245/60r15? - TCCoA Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-30-2003, 01:12 PM Thread Starter
1st Gear Poster
 
NaPalmfsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Leesburg, FL
Age: 37
Posts: 51
Send a message via AIM to NaPalmfsr
245/60r15?

Stock tire size on my '94 is 215/70R15, but that is not fat enough to hold the road. I was wondering if anyone has ever used a 245/60R15 would fit without rubbing, becuase I would rather not have the tires rubbing. I fI have to stay with a 215, Its not a big deal, I just wanted to be able to use a fatter tire for traction if it was possible.

'94 V8
Custom Ram Air System
Custom Upper Intake Tube
3.73 R&P, with Trac Loc
Kenwood Headunit
______________________________
More to come,.......
NaPalmfsr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-30-2003, 01:16 PM
Seasoned Veteran Poster
 
mamberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Philly
Age: 58
Posts: 890
Lots of people on here (myself included) run 245/60/15's with no trouble at all.

Of course, there are those who say that the tire is too wide for our wheels, but nobody I know or heard of has ever had any problem.


This has been discussed many times before, I am sure you could come up with a lot of reading if you did a search.
mamberg is offline  
post #3 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-30-2003, 03:25 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Age: 36
Posts: 2,129
Send a message via AIM to chrisnack
Quote:
Originally posted by mamberg
Lots of people on here (myself included) run 245/60/15's with no trouble at all.

Of course, there are those who say that the tire is too wide for our wheels, but nobody I know or heard of has ever had any problem.


This has been discussed many times before, I am sure you could come up with a lot of reading if you did a search.
Yeah it's debatable on a 6.5" rim. Under normal driving, it's probably fine. I bet I could rip that tire off in no time flat on the track (autocross).

For most normal people, i'm sure it's fine. It's a "bit" wide, and you really should have a larger rim, but you can get away with it.

Like I said, it wouldn't stand a chance with my driving on the track.. but hey... we're not all perfect

NSN Motorsports
http://www.nsnmotorsports.com
"Fordless" - But I do have alot of Mercon V laying around...
'96 Eagle Talon ESI

Parts ---> Dan Newman - Town & Country Ford - 800-847-2047
chrisnack is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-30-2003, 05:42 PM
Stroked and Blown
 
BlakTbird96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dundalk, MD
Posts: 2,395
Send a message via AIM to BlakTbird96
I have 245 60/r15 and have had no trouble at all. They do however make the car sit a little lower and if you have a body kit like me, your front piece and your tailpipes will definently hit/scrape if you go over a rather high speed bump or if you drive over a dip.
Frank
96 Tbird 3.8

My other home:
Mid-AtlanticMN12's

'96 Ford Tbird 3.8 SC
'06 Chrysler Sebring "Vert 2.7
BlakTbird96 is offline  
post #5 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-30-2003, 07:34 PM
1st Gear Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NC
Age: 63
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally posted by NaPalmfsr
Stock tire size on my '94 is 215/70R15, but that is not fat enough to hold the road. I was wondering if anyone has ever used a 245/60R15 would fit without rubbing, becuase I would rather not have the tires rubbing. I fI have to stay with a 215, Its not a big deal, I just wanted to be able to use a fatter tire for traction if it was possible.
i have the same question here. i have a 95 bird and it calls for the 215/70R15 also, i just bought the car from a friend of mine, and he put 235/60R15 tires on it. i like that they are wide, to me they look a lot better than stock tires. these tires are new and im gonna get some miles out of um. but i would like to replace them with the 245/60R15 tires, i think they are a little closer to the height of what it calls for. thanks for any advice on this.

Frank

95 T-bird 4.6
dual Flowmaster mufflers,resonator removed, removed air intake baffle,P245/60R15 Tigar Paws, 3.08 trac-loc rear,
transgo shift kit.
94,000 mi.

