fast and furious
06-25-2006, 10:49 PM
#11
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 45
RE: fast and furious
ORIGINAL: C~RA!
I thought it was an awesome movie. I have seen it three times. The skyline engine in the mustang was wierd. I don't even think it would fit and the pipe they put on the stang was stupid and way to ricey for the stang. The drifting was awesome and it had some what of a plot. I think it was an awesome movie. The RX-7 with the wide body kit was pretty sick (Han's car)
I thought it was an awesome movie. I have seen it three times. The skyline engine in the mustang was wierd. I don't even think it would fit and the pipe they put on the stang was stupid and way to ricey for the stang. The drifting was awesome and it had some what of a plot. I think it was an awesome movie. The RX-7 with the wide body kit was pretty sick (Han's car)
That was another 350z, that han was driving. That big orange and black bodykit was a veilside. The girl drove an rx7.
06-26-2006, 12:42 AM
#12
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,287
RE: fast and furious
ORIGINAL: C~RA!
I thought it was an awesome movie. I have seen it three times. The skyline engine in the mustang was wierd. I don't even think it would fit and the pipe they put on the stang was stupid and way to ricey for the stang. The drifting was awesome and it had some what of a plot. I think it was an awesome movie. The RX-7 with the wide body kit was pretty sick (Han's car)
I thought it was an awesome movie. I have seen it three times. The skyline engine in the mustang was wierd. I don't even think it would fit and the pipe they put on the stang was stupid and way to ricey for the stang. The drifting was awesome and it had some what of a plot. I think it was an awesome movie. The RX-7 with the wide body kit was pretty sick (Han's car)
06-27-2006, 11:59 PM
#15
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 9
RE: fast and furious
A well built small block like the 289 or 302 would beat the hell out a ricer they are both high revving engines. A 289 was what powered the original GT 40's in the 60's that was beating Ferrari's,Porches, and other european cars in 24 hr races. Just my opinion.
06-29-2006, 11:14 PM
#16
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 28
RE: fast and furious
ORIGINAL: TM04Stang
A well built small block like the 289 or 302 would beat the hell out a ricer they are both high revving engines. A 289 was what powered the original GT 40's in the 60's that was beating Ferrari's,Porches, and other european cars in 24 hr races. Just my opinion.
A well built small block like the 289 or 302 would beat the hell out a ricer they are both high revving engines. A 289 was what powered the original GT 40's in the 60's that was beating Ferrari's,Porches, and other european cars in 24 hr races. Just my opinion.
07-10-2006, 04:04 PM
#19
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,541
RE: fast and furious
Although putting a Skyline(RB26DETT) motor in a mustang is just bad taste, it is a awesome motor. Its the LS1 of japan. Pretty stout bottm end too. Stock bottom ends in those cars easily handle 700 hp.
07-13-2006, 11:54 PM
#20
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: California, Los angeles
Posts: 700
RE: fast and furious
Hey guyz those of you who HAVE NOT seen the movie yet...
I thought id NEVER say this but...
it ROCKED! great movie you car enthusiasts should all see it. THe action and the cinematography is amazing. Im all american muslce guyz and trust me i thought same.
my gf dragged me into it lol...
I LOVED THE MOVIE!
I thought id NEVER say this but...
it ROCKED! great movie you car enthusiasts should all see it. THe action and the cinematography is amazing. Im all american muslce guyz and trust me i thought same.
my gf dragged me into it lol...
I LOVED THE MOVIE!