The comments about how crappy the LT1 was are pretty funny. The Ram Air Firebird’s 305 horsepower doesn’t sound so bad in an era where the base Porsche 911 had 270 HP and the Supra Turbo had 320 HP. That’s what was available back then. Pull up a chair young fellas and listen to an old guy that was there with both a 95 Firebird Formula and an 87 Buick GN.
It was so frustrating watching that guy drive that trans am. There is no way that accord should beat that trans am at any of those competition with even a mediocre driver. He was even scares to go through the slalom !!!
@@TheMrLebaron Lol what ? No its not. The accord is way slower on paper. Those LT1 f-bodies run high 13's out of the box and the Accord is barely in the 15's. Rerun this with any other driver in the TA.
My 89 gta had a stroked 350 and tall gears. When guys wanted to race I said sure, from here to the next town. It was quick light to light, but way better suited to actual highway driving. Back then, the mustang with the 302 was the main competition but couldn't take curves as fast. The Cadillac with the north star was the sleeper that would always shock the kids who thought they had a quick ride. Integras and civics were always up for a race. Miss those days.
My cousin had the Camaro SS SLP pack version of this car back in the late 90s. Routinely ran low 13s , usually 13.3s. I know they are at elevation and on a runway but that Trans am, if it doesn’t have 200k miles should walk the Accord.
@@dnegel9546The Ls1 is the engine, made by Chevrolet. It is the same engine in both the Pontiac Trans Am and the Chevrolet Camaro. Both cars are from General Motors.
@@dnegel9546 ahh ok, I don't know the engine nomenclature per year. Just that they are engines 😂. I had an '87 IROC Z with the 350 tpi, it was lots of fun.
@@greg0063 Yeah, that was the first generation with the center-bolt heads. Then came the "Vortec" (L31), then LT1/LT4, and then the dawn of the LS engines. The Camaros and Firebirds had the LT engines from '93-'97. In '98 they switched to the LS.
I still think GM made a mistake getting rid of them. Cause they were close to becoming bankrupt so they dropped few brands. Pontiac was ahead of its time for many features; heads up display for example was offered on top trim of 2000 Grand Prix and Pontiac Aztek.
Wrong body style Trans Am commercial! The Trans Am in the comercial is the 1998-2002 WS6 Trans Am with around 320 HP LS engine with 4 headlights, not the 1993-1997 2 headlights Trans Am 275-285 HP LT1 engine (305 with SLP ram air) you have. Both are 4 gen but the LS engine car is quicker! 😉
I owned a 1993 Pontiac trans am V8 new back in the day and ran low 14s on the track every time. Never did my car run a 16 plus quarter mile. My shifts were smooth and fast.
Da has alot to do with it man. You're not running 2 seconds faster because you shift faster lol. This is mostly about them being a mile above sea level people just don't realize how much that matters. They didn't get new tires or tune up the camaro and the dude driving it was asleep at the line. This is essentially a Honda commercial don't think too deeply into it we know most well running well driven lt1s are gonna best new accords like this one.
No shit. I know the elevation matters but even the 275 HP 1994 and up LT1 Z 28s and Trans ams ran high 13s with drag radials in the Detroit area, 600 ft above sea level. My 96 standard cab 2 WD L31 (vortec 350) ran 15.40s with 255 HP. I never drove a car a mile above sea level. That would be interesting to see how much it kills performance. Regardless, the Poncho is just way cooler even if it was a tad slower.
@wrotenwasp it's not just elevation it's the da. Da isn't only factored in by elevation. Btw 600 ft is nothing man if your da was 600 that is pretty damn good da. It's 2000 where I run at and even that is nothing compared to a mile or more above sea level which is over 5000 feet. That is a very significant difference from 600 feet. The car was also on old tires and had no tune up prior. It's an old car.
Someone in my neighborhood has a last generation dark blue he parks it in front of my house and I drool over it I think the one that had the gnx motor was a cool edition too
Ok.. as a former owner of a 94 TA A4.... something seems off, perhaps elevation is truly hurting it... I ran 12.9s at 106.xx on Coopers withs 3.42 diff, SLP TC (2400 lock), 1 3/4 mid length headers and a Crane 210/224 baby cam. Stock it was a 14.5 car around 96-97 mph. This was in the Caribbean, hot and humid. And Fbods were NOT boats! They dominated SOLO racing if I recall right. Mine had Bilstein HDs and full BMR suspension on a 275 square setup. Some people put 315s in the back. The panhard design was so good Ford used it on the 2005 redesign.
@ThePhoenixw68 Optispark is amazing when it works which if you do the bulletproofing mods is always. But yea somethings up with that TA but I'm betting on driver being an issue.
Those old LT1 if the optispark is bad would really run crappy ...plus 5k feet definitely hurts performance. My Lt1 would beat or hang with Ls1 till about 75mph then the Ls1 start to pull away. Missed that car it was fun.
Interesting to say the least. I have a 2023 touring hybrid. I bought the car 7 weeks ago 3/10/23. Freaking unbelievable car. 11,000 miles on it already because I am a courier and go all over the Midwest. I've driven both of these cars. Honda is WAY more fun. And the hybrid system is very quick. Not to mention way higher than the epa mpg estimates. So what you muscle car guys have to understand is the engineering that this car possesses. It is next level and then some. 247 lb ft of torque. You'll never regret buying a Honda accord! The best car easily. You get performance and economy and luxury in an accord.
I am buying a Sport-L and managed to nab one at $1600 under MSRP, which I am told is dealer invoice price. I wouldn't say the Honda is exactly excellent at anything, but for under $34k I'll take it!
@@user-3tf67bk46u All the reviews for the 2023 model specifically stated how much more comfortable the seats are, especially on longer drives. So hopefully they rectified that issue. I won't have mine for about a month, but the seats were definitely comfortable for me.
Altitude sapping power on the Bird and EV torque for the Honda. Unless the tires on the Bird are junk and/or he just roasts the tires, it should still be quicker at a lower elevation.
I owned a GEN 4 F-Body and back in the day braking was tested several times by the big auto magazines of the day and braking when new from 60mph-0 was well documented at 112 feet which was 911 territory at that time. 130+ feet seems excessive or brake performance/tire quality obviously diminished. Even still the Accord would have beat it in this test. Interesting vid even if a sales pitch for the new Gen11 Accord.
