tyre smoke. Acceleration at highway speeds like that is 0_o Fastest car i've driven that I've taken sideways was an Audi A3 Quatro 3.2. It IS possible to make them go sideways. high speed, good space, and recklessness help. It's also blissfully easy to control quattor while it's sideways, even though it doesn't really stay there long.
It was my brothers car and I didn't have my license at the time but he let me drive it a few times so I guess it could count as we live in the same house lol. He had a 89 civic si with a 97 b16a motor in it. Slapped on a type r head, motor was slightly built when we bought it, not sure what but it ripped a lot better than most b16's my brother drove (he's a mechanic). I know he did a aem fuel rail and regulator, intake, exhaust, headers, cams, and pullies. I used to love the way vtec screamed when it kicked in, and being the old cable shift 1st gen tranny he could rev it up to 8k on the stock computer, shift up and be back in vtec again. It was a fun car to drive, sadly he got rid of it after 2 years. We got it to 180 km/h but thats when the governor on the stock computer kicked in so we couldn't get passed it. I'd say it would keep on going but can't tell for sure so i'll just say top was 180 km/h.
Caterhma 21 with a 1.8 VVC engine. Fast enough to have fun with and most importantly the noise it make through the rev range when accelerating. Jack
I had my 2.0 Cavalier GSI off the clock (clock stopped at 140mph) but the needle hit the bottom of the dash (guess it would be around 155mph) down hill with a tail wind. My current motor, 2.5 V6 Vectra CDX will do 160mph easily.
Fastest accelerating car I've owned is a Daihatsu Charade GTti, 3cyl 1l, turbocharged and tuned to 135 bhp, weighed as much as a mini, 0-60 in that was somewhere in the region of 6.5 sec on a dry day, couldn't get traction in the wet it'd spin the wheels in every gear as it came on boost. Fastest top end was probably the e30 m3 that lasted 6 weeks before I found a ditch with it.
4 door 1.3l Vauxhaull Chevette. Pea Green. Fist sized custom aerodynamic rust hole on drivers wing. Top speed about 90mph. Maybe not the fastest car I've ever owned, but certainly the scariest to drive flat out. Down-force - negligible (actually slightly negative). Weight - low. Susceptibility to side winds and buffeting when overtaking - high. One mistake - dead. Manchester to Glasgow at 3am - a 3 hour white knuckle ride. I miss that car.
sorry, but most speedo's fall out of calibration near the pin, so what looks like 5mph is closure to 1mph increase. Only way for sure is GPS, or a better calibrated speedo, also the rare Vectra SRI MSD edition (2.5 V6) had a top speed of 140mph.
Well if we're adding "fastest we've ever been in" to the list, I'll add mine. My Fathers cousin built and rallys a 60 series Toyota Starlet - the last time I was out in it he was running a 1600 Suzuki Swift engine with fuel injection in place of the carbs and an intricate remap on a competition ECU to make it scream. Put a nicely built car round that, add a sequential box and a very good driver and you can see how a quick spin turned into a fun afternoon Top speed with that engine was somewhere around 160 but the amazing thing was the acceleration. I'll never forget the sensation of it just pinning you into the seat. He's changed that engine and competes in a different class now. 1400 Vauxhall eninges seem to be the new popular engine to have in small clubman type rally builds. That guy wins pretty much every event he enters, so the class doesn't really make much difference to him
where's pooky and his stang? Guess he too scared to get the tires dirty on the road to find out how she goes.
About this point, how accurate is the speed reading in your average sat nav? My old navman, my tomtom (which I hate) and my newer big widescreen navman all show roughly the same speed compared to my speedo, somewhere around 5% slower. I was assuming it should be pretty accurate, due to the fact its GPS, but then I was also trying to take into account the potential lag. I must try an app that gets your speed on my htc desire, that gets a gps signal faster than any sat nav I have had or "raced" when I get in someone elses car
Satnav should be extremely accurate when you're travelling at a set speed. Speedos generally show about 5% faster than actual speed, to make sure the speedo's always telling you you're going too fast, as opposed to telling you the opposite which would not be a good thing. Changing from stock wheels can also affect your speedo reading, smaller wheels increase the reading, while larger decrease it. None of these factors are a problem with GPS, where it's only the granularity of sample rate and position that are an issue. Obviously if you're going at a steady rate the effects of these are negligible, or indeed non-existent.
about 5% slower than speedo rating sounds about right. Most manufacturers set their speedos to show faster than you actually are for safety reasons. Pretty much the only car i've experienced otherwise was my 2005 Volvo S40 2.4i. I know a car magazine in South africa mentioned that the speedo underreads by about 2km/h at 100km/h. So i tested it, and found that mine was about the same. good to know when you're braking for a manned speed trap.
Triple maths fail. u = 0mph v = 60mph t = 1hr a = 60mi/h^2 s = ut + 0.5at^2 s = 1/2(60mph per hour)(1^2) + 0(1) technically you should use s = t(u+v)/2 = 1 (0 + 60) / 2 = 30 EDIT: This is what happens when you try to read whole threads in one go.
1968 Camaro SS with a 396 big block and 4 speed transmission. Looked awful but was unbelievably fast as long as you were going in a straight line.
