Are these fast??

Dark_5.0 · 05-15-2002, 12:35 PM

My brother is buying an 83' 280zx GTO turbo.......And my sisters boyfriend just bought a bone stock Grand National, I dont think I have ever seen a bone stock grand national before.

I know the Grand national is fast but how fast would one be stock @3000ft I am guessing about a 14.3-14.5

The 83 280zx turbo is "supposed" to be fast. Anyone ever seen one of these run?

Just trying to get to know the new competition.

Later,

Mercury · 05-15-2002, 12:43 PM

I wanna say a Bone Stock GN can hit low 13's to mid 13's. Remember the main reason they were discontinued was because it killed the Vette in Performance.

KillerStang · 05-15-2002, 12:45 PM

the GN stock is in my opinion damn slow, seen 1 run here at the rack and he was runnin high 15's and i have seen a 280z run at the track but i have seen the around and they r pretty damn quick, u gonna set them up in a race or whut? if they gonna race im puttin my money on the 280z but thats me

95mustanggt · 05-15-2002, 01:56 PM

I've driven the aluminum I6 280Z before. It was not very fast. Even my 95 GT would have beaten it. With a Turbo....not sure, could be a lot faster.

The GN, I raced one and I took him, not by a lot, but I beat him. I would guess my car is a high 14 second car, so 15's sound right for a stock GN. Of course I've heard all the storey's about 11 and 12 second GN's, but then again who hasn't.

The Deuce · 05-15-2002, 02:51 PM

The turbo cars are pretty quick. HP up over 200 in a car that light. Faster than the IROC's and some older GT's. I mean the early '80's cars. Your Mustang should be faster and the GN will b real close. That is, if ithe Z is in good shape. I've always been in the market for one with t-tops, but the first thing to go on that car is the Turbo. Most people just go without fixing because the car does decent without. If the turbo is good(and it's a 5spd), it will be a race with those two. Let us know what happens

red82gt · 05-15-2002, 04:14 PM

When Nissan switched to the 300 instead of the 280 it then had 200hp, the 83 280 only had about 175 or so, it was fast for it's time but was still beat by the 5.0's and SVO's of the same era.
The GN will not slow down as much at altitude as a N/A car because of the turbo, I think it will still do 14.3-14.5 in the 1/4.
A lot of people mistake Buick T-Types as grand nationals and report 15 second 1/4's but the real deal GN's are good for 14.0 or better @ sea level and the GNX's do low 13's.

The Deuce · 05-15-2002, 04:40 PM

My 240z makes 150bhp. It is a stock '72. If 400cc, turbo and fuel injection only makes 25hp gain, I'd be surprised. I will get a definate hp number and post it, with a reference.

91GTturbo · 05-15-2002, 04:57 PM

If someone saw a GN run in the 15's, it was a non-intercooled 84-85 model, the guy let out way before the 1/4 mile was up, or it was a raged out piece of crap. The guy that tunes my car for me and has worked on evey mustang I've owned specializes in GN's. I've seen just about ever possible combination that can be ran in a GN. They are just like mustangs, some run faster than others, but the slowest I've ever seen a stock GN run was 9.26 in the 1/8th, which translates into about a 14.3x 1/4. Most run 8.60's to 8.90's in the 1/8 and that's far from a 15 sec 1/4.

The only thing the Z has going for it is weight, or should I say lack of it. It's probably in the 2200 lb range with driver.

I say the Z is going to get killed unless it's got some serious mods.

Oh, and a T-Type is nothing more than a GN painted a different color and rebadged along with a few differences on the interior. They run the same times as real GN's.

blue00gt · 05-15-2002, 06:00 PM

The '83 280ZX is actually not that light of a car. Not anywhere near as light as the preceding Z models; they tried to make it more of a luxury car by the '80s and added a ton of weight. I think my '79 Z was about 3000lb. My buddy has an '83 turbo and I think he said it has 180hp. I drove it before and it was pretty slow. I'd guess high 15s.
The Grand National was the fastest American production car of '87. I think they had almost 400lb-ft of torque, so if you saw one run that slow in the 1/4 it was either hurting or a Regal non T-type.