The car has 15 year old tires and runs awful lol these guys ignore all the comments about how unsafe and stupid it is to not tune up a vehicle and run tires 4 presidental terms old. The trans am with a tune up and tires would perform MUCH better
That should have been 75 centi-seconds, which nobody says anyway. Cool race though, times have changed for sure, and with EV vehicles, they're all set to destroy race times of all ICE cars in the future.
I think my '21 Accord Sport 2.0 would be a better race. 0-60 in about 5.4 and the 1/4 in about 13.9. Not bad for a definitely underated 252hp car. Closer to 280... And 25 mpg combined.
I agree, but the old schools are still way better and more interesting to drive because they were lighter. Plus, design wise had more character and uniqueness to them. Newer cars are nothing, but computers with 4 wheels relying on tech to try to impress the driver, instead of being a pure driving machine.
@Victor Martinez I have a manual ‘99 Camaro with the 5 speed just the V6 though and just bought a ‘99 Trans Am too but it’s auto sadly I wish it had the T56 :(
I love this old versus new series. These are the type of matchups I want channels like carwow to have more. It really shows the progress in performance.
I want to see a Camaro 2000 SS vs a 2020 SS, or at least something with the same badge 20ish years apart. The different generation V6s might be an even bigger disparity.
It’s a silly comparison. One is a driver’s car from 30 years ago. The other is basic transportation. Are they trying to sell that the Accord is a hot rod or something? What would have been a cool comparison would be the Trans Am and a new Camaro. Two muscle cars that are driver’s cars. There is nothing exciting about a Honda Accord.
@@lennygarrison6836 forgot the 2023's were hybrid but the point still stands. A pure NA motor is at a major disadvantage vs a hybrid or forced induction assisted motor at that altitude.
@@ROBMACDUI You’re smoking something good if you think the accord would stand a chance with a driver mod. It barely beat him despite having the reaction time of a turtle and being a mile above sea level…
Did you guys get new tires for the trans am? If I recall, in the video where they brought it in for inspection, the tires were from 2010. That makes a huge difference in braking and dig races.
I agree, there is something very off on this. Just looking at a dead stop to 60 the T/A should be around 5.6 to 6.0 seconds. The new accord is nowhere near that, so the T/A should have been much stronger off the line and beyond. Those 1/4 times were more in line with my old '93 Plymouth Duster V6 manual at 8.3 0-60 and 16.4 @ 83 mph in the quarter.
It's kind of weird cause I own a fk8 and my 97 Trans Ams ws6 is faster in the 1/4 mile ( both stock ). But of course, the fk8 is better in everything else.
Now imagine if that accord was the 2.0t ,this was just a base accord and it was hybrid,people hate Honda for no reason but that 2.0t is faster than any normal everyday car in the road and can hang with big boys. Facts
For handling on a '90s firebird, all the suspension bushings need to be replaced. Anti sway bar, bushings etc. Plus the shocks need to be new with good tires. It makes a huge difference having fresh nylon bushings instead of worn out rubber ones in handling.
An old friend of mine had a trans am similar to this one. I don't know which engine it had, but i remember the acceleration. It went 0-60 in about 7.5 seconds.... HOWEVER, it also probably went from 60 to 120 in another 7.5 seconds. He told me, "it's not a drag car, it's a 'running from the cops' car.
I would pick the Firebird over the boring Accord any day. At least cars had less tech back then, character, and were worth actually being driven, compared to cars of today that are nothing, but computers with 4 wheels having no soul.
Newer engines for the most part sound horrible. At least the old ones like the Firebird sounded great and used less tech making them lighter or easier to drive.
Most comments made me laugh. The message of this video is not which car is better, but how far technology advanced in the past 25-30 years. Doug Demuro in a similar way took his Mercedes E450 to drag race against an F40 and the results were impressive.
Interesting comparison. Owning a 2019 2.0 sport and a 2001 WS6 I honestly can’t say which is quickest off the line. They are quite different to drive and the accord is really fun to drive in sport mode. However, it doesn’t compare to rowing the six speed with the tops off in the TA.
I think it's been a while since you drove the firebird lol they trap 10 mph higher than a 2.0t accord. 2.0t accords are fun but they aren't even in the same league as a LS1 f body. You might make the same power with every bolt on and e85 as a bone stock LS1.
That LT1 has some sort issue going on. It’s way down on power. My family had a 97 WS6 T/A and it produced a lot quicker times than that T/A is. Heck even my old 94 Caprice 9C1 with a LT1 and 200k+ hard police use miles ran a 15.7 in the quarter.
At the now defunct Los Angeles County Raceway (LACR) my 1990 Mustang LX with a 5.0 and 5 speed ran the 1/4 mile at 15.1 seconds at a little over 91 mph. The Mustang was stock with 1,100 miles on the odometer. My 1987 Buick Regal T-Type (3.8 inter cooled turbocharged motor) ran a 14.7 ET at 94 mph. It was ran with less than 2,000 miles on the odometer. LACR was located at approximately 2,700 feet above sea level. New cars today blow the old cars away with respect to performance, and use much less fuel. However, the new cars have no personality, although they are more comfortable. Oh well. Thanks for an excellent production!
Didn’t know 5.0s were that slow. My 2003 Mustang GT is in the low 13s. Granted she has FBO and built rear end with 4.10 gears but still. Spending a little money wakes up the 4.6 pretty well.
According to the magazine’s of the day, the 5.0 LX fox body was a low 14 second car. With the 10 minute tuneup (removing the air silencer, bumping up the timing) many people got them well into the 13’s.
@@stang-rv4pb actually the weekend before I ran my then new 5.0 the magazines were out at the track and the best pass was a 15.3. The owner of the track asked me what modifications I had made. It was a new car with no mods. He was impressed. Check out the 1990 major magazines on stock Mustangs. Remember, my runs were at 2700 feet above sea level. Anyway, thanks for the comment.
@@BarryJoeBailey, I was talking about the 5.0 LX, with a 5 speed manual, not the GT. The GT was about 200 lbs heavier, and a good 1/2 second slower in the 1/4 mile. Also, the magazine’s tend to get better times then what most driver’s can achieve, as they only start recording time after one foot of rollout. Also, different tracks = different times. I owned a 5.0 LX notch back, it had no AC, crank down windows, it was a plain Jane car, but in stock form, it would walk a GT.
