Re: ?????

Discussion in '1987 Callaway Corvette B2K Twin Turbo' started by import_lover_69, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. 345 hp in 1986 is not a bad figure, considering how crappy most engines were back then<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. ?????

    tt and just 345 hp?<!-- Signature -->
     
  3. look at the year, it probably had like 250 stock, added small turbos.
     
  4. 230 hp stock <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><!-- Signature -->
     
  5. its a v8 plus its a twin turbo, only 345bhp, im dissapointed
     
  6. you fools!
    look at the year , its a '86!
    thats a lot of horse power for back then.
    cars still sucked because of that shit that happened in the 70's that killed off muscle cars
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  7. This corvette is bunk. I dont care if its a 86 or a 96 its only got 345 horse with a twin turbo V8.Maybe they should try NOS and see how many more horses they can pull out of that pig.
     
  8. I'm not sure why a twin turbo would have so little HP. That is strange. Could it be a way for the HP to seem low for insurance reasons?
     
  9. #9 bronx69, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    First off all the stock 85-90 corvettes ran 0 to 60 in 5.5 seconds
    witch is hardly slow for that time or even our time! second of all the stats on this car is way off
    so be ware of the sleeping giant.

    Coupe
    191.5 mph - 308.2 kph

    Convertible
    176.2 mph - 283.6 kph

    0 - 60 mph
    4.44 s

    0 - 100 mph
    10.50 s

    Standing 1/4 mile
    12.77 s @ 113.1 mph

    http://www.callawaycars.com/Corvette/TwinTurbo/twinturbospecs.htm

    i have even seen numbers much lower than that.


    Now that i have cleared that up i just wantted to say you are correct
    the stock corvette was still rather slow for a V8 how-ever if you gut out the catalistic converters the numbers will sky rocket into the 4's
     
  10. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from NOS inhaler</i>
    <b>This corvette is bunk. I dont care if its a 86 or a 96 its only got 345 horse with a twin turbo V8.Maybe they should try NOS and see how many more horses they can pull out of that pig.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    oh and #$%# something up in the process b/c the motor cant handle it yeah y didnt i think of that
     
  11. My dad has a 86 Vette with 415 HP. Twin Turbo's, Exauhst mods and a whole bunch of other stuff in the engine. It took us a lond time to do this but it was very worth it. Back then 345 HP was a lot. There were a lot of cars in 1986 that didnt even have 100 HP. There is a lot of power in the Vette engine's.
     
  12. 345 hp in 1986 is not a bad figure, considering how crappy most engines were back then.
    surely this is some kind of joke correct? i swear you americans are living in your own world sometime. tell you what, why dont you just forget about the fact that the rest of the world makes automobiles. pray i dont see you in a classic eurocar discussion in case i quote you from this thread.
     

Share This Page