Nissan needs to get in F1.
FUCK yea! I'd be a Nissan sackrider for sure!
Posted 10 April 2008 - 03:38 AM
Nissan needs to get in F1.
Posted 10 April 2008 - 05:03 AM
this is true... although they are technical wonders, i really want a car like an S2k or an elise. something i can feel while im driving. ya know?? when i tell most "car guys" my favorite car is the S2k, they look at me like and then usually say something about no torque, only 240 hp, or its not good for drifting. and then i know not to talk to them about cars anymore
Posted 10 April 2008 - 05:19 AM
FUCK yea! I'd be a Nissan sackrider for sure!
Posted 10 April 2008 - 06:58 AM
Posted 11 April 2008 - 01:47 AM
driftingthis is true... although they are technical wonders, i really want a car like an S2k or an elise. something i can feel while im driving. ya know?? when i tell most "car guys" my favorite car is the S2k, they look at me like and then usually say something about no torque, only 240 hp, or its not good for drifting. and then i know not to talk to them about cars anymore
Posted 11 April 2008 - 05:48 AM
Leading up to the official reveal of the Corvette ZR-1, a rare week went by when we didn't see spy shots of the General's new super coupe eating up the Nurburgring. But still images don't tell the whole tale, so InsideLine sent its spies to the North Loop with a video camera to capture an uncloaked ZR-1 making the rounds on the 'Ring. According to the men behind the lens, they were able to clock the 620 hp, supercharged 'Vette running laps "in the low 7:40s," easily within reach of supercars costing substantially more than the ZR-1's estimated $100k price tag. But what about the elephant on the 'Ring in the room? The Nissan GT-R V-Spec.
As reported earlier this week, spies caught the GT-R V-Spec lapping the Nordschleife, and with stopwatches at the ready, they were able to time Godzilla's lightweight (by an estimated 330 pounds), more powerful (70 hp or so) sibling at an unbelievable 7:25 per lap. According to the crew that crudely timed the ZR-1, the track was damp, so that 7:40 time could easily be improved by at least four or five seconds. But that's still a long way off.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users