That trans am needs to go on a dyno. These are the same guys with the tflclassics channel and that car has been shown with a number of issues when he first bought it.
In the late 90's i rode along with a WS6 T/A driver on a road course. We had to yield to 2 Integra Type R whom we were holding up. That made me realize that handling and light weight are everything.
Less than 5% of the US population lives at an elevation that dictates such performance or lack thereof. It's very hard to get excited over knowing that your performance numbers will always be low. Good production and great energy, but the application to 95% reality is nil. One thing can be said : I still watched it, and that is what you were out to have happen. Props!
Puts it all into perspective. The truth is the Pontiac is still wayyyyy more fun which is more important than numbers unless you’re actually racing for money lol
Amazing technology. Simply adding a small electric motor to the ICE has proven to be better then a V8 or perhaps turbo, plus superior fuel economy. Great video guys.
@@raymondluna3187 commuter car vs a loaded sports car. Even with old tires the Pontiac would have a tire made for traction compared to the accords economy tires. I think your missing the whole point of the vid.
The whole hybrid thing is pretty interesting. My employer issued a 2022 Prius to me. Mostly heavy stop and City traffic getting 54mpg. The technology can also be used to go fast also, as with the new E Vette...I think something like 600hp?
@@christophersambuco9414 evs are amazing in the way they support child and slave labor just like the people that by these things but hey to each his own
@@raymondluna3187 hey whatever it takes to protect the environment just not the environment in Africa. The wealthy dont want to talk about all the pollution in africa but atleast california wealthy ppl can sleep at night knowing they are saving their environment.
Sorry guys, I call bs on this! Not saying the Honda is bad. Most new cars are on steroids with turbos to compensate for their high weight and driving prices up. But, even the much heavier '95 Buick Roadmaster with an LT-1 did top times of 6.7 to 6.9 sec 0 to 60 and around 15 sec for the 1/4 mile. The Firebird should top this if you use a better driver as we've seen here.
its a combo of shit driver ,bad tires and probably even worse maintainence .Its also funny that most people always look at displacement and fail to understand that a turbo 2.0 has more "air" inside the cylinder than a 5.7 ...but hey people these days don't know their own gender so asking from them to know the times for a Buick Roadmaster is almost crazy lol
Hardly a lump. Ram Air Firebird had 305 HP. By comparison the V8 in a Porsche 928 had a whopping 345 HP. The LT1 was entirely competitive with other V8s at the time and had more power than the Mustang.
@@holdenc3082 the Mustang is just another example of the same thing, and you're comparing it to a Porsche V8 that was, iirc, 5 liters at pique, and that they stopped making in 1991, and made 40 more horsepower. That's not competitive, my dude. Now, to be fair, the Porsche would have been a much more expensive car (relatively speaking), but, still, bad comparison.
@@jonjonzz3414 You would be wrong. The 928 and its 345 HP V8 was still being produced in 1995. It’s an entirely valid comparison that a car that costs twice as much as the Firebird only has 40 HP more. In its price range the Firebird would run with anything else at the time. The Toyota Supra turbo only had 320 HP. You seem to lack perspective on what was available back then. How about listing off some cars that cost under $50k that would outrun a Ram Air Firebird back then? I can tell you the 270 HP base model 911 from that era won’t cut it.
Old school cars are still way better than these new ones. Funny thing is many of these newer vehicles are in junkyards way more than older vehicles ironically. Which is why you still see older vehicles on the road more compared to newer rides.
I actually had that Pontiac Trans Am promo video from the intro. It was sent by GM along with a large spiral bound brochure for the Firebird. I think it was a VHS tape, probably one of the last times they ever did such a thing back in the 90s. They didn't shy away from spending money on physical marketing materials back then.
A better test would be to rebuild the brakes, not just pads and rotors but hoses, master cylinder, power booster, new tires, do a compression test on the lt1 , make sure the clutch isn’t slipping prior to the test. Then test both cars swap drivers and do it again. With the car running 94mph in the 1/4 it makes me suspect the 350 is down on power.
That makes no difference in a 3000 pound car. makes no difference on a 300 pound motorcycle if a guy weighs 100 pounds more. the bike or car will go that fast with a 16 pound spider monkey or a 260 pound dude
@@toyyoda3710 wtf are you talking about that dude weighs like 150 lbs more than tommy and that DOES make a huge difference. Lol. Why do you think most F1 drivers are like 5ft tall and weigh 90 lbs. 😂
I never once heard someone say, oh wow! A honda accord!.... The Firebird however is a differrent story. Now why do I have Jerry Reed songs stuck in my head?
Don't worry about the despicable outcome of the TA.. clearly he can't launch worth shit, my 1998 firebird was pulling mid 13 second 1/4mile times at around 108mph on regular tires with 6sp manual with only a airbox and tune at the track. And $200 Hawk HPS brake pads made a HUGE difference in stopping. Great cars that takes very little to perfect
Yup thats correct for sea-level times. He's at elevation of around 5000 feet. He really didn't launch the car well though and those tires aren't that great either.
16.19 in the quarter is NOT what a brand new Firebird Comp TA would run - go back and look up the Car and Driver stats! My stock regular (i.e. - non Ram Air) Formula would regularly run between 14.11 to 14.17 and I never flogged it like someone who didn't car if it broke - like the magazine testers did!
The comments about how crappy the LT1 was are pretty funny. The Ram Air Firebird’s 305 horsepower doesn’t sound so bad in an era where the base Porsche 911 had 270 HP and the Supra Turbo had 320 HP. That’s what was available back then. Pull up a chair young fellas and listen to an old guy that was there with both a 95 Firebird Formula and an 87 Buick GN.
I rather have the old school engines than these new crappy unreliable ones. They also sounded the best back in the day also.
@@CB12345 I am disappointed in the New accord, CVT only, are you kidding me
Hell a 1978 Camaro Z28 had like 178 hp.
Grand national
These guys just can’t drive, or this LT1 needs an Optispark/Tuneup.
With a reaction time like that... you could put him in a GTR and the accord would get him off the line.🐢
That was my thought but you said it much better.
No kidding right!
Yes he’s definitely a “leave on green” guy at the track lol.
