9.98@138.80mph--stock bottom end 346 n/a
10-30-2008, 07:52 AM
#41
Staging Lane
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Winter Park, FL
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the weight is a not an issue. Even with the mods he listed above anybody would know it is lighter than what he claims.
The real issue is the HUGE bump in MPH on the last half of the track. A bump that seems inconsistent with his previous runs.
To bad the people on on CF don't have the drag racing "common sense" the people oin here have.
The real issue is the HUGE bump in MPH on the last half of the track. A bump that seems inconsistent with his previous runs.
To bad the people on on CF don't have the drag racing "common sense" the people oin here have.
10-30-2008, 08:07 AM
#42
CARTEK Racing
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: East Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 2,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This isn't the first time someone has been accused of using nitrous/stroker.
Cartek has been accused in the past and even went as far as tearing a motor down for a guy (we all know by the way) who swore the car in question was a stroker. Tore it down right in front of him immediately following a supervised track outing. The guy admitted he was wrong publicly.
I don't see why the same can't be done here. Rob doesn't have to go pulling the motor or anything but at the Corvette Challenge next week I don't see the harm in him opening his car to visual inspection (hood trunk cockpit) and a weight verification on the Etown scale.
If it were me, I would jump at the chance to shut Alex up.
But seriously, I think for this record and for AMR to get the credit they deserve my suggestion would be the best way to go. Anything is better than all this back and forth stuff.
Cartek has been accused in the past and even went as far as tearing a motor down for a guy (we all know by the way) who swore the car in question was a stroker. Tore it down right in front of him immediately following a supervised track outing. The guy admitted he was wrong publicly.
I don't see why the same can't be done here. Rob doesn't have to go pulling the motor or anything but at the Corvette Challenge next week I don't see the harm in him opening his car to visual inspection (hood trunk cockpit) and a weight verification on the Etown scale.
If it were me, I would jump at the chance to shut Alex up.
But seriously, I think for this record and for AMR to get the credit they deserve my suggestion would be the best way to go. Anything is better than all this back and forth stuff.
Agreed!
Provided of cource that the car replicates the number in the condition it is claimed to be with the slight adjustment for DA
10-30-2008, 08:58 AM
#43
On The Tree
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked the question yesterday how his car, picking up the mph it did in the second 1/8 was defying the laws of physics. So, I'll ask it again...which laws? How are they being defied?
Before you throw around terms you don't understand you better read up on Newtonian physics and Newtons laws of motion. Otherwise, don't go saying things you can't back up with mathmatical analysis...which, is what I'm asking for.
Prove on paper that it can't be done....because that is what you are intimating when you make that kind of statement .
And for those of you who accuse me of not being "technical" (and you know who you are) here's your chance to prove it. Go for it.
Before you throw around terms you don't understand you better read up on Newtonian physics and Newtons laws of motion. Otherwise, don't go saying things you can't back up with mathmatical analysis...which, is what I'm asking for.
Prove on paper that it can't be done....because that is what you are intimating when you make that kind of statement .
And for those of you who accuse me of not being "technical" (and you know who you are) here's your chance to prove it. Go for it.
10-30-2008, 09:53 AM
#45
CARTEK Racing
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: East Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 2,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked the question yesterday how his car, picking up the mph it did in the second 1/8 was defying the laws of physics. So, I'll ask it again...which laws? How are they being defied?
Before you throw around terms you don't understand you better read up on Newtonian physics and Newtons laws of motion. Otherwise, don't go saying things you can't back up with mathmatical analysis...which, is what I'm asking for.
Prove on paper that it can't be done....because that is what you are intimating when you make that kind of statement .
And for those of you who accuse me of not being "technical" (and you know who you are) here's your chance to prove it. Go for it.
Before you throw around terms you don't understand you better read up on Newtonian physics and Newtons laws of motion. Otherwise, don't go saying things you can't back up with mathmatical analysis...which, is what I'm asking for.
Prove on paper that it can't be done....because that is what you are intimating when you make that kind of statement .
And for those of you who accuse me of not being "technical" (and you know who you are) here's your chance to prove it. Go for it.
Fine, if he answers the other 4, Ill let him pass on that question...
