100 horsepower per liter naturally aspirated
11-04-2007, 01:30 PM
#761
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, TX!
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
for **** sake lock this GD thread! it has done its good pages upon pages ago and only exists now as an annoyance and blight upon the *** of ls1tech. thank you.
11-04-2007, 02:38 PM
#762
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ewing, NJ
Posts: 1,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think a lot of the comparison falls to the system of decreasing returns you get from displacement. bigger will always make more power, but it doesn't continue to go up in an HP per CiD ratio. to move a greater displacement, you have to move heavier stuff further.
the LSx platform is certainly capable of higher rpm operation, but by the nature of such a large cubic inch base you also have to exhaust a very large volume of used air, this equates to noise that the average new car buyer is not really into. if you add the cam or compression to this volume to make the 100 per liter being discussed, you are creating vibration and off idle drivability that most new car buyers also aren't into.
the ability to make more power is not the problem any more as much as the ability to hit the largest market appeal while making a fun sounding power number and still maintaining the mileage and emissions standards that the government demands.
i am sure we will start to see some new, even more impressive factory HP numbers from GM over the next few years. with the advances being made with displacement on demand technology and even higher resolution engine controls, the potential benefits are nearly endless.
the LSx platform is certainly capable of higher rpm operation, but by the nature of such a large cubic inch base you also have to exhaust a very large volume of used air, this equates to noise that the average new car buyer is not really into. if you add the cam or compression to this volume to make the 100 per liter being discussed, you are creating vibration and off idle drivability that most new car buyers also aren't into.
the ability to make more power is not the problem any more as much as the ability to hit the largest market appeal while making a fun sounding power number and still maintaining the mileage and emissions standards that the government demands.
i am sure we will start to see some new, even more impressive factory HP numbers from GM over the next few years. with the advances being made with displacement on demand technology and even higher resolution engine controls, the potential benefits are nearly endless.
11-04-2007, 08:45 PM
#763
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you get that!
11-05-2007, 10:20 AM
#764
Launching!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
explain why a 470fwhp regular 12 sec dual purpose 3450lb dry car with big stall big revs 3.9 gears 3 speed auto (70 cubic inches advantage)+ 2 people in the car
got abosolutely smoked by a (270rwhp) 2950lb dry 5 speed manual with 3.36
highwway gears +3 people in that car well over 12 car lengths
despite the former getting the obviously expected start?
>>>>
Just wanted to ask,
What kind of race was this?
How far did these cars run, 1/8 1/4 1/2 or full mile?
What gear is the 12 second car in when he crosses the 1/4 and at what rpm?
Also, what is the max RPM of the 3 speed car?
What kind of 1/4 mile times was the 5 speed running and in what gear does it cross the 1/4 in and at what RPM?
What is the max RPM on the 5 speed car?
Sounds like the 3 speed auto has a weak topend to me due to gearing...
Are you also saying the 3 speed auto car has "nearly" 200 more RWHP?
Sorry for the 20 questions, just trying to understand and decipher what you typed...
got abosolutely smoked by a (270rwhp) 2950lb dry 5 speed manual with 3.36
highwway gears +3 people in that car well over 12 car lengths
despite the former getting the obviously expected start?
>>>>
Just wanted to ask,
What kind of race was this?
How far did these cars run, 1/8 1/4 1/2 or full mile?
What gear is the 12 second car in when he crosses the 1/4 and at what rpm?
Also, what is the max RPM of the 3 speed car?
What kind of 1/4 mile times was the 5 speed running and in what gear does it cross the 1/4 in and at what RPM?
What is the max RPM on the 5 speed car?
Sounds like the 3 speed auto has a weak topend to me due to gearing...
Are you also saying the 3 speed auto car has "nearly" 200 more RWHP?
Sorry for the 20 questions, just trying to understand and decipher what you typed...
11-05-2007, 11:25 AM
#765
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like the 3 speed auto has a weak topend to me due to gearing.
Sorry for the 20 questions, just trying to understand and decipher what you typed...
I was not involved with the automatic cars engine build.
