DodgeIntrepid.Net Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
anyone have any good kills with there 3.3 or heck even the bad ones reeally intersting i think since most of these stories are by 3.5's and r/t's:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
There aren't many cars a 3.3L can beat. Stock 0-60 is 10.3secs and 17.4 in the 1/4 mile
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
If you lookup 'I though I was in for it' and Burnt CRX & Accord you will find the two best races I have had in my 94 3.3 Intrepid. Mind you it isn't a 3.5 that can kill Civic Si's and Preludes but it can still move!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
I looked up that thread. I don't know what u guy's are talking about, a 3.3L can't beat even a 92 Civic SI, it runs 0-60 in 8.6 secs and 1/4mile in 16.6.... The same as as 3.5L

None of our cars (except the R/T's) can even touch a Prelude, 1994 did 0-60 in 7.1 secs and 15.6secs in 1/4 mile. New Type SH Preludes do 0-60 in 7.7 and 1/4 mile in 15.8secs. New Civic SI's are just as fast.

Only R/T's will come close, if not beat, a Prelude. If someone says they're 3.3L beat a Civic SI they're either lying or the Civic had 400lbs+ of excess weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
I also read the "burnt CRX and Accord"

The CRX had to be a normal one, because a CRX SI would beat a 3.5L. As for the Accord, you could have only beat it if it was an Automatic. My cousin dusted me in his 92 EX 5spd, by one car length and I have a 3.5L.

But then again, u said u were driving in snow so my comments are probably not relevant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
I took the CRX and Accord by surprise because the two of them were racing and I just came out of nowhere and raced them. I know that CRX's are fast, neighbour has a soup'd out one, and truly don't think the guy really gave it to the CRX, mind you there was a bit of snow on the ground too.

About hondas and Acuras in general I DO know what the are capable of doing. I have driven 89 Civic CX, my brothers (very slow, bottom of the line), 90 Acura Intega my dad's 5 speed, fast as hell if you know how to shift it right, very nice gear ratio!!!, 91 Civic Si, my mothers, and my dad's old car 91 Honda Accord Station Wagon 5 speed, YES 5 speed fully loaded, but of course I had to write off his favorite car. I remember my dad had his wagon in the garage for a couple of days and had a loaner Civic Si (auto) don't remember the year 94-98 but I was in the car one day when he merged into traffic and had to close his eyes because the car had NO pick up, when compared to his wagon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
Actually I have taken it to a lot of cars in my 1995 3.3L that was running strong and tuned up.

My friend had a modded Civic SI with AEM modifications. I took it to him on the freeway everytime I got a hard second gear kickdown around 65MPH. Around town when I would get a hard first gear kickdown I whooped him. Knowing I'd loose I wouldn't do no 0-60, off the line or anything, understandibly I'd loose to most cars in that case.

I actually raced a 5.0 Mustang, looked like something around 1990 in my 3.3L. I already know no one will believe this but after getting a hard second gear kickdown I was right there. We had an opened road, he was definately racing, we were side by side and I even got ahead of him a couple times. We hit about 100MPH several times. We were being cool because there were some twists and turns in the freeway. I'm sure it was an Automatic cause I know a manual with a good driver would have whooped me being that my parents owned a couple 5 speeds. Could have been a driver ability issue but that's what happened.

One time for the hell of it I was with my friend and raced an older Porsche 911. A chick was driving the 911, man she knew how to drive. At around 30MPH I got a hard first gear kickdown and wasn't really that embarrassed. My 95 lunged forward and barked really nice. The 911 punched it pretty hard and was understandibly a few car lengths ahead after a few seconds.

My 3.3L was not that bad. Kinda wish I still had it to do a Performance Ignition, Wires, Exhaust, Intake and Superchip that's available for it. Wouldn't have been too bad......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
That's pretty bad if a piece like an accord manual can beat a 3.5...I'm sorry but I'm not buying that unless your car has alot of miles on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
That's true, you (3.3L's) can beat most cars from a rolling start. (because of ur torque)

As for an Accord beating me, those cars have same accel stats as a 3.5L, except he was pushing his past the redline (where it makes the most power) so he was able to take me by one car length.

If we we're going 40mph or so and then we started racing, I'd dust him easily, but our cars don't have much power off the line. We don't feel it until we pass 3000 rpms. That's why I started catching up to him, and I would have passed him, we just ran outta space.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Good guy

That's a class act answer. Please realize I wasn't mudslinging. You are indeed a man of integrity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
It's all good bro, we're all friends here. Heck, I almosted started to cry when he beat me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
man i get so depressed when iread these im trying to figh=ure out how to get my 3.3 at least up to the 3.5 standard w/o swaping engines im thinkg bore and storke wuold help but the dohc compared to the sohc would suck too
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
The 3.5's are SOHC, not DOHC. I wish it were DOHC though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
There are tradeoffs to DOHC, production cost probably being foremost among them. It also makes for a bulkier engine, so there are probably packaging issues that they wanted to avoid. It also increases parasitic drag quite a bit on the engine compared with SOHC. So they have to design the engine to compensate for those losses *plus* produce more power, to make it DOHC worthwhile, and they end up with a little less gas mileage in the bargain.

The 3.2L and 3.5L could conceivably have benefited from more tuning. If you look at horsepower per liter, the 2.7L puts out 200hp, which is 74hp per liter. At that output level, a 3.2L should theoretically put out 237hp, and a 3.5L should put out 260hp. That's a good bit more than those engines put out stock, so I'm sure there was room for tuning.

-- Marcus
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,811 Posts
If you look back a ways I have posted a couple kills. Si has posted ALOT of kills with his 3.3L Concorde.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Si has been gone for awhile. I remember him saying he would be away for some time, but I don't remember why. I rather enjoyed his posts:D
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top