Personally I love the Trans AM more, but they are both F-bodies so I guess it just boils down to personal preference. The late 60s, early 70s Camaros/Trans AMs were beasts! 455 cubic inches of pure power... and if it wasn't for the emissions control that resulted in a lack of power output in the later model versions of the Camaro and Trans AM - I wouldn't have been surprised if they came out with an 8 liter monster that went 0-60 in 5 seconds (in the 1970s).
I really do apprchiate the fact that you recognized the accual facts & appolized. BTW, I never called you a ricer, I like alot of hondas like the S2000 & NSX, even the accord. But i prefure domestics. And still must disargee with you, the 3800 camaro is one of the most underestimated cars out there & is overlooked becuase of the LS1. The fact that it beats most other sports cars Highest model & its the camaro lowest model is a testimony to that.
I couldn't agree with you more FoxtrotBPS except for the Honda thing...if you put as much upgrades in an American car as these goofballs waste in their pocket rockets...there wouldn't even be a race, and the guy in a Camaro or Mustang will be paying the pizza delivery guy for the pizza he ordered while he was waiting for the Honda to finish. The High Out-put V6 is underestimated due to understanding of quality and advanced modern engineering. It's the best engine to upgrade below any V8!
yes finally someone who understands, i have a 3.8 camaro and im currently building it up and people always talk shit, guess they wont talk shit when i smoke theyre ass
I'm not trying to say Honda is a faster car in anyway - I was just clearly trying to point out, for stock, the Camaro is surprisingly slow. I'm only saying this because I rode in my brothers 98 Camaro 3.8L.
Tell him to get a tune up cause something isn't right with his car. I've beaten plenty of stock V8's and every V6 that wants to race me a quarter or a half a mile. I don't even want to get into the joy of beating 4 cylinders that have put more money into the car than I payed for mine and I still look at them through my exhaust...though I did tweak a few things...but no turbo yet!
Foxtrot is right. The 95 Camaro 3800 car he posted of the 1/4 time is a SERIES II motor, but he threw me off because he didn't say Series II. Now these other fucktards are trying to say a L36 engine is a series I. I apologize Fox I didn't catch that 1995 car you posted, cause the SERIES II did in fact come out in 1995 with a naturally aspirated L36 engine. And yes I agree the Camaro has a tons more HP potential. But not so much the L36 as his supercharged big brother.
Fifth, and finally, one of my favorite all-time cars is the Trans AM, especially the 72' which is a rare classic, due to the United Auto Workers strike of 72 which halted production of GM made vehicles.
Third, since when does being a fan of Honda make me a ricer? Apparently a lot of people don't know what the hell a ricer is. A ricer is a person that puts mods on his/her car (scoops, wings, whatever) to make it appear that the car is fast, when it in fact it is not. So loving a stock 4 cylinder Honda does not make me a fucking ricer. Fourth, pantera is right, I should have mentioned the 0-60 times of the two cars I posted were automatic transmissions.
First, the L36 is the 3800 SERIES 2, not the same motor fucktard (You need to get YOUR facts straight). You were comparing a Series 1 motor with the Honda. Second, no shit sherlock the gear ratios are more aggressive then the Accord its a fucking sports car.
First, Sealy1986 just got powned like a little bitch, and second, I hate stupid rice burners, and third i hate know-it-alls that in reality, know nothing...
So take your made up 0-60 times and look at the real facts. The camaro has more agressive gear ratios than the monte carlo does & runs much better times.
Im finished waisting my time here, your probly not even old enough to drive.
The accord isent made to be a fast car, its made to be a practical family car so parents can bring their kids to school. And it does a good job at it, but idoits like you ruin the car.
Not only does the camaro have better style, more power and is faster in a strait line. But it would obsolutly kill the honda on a track. You cant beat the RWD setup the camaro has with the engine mounted almost behind the rear axil.
And yea, the accord is a couple hundrend pounds lighter. But look at the HP:
1998 Hond Accord:
Horsepower 135 @ 5050 RPM
Torque 153 @ 3750 RPM
1998 Chevy Camaro
Horsepower 200 @ 5200 RPM
Torque 225 @ 4000 RPM
Plus its easy to add HP to the 3800, and it can handle alot more power than the honda can. It is also more reliable and won 10 best engines of the year award several times.