I was informed it was setup by a reputable engine builder + drag racer for dual purpose with approximately 460-470bhp with open exhaust, as opposed to the others 390 bhp with open pipes.
Both cars did not race legally that day,
but both ran full exhaust systems,despite the heavier car with the proven 12.5-12.7 quarter mile times with compromised converter +gears and not as could be 60 footers,regardless still got a good 2-3 car jump and maintained it,untill the manual car hit 2nd gear and from there on in ,thats where the fun started.
Both went on with it to a pre refferenced known location
which coincided approx a quarter mile and the rest as you know.
Now if you ask me,the auto car especially with the c4 transmission and 378ci engine should have been equipped with the 3.9-411 gears,there are other variables too ,such as fuel,exhaust,tyres, maybe that he was running no special grade dyno fuel which as you know is one of the oldest tricks in the book any race engine builder will use to prosper the advantage.
So now this engine is only making approx 430 bhp on its street setup,
then ponder to myself surely no stock stoke low compression can gonna pull away like the manner it did from a 13 second car let alone proven 12 second car!and despite in did it with the taller gearing and full exhaust and passengers and fuel load that eventually level out both vehicle masses within 100lb at that.
The manual car was built as a dual purpose street and circuit racer,
drag racing was never its agenda.
If anything it wasn't designed to be just for the strip, even though it was a beaut car to launch considering gearing and suspension,when i had had the previous 4 speed muncie,3.08 diff + 2-3/8id exhaust system on that well cammed up little engine,it would haul from a conservative no wheelspin whatsoever,with basically normal clutch disengage manner, then immedietaly floor it and surge past 60mph around 4.5-4.7 secs(depending on time or day) with just the one gear change!
Now the wierder bit is how this other punter, promoting his circiut race special
$150,000us invested in that very nice show car with the best of everything ,including a 8 itre 700+bhp motec tuned engine with all the bells and whistles added to its merits.
That car was compared to a 91 LP built 635bhp 304ci holden powered
v8 supercar with the proven race track credentials,thecomparo
was meant to see how the cars fared in certain acceleration tests,however only the 0-60mph results were publushed officially for everyone to see them.
the LP race car managed to whip up appox 60mph in 5.11seconds
and this 8 litre show car nailed 0-60 in 5.26seconds.
Now how am I supposed to comprehend the variables, when
on paper the inferior engine is doing what its not ought to be doing according
to the experts?
In an odd way, I don't blame them either,after all they were the times with 635+700+ bhp engines!
However I did put in the effort with in that little 390 horse engine,+ would like to thank steve g + his very much appreciated time to share his cylinder head data
flow analysys with the ve + in providing the most critical of all tools to get on with
the porting (to the exact tolernces he devulged),awg cams for grinding the cam
to compliment the flow bench data + coincide the negative pressure ve timing events withinin the desired powerband,H+M headers for developing them beaut
41mm id 400hp race car headers.(lotsa time saved there)
I was very fortunate finding the correct parts within the very scarce and limited funding and told myself ok thats what I got,Im gonna make the most of this once and for all,and never look back on what could have ben done with a tad more coin.
That engine did over 90,000miles without even a valve spring change + is still running fine till this day with the 3rd owner of that car!
so its fair to assume all got their moneys worth there
Sorry for the 20 questions, just trying to understand and decipher what you typed...
I was not involved with the automatic cars engine build.
I was informed it was setup by a reputable engine builder + drag racer for dual purpose with approximately 460-470bhp with open exhaust, as opposed to the others 390 bhp with open pipes.
Both cars did not race legally that day,
but both ran full exhaust systems,despite the heavier car with the proven 12.5-12.7 quarter mile times with compromised converter +gears and not as could be 60 footers,regardless still got a good 2-3 car jump and maintained it,untill the manual car hit 2nd gear and from there on in ,thats where the fun started.
Both went on with it to a pre refferenced known location
which coincided approx a quarter mile and the rest as you know.
