Turbo completion date....

I enjoy a friendly debate but you guys don't need prove anything to us SCers cause we already know the truth...

Click to expand...

Just getting the facts straight.

progress1vebmx

You claim you are getting the facts straight when. Only in your world buddy...Everybody knows the GN is a 14 second car...For you to come on here and claim it is a 12 second car is obsurd...The corvette is a 12 second car it is the pride of GM and will always be the fastest car produced by GM then next comes the TA then the Firebird 13 second cars then your beloved GN... This in stock form of course... Great you modified your GN so it could be faster than 14 seconds.

If I were to come on here and claim that a thunderbird is faster than a mustang ... I would for sure be talking crazy... Everybody knows that a mustang is faster than a T-bird.. If you were to put a SC 3.8 motor in a mustang it would out run a T-bird...Mustang is the pride of FOMOCO...

Thanks for the link to gnttype.org I have been checking it out very interesting site...

progress1vebmx said:

Just getting the facts straight.

Click to expand...

If anybody in this site was interested in getting the facts straight then I would hope they would visit a Buick site. The GN's are ugly. If you are looking for a means of getting down the strip quickly there is a long list of cars that you'd be better off with. I I wanted to do the 1/4 in a fast BOX I would buy a Mustang. I could stuff a twin turbo'd Viper V-10 in a Pinto and smoke ANY GN out there. Sure, it would be quick, but it would still be U*G*L*Y*. The GN is a awesome performer don't get me wrong, and it is a compliment to GM's stable, performance wise; but don' try to impress anybody with those numbers. There are Ford Focus' in the 8's for crying out loud. If you are looking for a car to be used as a weekend dragster then a GN or even a SC for that matter isn't the best choice. Unless you're planning on doing what David N. is doing. Bottom line like it or not is that the Mustang is the undisputed king of the strip, as far as numbers go.

Moral of the story: Not quite sure, I started rambling again Something about Ford rules, GM sucks I think.

You GN guys need to understand that Stocker 89 doesn't like turbos and IMO doesn't represent the views of most people around here.

I like anything that makes cars quicker.

David

Back to the UNHIJACKED portion of this thread dealing with DB's turbo setup.

Hey DB, make sure you let me know when HP has something significant done, like placement of the turbo/turbos, so I can maybe go down there and snap some spy photos. BTW, if for "some reason" the spoiler on your car isn't there when you get to NM I know nothing about it and it definitely isn't in my garage, so no need to check there. Just wanted to let you know.
Also, after looking at your car I've come to the decision that your rims need to be upgraded. 400.00 bucks and some stock 91 SC wheels is my offer. You NEED some 18x10 bullits for all that power you're going to have.

David Neibert said:

I like anything that makes cars quicker.

Click to expand...

Can I get an AMEN!!

stocker 89 said:

The corvette is a 12 second car it is the pride of GM and will always be the fastest car produced by GM then next comes the TA then the Firebird 13 second cars then your beloved GN... This in stock form of course... Great you modified your GN so it could be faster than 14 seconds.

If I were to come on here and claim that a thunderbird is faster than a mustang ... I would for sure be talking crazy... Everybody knows that a mustang is faster than a T-bird.. If you were to put a SC 3.8 motor in a mustang it would out run a T-bird...Mustang is the pride of FOMOCO...

Click to expand...

What???????
Corvettes are 12 second cars? All of them? even a 1955 straight 6 'vette? a 1987? I think the GN was walking the 'Vette back then, hence the "I brake for Corvettes" bumperstickers. Don't you really mean SOME Corvettes? Then the T/A? Which one 1974 S.D.? 1979 Turbo V8? then the Firebird? All Firebirds? 1983 V6? Then the GN? Don't Camaro's fit in there? NO Syclones? Or are those 15 second vehicles?

Mustang is faster than a T-bird? Which one, all of them? Surely not a 1978 2.3L 'Stang II VS a Supercoupe? I don't even thing a 1994 Mustang GT could beat a 1994 SC, stock for stock, I cross shopped them when I bought my SC. I also whipped up on a coworkers 1988 5.0, in my stock 1989 SC. I'm not saying SC's are faster than all Mustangs, but they are faster than most of them out there, stock for stock.

