luvmySS Posted May 26, 2003 Report Share Posted May 26, 2003 I don't know if anyone's seen it, but there is an article comparing the Chevy Silverado & Ford Lightning in the August edition of Truckin'. They got pretty crappy ET's in the 1/4 for the SS, in my opinion, 16.06. They also only got a 0-60 time of 7.48 for the SS as well. The Lightning got a 14.68 in the 1/4 and a 6.37 in the 0-60. It seems like the times are pretty bad for the SS compared to what MotorTrend & Car and Driver came up with. I guess they made four runs of each truck and took an average of that to come up with the above numbers. Maybe that is why they aren't very good. There is a pretty good article in the July issue of Sport Truck and a single page review in the June issue of Automoblie...in case you are a nut like me and want to have copies of magazines with articles related to the vehicles you own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted May 26, 2003 Report Share Posted May 26, 2003 Thanks for the heads-up on those mag's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmcswain Posted May 26, 2003 Report Share Posted May 26, 2003 Ditto, thanks for the heads up!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcairns Posted May 26, 2003 Report Share Posted May 26, 2003 ...in case you are a nut like me and want to have copies of magazines with articles related to the vehicles you own. How did you know I was doing that Do you know what track they are using for the tests at Trukin ? A high altitude track will givel slower times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
454ss Posted May 26, 2003 Report Share Posted May 26, 2003 Truckin is not always correct with their testing....maybe they just used somebody that didn't know how to launch, my buddy never raced before and got the same times with his 01 Lightning...but after 3 more runs he got a 14 flat....so experience counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotbellyJoe Posted May 26, 2003 Report Share Posted May 26, 2003 From what people hagve said the Gen2 L's are hard to lauch, but i can garrauntee that both of those ET's are WAAAAY too high, so whether it's elevation or whatever there has to be some reason for it.... -Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted May 26, 2003 Report Share Posted May 26, 2003 With the Lightning, it really depends on the surface. We have launched hard on the street, had her just hook and go. Then we have launched on the street, and spun through 3 gears. All in all, the new compound F1's do an admiral job. Track launching would be much the same. Some people can easily get 1.7-1.8 60-foot times with their stock trucks on the F1's. Pretty amazing when you think about it. Those times from Truckin definitally sound like high elevation. If they would have done them now that it is hot........ the Lightning would have looked even worse. Heat and superchargers do not mix well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedG Posted May 27, 2003 Report Share Posted May 27, 2003 As the altitude gets higher the more advantage a supercharged motor will have. The supercharger just regulates how much pressure there is in the manifold where the normally asperated motor just loses power. I live at 4500 feet and lose approx. 20%. So any test not at sea level does not give a true representation of how they do against each other under optimum conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luvmySS Posted May 27, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2003 How did you know I was doing that Do you know what track they are using for the tests at Trukin ? A high altitude track will givel slower times. I thought I was the only nut that did that Unfortunately I'm at work now and didn't bring the mag with me but, if my memory serves me correctly, which it seems to rarely do these days , they didn't give any specifics on the track they used. I checked the mag when I got home last night and there is no mention of where they did the run. Kinda makes you wonder if they really even did run them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstwins Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 Look at the pictures they took of it, and see if you can read any banners in the background. Particularly starting line shots will show you something there. Anyone figure out how to drive one of these things slowly? I am absolutely blown away by the handling of this TRUCK! 60 mph on twisty back roads and the truck is as level as sitting still. Deer better watch out! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 truckin' is pretty much slow on every test. any regular reader will pick up their terrible testing as normal for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcairns Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 Just picked up a copy to read. It is kind of a flawed comparison to do a shoot out between and Ext Cab and a Reg Cab truck, the reasons for choosing one format over the other pretty much eliminates the need to compare the rest. It also looks like they suffer from lazy journalism, they copied the error from Chevy's material about the "polished wheels" when they had a set of painted ones right there in front of them. They also said the transmission is a 4L85-E, when we know it is the 4L65-E. One thing I found odd, was there ideas about the styling of the two trucks. They thought the SS's styling was "dated" and the Lightning's more "up to date". I suppose I am biased, but I have thought just the opposite. I think the rounded 90's style of the Lightning is dated. And looking at Ford's Gen III concept Lightning, I think Ford agrees. It features more angular looks, somewhat like the SS and many newer vehicles. I actually like the look of the Gen III concept, although the arches over the wheels remind me of the mid 90's S-10, that I didn't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luvmySS Posted May 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 I agree that trying to compare the trucks is extremely flawed but it is inevitable since there are so few sport-type trucks on the market. I also thought their journalism was pretty lame. They were probably cramming to fill up the mag, even though most of it is advertising. God know they could have easily put an ad in it's place. I too, am biased about the look of the truck and I find it ironic that they slam the SS's look, yet 90% of the trucks they show in their mag are very similar to the style of the SS. Go figure! I think they may have inhaled too many exhaust fumes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOHRTBT Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 Not a good comparison at all..Apples and Oranges. My buddy has one bone stock and has run a best of 13.3 in his L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsen Posted May 28, 2003 Report Share Posted May 28, 2003 One thing I found odd, was there ideas about the styling of the two trucks. They thought the SS's styling was "dated" and the Lightning's more "up to date". I suppose I am biased, but I have thought just the opposite. I think the rounded 90's style of the Lightning is dated. i could't agree more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.