Now if you ask me,the auto car especially with the c4 transmission and 378ci engine should have been equipped with the 3.9-411 gears,there are other variables too ,such as fuel,exhaust,tyres, maybe that he was running no special grade dyno fuel which as you know is one of the oldest tricks in the book any race engine builder will use to prosper the advantage.
So now this engine is only making approx 430 bhp on its street setup,
then ponder to myself surely no stock stoke low compression can gonna pull away like the manner it did from a 13 second car let alone proven 12 second car!and despite in did it with the taller gearing and full exhaust and passengers and fuel load that eventually level out both vehicle masses within 100lb at that.
The manual car was built as a dual purpose street and circuit racer,
drag racing was never its agenda.
If anything it wasn't designed to be just for the strip, even though it was a beaut car to launch considering gearing and suspension,when i had had the previous 4 speed muncie,3.08 diff + 2-3/8id exhaust system on that well cammed up little engine,it would haul from a conservative no wheelspin whatsoever,with basically normal clutch disengage manner, then immedietaly floor it and surge past 60mph around 4.5-4.7 secs(depending on time or day) with just the one gear change!
Now the wierder bit is how this other punter, promoting his circiut race special
$150,000us invested in that very nice show car with the best of everything ,including a 8 itre 700+bhp motec tuned engine with all the bells and whistles added to its merits.
That car was compared to a 91 LP built 635bhp 304ci holden powered
v8 supercar with the proven race track credentials,thecomparo
was meant to see how the cars fared in certain acceleration tests,however only the 0-60mph results were publushed officially for everyone to see them.
the LP race car managed to whip up appox 60mph in 5.11seconds
and this 8 litre show car nailed 0-60 in 5.26seconds.
Now how am I supposed to comprehend the variables, when
on paper the inferior engine is doing what its not ought to be doing according
to the experts?
In an odd way, I don't blame them either,after all they were the times with 635+700+ bhp engines!
However I did put in the effort with in that little 390 horse engine,+ would like to thank steve g + his very much appreciated time to share his cylinder head data
flow analysys with the ve + in providing the most critical of all tools to get on with
the porting (to the exact tolernces he devulged),awg cams for grinding the cam
to compliment the flow bench data + coincide the negative pressure ve timing events withinin the desired powerband,H+M headers for developing them beaut
41mm id 400hp race car headers.(lotsa time saved there)
I was very fortunate finding the correct parts within the very scarce and limited funding and told myself ok thats what I got,Im gonna make the most of this once and for all,and never look back on what could have ben done with a tad more coin.
That engine did over 90,000miles without even a valve spring change + is still running fine till this day with the 3rd owner of that car!
so its fair to assume all got their moneys worth there
Last edited by oz304; 11-07-2007 at 08:00 AM.
11-05-2007, 11:58 AM
#766
Launching!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
reputable engine builder + compromised for dual purpose with approximately 460-470bhp with open exhaust as opposed to the others
390 bhp with open exhaust,both cars did not race legally that day
but both ran full exhaust systems.now despite the heavier car with the proven 12.5-12.7 quarter mile times with compromised converter +gears
and not as could be 60 footers it got a good 2-3 car jump till maintained it
untill the manual car hit 2nd gear and frome ther on in thats where the fun started both went on with it to a pre refferenced known location
which coincided approx a quarter mile.
>>>>
You mentioned the 5 speed car put 12 cars on the 3 speed car at the end?
If the 3 speed car runs 12.50's and lost in an approx. 1/4 mile run, what kind of 1/4 mile time did the 5 speed car run???
12 car lengths pulled on a 12.50 car would be worth what in the 1/4 as far as time ( not too mention mph ) ?
Maybe the 5 speed car has a little more power than we know of.
390 bhp with open exhaust,both cars did not race legally that day
but both ran full exhaust systems.now despite the heavier car with the proven 12.5-12.7 quarter mile times with compromised converter +gears
and not as could be 60 footers it got a good 2-3 car jump till maintained it
untill the manual car hit 2nd gear and frome ther on in thats where the fun started both went on with it to a pre refferenced known location
which coincided approx a quarter mile.
