I Used To Think A Pontiac Bonneville SSEi Was Fast 

"MichaelGauby" (michaelgauby) 01/05/2018 at 15:30 • Filed to: Pontiac, Speed, Used Car, Bonneville, SSEi

2

19

I really do like this color

First forced induction car I ever drove. Was super proud of it until I realized the 0-60 time was nearly 8 seconds. Did any of you have cars like this?

cmill189 - sans Volvo > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:34

3

When I was 18 I thought my Probe GT with a KLZE swap and supporting mods was fast. “Quick” was probably a better word.

farscythe - makin da cawfee! > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:37

0

my panda did 0-60 in maybe....

(nah it was like 16 seconds)

Jake - Has Bad Luck So You Don't Have To > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:38

1

Damn that car looks excellent in red.

Highlander-Datsuns are Forever > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:39

2

My coworkers think my Mazda 3 with the 2.0L engine is fast. I just rev it to 5500 and they are like wow!!! Little do they know it’s like a 9 second to 60 mph car.

404 - User No Longer Available > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:40

2

Well I went from a 110hp 4-cylinder Cavalier to a 200hp V6 G6...

It was quite an improvement, but still.

sony1492 > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:41

0

I thought my SC was reasonably quick and than I had trouble keeping up with an 03 Tacoma 4x4 Granted it was supercharged and piloted by a madman but it was eye opening.

WilliamsSW > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:43

4

First new car was a ‘90 Sunbird convertible, 165 HP turbo and a 5 speed. I thought it was fast as hell.

0-60 was probably right in that same 8 second range. Whoo hoo.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:44

0

I used to think our Trailblazer was quick, that said mid 6's to 60 isn’t bad for an SUV.

Gerry197 > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:45

2

My VW CC 2.oT, I thought wow this is the all singing and dancing 2.0 TSI! Then I found it’s 0-60 time was 6.7 seconds, or exactly the same time as my 12 year older E46 sedan which had less hp and a lot less torque.

My new F150 2.7L V6 does 0-60 in 5.8 seconds and gets better mpg then either of my old sedans.  

Nibbles > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:46

1

8 seconds is still not bad for a V6 full size sedan

I didn’t get anything that had a sub-8 second 0-60 until we bought the S40 T5 back in 2014, and that was still barely under 8 seconds

Maxima Speed > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 15:51

1

Had 1997 Maxima, thought it was quick then I bought a 2006 Mazda 6, and in short order bought a 2004 V6 Solara. The Solara makes the Maxima look anemic.

cmill189 - sans Volvo > WilliamsSW 01/05/2018 at 15:58

1

That was fast by 1990 standards and not even bad today by economy car standards. Did the rear squat while the front lifted? Old cars that do that always give you a sensation of speed.

crowmolly > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 16:02

2

Well, it probably had the 2.93 final drive which helped fuel consumption but was shit for off the line performance.

I used to drive a GTP. Wasn’t exactly fast by today’s standards but back then I would beat Mustang GTs with regularity- paper filter stock.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 16:06

0

It’s all relitive. My Galant isn’t “fast” but it’s the fastest thing I’ve owned

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > Highlander-Datsuns are Forever 01/05/2018 at 16:08

0

Lol. I took a girl out on a date once who thought my 99 Civic Ex was super fast. But I think it was more just the high rpm making it seems fast. She drive a Malibu v6 that was probably just as fast.

gmctavish needs more space > MichaelGauby 01/05/2018 at 16:21

1

My E28 533i with a chipped 3.5 M30 out of a E34 535i and a 3.73 LSD was the only car I’ve had that really seemed fast. I dunno how fast it really was, but it sure as hell felt fast.

WilliamsSW > cmill189 - sans Volvo 01/05/2018 at 17:21

0

Probably a little bit - but at the time, I was actually used to cars that lifted a lot more than that Sunbird. It was stiffly sprung, and I was used to much older cars (mid 60's GM stuff) that did that a hell of a lot more than that Sunbird did.

Snerk > MichaelGauby 01/06/2018 at 01:17

1

First car I had was a 1985 Volvo 245DL.

It was hazardously slow when I got it, so I decided to do a tune-up and discovered that it’s spark plugs were gapped hilariously big — like, twice the spec. New plugs in at spec and holy crap, that thing flew ! 18-year-old-me, a legal driver for all of two weeks, having already grown accustomed to the car’s glacial nature, was deeply impressed with my newfound performance! “This thing is fast !”, I thought to myself.

It made 114hp. At the crank. In 1985. God knows what it made then. I was pretty well blown away when I got my new DD, a 2009 VW Rabbit 2.5L 5cyl with 170hp/177ft-lbs. Even moreso when I rode in a few cars during that time that were actually fast. Even the Rabbit isn’t fast, but compared to that Volvo, I can’t help but laugh at what I used to think.

jdrgoat - Ponticrack? > 404 - User No Longer Available 01/06/2018 at 19:38

0

I still think those 3.5 V6 G6 (and Malibu, Aura) have a good amount of balls given what they are. I was driving a 120hp S-10 at the time I first drove one, so that probably plays a role, too...

Maybe that’s part of the reason I really want one of those 3.5 LX9 V6 engines in my Fiero. Not fast, adequate.