Wow, you Idoit. The L36 is the 3800, so they are the same engine. It will wun a 0-60 time of less than 7 1/2 seconds. I know becuase ive done it. It also ran a stock 1/4 mile time of 15.7. You oviously dont know your facts. On top of that the 3800 has tons more potentional. Your oviously some stupid 14 year old that gets his facts from the fast & the furious.
Oh yeah, while i'm still rambling...here's the total exterior curb weight from the 98'Monte Carlo, 98' Camaro, and the 98' Accord (taken from MSN Autos):
Camaro: 3,331 lbs
Monte Carlo: 3,239 lbs
Accord: 3,009 lbs
Although the Accord is the lightest, its only the lightest by 322 lbs. I'm not really sure of the significant time gain from 322 lbs, but i'm pretty sure its not that much.
Oh yeah, and if we are going to talk weight differential. The 98' Monte Carlo weighs a few hundred pounds less then the Camaro, so if anything its 0-60 time is a tad faster then the Camaros. But a lot of the time that whole 0-60 mumbo jumbo is really dependent upon driving ability.
.... Thats kuz a honda weighs next to nothing compared to a Camaro. you can have a 500hp lead sled and a 300hp aluminum can and the 300hp car will win. Its all about weight over power.
It isn't so much about weight differential then it is about torque. It all depends on how fast the camshaft profile can push the pistons to speed. I was kinda surprised the Honda 4 banger had near identical 0-60 time with the Camaro because Hondas lack low end torque. In a 0-60 test I wouldn't see a Honda beating a Camaro. But a 30-70 test, the Honda might give the Chevy a run for its money.
Thats not true. Here are the accual times: 1998 Honda Civic GX: 0-60:11.9 1/4 Mile:18.1 1995 Chevrolet Camaro 3800: 0-60:7.4 1/4 Mile:15.7
I had to use the civic becuase all the accourd times are of the V6. But the Civic is lighter than the accourd & they use the same I4 engine. Try looking at some fact before you post.
LOL you got that from albeedigital dot com. A stock 3.8L V6 Camaro came with the L36 engine. Since I can't find the 0-60 times on the Camaro, I will provide the 0-60 times on the 98' Monte Carlo which uses the same L36 engine. Both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times were taken from MSN Autos
actually you have no idea what you are talking about. The monte carlo is not the camaro. you are ignoring transmission types, gear ratios, and a lot more. You get your data from print outs in a magazine which mean jack shit in the real world.
I actually have a 3.8L camaro RS, 5 spd, 3.42 gears and a 4 banger honda with a 5 speed.....Its not even close, the honda can't hang, even if I put on a big ugly wing, lol.
what kinda exhust is on there im looking for one for my 3.8 2002 camaro
16harryy 1 year ago
what kind of exhaust is on it right now? im looking for a new exhaust system for mine
vampiresremedy666 1 year ago
what should a 98 camaro v6 run in a quarter with a flowmaster exhaust no cat k&n filter whisperlid intake and 245/55 cooper tires and it's a stick
camaroman102 2 years ago
@camaroman102 some where in the 15s or low 14s depending on how clean your shifts are
DarkCanuck16 1 year ago
Ouch, off centered almost 4 inches. ick.
Lutey110 2 years ago
What kind of exhaust is on the car?
justsk8at8 3 years ago
Well Foxtrot,
Personally I love the Trans AM more, but they are both F-bodies so I guess it just boils down to personal preference. The late 60s, early 70s Camaros/Trans AMs were beasts! 455 cubic inches of pure power... and if it wasn't for the emissions control that resulted in a lack of power output in the later model versions of the Camaro and Trans AM - I wouldn't have been surprised if they came out with an 8 liter monster that went 0-60 in 5 seconds (in the 1970s).
Sealy1986 4 years ago
Drive a Audi A4 Turbo trading in for a 01 Camaro 3.8 that will take me by a car length if not more
Untrus 4 years ago
I really do apprchiate the fact that you recognized the accual facts & appolized. BTW, I never called you a ricer, I like alot of hondas like the S2000 & NSX, even the accord. But i prefure domestics. And still must disargee with you, the 3800 camaro is one of the most underestimated cars out there & is overlooked becuase of the LS1. The fact that it beats most other sports cars Highest model & its the camaro lowest model is a testimony to that.
FoxtrotBPS 4 years ago
I couldn't agree with you more FoxtrotBPS except for the Honda thing...if you put as much upgrades in an American car as these goofballs waste in their pocket rockets...there wouldn't even be a race, and the guy in a Camaro or Mustang will be paying the pizza delivery guy for the pizza he ordered while he was waiting for the Honda to finish. The High Out-put V6 is underestimated due to understanding of quality and advanced modern engineering. It's the best engine to upgrade below any V8!
Bruker6 2 years ago
yes finally someone who understands, i have a 3.8 camaro and im currently building it up and people always talk shit, guess they wont talk shit when i smoke theyre ass
BMTMFH 2 years ago
I'm not trying to say Honda is a faster car in anyway - I was just clearly trying to point out, for stock, the Camaro is surprisingly slow. I'm only saying this because I rode in my brothers 98 Camaro 3.8L.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
Tell him to get a tune up cause something isn't right with his car. I've beaten plenty of stock V8's and every V6 that wants to race me a quarter or a half a mile. I don't even want to get into the joy of beating 4 cylinders that have put more money into the car than I payed for mine and I still look at them through my exhaust...though I did tweak a few things...but no turbo yet!
Bruker6 2 years ago
hahaha, sealy is an idiot. Why would you compare a series 1 car? if you did you'd have to compare the hondas of the late 80's and early 90's
crmartin07 4 years ago
Foxtrot is right. The 95 Camaro 3800 car he posted of the 1/4 time is a SERIES II motor, but he threw me off because he didn't say Series II. Now these other fucktards are trying to say a L36 engine is a series I. I apologize Fox I didn't catch that 1995 car you posted, cause the SERIES II did in fact come out in 1995 with a naturally aspirated L36 engine. And yes I agree the Camaro has a tons more HP potential. But not so much the L36 as his supercharged big brother.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
Fifth, and finally, one of my favorite all-time cars is the Trans AM, especially the 72' which is a rare classic, due to the United Auto Workers strike of 72 which halted production of GM made vehicles.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
Third, since when does being a fan of Honda make me a ricer? Apparently a lot of people don't know what the hell a ricer is. A ricer is a person that puts mods on his/her car (scoops, wings, whatever) to make it appear that the car is fast, when it in fact it is not. So loving a stock 4 cylinder Honda does not make me a fucking ricer. Fourth, pantera is right, I should have mentioned the 0-60 times of the two cars I posted were automatic transmissions.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
First, the L36 is the 3800 SERIES 2, not the same motor fucktard (You need to get YOUR facts straight). You were comparing a Series 1 motor with the Honda. Second, no shit sherlock the gear ratios are more aggressive then the Accord its a fucking sports car.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
First, Sealy1986 just got powned like a little bitch, and second, I hate stupid rice burners, and third i hate know-it-alls that in reality, know nothing...
so...
Props to you FoxtrotBPS.
colthard 4 years ago
FoxtrotBPS just owned your ass
hahaha.
That kid should be in the fast and the furious with all the other morons who love hondas and the only way they can try and keep up is with nitrous.
How do people drive a car without a lot of TQ. I know i couldnt
Haganracing 4 years ago
So take your made up 0-60 times and look at the real facts. The camaro has more agressive gear ratios than the monte carlo does & runs much better times.
Im finished waisting my time here, your probly not even old enough to drive.
FoxtrotBPS 4 years ago
The accord isent made to be a fast car, its made to be a practical family car so parents can bring their kids to school. And it does a good job at it, but idoits like you ruin the car.
Not only does the camaro have better style, more power and is faster in a strait line. But it would obsolutly kill the honda on a track. You cant beat the RWD setup the camaro has with the engine mounted almost behind the rear axil.
FoxtrotBPS 4 years ago
And yea, the accord is a couple hundrend pounds lighter. But look at the HP:
1998 Hond Accord:
Horsepower 135 @ 5050 RPM
Torque 153 @ 3750 RPM
1998 Chevy Camaro
Horsepower 200 @ 5200 RPM
Torque 225 @ 4000 RPM
Plus its easy to add HP to the 3800, and it can handle alot more power than the honda can. It is also more reliable and won 10 best engines of the year award several times.
FoxtrotBPS 4 years ago
Wow, you Idoit. The L36 is the 3800, so they are the same engine. It will wun a 0-60 time of less than 7 1/2 seconds. I know becuase ive done it. It also ran a stock 1/4 mile time of 15.7. You oviously dont know your facts. On top of that the 3800 has tons more potentional. Your oviously some stupid 14 year old that gets his facts from the fast & the furious.
FoxtrotBPS 4 years ago
Oh yeah, while i'm still rambling...here's the total exterior curb weight from the 98'Monte Carlo, 98' Camaro, and the 98' Accord (taken from MSN Autos):
Camaro: 3,331 lbs
Monte Carlo: 3,239 lbs
Accord: 3,009 lbs
Although the Accord is the lightest, its only the lightest by 322 lbs. I'm not really sure of the significant time gain from 322 lbs, but i'm pretty sure its not that much.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
Oh yeah, and if we are going to talk weight differential. The 98' Monte Carlo weighs a few hundred pounds less then the Camaro, so if anything its 0-60 time is a tad faster then the Camaros. But a lot of the time that whole 0-60 mumbo jumbo is really dependent upon driving ability.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
A stock 1998 3.8L V6 Camaro and a stock 1998 Honda Accord 4 cylinder have near identical 0-60 times.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
.... Thats kuz a honda weighs next to nothing compared to a Camaro. you can have a 500hp lead sled and a 300hp aluminum can and the 300hp car will win. Its all about weight over power.
xx98stallionxx 4 years ago
It isn't so much about weight differential then it is about torque. It all depends on how fast the camshaft profile can push the pistons to speed. I was kinda surprised the Honda 4 banger had near identical 0-60 time with the Camaro because Hondas lack low end torque. In a 0-60 test I wouldn't see a Honda beating a Camaro. But a 30-70 test, the Honda might give the Chevy a run for its money.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
Thats not true. Here are the accual times: 1998 Honda Civic GX: 0-60:11.9 1/4 Mile:18.1 1995 Chevrolet Camaro 3800: 0-60:7.4 1/4 Mile:15.7
I had to use the civic becuase all the accourd times are of the V6. But the Civic is lighter than the accourd & they use the same I4 engine. Try looking at some fact before you post.
FoxtrotBPS 4 years ago
Thank god someone has a brain on here.. wtf is with the honda riceboy fan.
Nice camaro btw.
Haganracing 4 years ago
LOL you got that from albeedigital dot com. A stock 3.8L V6 Camaro came with the L36 engine. Since I can't find the 0-60 times on the Camaro, I will provide the 0-60 times on the 98' Monte Carlo which uses the same L36 engine. Both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times were taken from MSN Autos
1998 Honda Accord DX: 0-60: 8.44 seconds 1/4 mile: 16.71
1998 Chevy Monte Carlo: 0-60: 8.25 seconds 1/4 mile: 16.24
Foxtrot, I know what I'm talking about, so next time don't compare apples to oranges.
Sealy1986 4 years ago
actually you have no idea what you are talking about. The monte carlo is not the camaro. you are ignoring transmission types, gear ratios, and a lot more. You get your data from print outs in a magazine which mean jack shit in the real world.
panterastang 4 years ago
I actually have a 3.8L camaro RS, 5 spd, 3.42 gears and a 4 banger honda with a 5 speed.....Its not even close, the honda can't hang, even if I put on a big ugly wing, lol.
panterastang 4 years ago
looks like it's running a lil rich there.
coldblade666 4 years ago
im buying exsaust for my camaro, the thing is it wont compare to the sound of an lt1 or ls1 :(
Reaper666DV 5 years ago