>>>>
You mentioned the 5 speed car put 12 cars on the 3 speed car at the end?
If the 3 speed car runs 12.50's and lost in an approx. 1/4 mile run, what kind of 1/4 mile time did the 5 speed car run???
12 car lengths pulled on a 12.50 car would be worth what in the 1/4 as far as time ( not too mention mph
) ?Maybe the 5 speed car has a little more power than we know of.
11-05-2007, 01:17 PM
#767
Sorry, but only a fool would honestly believe that 270RWHP in a 3490lb (2950 + (180 x 3)) would exceed the performance of 376RWHP (470 - 20% drivetrain loss) in a 3810lb (3450 + (180 x 2)), in the manner you've stated. Power to weight just doesn't support it.
3490/270 = 12.93lb/HP
3810/376 = 10.13lb/HP
ET = ((W/HP)^.333) x 5.825
((3490/270)^.333) x 5.825 = 13.66 seconds
((3810/376)^.333) x 5.825 = 12.60 seconds
MPH = ((HP/W)^.333) x 234
((270/3490)^.333) x 234 = 99.79 mph
((376/3810)^.333) x 234 = 108.22 mph
All the proper math (which does assume ideal traction and gearing) suggests that the heavier car with more power should exceed the performance of the lighter car with less power by a substantial amount. Yet your claim is that just the opposite happened. Either your numbers are off, someone lied to you and you've continued to spread the mistruth, or somehow the laws of physics have been broken. I would never argue that I'm smarther than anyone on the board, ecpecially in the Advanced Tech forum, but I thin k several would concur that your example has to flawed, perhaps in more than one way.
Also, I have to question the relevance of endurance race cars in a discussion of 1/4 performance.
3490/270 = 12.93lb/HP
3810/376 = 10.13lb/HP
ET = ((W/HP)^.333) x 5.825
((3490/270)^.333) x 5.825 = 13.66 seconds
((3810/376)^.333) x 5.825 = 12.60 seconds
MPH = ((HP/W)^.333) x 234
((270/3490)^.333) x 234 = 99.79 mph
((376/3810)^.333) x 234 = 108.22 mph
All the proper math (which does assume ideal traction and gearing) suggests that the heavier car with more power should exceed the performance of the lighter car with less power by a substantial amount. Yet your claim is that just the opposite happened. Either your numbers are off, someone lied to you and you've continued to spread the mistruth, or somehow the laws of physics have been broken. I would never argue that I'm smarther than anyone on the board, ecpecially in the Advanced Tech forum, but I thin k several would concur that your example has to flawed, perhaps in more than one way.
Also, I have to question the relevance of endurance race cars in a discussion of 1/4 performance.
11-05-2007, 06:44 PM
#768
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, TX!
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in an odd way i keep asking myselfs these questions too,i was not involved with the assumed heavier cars engine build but i was informed it was setup by a reputable engine builder + compromised for dual purpose with approximately 460-470bhp with open exhaust as opposed to the others
390 bhp with open exhaust,both cars did not race legally that day
but both ran full exhaust systems.now despite the heavier car with the proven 12.5-12.7 quarter mile times with compromised converter +gears
and not as could be 60 footers it got a good 2-3 car jump till maintained it
untill the manual car hit 2nd gear and frome ther on in thats where the fun started both went on with it to a pre refferenced known location
which coincided approx a quarter mile.
now if you ask me undoubtably the auto car especially with the c4 transmission and 378ci engine should have been equipped with the 3.9-411 gears,there are other variable too such as fuel maybe that day he was running no special grade dyno fuel which as you know is one of the oldest tricks in the book any race engine builder will use to prosper the advantage.
