islander033

If you pull a legit 1.49 you'll have 1.2g beat pretty good.


So....what looks more plausible for a bolt on LS6 at 3200lbs RW?



or



and and

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

I was talking about lateral g's

Those calcs don't mean **** man. I can't hardly believe a "real" drag racers like yourself gives those things much credit. Just showed your true colors right theerrrrr

Especially when talking about 60'. Way way to many variables right there.

Atleast the 1/4 calcs gives things a chance to even out a bit and they can still be off drastically in et or mph or both.

islander033

But you were touting 60ft calcs that were wrong to try and prove your fake 60, then ddnspider corrected them and you didn't want to talk about it anymore. lol

Nothing wrong with Wallace to get ball park info, and it shows you aren't even near the park. ouch

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

I wasn't touting anything other than those calcs aren't gospel.

Besides....we have already concluded if a 300whp car csn 60' in the 1.5s then i should be able to do better.

islander033

Yes you were, no need to lie. Everyone seen it man. Post #700, you were sucking the bad math off and bathed in the goop.

Ok, so bet me for you to 60ft a tenth worse than your best ever. 1.368 or better and you can take my cash at 3:1 for what ever you want to bet.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

Only one lying is you thinking the calcs are gospel.

Just how dumb are you? How many times do i have to say I've changed nearly everything in the suspension? I have no idea how it's gonna 60' next time out. I didn't even make most the changes soley for drag strip performance.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

You did say that, didn't you? Until the math disproved it, then the maths wrong, aint it?

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

The math did back it up. The math showed that you can't calculate every factor. Your math tried to show that the acceleration is linear......it is not. So therefore the math failed to prove it couldn't be done. Which is a success for me.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

Holy crap you're dumber than I thought. Let's try this:

Darth posts math.....

I reply with:
You respond with:
I respond FIXING DARTHS MATH and disprove the 1.26 60 USING the math YOU AGREED WITH.....and now you say that the math can't be used.

You really are so bitter its hilarious. It's ok, everybody whose read this can see for themselves your full of crap. People coming out of the wood work in threads saying their sick of your arrogance and bashing. As long as people know to ignore you the same way they ignore KT, the work here is done.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

I'm not bitter....you are because you're a ******* dumbass.

The only thing the math had to do was prove that yes it is actually possible. You were looking for something absurd to prove it wasn't possible and you didn't get that.

I can see why you would be pissed when I've outran one of your boosted junkers and right on the heels of you other boosted junker with a bolt on ls6.

Btw.....goin by all this 60' talk your sig seems awful strange. You did a 1.6 60' to go a 12.9 and a 1.6 60' to go a 11.2 wuth twice as much power. That smacks everything in the face you have been preaching here

Nice talkin wif ya Moron

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

Yes!!! yes!!! Thank yoy!!! I always knew I'd get you to 1 day admit that I've been faster AND quicker than you with my junk. Run what you brung.....I brought a 3800lb boosted motor with a heavy *** drivetrain and full weight clutch and flywheel on stock 16 inch wheels.....you brought a motor swapped and holesawed car with a faceplated trans with a horrible 5.5" clutch....and I've been faster AND quicker. Sounds like you made the wrong choice. Thanks for making my day and lettinge quote it for eternity.

Oh and that 12.9 with a 1.6 sixty? Was on a stock 160k mile z28 with an ls1 intake....a measly tenth off your real best sixty.....but don't worry, my new boosted junk will be back to the track before summer and go quicker than your best slip with a stock 4l60e and 10 bolt....that'll make 2 junk cars that are quicker than you. I put money in the hp you put the money in the drive train.....I've still be quicker. Maybe you should look at a cam

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

I am perfectly happy nipping on the heels of a cammed boosted car with a bolt on engine......it makes me laugh. Like alot

If i did do a cam it would likely outrun your cam and boost.....so I'd be ok with that. Just like I'd be ok with out running you with out a cam but with boost. Either or makes no difference to me.

Now back to this 60' business. According to your math and islanders 60' calc having the same 60' but et being nearly 2sec apart is impossibull

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

"Coulda woulda shoulda if I did my cam I'd be faster."....typical bench racer. Beat my time or shut your mouth and go back to holesaws. I can make the math work for both my cars....it's ashame you can't use math to prove yours haha.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

No bench racing...i have actual numbers. You claim a cammed car is faster....hell your boosted cammed cars aren't at this point

Now back to this impossible 60' to run a 12.9.

Math can't prove nor disprove mine. But one thing for sure it shows what a dumbass you are.

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

I'm getting tires of seeing this SR&K type garbage in places outside the SR&K section. Enough.