Mustang is the pride of FoMoCo? What about 1999 - 2002 when the quickest thing from Ford was a truck? 2003+? It's not the Mustang, it's the GT that's the pride of FoMoCo now.

Focus in the '8s ....Big deal, you guys are missing several points here. You are trying to compare race cars with street cars. It is really not uncommon for G.Ns to run the numbers these guys are talking in street trim. I work with a guy who has a G.N that he drives to the track, runs 11's, and then drives it home, getting 25 MPG the whole way with the A/C on. I hear of a GN in Dearborn that runs '9s on the street. The point is it is VERY easy to make G.Ns quick.

You want to compare one with a "Pinto with a turbo viper V10" .....Ridiculous. You could buy a GN and be in the 10's for what it would cost for the V10 engine alone, and still be more streetable than whatever hybrid Dodge/Ford mess you are dreaming up.

I Disagreeeeee!!!!

I'm not saying SC's are faster than all Mustangs, but they are faster than most of them out there, stock for stock.

Click to expand...

Ummmmm If your talking older straight six stangs or even the newer 2.3 I4 or 3.8 V6..Perhaps..But to even say that an SC stock for stock is faster then most mustangs out there???..Hell there are more Stock 5.0 stangs outthere that will gladly hand any stocks SC there ars..Ive owned a few SC's as well as a few stangs..All my SC's stock ran 15.1-15.4 at sea level.

My slowest stang was a 90 automatic convertable 5.0 lx at 14.8. My stock 84 notch 5 speed with 5.0 ran a 14.5. My 87 convertable stock 5 speed ran a 14.0 stock. Hell my 87 cougar xr7 with an HO transplant ran a 14.4 stock(with exhaust) and an AOD. I converted that to stick and rtan consistent 13.5's..No drag radials or slicks..Times as is.

Mustang is the pride of FoMoCo? What about 1999 - 2002 when the quickest thing from Ford was a truck? 2003+? It's not the Mustang, it's the GT that's the pride of FoMoCo now.

Click to expand...

The Mustang will always be FOMO pride and joy. Long after the ford GT is gone the mustang will live. In 1999 the LIGHTNING 1/4 times were 14.6 0-60 in 6.2 sec. The mustang GT did the quarter in 14.1 and the Cobra 13.9. Of course we can find different numbers to suit our needs but I pulled these from a reliable source.

I work with a guy who has a G.N that he drives to the track, runs 11's, and then drives it home, getting 25 MPG the whole way with the A/C on. I hear of a GN in Dearborn that runs '9s on the street. The point is it is VERY easy to make G.Ns quick.

Click to expand...

No denying GN's are peppy cars..Stock they run anywhere from low 14's to mid 15's. However they are more unreliable then an SC..At least an SC when maintained stays together. You shoulda went to a few of the GN vrs stang shootouts they used to have. 90% of them (GN's)went home in a bucket. The turbo TA which 5 of my freinds happen to own currently is a slightly better engine wise. Not anything like a GNX. Ive seen them run mid to high 13's to mid to high 14's stock(even a 15,16 here and there. Low 13's, high 12's are easily attainable with a GN..Past that you have all sorts of problems and it is no longer a CHEAP performance car that.

Whoa there, Sparky. Don't go blasting cars that you don't know anything about.

Click to expand...

This is for you Mr Scotty Boost( I just saw your post)...I guess you have owned your car since new...And you most likely then have the 1 T type in existence that hasnt blown up. I must congradulate you on that...Or did you buy it used? (did someone lie to you about the cars past when you bought it used) I happen to have ALOT of experience with these cars. And I know very much what they run and what they are capable of. However since you must be the original owner being you know everything is 100% original and has never been repaired or fixed I wont list everything that goes wrong with these cars. One thing I know about it turboes:O)..So let the debate begin:O)

Sorry your post got Highjacked Frank..But it will be interesting

Andy 94SC said:

You want to compare one with a "Pinto with a turbo viper V10" .....Ridiculous. You could buy a GN and be in the 10's for what it would cost for the V10 engine alone, and still be more streetable than whatever hybrid Dodge/Ford mess you are dreaming up.