ok so maybe now this engine is only making 430 bhp on its street exhaust
and pump fuel so then i say to myself thats it surely no stock stoke
low compression is gonna pull away in like the manner it did that day
but it did despite its taller gearing,and with full exhaust too and passengers and fuel load that eventually level out both vehicle masses within 100lb at that.the manual car was built as a dual purpose street and circuit racer
drag racing was never its agenda if anything it wasn't designed to be
even though it was a beaut car to launch considering gearing + considering
its suspension,but when i had had the previous 4 speed muncie,3.08 diff +
2-3/8id exhaust system on that well cammed up little engine
it would haul from a conservative no wheelspin whatsoever basically normal clutch disengage manner then immedietaly nailed it would nail 60mph
betweem 4.5-4.7 seconds!
now the even wierder bit is how this other punter promoting his one off
$150,000us+ 8 litre 700+bhp motec injected car (very nice i might add)
which was compared to a 91 larry perkins built 635bhp holden powered
v8 supercar whith the proven race track credentials,this comparo
was meant to see how the cars fared in certain acceleration tests.
the larry perkins race car managed to whip up appox 60mph in 5.1 seconds
and this 8 litre monster nailed 0-60 in 5.2 seconds.
now how am i supposed to comprehend the variables when
on paper the inferior engine is doing what its not ought to be doing according
to some experts? in an odd way i don't blame them either.
but by god i did put in the effort with the missus help(no one else except
for steve gay + his very much appreciated time to share his cylinder head data and awg cams for providing me a camshaft exactly to the rpms
of the chosen powerband within its limited range.and h+m headers for them
41mm id 400hp race car headers.
i was very fortunate in finding the correct parts within the very scarce and limited budget and said to myself ok thats what i got ,im gonna make the most of this once and for all.that engine did over 90,000miles without even a valve spring change so its fair to assume i got my moneys worth.
11-05-2007, 07:52 PM
#770
Launching!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Black_Knight, ALWAYS triumphs!
1BadAction:
Did you google LS1 and put together the first 10 words of every site that came up or are you just drunk?
>>>
Your google link no worky.
11-05-2007, 08:48 PM
#771
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You mentioned the 5 speed car put 12 cars on the 3 speed car at the end?
If the 3 speed car runs 12.50's and lost in an approx. 1/4 mile run, what kind of 1/4 mile time did the 5 speed car run???
12 car lengths pulled on a 12.50 car would be worth what in the 1/4 as far as time ( not too mention mph ) ?
Maybe the 5 speed car has a little more power than we know of.
[/QUOTE]
Its fair to assume given the variables on the day,that the mid12sec car,was a more so, a high12-low13sec car.
Conversely from memory the manual car was hovering around the 190+kph,on the back stretch of a pre refference (where i used to check the tunes)which was a 400 meter bitumen road ,with the 5 speed + 3.36gears and a reasonable but not optimal conservative launch.
I forgot to mention I fitted that car,with the larger 3in diameter gm one tonner chrome moly tailshaft,with the very large universals that came standard on v8 one tonner tray tops.
I didn't want to compromise when it came to putting the power from the flywheel to the ground+ didn't opt for lightweight flywheel for this particular engine,so i fitted a compromised steel flywheel with the weight biased towards the outside of the diameter, which makes any manual car nicer to drive, regardless of load or gear or given application, in the vast majority of the rev range.
I like the concept of maintaining rotation inertia energy to its potential maximum.conversely that car would out brake any recent model I driven fitted with factory brakes,with its front mounted iron hq holden calipers+rear alloy pbrs.
Stopping from 120-50 wasn't ever a problem with the massive f150 brake vacum tank fitted, that boosted the power on the brakes when they were needed and did a good job of keeping brakes in check when driving stop go in the city was the order with the big cam too.
As for the power that day the car ran a recal 730CFM 4778cfm holley.
It was not exactly the ideal carby for that engine but what happened was I swapped the original 4777 680cal holley for a f5000 mechanical injection,which despite feeling the marginal improvments
in power,was using up too much fuel to my liking,so i got rid of it.
I then got a good deal on the 4778 which i figured would adapt reasonably enough to the little engine.
Maybe by chance it made more power with the 4778 .
I cannot say that it felt slower despite it ought to have.
If the 3 speed car runs 12.50's and lost in an approx. 1/4 mile run, what kind of 1/4 mile time did the 5 speed car run???
