10th Jun 2008, 12:23
Your Camaro v6 only has 165 HP and your car weighs more than 2800 lbs. Of course a Cavlier Z24 is faster! My father's Buick Park Avenue would leave your Camaro in the dust.
10th Jun 2008, 22:27
OK the 0-60 time for a 5.0 Mustang fox body is 6.2 seconds. The 0-60 time for a 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier Z24 is, wait for it, 8.7 seconds. Hope that clears things up.
3rd Jul 2008, 22:20
I have a 2000 Chevy Cavalier... I have headers, aftermarket exhaust, short ram intake, and some other goodies... I have 537hp..
I have no problem beating Camaros and or Mustangs... if you want you can even throw in Corvettes...
It's my lil sleeper... it's just dropped with a body kit rims and limo tinted windows... that's all you see... craps on imports and V8s... LOL... you can't see me...
20th Jan 2009, 22:13
I just got one for free, needs minor fixing. This thing's a real rocket. I was lined up with a Vette and blew its doors off the hinges. The seat snapped off, and I bent the steering wheel.
These things are fast.
14th Mar 2009, 12:19
Wow.. just.. wow. The comments on this review just blow me away. It's great you enjoy your car no matter what you drive, but you Cavalier owners need to separate fantasy from reality. You drive a Cavalier. You aren't smoking Z28s, SS Camaros, Mustang GTs, and Corvettes. The Z24 runs low 16s in the quarter mile from the factory. These cars you all claim to be smoking are running low 13s to high 12s with the exception of some model GTs running 14s or low 15s. That's not even counting the many other cars out there with similar performance numbers such as the Buick Grand National, STI, EVO, Supra, and SRT-4. All of which are Turbocharged.
I've driven a Z24 and these cars aren't fast by any measure. This is coming from someone driving one of these low 13 second cars. You're comparing a 150hp econobox to a 300hp+ high performance sports car which has something the cavalier lacks immensely: Torque. It would take thousands in modifications and forced induction to even come close. Enjoy your car for what it is, but don't go around claiming your Cavalier is smoking cars that are out of your league by leaps and bounds. Stick to more believable stories like beating a Civic or minivan. Go drive a Z28 with a 6 speed manual and you'll see why.
26th May 2009, 13:37
OK, to solve everyone's taking on a Z24 and 5.0 race. My Z24 smashes 5.0. I've only lost to one. And all I have a stage 2 Greddy turbo with 14 pounds of boost. Now stock my car kept up with the 97 model year 4.7L V8 Mustang GT, but probably wouldn't keep up with a 5.0, but I don't know. Z24s are pretty quick, and it also depends on the driver and the mods done. But like I said, z24 5.0 no doubt the 5.0 beating it stock without question but with slightly mods done to the Cav 5.0 = done. I only lost to one 5.0 Mustang, never lost to anything else. Including Evos and STI. Oh, and a SRT-4 beat me.
21st Jun 2009, 20:21
I own a 2000 Z24 Cavalier and these things are not real fast. I don't care what anyone says about MOD's and all that, you are not smokin' 5.0's.
My Z24 is a daily driver to get me from home to school and to the beer store, and that's about it. I have lost every single race against a V8 yet, and I don't plan on racing anymore of them.
If you drive a Z24, you can probably beat Neon's, Civic's, and pretty much any little stock I4's around (EXCEPT Cobalt SS/SRT4/ECT...), but nothing bigger.
12th Feb 2010, 19:44
OK, I own a Z24, it is modded (no boost but everything else). I've raced a lot of cars and smoked them, BUT most were just Civics and other naturally aspirated 4 bangers. I can beat some 6 cyls, but never any 8s... well almost 1; it was a 92 305 Camaro, but it had a lot of problems with it, so to say a Cav can beat a 5.0 or any SS, you gotta have a V8 under the hood as well.
Yea well it'll keep up (barely) but never win!!! Unless you're boosted! I've seen stock turbo Cobalts smoke some fast cars, so if you want fast, get a turbo!!! Oh yeah, BTW for everyone there, don't turbo your 2.4, the OEM compression on that thing is 250 pounds per cyl. (unless you wanna see some fireworks!!!)
27th Feb 2010, 15:43
Let's not joke around. 5.0s, anything with an engine that probably weighs the same as a Cavalier with everything in it, is most likely gonna smoke the Cavalier. But with any car, if you fix up the Cavalier, whether it is a super charger, or turbo, chips, exhaust, intake, who cares. If you mod your Cavalier, you'll stand a better chance. BUT that is if the muscle car is still STOCK. If that muscle is fixed up, if you look and see that the whole car is shaking, I'm sorry to say that unless you are putting over 30,000 dollars into the small Cavalier, you stand (everybody listen to this) NO CHANCE.. I know this, I have a 2000 Cavalier Z24, from personal experience (embarrassment by the way) you stand no chance.
If you wanna stand some kind of chance, look into the Mitsu 3000GT twin turbo VR4, Mitsubishi Eclipse, Nissan 300ZX, Mazda RX-7, Honda Prelude, Civic, del Sol, and my personal favorite, the Acura Integra. Look into those, and you might stand a chance.. Those are built for speed, unlike the Cavalier, which was built for economy (saving gas).
17th Aug 2010, 15:04
OK, I don't know about anyone else on here. As far the Z24s and the Mustangs go, I own both; a 2000 Z24 and a 1989 Mustang 5.0.
The Mustang has the following a Hurst short throw shifter, King Cobra clutch, BBK firewall clutch adjustment, K&N cold air intake, 3.73 gears, new fuel pump, BBK fuel pressure regulator, 5" tack with shiftlight, BBK subframe connectors.
The Z24 has nothing is bone stock.
I have pics of both the cars, and I have a 4 different videos of them racing. The Z24 wins every time. If you want videos or proof of ownership, I will provide.
18th Aug 2010, 12:40
OK, you are telling me a 150 HP 4 cylinder car with no mods that gets a best time of maybe 7.5 seconds to 60 (with a good driver) can take a 5.0 Mustang with mods on it? The stock Mustang was 225 HP and did 60 in 6.2 seconds. Modded it will surely be down in the mid 5 seconds range.
Just how did you perform this feat of absolute impossibility?
19th Aug 2010, 12:05
Yeah, okay... I had a '90 Z-24 with the 3.1 V6 and it would smoke any of the newer 4 cylinder Z's from '95 up as it had way more torque with the V6. I also couldn't beat any 5.0 with mine, even speed shifting it through the first 4 gears. Something is wrong with this picture! You don't lose races with a 75 HP advantage (stock) and 150 lb/ft more of torque in two cars that weigh roughly the same. Impossible!