96 Crown Vic LX wifes car
stock, leather,very nice car
156,000 mi.
95bird4.6 is offline  
post #6 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-30-2003, 10:46 PM
Stroked and Blown
 
BlakTbird96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dundalk, MD
Posts: 2,395
Send a message via AIM to BlakTbird96
like i said, i have 245 60R/15. You will be fine, trust me, i have had these on my car for 2 years now.
Frank
96 Tbird 3.8

My other home:
Mid-AtlanticMN12's

'96 Ford Tbird 3.8 SC
'06 Chrysler Sebring "Vert 2.7
BlakTbird96 is offline  
post #7 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-30-2003, 11:29 PM
Refrigerator Raider Hater
Moderator
 
GreenBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vermont
Age: 35
Posts: 11,719
Most tire companies will not warrenty a tire that's mounted to a rim outside of their approved range.

every tire I've seen lists the maximum width on a 6.5" rim with 60 series is 235. It's not THAT much shorter, plus it'll trick you into going at bit slower. (Cops )




Matt "Looks Like Egon" Davis
96 Alpine Green V8
98 Audi A8 4.2Q in Racing Green Totalled
02 Audi A8L 4.2Q in Black

I buy my OEM Ford parts at 10% over dealer cost from Steve in White Bear Lake, MN.
You drive "like a man possessed"... by a woman!
GreenBird is offline  
post #8 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-31-2003, 11:31 AM
1st Gear Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NC
Age: 63
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally posted by GreenBird
Most tire companies will not warrenty a tire that's mounted to a rim outside of their approved range.

every tire I've seen lists the maximum width on a 6.5" rim with 60 series is 235. It's not THAT much shorter, plus it'll trick you into going at bit slower. (Cops )
thanks for that info, i looked it up at the uniroyal website.
but i wonder if my rims are 6.5 ,they are stock alum. kinda
curved looking spokes.

thanks

Frank

95 T-bird 4.6
dual Flowmaster mufflers,resonator removed, removed air intake baffle,P245/60R15 Tigar Paws, 3.08 trac-loc rear,
transgo shift kit.
94,000 mi.

96 Crown Vic LX wifes car
stock, leather,very nice car
156,000 mi.
95bird4.6 is offline  
post #9 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-31-2003, 11:44 PM
Refrigerator Raider Hater
Moderator
 
GreenBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vermont
Age: 35
Posts: 11,719
Quote:
Originally posted by 95bird4.6


thanks for that info, i looked it up at the uniroyal website.
but i wonder if my rims are 6.5 ,they are stock alum. kinda
curved looking spokes.

thanks

Frank
15" steel are 6" wide
15" alloy are 6.5" wide
16: alloy are 7" wide.
This applies to all stock mn12 wheels.




Matt "Looks Like Egon" Davis
96 Alpine Green V8
98 Audi A8 4.2Q in Racing Green Totalled
02 Audi A8L 4.2Q in Black

I buy my OEM Ford parts at 10% over dealer cost from Steve in White Bear Lake, MN.
You drive "like a man possessed"... by a woman!
GreenBird is offline  
post #10 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-08-2004, 01:55 PM
Stroked and Blown
 
BlakTbird96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dundalk, MD
Posts: 2,395
Send a message via AIM to BlakTbird96
Hi all, we have established that 235/245/60R15 will work fine however, i have a question that is quite related. When we switch to the 60 series tires, does it slow down our 1/4 mile et? Think about it, I f we have smaller tires, it may not get as much take off as the taller tires, but with the smaller tires, does this mean we have a higher top speed. Just like a 4:11 rear is better take off but less top speed whereas a 3:27 rear is less take off but more top speed. I noticed this about 2 summers ago (summer 02') I was driving out through Western Maryland and if any of you are familiar with the area, some of you may be familiar with Route 68. I was driving on route 68 and decided to put the pedal to the metal to see what my car could do. The top speed of the 96 Tbird is only suppose to be 105mph all stock with the limiter. I had my car a tab past 110 and it was still going. The only reason why i backed off was because my CB radio antenna flew off lol. Anyways was my car going past the limiter's speed because of the smaller tires? Well, any help would be appreciated. thanks all, Frank 96 Tbird 3.8

