Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this if there is even such car... i don't know were 2 start lookin'!
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this Change the name of the thread to cars under $120,000, b/c that's how much they really cost. They cost $160 when they first came out. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this does it have to be a production made car?
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this this isnt the best car. no where near it.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this The Lingenfelter 427 Twin Turbo Corvette and the SVSi Stryker TT Stage III.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this DOES IT HAVE TO BE A PRODUCTION CAR!!!!!!!!?????????????
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this Sure, like the title "Name one front engine car for $160k or under that can beat this" But it the Title should be "For $110k Considering at the hennessey web site, the price for the 800TT option is: "Price: $37,500.00" Add $72,500, price for a, when new, Viper GTS = $110,000 So now, Name ANY CAR, that comes from a factory, tuner or stock, for $110k or under. Now the SVS, would be out. that kit costs 58k. But the lingenfelter TT kit, cost 50k, add another 50k for a zo6 and it comes to be probably the only car that can beat the 800tt for the price.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this Yeah OK, under 110k the SVS is out...but the topic is still "under 160k". But just like you said, The Lingenfelter 427TT Corvette is probably "best bang for the buck" of all street legal cars ever.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this Well, considering a Venom 800TT doesn't cost 160k anymore, and if you go to hennesseyperformance.com, they have it for (when put all together) $110,000. So considering that, the name shoud be changed to "name one front engine car under 110k" IMO.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this well the title never said anything about production. it just says "under 160k" (which should be 110k(i figured out that one several months ago)) "front engine car." now all of us know that you can get a new 572 big block with 720hp and throw a 50% increase supercharger on it and have 1080hp. sure its going to cost money but it wont cost 110k. thats for sure. well thats just something i thought i would throw out because thats what im going to do in a few years. on the other hand (im not for sure about the car being production) but what if you modify one? well never mind i guess that wouldnt work. but if you go to exvitermini.com you can see an 8 second skyline. now the skyline is a pretty sweet car. im not dissing the viper though its my favorite car. but i think the skyline runs a few tenths or hundreths faster than the 427tt. the only thing is they built the engine out of a garage. the skyline isnt a production car, but it will out perform the 800tt in the 1/4 mile. but i think it only gets up to 210mph or so. thats a 27mph difference. i bet the 800tt would catch up to it in 4th gear. now i dont think the viper can pull 210 in 4th but someone could build a better car for under 110k. but the title needs to be changed to "110k" and "production cars"
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this Well, you know a 8 sec Skyline (under 110k) doesn't last much longer than a quarter mile "full throttle".
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this whats it matter. you would be killing everone anyways in a strait line.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this OK. For $145,000 you can buy the Lingenfelter Corvette. It has better engineering and better performance. With only a 7L V8 (instead of the 8L or so in the Viper) this car goes 0-60 in 1.97 seconds and does the 1/4 in 9.2. It whoops the Venom 800TT. And it has 802 hp and less displacement. So that shows how Dodge sucks at engineering.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this WHO GIVES A SHIT! SCREW THE CORVETTE. Bottom line, this is a bad ass car. Enough said.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this uh, yes you would. my car has everything except a good top speed. but i kick butt in a strait line. when iM just a few cars ahead of them they BACK OFF!!!! because they say "wow dont want to mess with this guy" even though ive got a terrible top speed THEY BACK OFF BECUASE THEY DONT WANT TO MESS WITH ME. MY POINT IS WHEN I RACE ON THE STREET I KICK BUTT FOR A FEW BLOCKS. AND SINCE IM ON THE STREET I ONLY RACE A FEW BLOCK. IF THEY WOULD STAY ON THE FLOOR THEY WOULD BEAT ME. BUT THEY BACK OFF BECAUSE OF FIRST IMPRESSIONS. SO I WIN IN A STRAIT LINE!!!!! SAME THING GOES WITH THEY SKYLINE. racing isnt just fast car and a "good" driver. its a fast car a "good" driver they ability to play with peoples minds to think that they wont win. while comparing my car on the street i use a plan and that plan is to kill everyone else off the line to make them think they can handle me.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this You sound like you've seen too many action movies.
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this no i just know how to race with my head<A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this CAdillacMAn23 "OK. For $145,000 you can buy the Lingenfelter Corvette. It has better engineering and better performance. With only a 7L V8 (instead of the 8L or so in the Viper) this car goes 0-60 in 1.97 seconds and does the 1/4 in 9.2. It whoops the Venom 800TT. And it has 802 hp and less displacement. So that shows how Dodge sucks at engineering. " with Only a 7lt v8, instead of a 8lt. V10, and has less displacement, so that means better engineering? LOL Take 7lts. or 427CI, and divide by the # of cylinders 8, which comes to 53.375CI / cylinder. The 800tt's at 48.8CI / cylinder. And if that v8 were made into a v10 (like the viper), it would measure 533CI, 45 more than the viper. "And it has 802 hp and less displacement. So that shows how Dodge sucks at engineering" That doesn't show dodge has bad engineering, Considering while the vette has less displacement, the 800tt gets the same amount of power with 4.575 / CI less than the vette. Also, while the vette has less HP, it also weighs about 200lbs. Less <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this Correction, the 800tt gets the same amount of power with 4.575 CI/ *Cylinder, less than the vette. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this A motot that can do that for under 160k? HMMMMMM..............the mazda 20b? yes the 20b for under 75k (half that price) will eat that like no tomarrow DEAL WITH IT VIPER LOVERZ
Re: Name 1 front engine car 160k of under that could beat this This thread is about Cars under 160k, that can beat the 800TT, not engines. So take that engine (mazda 20b) put it in a car, (car should be production, b/c you can tune some cars to do faster 1/4's than the 800tt, so production cars) Now will that car, with that engine beat the 800tt? (look at the stats. of the 800tt before answering) 800tt: (street tires) 0-60: 3.2 0-100(est.): 6.6 1/4: 10.71 @ 137.6 skidpad: 1.06 60-0 braking: 110ft slalom: 75.1mph <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>