|
Back to the Dakota..
On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 6/10/13 11:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 9:51 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 8:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... "BAR" wrote in message . .. The F-150 Lightening was a Porsche killer. --------------------------------------------- You're dreaming. The last year Ford built the Lightning, it had impressive performance numbers in the quarter mile, but that's not what a Porsche is all about. But, for the record: 2001 Ford F-150 Lightning 0-60 mph 5.1 Quarter mile 13.7 2001 Porsche 911 Turbo 0-60 mph 3.8 Quarter mile 12.1 Now, take them off the track and onto the streets and there's no contest at all. The Porsche will surefoot around corners and bends in the road that would cause the Lightning to climb up a tree. I had a 2001 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Finest engineered car I've ever driven, and I've had a few. Load the Porsche full of gravel and go up a steep dirt road and see which one prevails! No one would load either vehicle up with gravel. The Lightning was a pick-me-up truck in name only, far too fancy for the workaday world. I took a Lightning out for a demo when I decided to trade in my SplashTruck. In those days, it didn't even have the tow capacity of the "regular" F150, which is what I ended up getting. Oh, and if memory serves, the Lighting had much lower ground clearance than the regular F150, too. Loaded with gravel and going up a steep bumpy dirt road would have been death for that truck. Not true at all, the Lighting was a damned good combo work/play truck, and the "ground clearance" was not much different than any F-150. It was lowered only one inch from a base 150. Towing is about the same as the base 150 as well. Since you have no idea what F150 I bought and probably not the model year, either, your claims are not applicable. When I was shopping for a new "full size" pickup, the Lightning did not match up to the towing or height specifications of the F150 I bought. Period. Sure they are "applicable". The Lightning was lowered 1", show me different. As for towing, a towing package was available for the Lightning just as it was for a standard 150. Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. |
Back to the Dakota..
In article ,
says... On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 11:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 9:51 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 8:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... "BAR" wrote in message . .. The F-150 Lightening was a Porsche killer. --------------------------------------------- You're dreaming. The last year Ford built the Lightning, it had impressive performance numbers in the quarter mile, but that's not what a Porsche is all about. But, for the record: 2001 Ford F-150 Lightning 0-60 mph 5.1 Quarter mile 13.7 2001 Porsche 911 Turbo 0-60 mph 3.8 Quarter mile 12.1 Now, take them off the track and onto the streets and there's no contest at all. The Porsche will surefoot around corners and bends in the road that would cause the Lightning to climb up a tree. I had a 2001 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Finest engineered car I've ever driven, and I've had a few. Load the Porsche full of gravel and go up a steep dirt road and see which one prevails! No one would load either vehicle up with gravel. The Lightning was a pick-me-up truck in name only, far too fancy for the workaday world. I took a Lightning out for a demo when I decided to trade in my SplashTruck. In those days, it didn't even have the tow capacity of the "regular" F150, which is what I ended up getting. Oh, and if memory serves, the Lighting had much lower ground clearance than the regular F150, too. Loaded with gravel and going up a steep bumpy dirt road would have been death for that truck. Not true at all, the Lighting was a damned good combo work/play truck, and the "ground clearance" was not much different than any F-150. It was lowered only one inch from a base 150. Towing is about the same as the base 150 as well. Since you have no idea what F150 I bought and probably not the model year, either, your claims are not applicable. When I was shopping for a new "full size" pickup, the Lightning did not match up to the towing or height specifications of the F150 I bought. Period. Sure they are "applicable". The Lightning was lowered 1", show me different. As for towing, a towing package was available for the Lightning just as it was for a standard 150. Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. Yes, everyone knows, you're never wrong, even when you're wrong. |
Back to the Dakota..
On 6/10/13 1:18 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 11:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 9:51 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 8:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... "BAR" wrote in message . .. The F-150 Lightening was a Porsche killer. --------------------------------------------- You're dreaming. The last year Ford built the Lightning, it had impressive performance numbers in the quarter mile, but that's not what a Porsche is all about. But, for the record: 2001 Ford F-150 Lightning 0-60 mph 5.1 Quarter mile 13.7 2001 Porsche 911 Turbo 0-60 mph 3.8 Quarter mile 12.1 Now, take them off the track and onto the streets and there's no contest at all. The Porsche will surefoot around corners and bends in the road that would cause the Lightning to climb up a tree. I had a 2001 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Finest engineered car I've ever driven, and I've had a few. Load the Porsche full of gravel and go up a steep dirt road and see which one prevails! No one would load either vehicle up with gravel. The Lightning was a pick-me-up truck in name only, far too fancy for the workaday world. I took a Lightning out for a demo when I decided to trade in my SplashTruck. In those days, it didn't even have the tow capacity of the "regular" F150, which is what I ended up getting. Oh, and if memory serves, the Lighting had much lower ground clearance than the regular F150, too. Loaded with gravel and going up a steep bumpy dirt road would have been death for that truck. Not true at all, the Lighting was a damned good combo work/play truck, and the "ground clearance" was not much different than any F-150. It was lowered only one inch from a base 150. Towing is about the same as the base 150 as well. Since you have no idea what F150 I bought and probably not the model year, either, your claims are not applicable. When I was shopping for a new "full size" pickup, the Lightning did not match up to the towing or height specifications of the F150 I bought. Period. Sure they are "applicable". The Lightning was lowered 1", show me different. As for towing, a towing package was available for the Lightning just as it was for a standard 150. Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. Yes, everyone knows, you're never wrong, even when you're wrong. Absurd, and I'm not the one here who gets into endless arguments with Greg...you are. |
Back to the Dakota..
On Monday, 10 June 2013 14:37:15 UTC-3, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:23:49 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote: Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. No dog in this fight This is my idea of an F-150 and Porsche drivers feared me. At least they would not cut me off ;-) http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg Those old pickups sure look puny compared to new models. We saw an early Tundra (T 100 ??)yesterday and it doesn't look as capable as a new Tacoma. |
Back to the Dakota..
On 6/10/2013 1:54 PM, True North wrote:
On Monday, 10 June 2013 14:37:15 UTC-3, wrote: On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:23:49 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote: Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. No dog in this fight This is my idea of an F-150 and Porsche drivers feared me. At least they would not cut me off ;-) http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg Those old pickups sure look puny compared to new models. We saw an early Tundra (T 100 ??)yesterday and it doesn't look as capable as a new Tacoma. Yeah, cracks me up... I see these guys with stock trucks a couple feet off the ground.. It's not like they are going off road, it's like the modern version of the red convertible wee wee machine:) |
Back to the Dakota..
On 6/10/13 2:08 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 6/10/2013 1:54 PM, True North wrote: On Monday, 10 June 2013 14:37:15 UTC-3, wrote: On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:23:49 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote: Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. No dog in this fight This is my idea of an F-150 and Porsche drivers feared me. At least they would not cut me off ;-) http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg Those old pickups sure look puny compared to new models. We saw an early Tundra (T 100 ??)yesterday and it doesn't look as capable as a new Tacoma. Yeah, cracks me up... I see these guys with stock trucks a couple feet off the ground.. It's not like they are going off road, it's like the modern version of the red convertible wee wee machine:) If memory serves, the F150 I had was a '97 and it was a competent truck. I traded it in in 2001 for the Tundra that came out right after the T100. The Tundra was far better than the Ford in terms of fit and finish, a seemingly world of difference. |
Back to the Dakota..
In article ,
says... On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:23:49 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote: Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. No dog in this fight This is my idea of an F-150 and Porsche drivers feared me. At least they would not cut me off ;-) http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg That's a good old truck. |
Back to the Dakota..
On Monday, June 10, 2013 8:40:05 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... With someone more skilled than I am driving it, my motorcycle will blow the doors off that Ford truck in 0-60 and in the quarter mile and again, with the right driver, leave that 911 Turbo you had behind, too. But...not me with driving. Only in a straight line. A car has more grip in the corners, and has the advantage on the track. You have to turn sooner or later. Wait, are you saying that a car will out corner a motorcycle? Yes! Not true, the reason being, you are right in thinking because of the amount of tire contact a car has does give it a greater friction coefficient, you also have mass to deal with, and simply physics will tell you that a given mass wants to stay in a straight line, and that mass is MUCH greater with a car. It's a centrifugal force thing! So, all in all, they are closer to equal than anything. Motorcycle has less contact patch, but also less mass. There must be some reason that nearly every track record is held by a 4 wheeled vehicle. Much greater traction coupled with aerodynamic down force the bike doesn't have. Nah, you're probably right, they're equal. |
Back to the Dakota..
In article ,
says... On 6/10/13 1:18 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 11:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 9:51 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 6/10/13 8:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... "BAR" wrote in message . .. The F-150 Lightening was a Porsche killer. --------------------------------------------- You're dreaming. The last year Ford built the Lightning, it had impressive performance numbers in the quarter mile, but that's not what a Porsche is all about. But, for the record: 2001 Ford F-150 Lightning 0-60 mph 5.1 Quarter mile 13.7 2001 Porsche 911 Turbo 0-60 mph 3.8 Quarter mile 12.1 Now, take them off the track and onto the streets and there's no contest at all. The Porsche will surefoot around corners and bends in the road that would cause the Lightning to climb up a tree. I had a 2001 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Finest engineered car I've ever driven, and I've had a few. Load the Porsche full of gravel and go up a steep dirt road and see which one prevails! No one would load either vehicle up with gravel. The Lightning was a pick-me-up truck in name only, far too fancy for the workaday world. I took a Lightning out for a demo when I decided to trade in my SplashTruck. In those days, it didn't even have the tow capacity of the "regular" F150, which is what I ended up getting. Oh, and if memory serves, the Lighting had much lower ground clearance than the regular F150, too. Loaded with gravel and going up a steep bumpy dirt road would have been death for that truck. Not true at all, the Lighting was a damned good combo work/play truck, and the "ground clearance" was not much different than any F-150. It was lowered only one inch from a base 150. Towing is about the same as the base 150 as well. Since you have no idea what F150 I bought and probably not the model year, either, your claims are not applicable. When I was shopping for a new "full size" pickup, the Lightning did not match up to the towing or height specifications of the F150 I bought. Period. Sure they are "applicable". The Lightning was lowered 1", show me different. As for towing, a towing package was available for the Lightning just as it was for a standard 150. Sorry, I have no interest in getting into anything like a Greg-Iboaterererer 300-post debate that never reaches a conclusion. Right....... Right. Absolutely right. Perhaps you can intrigue Greg with this discussion and get back to me a few hundred posts later. Yes, everyone knows, you're never wrong, even when you're wrong. Absurd, and I'm not the one here who gets into endless arguments with Greg...you are. Gee, can't seem to stay on the topic, eh? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:52 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com