💯 these guys both suck at driving/racing. They haven’t shown what a LT1 can really do.
My 2003 Mustang GT with less hp does WAY better at 13.4 1/4 mile.
Idk how TFL gets such bad times!
Maybe if the T/A didn’t wait an hour to launch , it’d be closer.
Yeah, the guy in trans am took off nearly 2 seconds late. 🤣 Bad reaction time...
The Pontiac needs a driver mod.
Pathetic launch
Agree…
Came here to say the same
That bloke couldn't drive a greasy stick up a fat Labradors arse.
I think he started his roll in 2nd gear too. 😂.
That driver in the Firebird needs lessons from my grandmother on how to race 😅😅😅😅
😂😂😂
😮
I can beat a Lambo with my Honda Fit. I only require the Pontiac guy to be my opponent. 😂
Beat a lambo with a Honda Fit!?!?!?!?!? Want to see Video Proof of that.......
Yeah he can’t drive
@@lancetheb.m.c someone missed the joke...lol
@@rotelfan2000 Woosh!
Hey i own a 13 fit sport and i fear no lambo.....in sharp turns!😅
Race starts @ 2:51
Thanks!
Hero
Not all heroes wear capes 👍
Thank you jesus
Thanks bro all that damn talking and no action 💪🏾💯
As a life-long TA owner/driver, I'm calling for a Driver Mod!
Even on paper the Accord is slightly faster
Yeshh need a new driver
Either the Accord jumped or the Firebird driver waited to take off. Rematch to be fair.
It was so frustrating watching that guy drive that trans am. There is no way that accord should beat that trans am at any of those competition with even a mediocre driver. He was even scares to go through the slalom !!!
@@TheMrLebaron Lol what ? No its not. The accord is way slower on paper. Those LT1 f-bodies run high 13's out of the box and the Accord is barely in the 15's. Rerun this with any other driver in the TA.
Brendan is definitely a “leave on green” guy at the drag strip lol. His reaction time would have had 4 numbers in it lol.
Yep he sucks.
Yeah that was a terrible launch too, did he rev it up or leave off idle?
His RT is like a 60' time 😂😂
@@redghost5773 🤣🤣. Absolutely. I had a 1.27 60’ this weekend. Would have been close race there lol.
Re-run that first race!!!!! One time? the Trans was sleeping
They are soooo lame
Honda masterd vtec just a lil late to the game🤣
Driver swap
These guys don’t know how to drive/race. This TA should’ve never lost to their L98 C4 Vette in the other video.
He didn't even load it up, started at 1,000 rpm's. Looked like he wasn't even trying.
My 89 gta had a stroked 350 and tall gears. When guys wanted to race I said sure, from here to the next town. It was quick light to light, but way better suited to actual highway driving. Back then, the mustang with the 302 was the main competition but couldn't take curves as fast. The Cadillac with the north star was the sleeper that would always shock the kids who thought they had a quick ride. Integras and civics were always up for a race. Miss those days.
Same with my '88 GTA back in the day, never had a shitstang outrun me
Oh man the memories! He’s lucky it wasn’t an LS1 😂
WS6 Trans Am is a best
Would have been a decent race
@@redghost5773 “Decent race?” Lol
@@redghost5773 wtf?! Hahahahahaha!
I have an LS1 T/A that runs 13.40 1/4
My cousin had the Camaro SS SLP pack version of this car back in the late 90s. Routinely ran low 13s , usually 13.3s. I know they are at elevation and on a runway but that Trans am, if it doesn’t have 200k miles should walk the Accord.
So a ls1 camaro ?
@@dnegel9546The Ls1 is the engine, made by Chevrolet. It is the same engine in both the Pontiac Trans Am and the Chevrolet Camaro. Both cars are from General Motors.
@@greg0063 mmm i know that but the op seems to be talking about a LS1 camaro/firebird. But the fbody in the video is a LT1.
@@dnegel9546 ahh ok, I don't know the engine nomenclature per year. Just that they are engines 😂. I had an '87 IROC Z with the 350 tpi, it was lots of fun.
@@greg0063 Yeah, that was the first generation with the center-bolt heads. Then came the "Vortec" (L31), then LT1/LT4, and then the dawn of the LS engines. The Camaros and Firebirds had the LT engines from '93-'97. In '98 they switched to the LS.
Buy new tires for the TA! Check fluids and do a tune up to be fair and see what happens. Pontiac forever!
I still think GM made a mistake getting rid of them. Cause they were close to becoming bankrupt so they dropped few brands.
Pontiac was ahead of its time for many features; heads up display for example was offered on top trim of 2000 Grand Prix and Pontiac Aztek.
Forever!
pontiacs r great!
Wrong body style Trans Am commercial! The Trans Am in the comercial is the 1998-2002 WS6 Trans Am with around 320 HP LS engine with 4 headlights, not the 1993-1997 2 headlights Trans Am 275-285 HP LT1 engine (305 with SLP ram air) you have. Both are 4 gen but the LS engine car is quicker! 😉
BINGO
Next time try a 1999 - 2002 model Trans Am with the LS1 :)
Or a mid 90s 4 cyl Accord.
They do have the c5, it's an auto though so it would really benefit with a high stall torque converter and drag radials.
Just when I thought there couldn't be a worse driver than Tommy, Brendan proves me wrong 😅
Get some better tires and a better driver for that Pontiac. A lighter 300 HP car should not loose to a 200 HP heavier car.
I owned a 1993 Pontiac trans am V8 new back in the day and ran low 14s on the track every time. Never did my car run a 16 plus quarter mile. My shifts were smooth and fast.
Da has alot to do with it man. You're not running 2 seconds faster because you shift faster lol. This is mostly about them being a mile above sea level people just don't realize how much that matters. They didn't get new tires or tune up the camaro and the dude driving it was asleep at the line. This is essentially a Honda commercial don't think too deeply into it we know most well running well driven lt1s are gonna best new accords like this one.
No shit. I know the elevation matters but even the 275 HP 1994 and up LT1 Z 28s and Trans ams ran high 13s with drag radials in the Detroit area, 600 ft above sea level. My 96 standard cab 2 WD L31 (vortec 350) ran 15.40s with 255 HP. I never drove a car a mile above sea level. That would be interesting to see how much it kills performance. Regardless, the Poncho is just way cooler even if it was a tad slower.