My other home:
Mid-AtlanticMN12's

'96 Ford Tbird 3.8 SC
'06 Chrysler Sebring "Vert 2.7
BlakTbird96 is offline  
post #11 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-08-2004, 02:34 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Age: 36
Posts: 2,129
Send a message via AIM to chrisnack
Quote:
Originally posted by cool dude
Hi all, we have established that 235/245/60R15 will work fine however, i have a question that is quite related. When we switch to the 60 series tires, does it slow down our 1/4 mile et? Think about it, I f we have smaller tires, it may not get as much take off as the taller tires, but with the smaller tires, does this mean we have a higher top speed. Just like a 4:11 rear is better take off but less top speed whereas a 3:27 rear is less take off but more top speed. I noticed this about 2 summers ago (summer 02') I was driving out through Western Maryland and if any of you are familiar with the area, some of you may be familiar with Route 68. I was driving on route 68 and decided to put the pedal to the metal to see what my car could do. The top speed of the 96 Tbird is only suppose to be 105mph all stock with the limiter. I had my car a tab past 110 and it was still going. The only reason why i backed off was because my CB radio antenna flew off lol. Anyways was my car going past the limiter's speed because of the smaller tires? Well, any help would be appreciated. thanks all, Frank 96 Tbird 3.8
A smaller tire should free up TQ since it's less mass to rotate. As far as effecting speed, it doesn't really. Your speedo will read faster since your speedo is calibrated for a particular tire height. But it's not going to actually change your top speed or anything. A heavier tire takes more TQ to get moving and more HP to keep moving. But beyond that.. shouldn't matter, again, taking into consideration the calibration. If you run a really small tire, you could be doing 60 but you speedo might say your doing 100, that obviously doesn't mean your doing 100.

it's like 105 or something like that for the limiter, if you aren't chipped. I've had my tbird to 135 and there was a fair amount of snot left yet. The V6 tbird might also not be limited, since I dunno how much beyond 110 you can really go, V6 doesn't really have all that much power to move a 3800 lb car past above and beyond 100 I would think.

NSN Motorsports
http://www.nsnmotorsports.com
"Fordless" - But I do have alot of Mercon V laying around...
'96 Eagle Talon ESI

Parts ---> Dan Newman - Town & Country Ford - 800-847-2047
chrisnack is offline  
post #12 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-08-2004, 02:53 PM
Seasoned Veteran Poster
 
XR7kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Norman, OK
Posts: 861
v6's are limited to 115 from factory, i've had mine to 125 no problem. also, a smaller tire has same affect as changing rear end gears, don't think it'll change from a 3.27 to a 4.10 or anything like that, but it does make small difference. falken actually says they're 255/50 will fit on a 6.5 inch rim. i think i'll stick w/ my 255 on 7.0 inch rims though
XR7kid is offline  
post #13 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-08-2004, 03:49 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Age: 36
Posts: 2,129
Send a message via AIM to chrisnack
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisnack
V6 doesn't really have all that much power to move a 3800 lb car past above and beyond 100 I would think.
Not saying it can't do it.. but it sure as hell isn't going to have the snot that my V8 still does up there...

NSN Motorsports
http://www.nsnmotorsports.com
"Fordless" - But I do have alot of Mercon V laying around...
'96 Eagle Talon ESI

Parts ---> Dan Newman - Town & Country Ford - 800-847-2047
chrisnack is offline  
post #14 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-08-2004, 11:49 PM
Back in Black

Administrator
 
ShadowDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Charlotte NC
Age: 44
Posts: 14,204
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisnack
Yeah it's debatable on a 6.5" rim. Under normal driving, it's probably fine. I bet I could rip that tire off in no time flat on the track (autocross).

For most normal people, i'm sure it's fine. It's a "bit" wide, and you really should have a larger rim, but you can get away with it.