12 car lengths pulled on a 12.50 car would be worth what in the 1/4 as far as time ( not too mention mph
) ?Maybe the 5 speed car has a little more power than we know of.
[/QUOTE]Its fair to assume given the variables on the day,that the mid12sec car,was a more so, a high12-low13sec car.
Conversely from memory the manual car was hovering around the 190+kph,on the back stretch of a pre refference (where i used to check the tunes)which was a 400 meter bitumen road ,with the 5 speed + 3.36gears and a reasonable but not optimal conservative launch.
I forgot to mention I fitted that car,with the larger 3in diameter gm one tonner chrome moly tailshaft,with the very large universals that came standard on v8 one tonner tray tops.
I didn't want to compromise when it came to putting the power from the flywheel to the ground+ didn't opt for lightweight flywheel for this particular engine,so i fitted a compromised steel flywheel with the weight biased towards the outside of the diameter, which makes any manual car nicer to drive, regardless of load or gear or given application, in the vast majority of the rev range.
I like the concept of maintaining rotation inertia energy to its potential maximum.conversely that car would out brake any recent model I driven fitted with factory brakes,with its front mounted iron hq holden calipers+rear alloy pbrs.
Stopping from 120-50 wasn't ever a problem with the massive f150 brake vacum tank fitted, that boosted the power on the brakes when they were needed and did a good job of keeping brakes in check when driving stop go in the city was the order with the big cam too.
As for the power that day the car ran a recal 730CFM 4778cfm holley.
It was not exactly the ideal carby for that engine but what happened was I swapped the original 4777 680cal holley for a f5000 mechanical injection,which despite feeling the marginal improvments
in power,was using up too much fuel to my liking,so i got rid of it.
I then got a good deal on the 4778 which i figured would adapt reasonably enough to the little engine.
Maybe by chance it made more power with the 4778 .
I cannot say that it felt slower despite it ought to have.
Last edited by oz304; 11-05-2007 at 10:24 PM.
11-05-2007, 09:33 PM
#772
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=black_knight;8072348]Ahhhhhhh!!!
oz34, dude,learn to use paragraphs and sentences.
used correct sentences in correct sequences,sloppy maybe,but not
impossible to read!
I do observe and try to read between the lines,even moreso the lines ye cannot see!
For the time being let fate do its work + hopefully the game will lift to a better level.
oz34, dude,learn to use paragraphs and sentences.
used correct sentences in correct sequences,sloppy maybe,but not
impossible to read!
I do observe and try to read between the lines,even moreso the lines ye cannot see!
For the time being let fate do its work + hopefully the game will lift to a better level.
Last edited by oz304; 11-10-2007 at 10:12 AM.
11-05-2007, 10:52 PM
#773
.Your writing is really hard to understand. You'd do well to make any effort you possibly can to not write in sloppy, meandering blocks that just ooze from one thought to the next with no clear pauses or conceptual separation.
If there is anything - anything - that you can do to write more clearly, then you will be taken a lot more seriously. And that's not a joke.
11-05-2007, 11:12 PM
#774
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-05-2007, 11:35 PM
#775
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=black_knight;8073661]I wasn't kidding, though. I mean, yeah, I was kinda joking with you but I was completely serious about the point that I was making.
But I wasn't joking was I?
people have free will to read what they see.
its either black or white
right or wrong,no grey areas(period)
Bottom line
either its good or evil 100%, take ye pick,thats the trickiest part of learning to read between them hidden lines.
We all got between now and the rest of our lives to learn how to distinguish the two.
But I wasn't joking was I?
people have free will to read what they see.
its either black or white
right or wrong,no grey areas(period)
Bottom line
either its good or evil 100%, take ye pick,thats the trickiest part of learning to read between them hidden lines.
We all got between now and the rest of our lives to learn how to distinguish the two.
Last edited by oz304; 11-07-2007 at 03:33 PM.
11-06-2007, 07:18 AM
#780
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, TX!
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YEP! KWACKA F' 'CKED EM TOO