@wrotenwasp it's not just elevation it's the da. Da isn't only factored in by elevation. Btw 600 ft is nothing man if your da was 600 that is pretty damn good da. It's 2000 where I run at and even that is nothing compared to a mile or more above sea level which is over 5000 feet. That is a very significant difference from 600 feet. The car was also on old tires and had no tune up prior. It's an old car.
Same here. Had a 95 formula and would run 14.01 in the quarter.
Firebird: Revs engine V8 Thunder
Accord: Revs engine “Propulsion system optimized for maximum output”
My favourite Trans Am growing up was the 90’s Fire Hawk.
Someone in my neighborhood has a last generation dark blue he parks it in front of my house and I drool over it I think the one that had the gnx motor was a cool edition too
The world's slowest V8 Trans Am, that's being driven by the world's slowest reacting driver vs everything in the TFL stable....excellent.
Do u even own a trans am? :/
Ok.. as a former owner of a 94 TA A4.... something seems off, perhaps elevation is truly hurting it... I ran 12.9s at 106.xx on Coopers withs 3.42 diff, SLP TC (2400 lock), 1 3/4 mid length headers and a Crane 210/224 baby cam. Stock it was a 14.5 car around 96-97 mph. This was in the Caribbean, hot and humid.
And Fbods were NOT boats! They dominated SOLO racing if I recall right. Mine had Bilstein HDs and full BMR suspension on a 275 square setup. Some people put 315s in the back. The panhard design was so good Ford used it on the 2005 redesign.
I think if the TA had a LS1 it would be a different story
He purposely sandbagged it or it has firing issues due to the crappy optispark. A TA doesnt run 16 sec quarter miles.
If the Lt1 had a different driver this would be a diff story
@ThePhoenixw68 Optispark is amazing when it works which if you do the bulletproofing mods is always. But yea somethings up with that TA but I'm betting on driver being an issue.
Those old LT1 if the optispark is bad would really run crappy ...plus 5k feet definitely hurts performance. My Lt1 would beat or hang with Ls1 till about 75mph then the Ls1 start to pull away. Missed that car it was fun.
Samse power and torque
"No one is cross shopping a 95 trans am with a brand new accord hybrid" *slowly raises hand*
Same. Among my vehicles are a Prius and a brand new 6.2L Camaro LOL
I was cross shopping a 2018+5.0 stang with my 2.0T accord lmao
Interesting to say the least. I have a 2023 touring hybrid. I bought the car 7 weeks ago 3/10/23.
Freaking unbelievable car. 11,000 miles on it already because I am a courier and go all over the Midwest.
I've driven both of these cars. Honda is WAY more fun. And the hybrid system is very quick. Not to mention way higher than the epa mpg estimates. So what you muscle car guys have to understand is the engineering that this car possesses. It is next level and then some. 247 lb ft of torque. You'll never regret buying a Honda accord! The best car easily. You get performance and economy and luxury in an accord.
I am buying a Sport-L and managed to nab one at $1600 under MSRP, which I am told is dealer invoice price. I wouldn't say the Honda is exactly excellent at anything, but for under $34k I'll take it!
@@user-3tf67bk46u All the reviews for the 2023 model specifically stated how much more comfortable the seats are, especially on longer drives. So hopefully they rectified that issue. I won't have mine for about a month, but the seats were definitely comfortable for me.
@@user-3tf67bk46u 👍
Not a fast Accord, A slow Trans AM
Mostly the driver
I would’ve smoked the trans am in my mustang GT with way less hp. Driver mod desperately needed lol.
Altitude sapping power on the Bird and EV torque for the Honda. Unless the tires on the Bird are junk and/or he just roasts the tires, it should still be quicker at a lower elevation.
I owned a GEN 4 F-Body and back in the day braking was tested several times by the big auto magazines of the day and braking when new from 60mph-0 was well documented at 112 feet which was 911 territory at that time. 130+ feet seems excessive or brake performance/tire quality obviously diminished. Even still the Accord would have beat it in this test. Interesting vid even if a sales pitch for the new Gen11 Accord.
I'm disappointed in the New accord
The car has 15 year old tires and runs awful lol these guys ignore all the comments about how unsafe and stupid it is to not tune up a vehicle and run tires 4 presidental terms old. The trans am with a tune up and tires would perform MUCH better
I don't think the pontiac started to brake quite on time.
No matter what they say it's no 2.0t honda can pay whoever to tell me it's fast but I'll keep my 2.0T forever like the boomer zoomer I am.
The C5 Z06 has a 60-0 of 99 feet, 5 feet short of the Honda. That's actually pretty impressive for a family car.
Trans am started a whole second later 😂
Why not use the 2002 TA WS6 RamAir ? This 1995 year Trans Am was so much slower than the 2002 WS6.
I love all of you guys I'm just going to say the transam needed a driver mod.
I call fowl Brenden has 100 Lbs on Tommy easily! 😮
I didn't think the old bird still had the horsepowers lol. Good job old girl 👏
This was a cool comparison. One correction is that the stop watch time is in 10ms increments not 1ms. So it's actually 750ms not 75ms.
That should have been 75 centi-seconds, which nobody says anyway.
Cool race though, times have changed for sure, and with EV vehicles, they're all set to destroy race times of all ICE cars in the future.
I tried to correct them on that and they deleted my comment. They don't like constructive criticism. ✌
Also not 130.5 ft it's 130ft and 5 inches. These guys can't measure let alone change the tires on the transam.
I think my '21 Accord Sport 2.0 would be a better race. 0-60 in about 5.4 and the 1/4 in about 13.9. Not bad for a definitely underated 252hp car. Closer to 280... And 25 mpg combined.
Also own a 10th Gen 2.0T…very underrated car and have surprised many with it’s performance
That's impressive.
What mph with that 13.9? Since et is indictive of traction.
Flash pro, bolt ons and e85. It becomes a completely different car
Them v6 accords are shockingly quick. I couldn’t pull away from one. 😂
Not surprising, most vehicles today could beat that 80’s tech!
I agree, but the old schools are still way better and more interesting to drive because they were lighter. Plus, design wise had more character and uniqueness to them. Newer cars are nothing, but computers with 4 wheels relying on tech to try to impress the driver, instead of being a pure driving machine.