Click to expand...

I wasn't comparing anything there little guy. My point was that if I was only concerned about going down the 1/4 mile then there are better choices than a GN or a SC. I could put a turbo 347 in a Mustang and I guarantee that no GN will be quicker. The same with a turbo, nitroused Z28, or a Pinto with a twin turbo Viper v-10. I'm tryin to say that IN MY OPINION, GN's are boxy and ugly. Like I said, if I wanted to race/drive a box I would've bought a Mustang and had more potential to boot. Some people love GN's, some people hate T-Birds, and vice-versa. I personally wouldn't rather own any other car than a Supercoupe, but hey, I'm a glutton for punishment.
Comparing cars, while it is fun, is just plain silly for all intensive purposes. No matter how fast/quick your car is, there is always one faster/quicker. Except for one of us on this planet.

P.S. The Pinto V10 was as far out a conception that I could come up with on the spot with the intent of letting you guys know that it was not to be taken serious. Andy94SC, "Master of the Literal", thought I was comparing it to a GN, I'm not, just to clear the record.

"You could buy a GN and be in the 10's for what it would cost for the V10 engine alone, and still be more streetable than whatever hybrid Dodge/Ford mess you are dreaming up."- Andy94SC

I could buy a motorcycle and be in the 9's for less than a GN, what's your point?

2qwiktocare said:

Corvettes, Camaros, and Mustangs can't compete dollar for dollar.

Click to expand...

How much is a decent GN nowadays? I would be willing to bet you that I could build a faster 86/87 Mustang dollar for dollar. You can get Mustang "trunks" cheap. Just remember, any turboing(is that a word?) you do to a V6 GN, someone can do the same to a V8 Mustang. Race over. Boo-yah!

Andy 94SC said:

Boy, I hope the GN guys coming here don't judge us all by a couple of posters....

Click to expand...

I'm always worried about that. Wouldn't want the GN guys to think badly of us or anything now would we. That would make me feel horrible!

On another note. These GN guys that have invaded this thread are saying stock GN's on slicks are running 12's.....yeah, sure. What needs to be cleared up is that the GNX, that's GNX, was the bad boy Buick. Not the GN. From the factory I mean. The GN was a 14/15 sec. stocker. The TTA's are quick little bastards. I've personally been kicked by one of those. I have respect for the GN, GNX, and Regal T-Types, don't like em cause they are GM, but I would drive on of those before I would drive a Camaro, Pontiac, or Corvette.

the whole point here is a turbo with the same boost and moving same air volume will outperform the M90.

simply becasue the m90 consumes too much darn power like 45hp or more hp and the turbo will consume like 10-15.

right there the power goes up to 255hp at 10psi. then you get a FMIC 270ish turn up the boost 280. do the exhaust 285 turn up the boost more 300

if you dont believe it look a the whipple project.
now with ported heads and with a turbo system is much easier to upgrade

Turbospeed put the nail on the head..A Turbo moving the same amount of air at the same AIR CHARGE temp will outperform a SC..

Only thing is Turboes dont last as long and arnt as consistant. ALOT of heat is transfered through the turbo//Add that to compressing the air....This is what makes Turbo cars inconsistent..Much less of a problem with a SC car..

Damon, My point was that most of the Mustang built to date are not V8 cars, and even quite a few of the V8's are slower than SC's. I know my '86 5.0 would not keep up with a 5-speed SC. I have my doubts about any of the speed density 5.0s, the carbed 5.0s, and the '94/'95 5.0s being quicker than an SC as well, that makes for a hell of a lot of Mustangs. So in My opinuion stating "Mustangs are faster than T-birds" is a very poor generalization. Just like stating Corvettes are 12 second cars - there are many flavors of Corvettes on the road, and most are nowhere near 12's.