10-30-2008, 09:56 AM
#46
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would want $5000 up front for a teardown by my mechanic. If it's not a 346 na then I give the $ back.
I'm happy with the car the way it is and will continue to enjoy it. Hope you guys enjoyed the video.
I'm happy with the car the way it is and will continue to enjoy it. Hope you guys enjoyed the video.
10-30-2008, 10:10 AM
#49
On The Tree
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go for it, since I'm not "technical" enough to do so.
10-30-2008, 10:24 AM
#50
CARTEK Racing
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: East Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 2,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But this should be a fairly easy exercise, no? You know the ~weight of the car...assume 3200lbs. You know the approximate power of the car...assume 525rwhp (factoring in DA and what the car would have dyno'd on a Dynojet...it's a large variable, but lets use that number for number's sake). You know the acceleration of the car in the first 1/8 of the mile. And you know how many mph the car picked up in the last 1/8 mile. So there...you have all the data you need to start plugging into the "laws of physics" in order to show what can...or in your case...can't be done.
Go for it, since I'm not "technical" enough to do so.
Go for it, since I'm not "technical" enough to do so.
Mark had a better idea then any of my questions...
let have him roll the car over the scales, show us whats under the hood, no need to a tear down, that extreme. and after that, run 139mph. We'll factor in air.
im sure we will hear excuses if the only traped 135, but at leat do it to shut me up.
Im more concerned as to why ROB will not answer me, and has you do it for him...
Now Rob... and ONLY Rob, please stand up...
10-30-2008, 10:36 AM
#51
On The Tree
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay...so then use 3280 in the "laws of physics" and see what you come up with. If the numbers are waaaay out of line...you win. If they are close...you lose...very simple...the math won't lie.
As for your other suggestions...here's a few for you. How about you pay Rob $500 for each thing he can prove you wrong on as accusations? That would be...1)shifting without the clutch 2)trailering to the track 3)racing weight (you seem to believe he's way under 3200lbs...and those are for a start.
10-30-2008, 11:02 AM
#52
CARTEK Racing
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: East Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 2,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay...so then use 3280 in the "laws of physics" and see what you come up with. If the numbers are waaaay out of line...you win. If they are close...you lose...very simple...the math won't lie.
As for your other suggestions...here's a few for you. How about you pay Rob $500 for each thing he can prove you wrong on as accusations? That would be...1)shifting without the clutch 2)trailering to the track 3)racing weight (you seem to believe he's way under 3200lbs...and those are for a start.
As for your other suggestions...here's a few for you. How about you pay Rob $500 for each thing he can prove you wrong on as accusations? That would be...1)shifting without the clutch 2)trailering to the track 3)racing weight (you seem to believe he's way under 3200lbs...and those are for a start.
come on Rob... man up
10-30-2008, 11:18 AM
#53
Don,
Can we agree that a visual inspection and weight verification IS NOT an unreasonable end to all this mess?
Forget for 1 minute the "laws of physics" stuff and let's get down to the meat of what's in question here.
I think we can all agree that there are members postng in here that do know what they are talking about when it comes to elapsed time, mph, power to weight ratio etc.
We are talking about experienced racers here that have legitimate questions. We are also talking about possible future AMR customers that would I'm sure LOVE to able to go and purchase a 9 sec capable heads and cam package.
What's the harm in the inspection?
Don, please choose your words carefully if you respond to me directly, there is no reason for you to speak to me that way again.
Can we agree that a visual inspection and weight verification IS NOT an unreasonable end to all this mess?
Forget for 1 minute the "laws of physics" stuff and let's get down to the meat of what's in question here.
I think we can all agree that there are members postng in here that do know what they are talking about when it comes to elapsed time, mph, power to weight ratio etc.
We are talking about experienced racers here that have legitimate questions. We are also talking about possible future AMR customers that would I'm sure LOVE to able to go and purchase a 9 sec capable heads and cam package.
What's the harm in the inspection?
Don, please choose your words carefully if you respond to me directly, there is no reason for you to speak to me that way again.
10-30-2008, 11:36 AM
#56
On The Tree
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don,
Can we agree that a visual inspection and weight verification IS NOT an unreasonable end to all this mess?
