[blkbute]

Is it true that the first gen 3.5 can beat out a second gen 3.2. and if so for either one beating one out, buy how much.

 

[1mz-fe]

rarewolf and other have posted 3.5 kills against 3.2 cars. i'm not sure why, the 3.2 has more power and torque. the hp/torque bands must be different.

 

[blkbute]

yeah, thats what I was thinking as well, but I thought I read somewhere on here that a 3.5 can beat 3.2/

 

[NCBrit]

I found this page http://home.earthlink.net/~patglenn/d.html

That shows different gear ratios between the 93 and 98 ES. Although it looks like it could be a typo.

It also shows that the 98 ES is faster in 0-60 & 1/4 Mile, but has a lower top speed than the 93 ES.

Food for thought.

Ah ****. I dug a little further into the site, and it seems that the data is calculated with some computer program. Not real world numbers.

[ September 07, 2001: Message edited by: NCBrit ]

 

[blkbute]

alright, hmm. anyone else?? hmm, I did know that the 1st gen have a higher top speed, I think its all with the speed limiter. I hate that damn thing, even though its not too safe to go much faster anyways.

 

[1mz-fe]

i thought the speed limiter was set on all the cars since 93 except the R/T at 118mph. what is the limiter set at on the 1st gen cars? is it different for the 3.3 vs the 3.5?

 

[blkbute]

hmm, I never took the first gen fast, only the second gen, my brother said he has had a first gen up to 210KPH, thats over 120 MPH.

 

[Champcar]

I thought the RT was the first not to have a speed limiter, because it's the first to have V rated tires. I think all before have had T or H rated ones, so they had to have a limiter. I know my 97 sport had T rated. Not sure what 1st generation ES's came with though.

Dave

 

[blkbute]

hmm, my brother does talk alot of **** though, but its what he told me.

 

[Valhalla 21340]

mine cuts out at 115 mph...

 

[rarewolf]

Fastest I've had my first gen 3.5 is only 105mph... one, cause I don't really want to go any faster... two, cause I didn't want to risk a visit by the IL SP, and three, cause I want to hold on to my engine a little longer.

The postings are correct, though... you can go by the numbers in the books and computers, like some do... or go by real street knowledge. Believe it or not, my 3.5 1st gen will put a whoopin on any 3.2 2nd gen (unmodified) out there. I have yet to meet a modified 3.2 (yet). I also did toast a nice Lincoln LS... black with all the fancy trim... enough speculation about it, I didn't stop to ask, but I WILL assume it was the V6 model.

We all talk and talk in the forums, and that is part of what frustrates me. The talk ends at the stoplight, and the proof starts with the accelerator. We can all try to blow smoke up our collective asses, but somewhere down the road we find out who is telling the truth and who is telling the lie.

My dream is to meet one of YOU on the road, recognize our cars, and get it on. THEN, we'll have something to talk about... eh?



-wolf out

p.s. speculation is good, and debate is fun, but let's remember to keep it respectful!

 

[steven]

Originally posted by 97 sport platinum:
i thought the speed limiter was set on all the cars since 93 except the R/T at 118mph. what is the limiter set at on the 1st gen cars? is it different for the 3.3 vs the 3.5?

I have taken my 96 3.5 ltr pass the 120mph needle on my speedometer. I am guessing that I was going 125mph or so. I went towards Vegas ( going 80mph on that stretch of roadway is like going 25mph in a school zone )

 

[brun064]

Some 1st gen. Intrepids didn't have the speed limiter. They were special edition ones with the sport suspension.