86 was teh slowest of all speed density stangs...My 87 was a speed density when it ran 14.0..Speed density cars are a tad quicker stock then mass air due to less intake restriction..I had my freinds 86 auto running real well with only an exhuast and gear change 14.2.....I just get a lil offended being I have a stang....However I like my sc 100% more :O)..not due to speed though..But Im workin on it

Hmmm... Interesting tread!

I just want to state for the record that the Buick GN or GNX are awesome nomatter how you look at it. Also there would never have been a turbo trans am later on if it had not been for the Grand National's success. (Or a typoon, OR syclone for that matter) This is seriously one car that I would buy in a New York second.
You are my Boy Darkside, but I disagree. We will debate this over a few beers when I get out there!

Also Damon:
I plan to take this car to some events and run an occasional quarter. I don't plan to totally abuse this stock 3.8 because who knows how long the stock block will hold up!? My brother "World B. Free" who occasionally posts around here has plans to help me finish one bad a$$ short-block soon for this car. HE HE!!!

Back to the original subject. Let's wait to see what the little Ford 3.8 turbo can do with this TURBO.............

We will all know soon!

Frank

OK Frank..With Traction and 12 psi I am going on the record as saying you will run somewhere in the 13's...There I said it.....Up the boost and we shall see :O)

I have been wanting to see this happen for quite some time. I am anxiously awaiting your results Dirtybird.

I am with Damon as far as guessing 13's fro a 12 PSI setup, that sounds essentially like you will be running stock boost, the only difference is you will be losing the Eatons parasitic. But I see no reason why one couldn't match the power numbers the (stock blocked) turbo buicks are putting out. I think our heads are better, and we have a stronger lower end, except for maybe the stock balancer. The trick, as always for us, will be putting the power to the ground.

No denying GN's are peppy cars..Stock they run anywhere from low 14's to mid 15's. However they are more unreliable then an SC..At least an SC when maintained stays together. You shoulda went to a few of the GN vrs stang shootouts they used to have. 90% of them (GN's)went home in a bucket. The turbo TA which 5 of my freinds happen to own currently is a slightly better engine wise. Not anything like a GNX. Ive seen them run mid to high 13's to mid to high 14's stock(even a 15,16 here and there. Low 13's, high 12's are easily attainable with a GN..Past that you have all sorts of problems and it is no longer a CHEAP performance car that.

Click to expand...

Low 14's to mid 15's? Wow, that couldn't be farther from the truth. I don't think there has been any GN running those numbers consitantly (IE it's not faster than 14/15 seconds). Say what you want about unreliability, but I own one of these cars and they are just as reliable as any other high performance car. When a GN is maintained it stays together too, just like any other car. We have STOCK GN's runnin 12's, even 13's on 200,000 mile GN's - used as daily drivers.

Past 12's is very easily attainable. I believe Razor, the guy who makes the progressive alky kits is running 11's on a stock car with alky.

Ford Focus running 8's? Big deal. You can get any car runnin 8's if you wanted to. Cal Hartline runs 8's, big deal, lots of GN's run 8's. I would like to see a multitude of Focus's running 8's.

On another note. These GN guys that have invaded this thread are saying stock GN's on slicks are running 12's.....yeah, sure. What needs to be cleared up is that the GNX, that's GNX, was the bad boy Buick. Not the GN. From the factory I mean. The GN was a 14/15 sec. stocker.

Click to expand...

No, the GNX shouldnt' even be on the street. It was SLIGHTLY faster than the GN. It shouldn't even be driven on the street. It's a collectors car - only 547 made - some of them sold upwards into 60,000$. They were more of a 13/14 second stocker. Yes, they can run 12's on slicks with good tuning. Like we need to lie to look cool.

Oh, many people don't like the boxy look of the GN. Then again, many people don't like the look of Stangs, Camaros, etc. Different things for different people. Personally, I love Gbodies =).


http://www.gnttype.org/members/times.html

Well, actually....

The goal is to throw all the boost at this that the stock block can handle. We will also be looking at the possibility of an alcohol injection system to achieve this goal.
Wish me luck!

Frank