Recommended Posts

Some Stats from Hennessey Performance on the Venom 1000

Power Output:

# 800 - 900+ Rear Wheel HP (900 - 1,100+ Flywheel HP)

# 900 - 1,000+ Rear Wheel Torque (1,000 - 1,200+ Flywheel Torque)

Acceleration (Stock 6-Speed Transmission):

# 0-60: 2.25 sec. *

# 1/4 mile: 9.75 sec. @ 148+ mph *

Note: * Denotes Viper World Record. Times were obtained with MT "ET Street" tires.

585300311[/snapback]

HA, I've seen a 9 sec Civic with less HP.

Not to hate on domestic's or nothing, but just saying. With all that horsepower and torque it should be able to beat a Civic. :laugh:

I'd like to have a Delorean because im a BTTF fan and it's one very rare car.

http://www.americandreamcars.com/1981delorean102703.jpg

585296611[/snapback]

saw one in town the other day... my friends obsessed so we just watched it, i'm nota car fan but its a damn nice car

sti2.JPG

Subaru WRX STi

031016ecli1.jpg

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII

typex180front.jpg

Nissan 240sx

sil80.JPG

Nissan Sil-80

These are my favourites.. although the 240sx/180sx/Sil-80 can be brought/modified, I'd still say it is one of my dream cars.. :cool: :cool:

DORIFUTO FOR LIFE!!!

p.s how could I forget?!!

delorean.jpg

Edited by Razorwing

Wow. Some people have some pretty ****ty taste in cars.

WRX STI?

BMW Z3? That's not even a real BMW for god's sake!

And an Evo? It's impressive but who the hell wants to own one of those?

As I said, I'll take one of these:

1020530.001.2M.jpg

460 BHP (or 500 on Plus model). Better handling than an M5, much faster, and with a WAY better interior. And just look at it! Although honestly I can't wait to see the next one built on the new A6 series platform.

Or for something a little less sane, one of these:

2005-veyron-f3q-stu.jpg

bugatti_veyron_blue_purple_concept_manu-01.jpg

That's 1001HP. Actually, it also happens to be an Audi engine. An 8.0 litre W16, to be exact. In fact it also has an Audi DSG gearbox and Quattro four-wheel-drive :)

Nevermind the fact that it consumes an estimated 1.3 gallons of gas per minute under WOT. It can still go 0-60 in under 3 seconds (with its specially made super-huge tires).

Edited by threedaysdwn
Wow.  Some people have some pretty ****ty taste in cars.

WRX STI?

BMW Z3?  That's not even a real BMW for god's sake!

And an Evo?  It's impressive but who the hell wants to own one of those?

As I said, I'll take one of these:

http://www.germancarfans.com/features/1020...0530.001.2M.jpg

460 BHP (or 500 on Plus model).  Better handling than an M5, much faster, and with a WAY better interior.  And just look at it!  Although honestly I can't wait to see the next one built on the new A6 series platform.

Or for something a little less sane, one of these:

http://www.channel4.com/4car/media/B/bugat...ron-f3q-stu.jpg

http://files.conceptcarz.com/img/Bugatti/b...ept_manu-01.jpg

That's 1001HP.  Actually, it also happens to be an Audi engine.  An 8.0 litre W16, to be exact.  In fact it also has an Audi DSG gearbox and Quattro four-wheel-drive :)

Nevermind the fact that it consumes an estimated 1.3 gallons of gas per minute under WOT.  It can still go 0-60 in under 3 seconds (with its specially made super-huge tires).

585302028[/snapback]

and don't forget the quad turbos.

to both of you fools who said you wanted 'eleanor' as your dream car, how the heck can it be your dream car if you don't even know what year car it is. One said it was '65 and the other has the name of the picture being a '69. If you split the difference you have the correct year. It's a 1967. It was the first year the GT500 was available. And a dream car to me is one I build to be my own to have straight-line performace, handling on a road course, good climate climate control, interiro comfort, and anything else i wish to add while i'm building it.

to both of you fools who said you wanted 'eleanor' as your dream car, how the heck can it be your dream car if you don't even know what year car it is.  One said it was '65 and the other has the name of the picture being a '69.  If you split the difference you have the correct year.  It's a 1967.  It was the first year the GT500 was available.  And a dream car to me is one I build to be my own to have straight-line performace, handling on a road course, good climate climate control, interiro comfort, and anything else i wish to add while i'm building it.

585302112[/snapback]

(Y)

My ultimate dreamcar would be a '67 GT500, but I'd hardly dare to drive it.. :p

As an everyday car, it'd be the new BMW M6, sooooo smooth. :cool:

As a weekend car, the Aston Martin DB9 would own me. :drool:

But hey, I wouldn't say no to any of the cars suggested here. :D

HA, I've seen a 9 sec Civic with less HP.

Not to hate on domestic's or nothing, but just saying. With all that horsepower and torque it should be able to beat a Civic. :laugh:

585300366[/snapback]

Oh NO! A RICE BOY! The Fast and the Furious kind of 9sec Civic... I don't understand this, buying a cheap Civic and changing everything in it.... Why not just buy a Saleen Mustang GT or better a Viper instead?

:D

When I first saw this thred, I wondered how long it would take for the RICE posts.

I don't have one particular car but a few on my top list:

MClaren F1 - Super fast and sleak looking. Plus it seats 3...

Aston Martin DB9 or Vanquish - Been a big fan since the latest James Bond Movies.

Carroll Shelby's 427S/C Cobra - This car has original style since its from the 60's.

I'm not all that big into Ferraris or Porsches anymore. I am starting to see more and more of them on the road.

wtf is a Delorean  ? is that the car thats from switzerland ? :whistle:

585302083[/snapback]

Back to the Future ever see it? The Delorean was designed by John Delorean I think he was from Scotland or Ireland not sure it had an all stainless steel body the motor wasn't too powerful a V6 I think it had gull wing doors as well.

My dream car would have to be the 2006 BMW M5.

side.jpg

OH YES. :yes:

Check out these specs: http://www.arielmotor.co.uk/04/specs.htm

And you can get a supercharged Honda Civic Type R engine to give it 300BHP, on Top Gear (a really ****ing ace TV show here in the UK) it beat all the top supercars around their track by a long way.

British and Japanese Engineering at it's best, forget any other countries cars, I mean look at America, they have to have huge engines to get power, Rally Art here in the UK got over 700BHP out of a Evo 8 engine before the head blew off.

Edit:

Also this:

web_two_cars.jpg

Look at that! You can buy that, and drive it on the road, and it can get to 60 faster than most bikes.

Edited by ollie_webbuk
1965 Shelby GT500 (Eleanor)

585296563[/snapback]

^ Indeed (Y) (you mean 1967 ;)), and also an BMW M5/G55 AMG :)

That "Top Gear" episode was great, Clarkson's skin going all over the place with the awesome power of that car.

Radish?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Python programmers in a nutshell. Now, guess what lang most AI programmers use... :-)
    • There was nothing whatsoever wrong with Vista as an OS after the SP1 update. People who claim it wasn't were using ancient machines for some silly reason. Not kidding, no hyperbole/exaggeration. Vista was good.
    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      443
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!