Yep, that's what they're saying: drive it at maximum speed and it'll take off!

 

I went over 140mph in my 1st gen. Felt perfectly stable. Lowered suspension, Koni's, urethane bushes, good wheel alignment and rear spoiler.

Someone on these forums has seen 200mph in his turbo 1st gen. Completely stock body, stock steering and modded suspension. Seems pretty stable to me.

 

That would be RICE RACING. Has anyone seen him lately?

 

I think that the sloppy recirc-ball steering makes the frontend feel light. I look forward to installing the CP Rack 'n pinion.

B

 

OK, I would have to see that to believe it!

 

This thread has alot of good info onit. I like it

 

It's not that hard to believe. It just takes some hp (around 500hp in this case), the right gearing, enough rpm and a bloody long stretch of road. Anyway, data-logs don't lie.

 

The recirc-ball steering has ****-all to do with the front end feeling light.

The issue is how much aerodynamic lift there is. Practically all cars have lift, not downforce.

Hmm where is the lift coming from... well, on the ol '80, I've noticed that at speed, the air pressure under the hood was sufficient to bend the rear corners of the hood up a half inch or so. Where's that air pressure coming from? Well, there's a *lotta* air going through the radiator and oil cooler, and it piles up underhood. High pressure under the hood, low pressure above the hood (high speed air, read up on your Bernoulli), hmm that would seem to generate LIFT.

Now, if you want scary feeling, you shoulda tried driving my T-bird. Road hugging weight my ***, that car felt like the front tires were coming off the ground at over 75. I have also been told that the ride height as viewed from outside was markedly higher at speed than at rest. 2nd-gen Camaros have been tested to have over 400lb of lift in the front end at something like 100mph, and those cars had better aerodynamics.

Half the time I think people who whine about stability in the 1st-gen are just too used to playing video games.