@@CB12345 Better? Oh hell no. Interesting, I'll give you that.
My uncle had a v6 firebird. Even tho they are slow by today's standards, to me they were always insanely cool.
It definitely falls in the "extremely lame but incredibly cool" category
F body cars still perform well even to today’s standards. They were ahead of their time.
@Victor Martinez I have a manual ‘99 Camaro with the 5 speed just the V6 though and just bought a ‘99 Trans Am too but it’s auto sadly I wish it had the T56 :(
F-bodies perform well to a modern standard? There are MINIVANS with 300 hp these days!
@@warbuzzard7167 Okay yeah but they always weigh way more and you aren’t even factoring in torque so what’s your point ?
Should've been a 98 Trans AM with the LS1. I love the V8 though. It has more curb appeal than that damn accord.
I love this old versus new series. These are the type of matchups I want channels like carwow to have more. It really shows the progress in performance.
I want to see a Camaro 2000 SS vs a 2020 SS, or at least something with the same badge 20ish years apart. The different generation V6s might be an even bigger disparity.
carwow has better drivers as well
I still like the Pontiac more. I just LOVE the styling of those firebirds. Pure muscle.
I’m a die hard Honda fan and I still like Pontiac better
Only fair to bring out a 1996 Accord, this is comparing apples to oranges.
It’s a silly comparison. One is a driver’s car from 30 years ago. The other is basic transportation. Are they trying to sell that the Accord is a hot rod or something? What would have been a cool comparison would be the Trans Am and a new Camaro. Two muscle cars that are driver’s cars. There is nothing exciting about a Honda Accord.
Now race the Accord Sport 2.0T against the new Accord.
Honda messed those cars up by dropping the 2.0 turbo engine. The 2.0 was pretty quick for what it was.
No they didn't fool, the way it is now is perfect
Yeah who doesn’t like a car that’s slower than the model it replaced?
Now race the older 2.0 accord
Old tired NA motor vs fresh turbo motor at high altitude..
Who had the fresh turbo motor?
@@lennygarrison6836 forgot the 2023's were hybrid but the point still stands. A pure NA motor is at a major disadvantage vs a hybrid or forced induction assisted motor at that altitude.
Old tired Na performance motor vs economy hybrid. Lol
@@ROBMACDUI You’re smoking something good if you think the accord would stand a chance with a driver mod. It barely beat him despite having the reaction time of a turtle and being a mile above sea level…
Did you guys get new tires for the trans am? If I recall, in the video where they brought it in for inspection, the tires were from 2010. That makes a huge difference in braking and dig races.
They want it to lose to the accord it's essentially a Honda commercial.
Needs major maintenance. But like most ppl with an lt1 they buy it and leave it as is.
Still miss the V6 Accord with a factory 13.9 1/4 mile. Loved that car
I had a 98 Z28 back in the day and it ran 12.97 in the 1/4.
I agree, there is something very off on this. Just looking at a dead stop to 60 the T/A should be around 5.6 to 6.0 seconds. The new accord is nowhere near that, so the T/A should have been much stronger off the line and beyond. Those 1/4 times were more in line with my old '93 Plymouth Duster V6 manual at 8.3 0-60 and 16.4 @ 83 mph in the quarter.
@@ThisThing-so3dq I was thinking about that, you are correct. 👍🏻
@@stacyholt6529 Those 3.OL stick Dusters felt like they had 250 HP though!
@@stacyholt6529they are racing at around 5000 feet, the air is thinner so the car will struggle to gain power.
Yeah I was shocked how bad his times are. My 2003 Mustang GT does low 13s despite making less hp!
All I have to say is. Just imagine the 2.0t accord.
Exactly... Amazing drive train and performance in a damn nice sedan. Sooo disappointed!
The Firebird sandbagged big time. Also, the fatass driver didn’t help, either.
It's kind of weird cause I own a fk8 and my 97 Trans Ams ws6 is faster in the 1/4 mile ( both stock ). But of course, the fk8 is better in everything else.
@ismancarris6802 driver actually sucked on his launch. 16.1 in a V8 300hp car is bad. Plus driver weights a lot too.
@@Phar2Rekliss I think they’re @ a high altitude. Both cars were slower than normal.
Fun show !
BTW it's 75 hundredths of a second not 75 milliseconds.
I would drop my head in shame if i got a 16 sec 1/4 run out of a low 14 second car. In the LT1s, the automatics were quicker in the 1/4.
They are at elevation, I believe over 5000 feet, that will kill mph and et.
@@lifebringsus4393 I could understand a few tenths but 2 full seconds.
@@MidnightinSavannah yup watch their other vids, 14 second cars are running 16s. The DA must be extremely high.
I would’ve smoked him in my 2003 Mustang GT with less hp. Dude should be ashamed. Car likely needs maintenance asap! 😂
High 13s
Be interesting to see this test done closer to sea level.
Now imagine if that accord was the 2.0t ,this was just a base accord and it was hybrid,people hate Honda for no reason but that 2.0t is faster than any normal everyday car in the road and can hang with big boys. Facts
“Ac off in both cars” Tommy, turn it on. It will automatically disengage the compressor drive when you send it.
Yeah that honda accord has an electric air conditioning unit.. So turning it off does absolutely nothing..
@@Adventureswithmike1 since they're dumb and don't know anything about cars they don't even know that lol.
For handling on a '90s firebird, all the suspension bushings need to be replaced. Anti sway bar, bushings etc. Plus the shocks need to be new with good tires. It makes a huge difference having fresh nylon bushings instead of worn out rubber ones in handling.
That accord is very impressive! Of course, I'd rather have the T/A as a personal fun or weekend car and the Accord as a family car.
Go to a normal altitude and try again this mile high stuff sucks. Those transam hit low to mid 13's bone stock all day long
It's always funny when they compare a manual transmission to a newer automatic transmission that can shift way faster than a human can.
An old friend of mine had a trans am similar to this one. I don't know which engine it had, but i remember the acceleration. It went 0-60 in about 7.5 seconds.... HOWEVER, it also probably went from 60 to 120 in another 7.5 seconds. He told me, "it's not a drag car, it's a 'running from the cops' car.
This the type of content that makes you feel content with your 4cyl.
