Dolorian??

[Dr. Evil]

Originally posted by Ben
Deloreans in their stock form are SLOW, and will not come close to hanging with a 5.0L

Its quite possible that my DMC has some internal mods that make it capable of hanging with a 5.0 Ford. I never knew the previous owner.

All I know is that I have hung with at least one 1992 5.0 Ford (stock), and one 2002 Honda S2000 Supposedly, the S2K driver didn't know how to shift, but that is his problem

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Ben
Deloreans in their stock form are SLOW, and will not come close to hanging with a 5.0L

Stock 1320: 17.9 seconds, stock 0-60 10.7 seconds. Lateral Gs of .77

If its as good as he claims, it has the title for the most under-rated car ever. With proper rubber it could put out some good cornering numbers I'm willing to bet, the car stock was pulling .77 on 195/60R14s 20 years ago, but that still doesn't explain the acceleration (or lack thereof).

[Seanith]

yeah those are cool cars.. i got to sit in one a couple weeks ago.. that one was mint!

[Ben]

Well I destroyed a Delorian twice back in April and I hang with stock 5.0L's so that would mean that...


Delorean Specs:

Type: Light-alloy 90deg V6 with two overhead camshafts
Displacement: 2.85 Liters
Bore & Stroke: 91x73mm
Block type: Light alloy with cast-iron cylinder liners
Cylinder heads: Light alloy cross flow with hemi-chambers
Cooling system: Water/Ethylene Glycol
Fuel System: Bosch K-Jetronic C.I.S. Fuel Injection
Ignition System: Bosch Electronic Breakerless
Emission Control: Lambda Sond/catalytic. Unleaded fuel

Max Horse power: 130 @ 5500 rpm
Max Torque: 153 ft LB @ 2750 rpm

0-60 in 8.5 Sec 1/4 in 17.6

Mustangs do the 1/4 at about 15 flat @ Sea Level, and High 15's up here

[jdmakkord]

Originally posted by Ben
Well I destroyed a Delorian twice back in April and I hang with stock 5.0L's so that would mean that...


Delorean Specs:

Type: Light-alloy 90deg V6 with two overhead camshafts
Displacement: 2.85 Liters
Bore & Stroke: 91x73mm
Block type: Light alloy with cast-iron cylinder liners
Cylinder heads: Light alloy cross flow with hemi-chambers
Cooling system: Water/Ethylene Glycol
Fuel System: Bosch K-Jetronic C.I.S. Fuel Injection
Ignition System: Bosch Electronic Breakerless
Emission Control: Lambda Sond/catalytic. Unleaded fuel

Max Horse power: 130 @ 5500 rpm
Max Torque: 153 ft LB @ 2750 rpm

0-60 in 8.5 Sec 1/4 in 17.6

Mustangs do the 1/4 at about 15 flat @ Sea Level, and High 15's up here

Compare it to a bone stock mustang of the same year and it may be a different story.
Hell my 87 supra turbo's stock specs were:
1/4 mile - 15.0 seconds @ 91 mph
0-60 mph in 6.4 sec
weight = 3529 lbs

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by jdmakkord


Compare it to a bone stock mustang of the same year and it may be a different story.
Hell my 87 supra turbo's stock specs were:
1/4 mile - 15.0 seconds @ 91 mph
0-60 mph in 6.4 sec
weight = 3529 lbs

A stock 1989 LX should be doing 15.1 @ 90 or so at sea level

[Dr. Evil]

Originally posted by jdmakkord
Compare it to a bone stock mustang of the same year and it may be a different story.

Hah '82 Mustangs were a joke. Actually, the early 80's weren't kind to cars across the board. Economy was more popular than performance, and the US mandated that speedometers stop at 85 MPH

[jdmakkord]

Originally posted by Dr. Evil

Hah '82 Mustangs were a joke. Actually, the early 80's weren't kind to cars across the board. Economy was more popular than performance, and the US mandated that speedometers stop at 85 MPH

If I remember right ford 302cid motors in the early 80's were only 130 or 140hp at the crank

[Dr. Evil]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
With proper rubber it could put out some good cornering numbers I'm willing to bet, the car stock was pulling .77 on 195/60R14s 20 years ago

Damn straight! Its a fun car to take on the twisties Proper rubber would help. I'm still running stock rims/tires because they're pretty lightweight. I measured my rear rim at 22 pounds... not as good as a Volk, but $500 cheaper

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Dr. Evil

Hah '82 Mustangs were a joke. Actually, the early 80's weren't kind to cars across the board. Economy was more popular than performance, and the US mandated that speedometers stop at 85 MPH

It wasn't that they didn't want to make fast cars, it was more they had trouble figuring out how to make them durable, never mind quick. All the new (at that time) emissions control stuff made getting power out of a car extremely difficult, and made them freakishly unreliable to boot. There's a reason why a lot of cars from that era aren't on the road any more. My dad had a '78 toyota wagon (the first year they used EGR systems) that lasted the motor only 25000 kms, and he had the record for the longest that model year had gone before the valvetrain was destroyed by the extra heat.