Like I said, it wouldn't stand a chance with my driving on the track.. but hey... we're not all perfect
Well I um... lets just say I was a little happy leaving a stop sign and making a right hand turn and hit the apex right at the 1-2. The rear kicked out 90*, then grabbed and turned 180* the other direction, then 270* back the other way (on dry pavement mind you, damn you perfect altitude weather) and my 245/60r15's didn't even roll over onto the side at all (no rub marks on the sidewalls from when the car was going completely sideways on 3 different occasions)

R.I.P. Joel Bender 07/30/79 - 03/26/06
R.I.P. Johnny Langton 1975-2011

1997 Thunderbird LX 4.6 AED 349.27RWHP/391.29RWTQ Engine Build Exterior shots
2002 Thunderbird Premium Triple Black 3.9
2015 Fusion Energi SE Luxury Magnetic Gray
*SCRAPPED* 1994 LX 4.6 NA [email protected] 236.07RWHP/286.26RWTQ
ShadowDragon is offline  
post #15 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-09-2004, 02:00 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Age: 36
Posts: 2,129
Send a message via AIM to chrisnack
Quote:
Originally posted by ShadowDragon

and my 245/60r15's didn't even roll over onto the side at all (no rub marks on the sidewalls from when the car was going completely sideways on 3 different occasions)
chalk your tires once and then drive around... that is the only way to tell how much roll over you are really having...

depends on the design of the tires.. my Yoko Avid Inter's didn't roll over at all, and they were a 70 series sidewall...

NSN Motorsports
http://www.nsnmotorsports.com
"Fordless" - But I do have alot of Mercon V laying around...
'96 Eagle Talon ESI

Parts ---> Dan Newman - Town & Country Ford - 800-847-2047
chrisnack is offline  
post #16 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-09-2004, 07:50 AM
Back in Black

Administrator
 
ShadowDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Charlotte NC
Age: 44
Posts: 14,204
No thanks, I'm used to the mark TC with the 3.73's now, ain't doing that again.

FYI, the BF Goodrich Radial T/A minimum rim size for 245/60r15 is 6.5"

R.I.P. Joel Bender 07/30/79 - 03/26/06
R.I.P. Johnny Langton 1975-2011

1997 Thunderbird LX 4.6 AED 349.27RWHP/391.29RWTQ Engine Build Exterior shots
2002 Thunderbird Premium Triple Black 3.9
2015 Fusion Energi SE Luxury Magnetic Gray
*SCRAPPED* 1994 LX 4.6 NA [email protected] 236.07RWHP/286.26RWTQ
ShadowDragon is offline  
post #17 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-09-2004, 08:01 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
JoeyICU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Syskesville MD
Age: 33
Posts: 2,894
Garage
a 235/60 15 will lower your rear end ratio a little bit....you will be ever so slightly off the line...its not b/c of weight....it might be but most tires weigh about the same in this size range....go with the 245/60...it looks stock...if you want quicker off the line....pick up the 235/60 15....i myself like the 245/60 15 better....i had kelly DR on the back of mine in that size...they were nice on the dry

p.s. i shoved a 265/50 15 on a 6.5 inch tarus steel rim

1995 Ford Thunderbird 4.6 LX - SC wheels, enlarged rear sway bar, full sound system, cut mufflers, PST 1 1/8" rear bar, Eibachs, Mark 8 LCA's, Al housed 3.55 gearset, cut mufflers
2011 BMX X5 Xdrive50i - BMS Stage 1, Cut Muffler
2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.7L-Her stock DD
1984 Ford F250 6.9 IDIT - head studs in progress
JoeyICU is offline  
post #18 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-09-2004, 05:22 PM
Stroked and Blown
 
BlakTbird96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dundalk, MD
Posts: 2,395
Send a message via AIM to BlakTbird96
V6 doesn't really have all that much power to move a 3800 lb car past above and beyond 100 I would think.