Unit 5302 · 05-15-2002, 07:14 PM

Ah the lack of knowledge on the Grand National. At least 91GTTurbo knows about them.

The Grand National and the T Type are the SAME.

The limited edition 1987 Grand National GNX is the fast one. The rest of the 1 Gallon 16lb turbo gnat's are 14 second cars. Probably see most drivers running low/mid 14's with the 1986-1987 intercooled 3.8's. The non-intercooled models from 1984-1985 run a little slower.

Unless it's a GNX, you're gonna whoop it stock. I know I've beaten a few with my GTs.

red82gt · 05-15-2002, 07:25 PM

I was referring to the 80-85 T-types. Some of these had as little as 155hp-these are the ones that people mistake for GN's.
I found one of my Motor Trends from 1987 and it has a comparison between the GN (non-GNX), the corvette, the IROC, and a Mustang GT.
The GN had 245hp and ran 14.0@100,
the GT ran 14.3@96.5,
the vette ran 14.9@93
and the Iroc ran 15.1@91
That's where I got my numbers for the GN from, I haven't seen a stock one run forever.

tireburner163 · 05-15-2002, 10:32 PM

GN's are suppost to be really easy to mod. You hear to stories about them running 11's and then driving home with the A/C on.

I don't really know THAT much abou them. But they are my second favorite car.

KillerStang · 05-16-2002, 12:00 AM

i posted the GN stock running the 15. dont know much about it i didnt talk to the guy, but i was at the track with 1 of my friends that has a GN. we were talking about it and we watched the guy run a 15 he started busting up laughing and said that was the slowest GN that he has seen. he would know more than me, im not sayin they all run 15 stock just the 1 i saw did. i have no idea whut they ran stock, but the 1 i saw ran a 15. and my friend almost died. you guys know more about this than i would, just putting in my 2 cents its not much tho

Dark_5.0 · 05-16-2002, 01:19 PM

I am not very scared of the 280zx but you never know about the Grand Nationals cause the 11 second ones sound just like the 14 second ones.

The guy with the Grand National has bumped it to 18 psi of boost and added 30# injectors.

I cant buy any more stang parts till I close the deal on the new house. So he might whoop me for now

but not for long I hope to run a 12 flat with a 125 shot.

Thanks for the info...
Later,

05-15-2002, 12:35 PM	#1
Dark_5.0 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Staging lane Posts: 4,337	Are these fast?? My brother is buying an 83' 280zx GTO turbo.......And my sisters boyfriend just bought a bone stock Grand National, I dont think I have ever seen a bone stock grand national before. I know the Grand national is fast but how fast would one be stock @3000ft I am guessing about a 14.3-14.5 The 83 280zx turbo is "supposed" to be fast. Anyone ever seen one of these run? Just trying to get to know the new competition. Later, __________________ 92' LX-Big brakes, Lots and lots of suspension, GT40X heads, Ported cobra intake, stock cam, Vortech SC trim. 00' Lightning-Stock 88'CRX-13 second ego killer

05-15-2002, 01:56 PM	#4
95mustanggt Registered Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Kamloops, BC Posts: 2,875	I've driven the aluminum I6 280Z before. It was not very fast. Even my 95 GT would have beaten it. With a Turbo....not sure, could be a lot faster. The GN, I raced one and I took him, not by a lot, but I beat him. I would guess my car is a high 14 second car, so 15's sound right for a stock GN. Of course I've heard all the storey's about 11 and 12 second GN's, but then again who hasn't. __________________ 1995 Mustang GT 20016 F150 Lariat Super Crew