The Trans Am is so beautiful. Aged so well
the interior sure as shit didn't
@@pontiacGXPfan Very true lmao. Hey it looks cool at nighttime when you can only see the red gauges haha
Considering the trans am wasn’t even launched let alone shifting in high rpm gee wonder why it lost first time
Beard guy cannot drive. Birds run high 13s ALL DAY LONG. 16??? Really. Why just one race too. LAME
I would pick the Firebird over the boring Accord any day. At least cars had less tech back then, character, and were worth actually being driven, compared to cars of today that are nothing, but computers with 4 wheels having no soul.
I like actually getting to my destination so no.
@@ROBMACDUI Do you not know how to drive? 😂
Unless TA is worn out and/or driver inept, the Pontiac should routinely turn a high 13 sec or low 14 sec 1/4 mile.
03:17 That accord sounds like a broken blender screaming like that! 😂😂😂
Newer engines for the most part sound horrible. At least the old ones like the Firebird sounded great and used less tech making them lighter or easier to drive.
They all sound like crap, ecoboosts especially. They’re fast but very docile and boring. I’ll stick to my fun old v8. :)
Most comments made me laugh. The message of this video is not which car is better, but how far technology advanced in the past 25-30 years. Doug Demuro in a similar way took his Mercedes E450 to drag race against an F40 and the results were impressive.
Lol ikr
Interesting comparison. Owning a 2019 2.0 sport and a 2001 WS6 I honestly can’t say which is quickest off the line. They are quite different to drive and the accord is really fun to drive in sport mode. However, it doesn’t compare to rowing the six speed with the tops off in the TA.
I think it's been a while since you drove the firebird lol they trap 10 mph higher than a 2.0t accord. 2.0t accords are fun but they aren't even in the same league as a LS1 f body. You might make the same power with every bolt on and e85 as a bone stock LS1.
@tommyistommy exactly and I bet weight isn't even that different on them.
That LT1 has some sort issue going on. It’s way down on power. My family had a 97 WS6 T/A and it produced a lot quicker times than that T/A is. Heck even my old 94 Caprice 9C1 with a LT1 and 200k+ hard police use miles ran a 15.7 in the quarter.
Not at 5000ft elevation - add at least a second to the ET or more 😂
No, Joseph is right. Ghere is something going on with that TA. Cuz the L98 C4 walked it too
At the now defunct Los Angeles County Raceway (LACR) my 1990 Mustang LX with a 5.0 and 5 speed ran the 1/4 mile at 15.1 seconds at a little over 91 mph. The Mustang was stock with 1,100 miles on the odometer. My 1987 Buick Regal T-Type (3.8 inter cooled turbocharged motor) ran a 14.7 ET at 94 mph. It was ran with less than 2,000 miles on the odometer. LACR was located at approximately 2,700 feet above sea level.
New cars today blow the old cars away with respect to performance, and use much less fuel. However, the new cars have no personality, although they are more comfortable. Oh well.
Thanks for an excellent production!
Didn’t know 5.0s were that slow. My 2003 Mustang GT is in the low 13s. Granted she has FBO and built rear end with 4.10 gears but still. Spending a little money wakes up the 4.6 pretty well.
According to the magazine’s of the day, the 5.0 LX fox body was a low 14 second car. With the 10 minute tuneup (removing the air silencer, bumping up the timing) many people got them well into the 13’s.
@@stang-rv4pb actually the weekend before I ran my then new 5.0 the magazines were out at the track and the best pass was a 15.3. The owner of the track asked me what modifications I had made. It was a new car with no mods. He was impressed. Check out the 1990 major magazines on stock Mustangs. Remember, my runs were at 2700 feet above sea level.
Anyway, thanks for the comment.
@@angelgjr1999 mine was brand new. The magazines ran 15.3 at the track with similar Mustangs. Look them up. Thanks
@@BarryJoeBailey, I was talking about the 5.0 LX, with a 5 speed manual, not the GT. The GT was about 200 lbs heavier, and a good 1/2 second slower in the 1/4 mile. Also, the magazine’s tend to get better times then what most driver’s can achieve, as they only start recording time after one foot of rollout. Also, different tracks = different times. I owned a 5.0 LX notch back, it had no AC, crank down windows, it was a plain Jane car, but in stock form, it would walk a GT.
That trans am needs to go on a dyno. These are the same guys with the tflclassics channel and that car has been shown with a number of issues when he first bought it.
The addition of the handling course test is great.
Now put the Accord up against a '98 with an LS1. See how that turns out because that's the car you're using in the intro.
👏👏👏 GREAT JOB GUYS .... HAVE A BEAUTIFUL DAY EVERYONE ✌️....it's almost Friday......
In the late 90's i rode along with a WS6 T/A driver on a road course. We had to yield to 2 Integra Type R whom we were holding up. That made me realize that handling and light weight are everything.
They should do the Comp TA against a 2023 TA. Ahhhhhh damn can’t.
Less than 5% of the US population lives at an elevation that dictates such performance or lack thereof. It's very hard to get excited over knowing that your performance numbers will always be low. Good production and great energy, but the application to 95% reality is nil. One thing can be said : I still watched it, and that is what you were out to have happen. Props!
Puts it all into perspective. The truth is the Pontiac is still wayyyyy more fun which is more important than numbers unless you’re actually racing for money lol
Nobody keeps a performance car stock so you have to look at potential of each car as well. That will go to the Firebird
Get the LS firebird and then come back and do it again.
Get the 2.0t Accord as well then.
All you need is a Lt1 that doesn’t run like shit
@@ROBMACDUI yeah no 2.0 is going to touch an LS engine.
Heck get a Mustang GT with driver mod. His times were atrocious I would’ve smoked that accord. 😂
@@ryanturnerboles I hate to break it to you but those accord 2.0t’s keep up with a LS stock.
“How scripted of a promotion do you want this to be?”
*”Yes.”*
I really like Brendan in these vids. I like his take on the classics.
4:13 "I think the main problem with this vehicle right now is traction off the start" says the driver of the TA that had zero wheelspin...
Amazing technology. Simply adding a small electric motor to the ICE has proven to be better then a V8 or perhaps turbo, plus superior fuel economy. Great video guys.
