i bet a stock 450 dirt bike would beat a lambo... the formula for going fast is hp:weight.. 500 lbs doing 0-60 in 3 seconds is not going to feel the same as doing it with 3k lbs. lamborghini gunna have a major power band compared to the rzr
there was no sandbagging involved.. Had the driver had more seat time in the lambo, a better launch or prepped track, averaged the best of 10 runs, etc yeh ok maybe you would times similar times to those listed on the back pages of Car and Driver Magazine. Fact remains there was no hollywood editing here.. Are we claiming it is faster then a diablo? NO.. but we did race, both gave it 100% and these were the results. 1st and only race.
Idk the Lamborghini Diablo dose 0 to 60 in like 3.6 sec and the rzr was top out a 73 mph and that took from 0:09 to 0:17 thats 8 sec, when the Lamborghini Diablo can be a 100 mph in 8.8 sec.... not nock n down the rzr900.... but that guy in the lambo most have not been try too hard.. i have a rzr900 ther fun would like to see that guy in the lambo jump it 6 feet and see what happends
@picas24 i'd have to agree with your stats, but on the flip side, the 900 is a lot more efficient when it comes to actually hooking up (on asphalt that is). The Lambo was lighting up the tires a lil too much for a good start and the 900 was hitting the rev limiter way too quick probably due to lighter stock(i'm assuming) weights in the primary clutch. put in a good driver for the lambo and a good clutch for the 900 and then we'll see whats up. pretty impressive needless to say though
i bet a stock 450 dirt bike would beat a lambo... the formula for going fast is hp:weight.. 500 lbs doing 0-60 in 3 seconds is not going to feel the same as doing it with 3k lbs. lamborghini gunna have a major power band compared to the rzr
bry250f 1 month ago
how come you cant hear the lambo it has a 6 litre v12.... something's up
offitcock 2 months ago
the rzr was hitting the limiter at the end
evansimon33 3 months ago
there was no sandbagging involved.. Had the driver had more seat time in the lambo, a better launch or prepped track, averaged the best of 10 runs, etc yeh ok maybe you would times similar times to those listed on the back pages of Car and Driver Magazine. Fact remains there was no hollywood editing here.. Are we claiming it is faster then a diablo? NO.. but we did race, both gave it 100% and these were the results. 1st and only race.
raceprovenmotors 4 months ago
If it were my company's turbo kit I'd have the Lambo sandbag it too...
Eclipsed00 4 months ago
Idk the Lamborghini Diablo dose 0 to 60 in like 3.6 sec and the rzr was top out a 73 mph and that took from 0:09 to 0:17 thats 8 sec, when the Lamborghini Diablo can be a 100 mph in 8.8 sec.... not nock n down the rzr900.... but that guy in the lambo most have not been try too hard.. i have a rzr900 ther fun would like to see that guy in the lambo jump it 6 feet and see what happends
picas24 5 months ago
@picas24 hey man dont forget that the rzr is way lighter
Renegade2651 5 months ago
@Renegade2651 true
picas24 5 months ago
@picas24 i'd have to agree with your stats, but on the flip side, the 900 is a lot more efficient when it comes to actually hooking up (on asphalt that is). The Lambo was lighting up the tires a lil too much for a good start and the 900 was hitting the rev limiter way too quick probably due to lighter stock(i'm assuming) weights in the primary clutch. put in a good driver for the lambo and a good clutch for the 900 and then we'll see whats up. pretty impressive needless to say though
DantheVan21 5 months ago
Holy shit....
xm2012 6 months ago
Now drive them around a mall and see who can pick up a sexy girl first
eclipsetuner99 6 months ago
Run a Busa! :)
vfIskullangel 7 months ago
need a little more weight on your primary clutch weights. keep it from slipping the belt and hitting the limiter.
mybigchevyhd 7 months ago
What was that number again. NICE.
ralphy3427 7 months ago
wtf lol
LITMM 7 months ago
That was fu$@ing sweet!!!!
Yafeelzmeh 7 months ago
whoa!!!
blissman20 7 months ago