05-15-2002, 02:51 PM	#5
The Deuce Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 2,325	280zx The turbo cars are pretty quick. HP up over 200 in a car that light. Faster than the IROC's and some older GT's. I mean the early '80's cars. Your Mustang should be faster and the GN will b real close. That is, if ithe Z is in good shape. I've always been in the market for one with t-tops, but the first thing to go on that car is the Turbo. Most people just go without fixing because the car does decent without. If the turbo is good(and it's a 5spd), it will be a race with those two. Let us know what happens __________________ 1997 Mustang GT "The Freak" - 13.80 @ 101.70, 2.07 60' 1995 Honda VFR750 - not much @ really fast (actual data pending.) 1964.5 Mustang 289 Rice Haters Club Member #13

05-15-2002, 04:14 PM	#6
red82gt Sober voice of Reason Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Kelowna, B.C., Canada Posts: 1,514	When Nissan switched to the 300 instead of the 280 it then had 200hp, the 83 280 only had about 175 or so, it was fast for it's time but was still beat by the 5.0's and SVO's of the same era. The GN will not slow down as much at altitude as a N/A car because of the turbo, I think it will still do 14.3-14.5 in the 1/4. A lot of people mistake Buick T-Types as grand nationals and report 15 second 1/4's but the real deal GN's are good for 14.0 or better @ sea level and the GNX's do low 13's. __________________ 393W: AFR 205's, hydraulic roller, TKO600.

05-15-2002, 04:40 PM	#7
The Deuce Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 2,325	Doing some homework My 240z makes 150bhp. It is a stock '72. If 400cc, turbo and fuel injection only makes 25hp gain, I'd be surprised. I will get a definate hp number and post it, with a reference. __________________ 1997 Mustang GT "The Freak" - 13.80 @ 101.70, 2.07 60' 1995 Honda VFR750 - not much @ really fast (actual data pending.) 1964.5 Mustang 289 Rice Haters Club Member #13

05-15-2002, 12:43 PM	#2
Mercury The Redneck James Bond Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Fayetteville NC Posts: 1,707	I wanna say a Bone Stock GN can hit low 13's to mid 13's. Remember the main reason they were discontinued was because it killed the Vette in Performance.

05-15-2002, 12:45 PM	#3
KillerStang Registered Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 30	the GN stock is in my opinion damn slow, seen 1 run here at the rack and he was runnin high 15's and i have seen a 280z run at the track but i have seen the around and they r pretty damn quick, u gonna set them up in a race or whut? if they gonna race im puttin my money on the 280z but thats me

05-15-2002, 04:57 PM	#8
91GTturbo Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Valdese, NC Posts: 361	If someone saw a GN run in the 15's, it was a non-intercooled 84-85 model, the guy let out way before the 1/4 mile was up, or it was a raged out piece of crap. The guy that tunes my car for me and has worked on evey mustang I've owned specializes in GN's. I've seen just about ever possible combination that can be ran in a GN. They are just like mustangs, some run faster than others, but the slowest I've ever seen a stock GN run was 9.26 in the 1/8th, which translates into about a 14.3x 1/4. Most run 8.60's to 8.90's in the 1/8 and that's far from a 15 sec 1/4. The only thing the Z has going for it is weight, or should I say lack of it. It's probably in the 2200 lb range with driver. I say the Z is going to get killed unless it's got some serious mods. Oh, and a T-Type is nothing more than a GN painted a different color and rebadged along with a few differences on the interior. They run the same times as real GN's. __________________ 91 single turbo vert

05-15-2002, 06:00 PM	#9
blue00gt Mustang Addict Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: McKinney, TX Posts: 1,294	The '83 280ZX is actually not that light of a car. Not anywhere near as light as the preceding Z models; they tried to make it more of a luxury car by the '80s and added a ton of weight. I think my '79 Z was about 3000lb. My buddy has an '83 turbo and I think he said it has 180hp. I drove it before and it was pretty slow. I'd guess high 15s. The Grand National was the fastest American production car of '87. I think they had almost 400lb-ft of torque, so if you saw one run that slow in the 1/4 it was either hurting or a Regal non T-type. __________________ Strike down the unroadworthy! 2000 GT Atl. Blue: '03 Cobra motor - 465rwhp/473rwtq, T-56 6-speed, full MM TA/PH & tubular K-member suspension, Saleen body, 17" Torq-Thrust II's, M/T ET Street radials, and lots more '94 Rio Red Cobra: All the bolt-ons, 3.73s