Forget for 1 minute the "laws of physics" stuff and let's get down to the meat of what's in question here.
I think we can all agree that there are members postng in here that do know what they are talking about when it comes to elapsed time, mph, power to weight ratio etc.
We are talking about experienced racers here that have legitimate questions. We are also talking about possible future AMR customers that would I'm sure LOVE to able to go and purchase a 9 sec capable heads and cam package.
What's the harm in the inspection?
Don, please choose your words carefully if you respond to me directly, there is no reason for you to speak to me that way again.
Can we agree that a visual inspection and weight verification IS NOT an unreasonable end to all this mess?
Forget for 1 minute the "laws of physics" stuff and let's get down to the meat of what's in question here.
I think we can all agree that there are members postng in here that do know what they are talking about when it comes to elapsed time, mph, power to weight ratio etc.
We are talking about experienced racers here that have legitimate questions. We are also talking about possible future AMR customers that would I'm sure LOVE to able to go and purchase a 9 sec capable heads and cam package.
What's the harm in the inspection?
Don, please choose your words carefully if you respond to me directly, there is no reason for you to speak to me that way again.
What you all seem to fail to understand is that the onus is not on Rob but rather on you (collectively) to show why his car can't do what it did with what he says he has (he's the one with the video and timeslip)...that's as plain as the big nose on my face (and Alex will confirm that self-assessment
). To argue anything else would be futile from where I stand.Rob has already thrown down the challenge...ante up $5000 and he'll tear the engine down for full inspection...if he passes muster, you lose the money...if he doesn't, you get your money back and he's left with egg on his face and can be accused as the biggest liar/cheat on the racing forums. I know of at least one other person (who will go un-named) that made the same challenge (he wanted $10,000) for a tear-down/inspection of his car to verify his results to be consistant with what he said his car has...so you guys would be getting away cheap.
I've given you all the information you need to see if at least on paper what he says he did is in fact doable...I'd certainly plug those numbers in (or get someone competent in physics to do it for you) prior to taking that bet.
10-30-2008, 11:52 AM
#57
On The Tree
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh...and as far as the weight thing...so what if it's 3200 verse 3280. I seem to recall Rob telling me he learned about all these "dieting" tricks from the last place he shopped. I'm sure Alex is well aware of these and maybe his car should hit the scales at the next rental he attends to see if the dieting secrets work.
I'm sure Alex is well aware of these and maybe his car should hit the scales at the next rental he attends to see if the dieting secrets work.
10-30-2008, 11:56 AM
#58
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, $5,000?
That's one way to insure the fact that no one will be going through his ****.
1) I don't think that this is that serious to anyone.
2) Of course no one will offer him 5k as collateral while they go through his setup.
Why don't you pick a smaller money amount and someone MAY take you up on the offer. Or just keep it at $5,000 where no one will fool with it. Then no one will know how much you're spraying.
Do you actually consider everyone else that stupid?
That's one way to insure the fact that no one will be going through his ****.
1) I don't think that this is that serious to anyone.
2) Of course no one will offer him 5k as collateral while they go through his setup.
Why don't you pick a smaller money amount and someone MAY take you up on the offer. Or just keep it at $5,000 where no one will fool with it. Then no one will know how much you're spraying.
Do you actually consider everyone else that stupid?
10-30-2008, 12:02 PM
#59
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Orange County
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is way way not possible... to pick up 33 mph out of a 346. Naaa not possible. It sounds like he is trying to make his time valid by stating he was running drag radials at 20lbs of pressure. Well if you were running that you wouldn't have got that 1/8 th speed because you would be spinninnnnnn. I have done 2 10.3 passes at 135 mph both times i crossed the 1/8th at 108 or 107.something. Yes i was on drag radials and in a 640rwhp and tq whipple cobra. He has a shot or a stroker the speed and times say he has more hp not less weight so the fact of checking out his car is going to do nothing.
10-30-2008, 12:04 PM
#60
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Orange County
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ohh yah and that is such a street racing crock term. Wow 5000 to look at his engine??? Some guy said he didn't have a ported eaton and we told him we would give him 500 to take it off and show us and if he was wrong we would take 500 from him and it was ported. Guess what he didn't pay sounds like rob