What video did you watch a brand new car with brand new tires semi beat in some categories a 30 ish year old car with crap tires haha
@@raymondluna3187 commuter car vs a loaded sports car. Even with old tires the Pontiac would have a tire made for traction compared to the accords economy tires. I think your missing the whole point of the vid.
The whole hybrid thing is pretty interesting. My employer issued a 2022 Prius to me. Mostly heavy stop and City traffic getting 54mpg.
The technology can also be used to go fast also, as with the new E Vette...I think something like 600hp?
@@christophersambuco9414 evs are amazing in the way they support child and slave labor just like the people that by these things but hey to each his own
@@raymondluna3187 hey whatever it takes to protect the environment just not the environment in Africa. The wealthy dont want to talk about all the pollution in africa but atleast california wealthy ppl can sleep at night knowing they are saving their environment.
Sorry guys, I call bs on this! Not saying the Honda is bad. Most new cars are on steroids with turbos to compensate for their high weight and driving prices up. But, even the much heavier '95 Buick Roadmaster with an LT-1 did top times of 6.7 to 6.9 sec 0 to 60 and around 15 sec for the 1/4 mile. The Firebird should top this if you use a better driver as we've seen here.
its a combo of shit driver ,bad tires and probably even worse maintainence .Its also funny that most people always look at displacement and fail to understand that a turbo 2.0 has more "air" inside the cylinder than a 5.7 ...but hey people these days don't know their own gender so asking from them to know the times for a Buick Roadmaster is almost crazy lol
Now let’s test which car does the best burn out……oh sorry Honda! 😂
Dude. It's a V8 from a 90's American car. It's a lump.
Hardly a lump. Ram Air Firebird had 305 HP. By comparison the V8 in a Porsche 928 had a whopping 345 HP. The LT1 was entirely competitive with other V8s at the time and had more power than the Mustang.
@@holdenc3082 the Mustang is just another example of the same thing, and you're comparing it to a Porsche V8 that was, iirc, 5 liters at pique, and that they stopped making in 1991, and made 40 more horsepower. That's not competitive, my dude. Now, to be fair, the Porsche would have been a much more expensive car (relatively speaking), but, still, bad comparison.
@@jonjonzz3414 You would be wrong. The 928 and its 345 HP V8 was still being produced in 1995. It’s an entirely valid comparison that a car that costs twice as much as the Firebird only has 40 HP more. In its price range the Firebird would run with anything else at the time. The Toyota Supra turbo only had 320 HP. You seem to lack perspective on what was available back then. How about listing off some cars that cost under $50k that would outrun a Ram Air Firebird back then? I can tell you the 270 HP base model 911 from that era won’t cut it.
Old school cars are still way better than these new ones. Funny thing is many of these newer vehicles are in junkyards way more than older vehicles ironically. Which is why you still see older vehicles on the road more compared to newer rides.
@@TenMillionYearProgram42 Hp isn’t everything. There’s a video on this channel of an SN95 Mustang beating a jaguar despite making 100 less hp 😅
the previous 10th Gen accord with the 10 speed was pretty quick stock and fast af upgraded turbo
Regardless of who beat whom, the fact that they’re this close really “makes ya think”! Some things do improve with time!
It’s not even the ls1
@@robertespinoza2740 I agree, the LS1 Firebird is the best one out of all the F-Bodies and it was a bit lighter/faster than the Camaro too.
Yes beware 6cyl camrys
Compare same year cars and get back to me. The 4 cyl Accord couldn’t get out of its own way.
@@Lucille69caddy, I think the fact that a 2023 Honda Accord is close to a Trans Am of _any model year_ is pretty amazing.
I actually had that Pontiac Trans Am promo video from the intro. It was sent by GM along with a large spiral bound brochure for the Firebird. I think it was a VHS tape, probably one of the last times they ever did such a thing back in the 90s. They didn't shy away from spending money on physical marketing materials back then.
I have the Trans Am from that video. Black and everything 😁
Chicks don't seem to care, but old dudes at gas stations drool all over the place
This is a neat comparison.
It would be nice to something like this with the Excape 2L turbo vs the CX-30 turbo.
A better test would be to rebuild the brakes, not just pads and rotors but hoses, master cylinder, power booster, new tires, do a compression test on the lt1 , make sure the clutch isn’t slipping prior to the test. Then test both cars swap drivers and do it again. With the car running 94mph in the 1/4 it makes me suspect the 350 is down on power.
Come on guys. The only real Transams were the the black ones with the bird on the hood from the 70’s. Can you say Smoky and the Bandit?
I thought a plot twist was coming with a 2.0t Touring making an appearance!
More like 'Comp'romised T/A
My 1997 TA would run a 14.2 stock. I don’t know why this Firebird doing 16s
The weight of the driver does impact those close races.
That makes no difference in a 3000 pound car. makes no difference on a 300 pound motorcycle if a guy weighs 100 pounds more. the bike or car will go that fast with a 16 pound spider monkey or a 260 pound dude
@@toyyoda3710 wtf are you talking about that dude weighs like 150 lbs more than tommy and that DOES make a huge difference. Lol. Why do you think most F1 drivers are like 5ft tall and weigh 90 lbs. 😂
I never once heard someone say, oh wow! A honda accord!.... The Firebird however is a differrent story. Now why do I have Jerry Reed songs stuck in my head?
90s V8s were really crap in the US :-/ gotta admit..
like ur generation yes
@the epic fail gamer why make it personal?
Yes the LS1 (1997 debut) is so crappy that it's the go to swap to this day for any car that can fit it.
Compared to what? Lmao they were the pinnacle of performance for under 100k! They made more power than anyone else's v8s in the era 💁
Don't worry about the despicable outcome of the TA.. clearly he can't launch worth shit, my 1998 firebird was pulling mid 13 second 1/4mile times at around 108mph on regular tires with 6sp manual with only a airbox and tune at the track.
And $200 Hawk HPS brake pads made a HUGE difference in stopping.
Great cars that takes very little to perfect
Yup thats correct for sea-level times. He's at elevation of around 5000 feet. He really didn't launch the car well though and those tires aren't that great either.
16.19 in the quarter is NOT what a brand new Firebird Comp TA would run - go back and look up the Car and Driver stats! My stock regular (i.e. - non Ram Air) Formula would regularly run between 14.11 to 14.17 and I never flogged it like someone who didn't car if it broke - like the magazine testers did!