Re: 6.22 sec!!!??? no, please Mayby it's 2.62? <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><!-- Signature -->
Re: 6.22 sec!!!??? no, please The low 3 second range or even 2.62 sounds much more like it.<!-- Signature -->
Re: 6.22 sec!!!??? no, please the cobra had a faster 0-60 with a big block 427 this car has a 327sbc . the 427 had a lot more tork in acceleration which would give it a perty good 0-60. however a 327's power is in hi rpm which would account for the not so bad 0-60. so i say give this bad ass car the hole quater mile wind up and we will see some impressive numbers suck my GM exuast
Re: 6.22 sec!!!??? no, please you know, looking at this car i'd fear 1 thing if i drove 1 of the high powered ones. could you imagine this car lifting off in the front? what would keep it from goin all the way? i'm sure it doesn't have the power to do that, but if it did the design wouldn't stop it. and oh, sorry to all the huge cobra fans, this would tear it a new 1. i love the cobra, but this is a faster car.
Re: 6.22 sec!!!??? no, please Most of these cars were 6.2 ltrs with 520 BHP. Top speed was approximately 212 mph. At a guess 0-60 would be 4-ish seconds, mainly due to the lack of traction.
Re: Just imagine getting 1 of these today and doing a little, or alot, of *new age* upgrades to make this car reach its full potential. Yeah, it would be nice.