Uhm....If a ricer 4 cylinder can go above 120, You can bet ur @$$ that my "3.8" Tbird will do it... lol (if it didnt have the limiter that is) V-6 Camaros, Firebirds, etc are about as heavy and can go 120 with out any problems. The new 2003/2004 Monte Carlos are 3.8's and those cars are way heavier than a Thunderbird and I believe some of them can hit 140 (SS models of course) Anyways.....To get back to the main subject.......tire sizes, lol..............I think I will keep the 60 series on mine or I may go up to a 65 series if there is a such thing....I like the width of the 60 series, but I think when the spring time comes around I'm gonna get new rims again and I'm gonna go with chrome this time (polished aluminum is a pain in the @$$ to clean) Well, talk to u all later...........Frank, 96 Tbird 3.8

My other home:
Mid-AtlanticMN12's

'96 Ford Tbird 3.8 SC
'06 Chrysler Sebring "Vert 2.7
BlakTbird96 is offline  
post #19 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-09-2004, 09:58 PM
TCCoA Founder
Administrator
 
Sir William's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mountain Home, AR
Age: 49
Posts: 4,161
Quote:
Originally posted by cool dude
I like the width of the 60 series
"60 Series" has NOTHING to do with the width. The 50-60-70, etc. (the number after the / ) in a tire size is the aspect ratio. It's a percentage measurement of how high the sidewall is compared to the tread width.


AAA/BB-CC
-- AAA = Treadwidth in millimeters
-- BB = Sidewall height as a percentage of AAA
-- CC = Rim size in inches

Hope this helps. The confusion comes from the fact that 60 series tires are *usually* wider than stock. People go from 70s to 60s with wider treadwidths. But it's the AAA that makes it bigger.

Edit: Massive brain fart corrections.

God Bless and Fly Low!

Sir William
TCCoA Founder


97 Thunderbird LX - Smoothed

99 Expedition Eddie Bauer

04 Grand Cherokee Overland

Last edited by Sir William; 01-09-2004 at 10:08 PM.
Sir William is offline  
post #20 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-10-2004, 01:51 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
JoeyICU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Syskesville MD
Age: 33
Posts: 2,894
Garage
the monte carlo with the 3.8 has 200hp.....not like the birds 140hp....and probbly the same tq....and......all the cars you mentioned weigh considerible lighter...V6 Camaros and Firebirds are in about the 3200lb range and at the most 3400lbs...but yeah a 3.8 bird might have trouble geting past 140.....but i could see one geting to 120ish

1995 Ford Thunderbird 4.6 LX - SC wheels, enlarged rear sway bar, full sound system, cut mufflers, PST 1 1/8" rear bar, Eibachs, Mark 8 LCA's, Al housed 3.55 gearset, cut mufflers
2011 BMX X5 Xdrive50i - BMS Stage 1, Cut Muffler
2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.7L-Her stock DD
1984 Ford F250 6.9 IDIT - head studs in progress
JoeyICU is offline  
post #21 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 12:22 AM
Stroked and Blown
 
BlakTbird96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dundalk, MD
Posts: 2,395
Send a message via AIM to BlakTbird96
Actually, the 96 and 97 3.8 Tbirds came stock with 145Hp...not 140. The 2003 Chevy Monte Carlo is a heavier vehicle.........I dont understand why your actually defending our rivals. The Monte Carlo may be faster, but it is a piece of *&^%. My parents have had so many recalls on that car (They own a 2003 Monte SS) and not just the recalls.....it has been in the shop quite a few times and it only has 11K. It may be faster, but in the long run, the Thunderbird will run circles around it in all other areas. As for the 3.8 Camaros and Firebirds, my brother had one....yeah there pretty quick but they are built very cheap, and you can feel every bump it hits, and try sitting in one.....very uncomfortable. Some of our rivals may be quicker but that is the only thing they have on us. the MN-12's will $%#@ on the rivals in all other areas. This is a Thunderbird/Cougar/Mark website, i think it is only right if we defend our cars against our rivals...........................Anyways, the only Monte Carlo's that can beat our regular, not sc, stock 3.8's are the SS's. The LS's are very slow (175hp and heavier than a MN-12) The SS's are fast, but try putting the SS Monte Carlo up against a Thunderbird SC. It wouldnt stand a chance, The SC would tear it a new @$$%*&%. Also try putting one of the 3.8 firebird/camaro up against a SC Tbird, it wouldnt stand a chance either. Anyways, the Tbird (in my opinion) is the best car ever produced. Peace out fellow Fox/Mn-12'ers. We should all stick together when discussing our rivals....u heard the old sayin....Birds of a feather, flock together. Peace

My other home:
Mid-AtlanticMN12's

'96 Ford Tbird 3.8 SC
'06 Chrysler Sebring "Vert 2.7

Last edited by BlakTbird96; 03-19-2004 at 05:40 PM.
BlakTbird96 is offline  
post #22 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 02:44 AM
The Band, not the Disease!
 
AnthraxBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NW Indiana
Age: 34
Posts: 3,090
Send a message via AIM to AnthraxBird
Monte Carlos do suck. They are slow and ugly to boot. Also, you have to understand the facts.. the Monte is lighter. I'm not "defending" GM, but it's just a fact. I'm running 235/60R-15's on stock 97 fan wheels. I love em. (accept there is a nail in one, i'll have to plug it up =()

1997 Mark VIII LSC - Toreador Red
AnthraxBird is offline  
post #23 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 11:41 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
JoeyICU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Syskesville MD
Age: 33
Posts: 2,894
Garage
ok for one calm down you read my post all wrong......and no a FWD 03 Monte carlo does not weigh more then 3700lbs....unless the V6 birds weight under 3600lbs i doubt they do weigh more then a V6 bird....and your statement was just very generalized as the cars you mentions are lighter....i didnt say they were better.....i kno the problems with all of them....yes the montes do break....yes the camaros qualty is poo......i didnt say they were better then the bird.....i merely said they were lighter.....and around the same hp....so they can pull themselves to a higher top speed.....im sure a 3.8 bird can get up into the 120 range i dont doubt that at all....and i am sticking together when im talkin about them i merely thought your coment was general about birds and chebys slow underbuilt competion

1995 Ford Thunderbird 4.6 LX - SC wheels, enlarged rear sway bar, full sound system, cut mufflers, PST 1 1/8" rear bar, Eibachs, Mark 8 LCA's, Al housed 3.55 gearset, cut mufflers
2011 BMX X5 Xdrive50i - BMS Stage 1, Cut Muffler
2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.7L-Her stock DD
1984 Ford F250 6.9 IDIT - head studs in progress
JoeyICU is offline  
post #24 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 12:20 PM
The Band, not the Disease!
 
AnthraxBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NW Indiana
Age: 34
Posts: 3,090
Send a message via AIM to AnthraxBird
Cool Dude Check this out, they are lighter =) :

The new 2003 and 2004 Chevy Monte Carlo LS with a 3400 V6 engine V6EPA highway fuel economy. The Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS's engine generates 180 horsepower at 5200 rpm and 205 lb. ft of torque at 4000 rpm. Also available is the Monte Carlo SS 3800 Series II V6 with sequential fuel injection with 200 horsepower. The Chevy Monte Carlo SS 3800 V6engine delivers an EPA MPG of 19 city and 29 highway. The refined 3800 V6 in Monte Carlo SS delivers smooth operation and power across a broad torque band . The efficient 3400 V6 in Monte Carlo LS features 180 hp and 205 lb.-ft. of torque at 4000 rpm.
Curb weight (lbs / kg) LS: 3340 / 1515 SS: 3391 / 1538

The V6 LX T-Bird will not beat a SS.. stock for stock. The v8 would have a run for its money, but I have raced a SS, Didn't have too much trouble =)

1997 Mark VIII LSC - Toreador Red

Last edited by AnthraxBird; 01-11-2004 at 12:40 PM.
AnthraxBird is offline  
post #25 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 01:26 PM
Stroked and Blown
 
BlakTbird96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dundalk, MD
Posts: 2,395
Send a message via AIM to BlakTbird96
Okay, yes the camaros/firebirds are quicker off of the line because they are lighter but I dont think weight has anything to do with top speed. That is like saying a Thunderbird SC only has a top speed of 120 because its heavy. Top speed is determined by gear ratio. Therefore, if a Thunderbird and a Camaro (both 3.8's) have say a 3:27 gears, I believe the top speed would still be the same but I could be wrong. All's I know is some of the Tbird SC's have been known to reach speeds in access of 160MPH. I know a regular 3.8 bird would never see that but that is because the SC's are supercharged. However, if the SC's have the same ratio as a 3.8 Tbird or Camaro, then thats like saying they can only reach 120 as well when i know SC's can go way over 120. (the 94 and 95 SC's alone came with 140 speedo's) So i dunno. I will have to research this more and find out. Im also gonna post the weight of my parents Monte SS and my Tbird to see which is actually heavier cause i do believe the Monte Carlo has the Tbird beat in weight. Nah Im not mad, Im just a little confused myself. Peace out all Frank 96Tbird 3.8

