what is the stock lancer ralliart 0-60 and 1/4 times?

 

well, I'm glad to know that I don't suck that bad. I thought they were pretty quick cars. But, once I have some grippy rubber he'll be toast....of course with the ECU. oh yeah and at the "track" of course...

 

Some articles say that the ralliart has the GTS in the 1/4 but the GTS has the ralliart in the turns. I can belive this. I've seen some around town and they don't seem too tough when driving side by side.

 

Mid 15's and just shy of 7 seconds 0-60 stock.

 

You guys do also realize that GM makes some of the best racing automatic transmissions in the world? When the old F-bodies died out (Camaro & Firebird) the automatic versions were like only .2 slower through the quarter than the 6 speed versions - and that's with professional drivers behind the wheel.

 

True, but we are talking FWD Pontiacs here. Not the RWD trannies in the Cambirds. My old Grand Prix had 146,000 miles when I sold it and it was still going strong, so I'd hardly say they all go to **** after 60/80K or whatever. There are very few performance parts for the FWD transaxles, but they do make a solid peice considering the torque the Northstars and 3800SCs put out. How they would compare to manual versions is a mystery.

 

Yep...well aware of that actually. Another example is that there is only .1 sec differece between the auto and manual for last years GTO.

The only problem is that for as good as they may be performance wise they sure dont last long.....a rebuild at nearly 70k miles is not exactly what I would call bulletproof

 

I shall also agree with GPTourer....my old 93 grand am se that I gave to my mom has 120K and still going like a champ.

The thread started talking about a very specific model, a newer grand am GT, and from experiance I must again say that performance wise they are pretty good, when it comes to maintainance though they are an utter nightmare. Like i said one post ago, 70K for an tranny rebuild=not good (the problem that forced him to trade it). And that was at the end of a laundry list of other problems.

Also, from a quick search of the net, my bro was certainly not alone.

 

Well... I said their transmissions are good, not the rest of the car, heheh. Most of their V6's and 4cyl engines are junk, their electronics are a nightmare, and their interiors don't hold up so well either. And yeah, I know most of their "legendary" trans's are RWD, but if you look at their drag racing efforts of recent years their FWD trannies hold up to some serious punishment as well. It's a shame they can't make the rest of their chassis that good...

But to sum up my whole point: having a GM with an auto is not much of a handicap.

 

They may only have 13 more hp, but they have 205 ft/lb torque. That's why he kept up. Plus, it's only 200 pounds heavier.

 

im going to run him and see what its got somtime at the strip

 

Think about it this way....its a lighter car and has a lower center of gravity....w/ more HP and a 6 speed gear box.....

All these things make for a "drivers car".....

 

My 92 Grand Am blew up spectacularly at 129,000 miles. That Quad4 engine they used was a tank and a POS at the same time. The engine could run forever, as long as you had the head milled every 100,000 miles Had massive problems with uneven cooling of the head, causing major warping.

 

Before the Lancer I had actually only owned GM cars, and I must say that I liked them except for the maintainace issues. Thats one of the big reasons I only looked at Japanese car makers because when it comes right down to it, the drivetrain is simply better in almost all instances.

So here I am with my Lancer and I must say, I'm Very happy to have it

 

I don't know about that.

I have seen stock V6 modern 'maro (17.1 - auto) and 'stang (17.4 - auto). Both were consistant during their runs. Their tranny is lazy since I have driven the modern 'maro.

As for the Grand Prix or Grand AM GT, yes, they are fast. 1st and 2nd gear can pull a huge holeshot off the line. See the modern V6 Altima and Maxima . . .