Strokerace

Dude, you better put your money were your mouth is. There is one thing that I know and that is GM. You better have a 73 too other wise you are just a bench racer like most. I don't care if you know a guy who knows a guy that might have ran this time. I know all about the cars from back then and how they underrated alot of them to meet specs for their sales. Its also kinda funny how there is no times for the 71's or 72's that had a higher HP, but the 73 with the lower posted HP had such a strange 1/4 mile time. Dude, give it up. Been to the track, saw these boat anchors go. Seen them tubed, tuned and thousands of dollars thrown at them and do this time to mid 12's. I will and can show up and tell you to your face that you are full of and any other wax ****** that has a 73 T/A too that they are full of crap too.

gldwngr

You're talking out of your ***, again.

I've read road tests on the TransAm 455 SuperDuty in Road & Track and Car & Driver way back when, and both mags had the Firebird TransAm 455SD in the 13s at 103.5 mph or so, and that was with an automatic transmission.

Strokerace

Read them again. The one artical read CAPABLE of doing 13.54. You should never believe everything in print until someone here actually can do these times.

Nastyzed

And everyone is supposed to belive you when you don't even know what engines came in what? You thought 454s came with t/as as well as 350s. Showing you clearly have no info whatsoever. People have dyno'd these cars in modern times too. It was underrated on paper per HP spec.

NUMBER 50

50 1970 Trans Am 13.90@102 400 RA 345 four-speed 3.91 HR 2/70

this was common fact by 73-74. The 70-72 also had high compression ratios and would never run on regular 87 octane.

You have never driven ANY sd-455 car so shut up. The only thing you drove to races was momys vega in which you still own today. Quite pathetic. The only thing you saw at the track were base model firebirds. Nobody drags a car of this value and they were too damn rare back then as well. TAKE YOUR head out of your ***. You can tell the difference between a 81 firebird and 73 trans am. Stop contracdiction yourself. You claim only 80 were made then go on to tell me you see them tubbed out at the track all the time. So when are we meeting up? anytime after 6 is good. Thanks

gldwngr

Fact is, you're wrong, again. The C&D and R&T articles were observed 1/4 mile times as performed by their own testers.

Strokerace

Moron. they never had 87 octane back in 73. It was leaded fuel and I believe it was in the high 90's or 100's for octane. Why do you think they started to see octane boost and lead additive. The valve seats on those engines back then was soft and used the lead to help reduce wear. That is why when leaded gas was dropped, alot of the older engines had new valve seats and valves added.

Like I said before, seen them raced at the track. Same set up you are spouting on about. Mid 14's with a driver better then you ever will be. Like Isaid before, you and your wax ****** buddies are just bench racers.Or should I say book racers. Just pulling numbers out of your asses because the book says so. Wake up and smell the coffee and come back to reality fool.

I really don't care what you children see posted in teh books or a magazine. Lets see, a 71 having 310 HP runs 13.9 yet a 73 with 290 HP runs 13.54. Thats funny. Thats the best I have heard in a long time. A car with the same weight, but 20 hp less runs faster. Please, just lay off the crack.You interleck is starting to show.It shows you only have pipe dreams and know how to read something that was posted back before you were born.

Nastyzed

Ok since you don't know how to read. I can read it to you in person when we meet up. HP NUMBERS WHERE INCORRECT THIS IS COMMON FACT. The reason the 71 was rated at more HP was because it was all on paper. In reality the 73 had more HP. I know they didnt have 87 octane back then moron I was talking now. KID? really? perhaps you will think twice when you call me that in person. You have no idea my age. Have you ever driven a 1973-74 SD-455? Trans am?? NO? so shut your mouth. It clearly shows in this thread you have no clue.

B6T

"WAIT TILL I'M DONE MY SWAP YO I'LL SMOKE YOU THEN!!!!"

Haha how old are you? 16? Can you please tell me when you're going to be at the track so I can show up and laugh at you in person when you FAIL and realize your car is still a boat anchor even with that Ecotec?

ALLAN_M

iTrader: (1)

Ecotec<my Addidas Shoes

AK420

i test drove an 02 r/t 5spd, that thing pushed alright still, although iv hated neons for a long time. and the srt-4 is ****** quik in comparison to anythin else in its class

ugly ugly car

Strokerace

In reality?? Moron, you better do some more fact finding. The 73's have the correct HP rating. Take one and put it on the dyno. They are and will always be a boat anchor. And yes, I have driven a T/A with the slug boat anchor motor. ITs kinda funny, you say that the HP was only on paper, yet no were is it documented on what the real HP was, even over 30yrs later. I know all about how they played with numbers and about the HP wars with all the muscle cars back then. Until you actually owned one, and driven one, you will know nothing about them. You are living in a fanasty world of make believe and reading out of a book that you have no comprehension on. This is the real world, not some fanasty world in a book.

Nastyzed

OMG. I'm done with this clown. The onylt hing you test drove was a 1981 turbo trans am. You have probibly never laid eyes on a real SD-455 car in your life. I posted countless amount of arguments that you could not reply too. You simply overlooked anything valid and rambled on about how you were there , etc. BULLSHIT. Go back through this thread and post production numbers of 454 , 350 , 307 and 305 powered trans ams from 69-86. I would be delighted to see your links. Better yet go back up EVERYTHING you said. Fact of the matter is Nobody buys your rubbish.





You dont even have the ***** to meet me in person. So **** you very much.

Strokerace

Dude, I have more then enough *****. Do you. Here is my address 17250 yonge st newmarket.You have no clue on anything now do you. GO back to the begining and read everything again. You are a total fawking reject that couldn't handle anything larger then a firefly.

Nastyzed

The York Region Administrative Centre is loccated at 17250 Yonge Street, Newmarket, Ontario.


From Downtown Toronto: Take the DVP / HWY 404 north to Mulock Drive. On Mulock Drive, travel west to Yonge Street and turn right.
Travel north approximately 1.5 kilometres. The York Region Administrative Centre is located on the northwest corner of Yonge Street and Eagle Street. Main entrance is located off Yonge Street. Visitor Parking is located off Gladman Avenue.
(Approximate travel time: 60 minutes)

Nice try dumb ****.. Pm me your first and last name and I will find you.

dj_jake

nastyzed, do you even own a ****ing car? i see you post day in day out, not even sure if you have a job with how much youre on the forums... youve got some piece of firechicken in your signature, and you wonder why stroker is giving you . i dont care for either one of you, but at least strokerace has some actual race experience. only thing youve raced is your mouth. i agree with him that all youre doing is repeating you read in a magazine.

Nastyzed
<signature>
A paradise lost... once you woke up from your ****ing mazgazine inspired dream