Well, it depends on the driver too.

Overall, I'm sure I am the better driver.. I find when two cars are closely matched like the GAGT and my bonnie that its the little things that count..

Ya, if you have the skills, chances are you will take him. Just be careful. His car will shift a lot quicker. I know from experience driving one. But your torque numbers should push you ahead those extra feet. Good luck.

I know I am skating on thin ice by asking you this Willwren - we obviously have a difference of opinion - but where did you get your numbers from.

It is my opinion that the 0-60 time you have referenced for a 1995 Bonneville should have two more letters (i.e. an E and an i).

In addition, most 0-60 acceleration tests of the 2000+ SSEi'* (stock) post numbers in the very low 7'*. Am I to believe that a 1995 SE (205 hp) will keep up with a 2000 SSEi (240 hp) in a 0-60 run?

This is a discussion I would like to see straightened out myself. I have seen different numbers for 0-60 times for both the SE and SSEi and this will be a big conflict. I myself have seen times for the SSEi from 96-99 in a 7.4sec. range and the'00 and present 7.64 1/4 mile 16.60sec @ 89.2 sec. This is in the Bonneville brochure for 2000, also some more info on the 96-99 SSEi times and specs.

http://www.cardomain.com/member_page...c%20Bonneville

According to Edmunds.com, a reputable source for automotive information on the internet, a 1997 Pontiac Bonneville SSEi can do 0-60 in 7.4 seconds. On a similar note, Edmunds.com has a 2000 Pontiac Bonneville SSEi doing the 0-60 run in 7.5 seconds.

(In my humble opinion, these differences are directly associated with the increase in weight from the 1997 model to the 2000 model which are 3691 to 3790 pounds respectively – a difference of 99 pounds.)

Back to the issue at hand, according to Edmunds.com a 1998 Pontiac Bonneville SE with a curb weight of 3446 pounds (identical to the curb weight of a 1995 Bonneville SE) can accelerate from 0-60 in 8.3 seconds.

Finally, to stay within the topic, according to Edmunds.com, a 2000 Pontiac Grand Am GT Sedan does 0-60 in 7.8 seconds. When compared with the 8.3 second 0-60 time of the 1998 Pontiac Bonneville SE, the 2000 Grand Am GT is the clear winner.

N.B. – All of the information above has been taken from an identical source, that being Edmunds.com. Thus, the numbers are valid when compared. The maximum accepted standard deviation (a.k.a. significant difference) for 0-60 times is no more than three tenths of a second (0.3).

Nobody is skating on thin ice here. It'* just a simple case of where you get your data from, and a little secret about the 95 SE.

http://www.angelfire.com/pa3/ford/performance1.htm

This is taken from manufacturer'* data for the most part. Edmunds is a pretty poor source for performance data. They don't state their source. They owner of the website I linked actually 'borrowed' the data from another site that I don't have the link for any more. That site stated their data came from manufacturers. (The usual disclaimers apply for anything on the internet, including Edmunds.....you never know) but I've found this data to be pretty close after watching this forum for quite some time.

This is all the data available on the Bonneville from this source. Note there isn't any 'recent' data on the SSEi, and yes, I've noticed a discrepancy in the data for the only SSEi listed. Yes, the 95 SE is that fast. The 95 SE was the lightest Bonneville ever built. Still not sure why the 95 was lighter than any other year, but keep in mind it was also the first year of the Series 2. This is what makes 95BonnevilleSESC'* car so uniquie. The lightest year for the lightest model, AND Supercharged.

Without arguing over each other'* sources, it'* a simple matter of putting a 95SE next to the amazing GA GT, and see who wins. I'll put my money (the little I have) where my mouth is. I know how badly I spank them, and I know how fast the 95SE really is.

You mean to tell me that this info is true? A Sunfire can beat my car? I really have neeb drinking too much, way tto muchhh!!!! '98 Sunfire-7.9 16.0 92 Bonneville-8.1 16.1

Hey... It seems like its going to be close...might have to take out the sub box ect... If I end up racign this guy youll get the results.. he also has a buddy with a 2001 neon Le.. thinks he can beat me.. no mods by the way " doesnt want to void his warranty. ha"... Il leave him in the dust..

[quote="willwren"]The 95 SE was the lightest Bonneville ever built. Still not sure why the 95 was lighter than any other year, but keep in mind it was also the first year of the Series 2. This is what makes 95BonnevilleSESC'* car so uniquie. The lightest year for the lightest model, AND Supercharged.

Willwren, I happen to agree with you about the authenticity, or lack thereof, of the test numbers on Edmunds.com. However, it is one of the few sites that has all of the information that I want to provide me with, more or less, an apple-to-apple comparison.

More importantly, I am now confused. In the first post, MrBonnie does not indicate whether or not his "95 Bonnie SE" is naturally aspirated or supercharged. This ambiguity is at the root of my lack of comprehension.

My point of view has always been this:

A SUPERCHARGED 95 Bonne SE will indeed WIN over a 2000 Grand Am GT in both a 0-60 and quarter mile run.

A NATURALLY ASPIRATED 95 Bonne SE will LOSE to a 2000 Grand Am GT in both a 0-60 and quarter mile run.

I think I am up to 8 cents now...