My other home:
Mid-AtlanticMN12's

'96 Ford Tbird 3.8 SC
'06 Chrysler Sebring "Vert 2.7
BlakTbird96 is offline  
post #26 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 02:24 PM
Stroked and Blown
 
BlakTbird96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dundalk, MD
Posts: 2,395
Send a message via AIM to BlakTbird96
Okay, I never said a 3.8 Tbird would beat a Monte Carlo SS. Yes a Thunderbird 3.8 SC would tear a Monte Carlo SS a new @$$%&*#. Anyways, here is a question about weight. How much does the 1996 Ford Thunderbird weigh. I looked in my door hinge on the driver side door and this is what I have. ...
GVWR-4,792lbs
Front GAWR-2,491lbs
Rear GAWR-2,324lbs
So, My question is how much does the car actually weigh? Is the 4,792 lbs the actual weight of the car, cause if it is, I liked to know where it gets all its weight. I owned a 1960 Plymouth Fury (one of the long ones with the big tail fins) and it only weighed 3,475 lbs, and it was made of steel and chrome. Somebody please explain to me what all this means cause i know the Thunderbird is a heavy car...but almost 5,000 lbs...come on now, Thats a little rediculas.

My other home:
Mid-AtlanticMN12's

'96 Ford Tbird 3.8 SC
'06 Chrysler Sebring "Vert 2.7

Last edited by BlakTbird96; 03-19-2004 at 05:42 PM.
BlakTbird96 is offline  
post #27 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 02:27 PM
Back in Black

Administrator
 
ShadowDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Charlotte NC
Age: 44
Posts: 14,204
Quote:
Originally posted by cool dude
GVWR-4,792lbs
Front GAWR-2,491lbs
Rear GAWR-2,324lbs
Gross Vehicle Weight Rating & Gross Axles Weight Rating. That's how much weight you can put on the car/axle.

A "standard optioned" 3.8L LX has a curb weight of 3561.

R.I.P. Joel Bender 07/30/79 - 03/26/06
R.I.P. Johnny Langton 1975-2011

1997 Thunderbird LX 4.6 AED 349.27RWHP/391.29RWTQ Engine Build Exterior shots
2002 Thunderbird Premium Triple Black 3.9
2015 Fusion Energi SE Luxury Magnetic Gray
*SCRAPPED* 1994 LX 4.6 NA [email protected] 236.07RWHP/286.26RWTQ
ShadowDragon is offline  
post #28 of 28 (permalink) Old 01-11-2004, 06:01 PM
TCCoA Founder
Administrator
 
Sir William's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mountain Home, AR
Age: 49
Posts: 4,161
Quote:
Originally posted by cool dude
Top speed is determined by gear ratio.
That's ludicrous. If that was the case, then there's surely some gear ratio that I could use to get a Yugo to 200MPH.

While gear ratio does come into play in top speed, it's mostly based on horsepower. There comes a point when X amount of horsepower can't overcome the aerodynamic drag and friction with a given gear. That's when you change gears to shift your power curve versus your speed curve. Simple.

I've been in a heavily modded SC that was still pulling hard as we eclipsed 145 and beyond, and let me tell you, there's no way my car could go there. I just don't have that kind of power no matter what gear I put in it.

The car was Tony Cerno's 94 SC Auto BTW. VERY strong car.

God Bless and Fly Low!

Sir William
TCCoA Founder


97 Thunderbird LX - Smoothed

99 Expedition Eddie Bauer

04 Grand Cherokee Overland
Sir William is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TCCoA Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome