Man....I'm a new proud owner of the tc and i just got 2000 miles on it and i decided i was going to race my buddies 94 3000 gt... Its a pretty good race pretty much whoever gets the better launch....The tc is very hard to launch but i learned launching between 2 1/2 grand and 3 is best....The 3000 starts pulling at about 80ish.

 

Did he have the 3.0-liter 161-hp SOHC V6?

 

If he kept up pretty good, its not a VR-4 or his friend does not know how to drive it.

 

Give a double amputee a VR-4 and a tC still wouldn't be able to keep up with it*









*exaggerated a little

 

yea maybe if he launches into reverse first somehow.

 

that'd be the SL and i think that'd be the ONLY 3000 a tC should take on.....lol

Jeff

 

yea thats prob the sl my friend has one its got like 222 hp or something its pretty quick but very heavy

 

yea its the sl model....I wouldn't mess around with a Vr-4 it would be a waste of gas

 

Sorry, guys

I hate to break it to ya, but even my 96 SL (being the 'fat pig' that it is) could whup a Tc bone stock..

I haven't raced a TC , but having driven BOTH cars, my BUTT DYNO tells me that the 3000 would win hands down.

Not taking away from the Tc's mystique, just that those two cars shouldn't be compared

If you REALLY wanna haul more azz, I suggest you return the TC, and spend the same amount of money on a first year IS300. I've been burned by a couple of those -- Just being honest

 

I thought the base model 3000GT have at least 200HP already... when does a V6 get so low HP? 161?

The VR-4 pulls like a rocket even stock + AWD.

 

yea that 3000gt with twin turbo is definitly fast. i saw it in the track and it burned both WRX STI and LANCER EVO....

 

That guy with the 3000 must have had alot of work to whip those cars. My buddy had one and he used to get killed my friends Evo VIII

 

The reason that year is so sloooow is because they went to SINGLE overhead cam instead of DUAL, They soon cancelled the run after that, citing "just too much rice -- no go" (hey, I can rip on my own ride, can't I)

A tricked and sprayed VR4 has a running chance against an EVO, but no way against an equally tricked WRX (how many do you see on the street still bone stock )

Let's get back to SCION talk now, fellas..
Any more, and just go to the 3SI forums

 

I used to own a 94 dodge stealth r/t which is an identical clone of the 3000gt. Also my buddy has a 94 3000gt sl. Both cars have the 3.0 v6 dohc engines which put out 222hp. My tc feels faster than my stealth but thats probaly because my stealth was auto and my tc is stick. Only the base model stealths and 3000gts got the 3.0 sohc 160 hp motor.

 

The 3000GT SL is a mid to low 16 second car... with a talented driver, maybe high 15s with a few tweaks... definately not scary.

 

All 3000 GT's were dual cam until 97, then they had a single cam 161hp option for a lower price... that year the dual cam also lost 4hp

 

The IS300 Isn't exactly fast... Not really any faster than the tC... Your butt dyno is inaccurate and needs to be calibrated.

 

I raced an SL 5 speed, and granded, I didnt launch very well...but I had NOTHING for him


Stoplight to Stoplight, I was back 2 carlengths or so

TRUST ME...the SL will smoke a tC im sorry to say (oh, and I have a 5 speed tC...not and auto...and its stock)

 

Bingo-

IS300 owners actually consider the car slow.

I know, because I own one.

The IS is faster than the tC if you race from a stop, but not much.

The tC keeps up if you start in 2nd gear

 

i used to own a 2000 camaro v6, and it should be faster than your '96 SL, my TC now seems to be just as fast as my old camaro. so it's not a hands down thing.