05-15-2002, 07:14 PM	#10
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	Ah the lack of knowledge on the Grand National. At least 91GTTurbo knows about them. The Grand National and the T Type are the SAME. The limited edition 1987 Grand National GNX is the fast one. The rest of the 1 Gallon 16lb turbo gnat's are 14 second cars. Probably see most drivers running low/mid 14's with the 1986-1987 intercooled 3.8's. The non-intercooled models from 1984-1985 run a little slower. Unless it's a GNX, you're gonna whoop it stock. I know I've beaten a few with my GTs.

05-15-2002, 07:25 PM	#11
red82gt Sober voice of Reason Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Kelowna, B.C., Canada Posts: 1,514	I was referring to the 80-85 T-types. Some of these had as little as 155hp-these are the ones that people mistake for GN's. I found one of my Motor Trends from 1987 and it has a comparison between the GN (non-GNX), the corvette, the IROC, and a Mustang GT. The GN had 245hp and ran 14.0@100, the GT ran 14.3@96.5, the vette ran 14.9@93 and the Iroc ran 15.1@91 That's where I got my numbers for the GN from, I haven't seen a stock one run forever. __________________ 393W: AFR 205's, hydraulic roller, TKO600.

05-15-2002, 10:32 PM	#12
tireburner163 It's a lot like a race car Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Meridian, MS Posts: 4,130	GN's are suppost to be really easy to mod. You hear to stories about them running 11's and then driving home with the A/C on. I don't really know THAT much abou them. But they are my second favorite car. __________________ 1987 Buick T-type 1998 HD Electra Elide

05-16-2002, 12:00 AM	#13
KillerStang Registered Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 30	i posted the GN stock running the 15. dont know much about it i didnt talk to the guy, but i was at the track with 1 of my friends that has a GN. we were talking about it and we watched the guy run a 15 he started busting up laughing and said that was the slowest GN that he has seen. he would know more than me, im not sayin they all run 15 stock just the 1 i saw did. i have no idea whut they ran stock, but the 1 i saw ran a 15. and my friend almost died. you guys know more about this than i would, just putting in my 2 cents its not much tho

05-16-2002, 01:19 PM	#14
Dark_5.0 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Staging lane Posts: 4,337	I am not very scared of the 280zx but you never know about the Grand Nationals cause the 11 second ones sound just like the 14 second ones. The guy with the Grand National has bumped it to 18 psi of boost and added 30# injectors. I cant buy any more stang parts till I close the deal on the new house. So he might whoop me for now but not for long I hope to run a 12 flat with a 125 shot. Thanks for the info... Later, __________________ 92' LX-Big brakes, Lots and lots of suspension, GT40X heads, Ported cobra intake, stock cam, Vortech SC trim. 00' Lightning-Stock 88'CRX-13 second ego killer

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FAST vs. Chip	STEEDAJEFF	Windsor Power	1	09-29-2002 02:16 PM
new to fast mustangs but not fast cars...I've a few ?'s	XGN	Windsor Power	3	07-03-2002 09:40 AM
Safety Q... How Fast Can You Drive A Fox Hatch With The Windows Down???	BowTie Eater 5 Liter	Blue Oval Lounge	8	04-17-2002 05:25 PM
Super cars and Fast and the Furious	#1 Pony	Blue Oval Lounge	9	01-29-2002 12:54 AM
Pesky Supra, actually thought he had a fast car.	Unit 5302	Stang Stories	7	03-20-2001 01:34 PM