[Redlyne_mr2]

I'll repeat my quote, deloreans are slow, handle like crap and are heavy(for a 2 seater). .77g's isnt all that great especially since youd need to replace all the cars bushings, shocks, struts and tires to achieve that. Dont get me wrong their cool cars just more of a novelty than a true performance car

[T5_X]

Originally posted by Redlyne_mr2
I'll repeat my quote, deloreans are slow, handle like crap and are heavy(for a 2 seater). .77g's isnt all that great especially since youd need to replace all the cars bushings, shocks, struts and tires to achieve that. Dont get me wrong their cool cars just more of a novelty than a true performance car

Let me repeat my quote, 2750 lbs!!!! That makes it weigh about the same if not less than your turbo SW20 there guy.

The test numbers are very inconsistent for the DMC-12. A rear engined car with equal length upper and lower control arms at all 4 corners rarely is a bad setup.

The bench racing is strong in this thread

[Redlyne_mr2]

Originally posted by Ranger_X31


Let me repeat my quote, 2750 lbs!!!! That makes it weigh about the same if not less than your turbo SW20 there guy.

The test numbers are very inconsistent for the DMC-12. A rear engined car with equal length upper and lower control arms at all 4 corners rarely is a bad setup.

The bench racing is strong in this thread

The bench racing is strong, the one I drove must have been a lemon because frankly it drove like crap. Independent suspension cant be beat but I the doesnt hadle all the well then there are other issues. Like I said my experience in one was fun but definitely nothing exhilerating about it

[T5_X]

Was it on stock tires? The stock wheel/tire setup is crap. I hear that the car is a little unrefined from the factory, but some tweaking gets it as a real 930 chaser on the twisties.

I didnt realize you've driven one, but when ppl bring up skidpad numbers to guage the handling performance of a car I get a little annoyed

[Redlyne_mr2]

Originally posted by Ranger_X31
Was it on stock tires? The stock wheel/tire setup is crap. I hear that the car is a little unrefined from the factory, but some tweaking gets it as a real 930 chaser on the twisties.

I didnt realize you've driven one, but when ppl bring up skidpad numbers to guage the handling performance of a car I get a little annoyed

The one I drove was auto, didnt they all come auto or are there exceptions out there?

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Ranger_X31
Was it on stock tires? The stock wheel/tire setup is crap. I hear that the car is a little unrefined from the factory, but some tweaking gets it as a real 930 chaser on the twisties.

I didnt realize you've driven one, but when ppl bring up skidpad numbers to guage the handling performance of a car I get a little annoyed

Skidpad numbers aren't COMPLETELY useless, if you know what the underpinnings are like as well

[T5_X]

Originally posted by Redlyne_mr2

The one I drove was auto, didnt they all come auto or are there exceptions out there?

No wonder it felt so lethargic! No, most are 5 speed, but 3 spd auto was an option. A very shitty 3 speed auto might i add.

Skidpad numbers aren't COMPLETELY useless, if you know what the underpinnings are like as well

True, but so often ppl just take them at face value. A Ram SRT10 weighs 5000 lbs with rear leafs and pulls high .8s that's just a refelection of its massively wide tires on huge diameter rims.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Ranger_X31

True, but so often ppl just take them at face value. A Ram SRT10 weighs 5000 lbs with rear leafs and pulls high .8s that's just a refelection of its massively wide tires on huge diameter rims.

Which is why I said a delorean could pull a lot better than a .77 with better rubber. Thats the stock number from 20 years ago, theres been a lot of improvements in tires alone over that time, never mind shocks and bushings and everyhting else

[Dr. Evil]

The automatic DeLoreans are C-R-A-P. The first DMC I owned was an auto... it was slow, and the tranny computer was fried so it often started out in 2nd just to make things worse.

The suspension is Lotus, by the way, so if you drive one that handles like jello then the owner hasn't maintained it very well. They probably don't know what grease zirks are

Hope I didn't piss ya off... I just love these cars and have fun thrashing them around the road. Other DeLorean owners hate me because I modify things, peel out, etc. When I told some owners I was thinking about nitrous, they never spoke to me again Dorks:tongue: