Nitrous LT1 vs N/A 5.0
01-03-2010, 05:18 AM
#122
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Especially if you got one with say... 8k miles on it for less than 10k?
01-03-2010, 05:31 AM
#123
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I honestly don't care that one 2V amazingly somehow ran a 13.7.
The fact is 98% of them don't run that. Maybe you need to think about what I mean by "internet numbers" and "real world" numbers. In real world numbers, they don't run that, ever.
In real world numbers, on the track, people that can drive, do indeed run 13.9s consistently. You don't agree? Doesn't matter. You're wrong. So are 98% of these GTs not getting into the 13s? Sure. 98% don't even run on a track, let a lot get raced.
I agree, mid-high 14s.
If the fastest is 13.7, high 13s,
even with a good driver will not regularly happen. Why? Because even with one hell of a driver you need ALL other aspects to come together. Track prep and DA are the two biggest ones, which in all honesty those 3 rarely all three happen.
Just like ls1s are capable of running a 12 second pass, but they are not 12 second cars.
They need a lot of different variables to all come together and make it a perfect situation on a perfect pass. Meaning, internet numbers.
I
So "most" ls1s you see run they run 13s, but 2Vs regularly run 13s there? This is why I think you are being naive.
Because I could care less what a car is rated at. I am going off what I have seen first hand.
So basically anyway anyone can prove to you about something is to go and hold your hand to a race ,and make sure you are paying attention. Even then though I think you'd be able to squirm your way out of an excuse as to why you didn't just get pwnt.
I have gave you much more than that over and over.
It's like you attempted to bake us a nice cake. Made it look nice and everything. but the filling was made of ****. You have stated a lot, but said nothing. For your own amusement. It does nothing for anyone else. Meaning this long post of yours did nothing to disprove my claims. Nothing. If a GT running 13.9s consistently with a good driver was such a obnoxious statement for me to make, it should have been an easy win no?
*shrug*
Stock 2v GTs will CONTINUE to run 13.9s consistently with good drivers. The world will still turn. And you'll still argue with everyone because that's what you do.
Do I mind it? Naw. I joined debate class in jr high, high school, and college because I like debating. So we can go on all day/night like this if you want
Last edited by Ke^in; 01-03-2010 at 05:38 AM.
01-03-2010, 05:44 AM
#124
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me lemon, you are set at discussing the majority of racers that can't race, and seem to want to pin the GTs averages on them. Sure these people run mid to high 14s (Read slower than rated) on the track. They don't know what they are doing. It's surely not the norm for those that can drive. Usually people take the differences 13.5/14.5 and make a medium. 14.0/14.1 Meaning the AVERAGE driver can get low to mid 14s in the GT. This is true. And NON OF THESE PEOPLE ARE THE PEOPLE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. I am referring to those that aren't "average" that KNOW how to race. They aren't getting 14s with this car.
So the case may be, you've seen a lot of average, to complete sucky people racing 2v. And that is what you are basing your experience on.
I don't share the same experiences with you. You cannot say "Because my experiences are different than yours, mine means more" That's absurd.
So in the end, lemons has never experienced a 2v being raced right. So he doesn't believe it's happened.
I have, many times over and over again, and it has, and continually will.
The funniest part of this whole argument, OTHER PEOPLE tried to tell you the SAME THING, yet you completely ignored them, but kept after me.
It seems to me it's a bit more to you than the time raced.
So the case may be, you've seen a lot of average, to complete sucky people racing 2v. And that is what you are basing your experience on.
I don't share the same experiences with you. You cannot say "Because my experiences are different than yours, mine means more" That's absurd.
So in the end, lemons has never experienced a 2v being raced right. So he doesn't believe it's happened.
I have, many times over and over again, and it has, and continually will.
The funniest part of this whole argument, OTHER PEOPLE tried to tell you the SAME THING, yet you completely ignored them, but kept after me.
It seems to me it's a bit more to you than the time raced.
01-03-2010, 06:08 AM
#125
Stick with me here..
So people that can't drive fbodys run 14s... Regardless if it 14.1 or 14.4. I think we can both agree that in average DA with an average driver an ls1 will run around a 13.4-13.6.. Can they be faster or slower? Yes, but I would say that is about normal.
Then you go to say that people that can't drive a GT runs low-mid 14s.
So, EVEN IF!!! You are saying the ls1 with a bad driver runs a 14.1 and a mustang driver runs a low-mid 14 (14.1-14.4). This means that with good average drivers in both on an average DA at an average track, the ls1 will be running mid 13s (13.4-13.6 as said) and the GT will be running 13.7-13.9.
Now, with that said.. LETS JUST SAY! That a GT can run a 13.7... Going off of this, that would be an AVERAGE PASS on an AVERAGE DAY with an AVERAGE DRIVER, which is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!
I sure as **** hope you ******* got that. I assume a little bit too much sometimes and think that people understand the flaw in their argument as well as be able to read in between the lines at times. Artic said it best when he said you give above average times for 2Vs and below average times for everything else.
I also find it hilarious that you are insinuating that every GT owner I have ever seen run has a shitty driver. It couldn't be that it was in a normal DA (+2000) on an average prepped track with a good driver, that would be impossible because he didn't run a 13.9 or better.
YOU have been talking about amazing drivers in an amazing DA in a 2V and a bad driver in a bad DA in an ls1. How often do you go to the track and pay attention to the DA? I don't think you have the slightest clue as to what DA does to a car, say the difference between running in +250 and +2400 DA.
I can't even argue with you because you honestly don't understand the simplest things and you for some odd ******* reason can't see that you are making flaws in your own argument, I'm not even having to do anything.
You stick to you 14 second 2V, I'll stick to my 10 second LsX.
http://s250.photobucket.com/albums/g...stockCobra.flv
Yes, he was really racing... And yes, he really thought he could run 13.9s to beat me.
So people that can't drive fbodys run 14s... Regardless if it 14.1 or 14.4. I think we can both agree that in average DA with an average driver an ls1 will run around a 13.4-13.6.. Can they be faster or slower? Yes, but I would say that is about normal.
Then you go to say that people that can't drive a GT runs low-mid 14s.
So, EVEN IF!!! You are saying the ls1 with a bad driver runs a 14.1 and a mustang driver runs a low-mid 14 (14.1-14.4). This means that with good average drivers in both on an average DA at an average track, the ls1 will be running mid 13s (13.4-13.6 as said) and the GT will be running 13.7-13.9.
Now, with that said.. LETS JUST SAY! That a GT can run a 13.7... Going off of this, that would be an AVERAGE PASS on an AVERAGE DAY with an AVERAGE DRIVER, which is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!
I sure as **** hope you ******* got that. I assume a little bit too much sometimes and think that people understand the flaw in their argument as well as be able to read in between the lines at times. Artic said it best when he said you give above average times for 2Vs and below average times for everything else.
I also find it hilarious that you are insinuating that every GT owner I have ever seen run has a shitty driver. It couldn't be that it was in a normal DA (+2000) on an average prepped track with a good driver, that would be impossible because he didn't run a 13.9 or better.
YOU have been talking about amazing drivers in an amazing DA in a 2V and a bad driver in a bad DA in an ls1. How often do you go to the track and pay attention to the DA? I don't think you have the slightest clue as to what DA does to a car, say the difference between running in +250 and +2400 DA.
I can't even argue with you because you honestly don't understand the simplest things and you for some odd ******* reason can't see that you are making flaws in your own argument, I'm not even having to do anything.
You stick to you 14 second 2V, I'll stick to my 10 second LsX.
http://s250.photobucket.com/albums/g...stockCobra.flv
Yes, he was really racing... And yes, he really thought he could run 13.9s to beat me.
01-03-2010, 09:10 AM
#126
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually think you are attempting to get this thread locked too. Or attempting to do this, then blame it all on me so I'll be banned. Just stating that beforehand.
For future references, don't private message me trying to convince me what a nice guy you are, and how everyone else that msg'd me were hate-mongers that need to get a life. How you think I will do just fine here etc, then turn right around in the main forum and act just like all the people that msg'd me said you would. It comes off as pretentious. Fake if you will.
You keep making these statements as if you have problems with me "following along"
if your rant was so just, you'd not have to revert to such shenanigans lemons. Come on, we can "debate" like adults can't we? I mean I am not getting butt-hurt by all means. But you seem to be taking this 13.9 thing a bit too seriously..
I wasn't giving a general number. My knowledge of what Fbodies run isn't up to par. So I'd never try to make any statement to the like unless it was a generic one. I know what *I* have seen them run. As far as that, no clue. So if my LS1 numbers are off, they are off because of guessing.
Being that I am not in the know about the averages of Fbodies, I will just have to take your word for it.
I said those that are mediocre drivers run low to mid 14s. (Meaning decent drivers, but haven't really figured it "out" Once they "figure it out" those 14.0/14.1 runs they make suddenly turn into 13.9s. This is what happened to me, and a bunch of other Mustang owners. Is the majority of those in Mustangs getting these times? Hell no. Most don't even race them.
AGAIN.. my comments about LS1 cars were purely from what I saw. I have no knowledge of the averages LS1 cars go. That's really why I joined this place. To learn more about LS1 cars. This debate really isn't about LS 1 cars. (I understand the comparison you are trying to make, but it just doesn't work here. Not with me anyhow. )
Wow that was some "internet" rice-boy math if I have ever seen it. For one, you'd have to agree to everything you are saying there. I don't. And no, my comments about the LS1 mean nothing. As I told you above. I have no clue about it. For your comments above to be legit, I would have. Sorry about that.
Oh I got what you were attempting to do.
Condescending and Pretentious.
You are referring to this same Artic right?
As for giving above average times for 2vs. I was. I was also using above average drivers. As for the other numbers, I more than likely said as far as I saw. If I was wrong, and someone showed me, I'd gladly say as much.
That's not what I am insinuating at all. Can you show me the link where I did this? Unless you were inferring to my OBVIOUS sarcasm.
No. AGAIN, why do you keep bringing in LS1s into the conversation? It has nothing to do with what I am referring to lemons. Hmm now what for reason would you have to do this? Hmm...
Sleight of Mind Fallacies
NIT-PICKING:
Instead of dealing with a comment or question directly, the idea here is to focus on some insignificant detail to evade the issue or buy time to think.
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
Here we go again
Ad Hominem Variants
OVER YOUR HEAD:
"I'd like to respond to that, but taking into account your background, education, and intelligence, I am quite sure that you would not be able to understand."
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
I am going against my own better judgments and rules for debate doing this, but I love it when people pull the "my car is faster than yours" in the middle of a debate that has nothing to do with it. It reminds me of that old SNL Episode with Will Farrell and his DODGE STRATUS!
Here it is (Minus Will, just as funny)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGo7kTG1Zo8
Irrelevant. BTW stop internet racing.
Now if you'd like to go back to what we were discussing (What others have told you too, that you've ignored is this.)
99-04 GTs are CONSISTENTLY capable of 13.9 times with a driver that knows what he is doing. This isn't even up for debate lemons.
Do most 99-04s runs 13.9s? Hell no! Most people don't know how to drive their cars let a lot launch them. You'll see more 14s cars than not.
Can people get a better time than 13.9 on a 2v GT? Sure. Many have. Just never twice :p
There have been LSx owners in here telling you they usually see these cars running 13.9/14.1 constantly. Yet you ignored them. Why? One even told you that he's seen a 13.7.
Why not attack these guys too? It's almost as if you believe that they can do that, you just refuse to admit it TO ME.
Which is fine. Don't. I don't care.
Just be a bit more honest with your debating, and less like the link posted.
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
The truth is lemons, if this was a real actual debate... one that gets points etc, you'd have been disqualified a week ago.
I have no reason to lie. None.
As for the rest of the forum goes, I've been treated nicely by everyone buy a few e-thugs/wonder-twins that thinks it's funny to keep mentioning the number 13.9 or referencing me in their posts. (I think they think that bothers me?) Which is to be expected being a n3wb in any forum. Then to also be a Mustang owner in a LS1 forum... Considering the circumstances, I've been treated well. To those that sent me private messages telling me not to bother with a certain someone. I should have taken your advice. I was wrong, You guys were right.
But this "No one can run 13.9s in a stock GT consistently" silliness is just that. Silliness.
I predict lemons responds to this post in an even more hostile way, going on about how I can't even understand what I read, or don't have the smarts to understand yaddaa yaddadda..
I wont reply. I am not going to keep this going with you because it's pissing other people off. Let them get mad at someone else. In the end, 99-04GTs will still be able to go 13.9s consistently.
end of line.
Just stating that beforehand. For future references, don't private message me trying to convince me what a nice guy you are, and how everyone else that msg'd me were hate-mongers that need to get a life. How you think I will do just fine here etc, then turn right around in the main forum and act just like all the people that msg'd me said you would. It comes off as pretentious. Fake if you will.
You keep making these statements as if you have problems with me "following along"
if your rant was so just, you'd not have to revert to such shenanigans lemons. Come on, we can "debate" like adults can't we? I mean I am not getting butt-hurt by all means. But you seem to be taking this 13.9 thing a bit too seriously..
So people that can't drive fbodys run 14s... Regardless if it 14.1 or 14.4.
I think we can both agree that in average DA with an average driver an ls1 will run around a 13.4-13.6.. Can they be faster or slower? Yes, but I would say that is about normal.
Then you go to say that people that can't drive a GT runs low-mid 14s.
So, EVEN IF!!! You are saying the ls1 with a bad driver runs a 14.1
)
and a mustang driver runs a low-mid 14 (14.1-14.4). This means that with good average drivers in both on an average DA at an average track, the ls1 will be running mid 13s (13.4-13.6 as said) and the GT will be running 13.7-13.9.
Now, with that said.. LETS JUST SAY! That a GT can run a 13.7... Going off of this, that would be an AVERAGE PASS on an AVERAGE DAY with an AVERAGE DRIVER, which is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!
Now, with that said.. LETS JUST SAY! That a GT can run a 13.7... Going off of this, that would be an AVERAGE PASS on an AVERAGE DAY with an AVERAGE DRIVER, which is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!
I sure as **** hope you ******* got that.
I assume a little bit too much sometimes and think that people understand the flaw in their argument as well as be able to read in between the lines at times.
Artic said it best when he said you give above average times for 2Vs and below average times for everything else.
I also find it hilarious that you are insinuating that every GT owner I have ever seen run has a shitty driver.
YOU have been talking about amazing drivers in an amazing DA in a 2V and a bad driver in a bad DA in an ls1.
Sleight of Mind Fallacies
NIT-PICKING:
Instead of dealing with a comment or question directly, the idea here is to focus on some insignificant detail to evade the issue or buy time to think.
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
How often do you go to the track and pay attention to the DA? I don't think you have the slightest clue as to what DA does to a car, say the difference between running in +250 and +2400 DA. I can't even argue with you because you honestly don't understand the simplest things and you for some odd ******* reason can't see that you are making flaws in your own argument, I'm not even having to do anything.
Ad Hominem Variants
OVER YOUR HEAD:
"I'd like to respond to that, but taking into account your background, education, and intelligence, I am quite sure that you would not be able to understand."
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
You stick to you 14 second 2V, I'll stick to my 10 second LsX.
Here it is (Minus Will, just as funny)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGo7kTG1Zo8
Yes, he was really racing... And yes, he really thought he could run 13.9s to beat me.
Now if you'd like to go back to what we were discussing (What others have told you too, that you've ignored is this.)
99-04 GTs are CONSISTENTLY capable of 13.9 times with a driver that knows what he is doing. This isn't even up for debate lemons.
Do most 99-04s runs 13.9s? Hell no! Most people don't know how to drive their cars let a lot launch them. You'll see more 14s cars than not.
Can people get a better time than 13.9 on a 2v GT? Sure. Many have. Just never twice :p
There have been LSx owners in here telling you they usually see these cars running 13.9/14.1 constantly. Yet you ignored them. Why? One even told you that he's seen a 13.7.
Why not attack these guys too? It's almost as if you believe that they can do that, you just refuse to admit it TO ME.
Which is fine. Don't. I don't care.
Just be a bit more honest with your debating, and less like the link posted.
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
The truth is lemons, if this was a real actual debate... one that gets points etc, you'd have been disqualified a week ago.
I have no reason to lie. None.
As for the rest of the forum goes, I've been treated nicely by everyone buy a few e-thugs/wonder-twins that thinks it's funny to keep mentioning the number 13.9 or referencing me in their posts. (I think they think that bothers me?) Which is to be expected being a n3wb in any forum. Then to also be a Mustang owner in a LS1 forum... Considering the circumstances, I've been treated well. To those that sent me private messages telling me not to bother with a certain someone. I should have taken your advice. I was wrong, You guys were right.
But this "No one can run 13.9s in a stock GT consistently" silliness is just that. Silliness.
I predict lemons responds to this post in an even more hostile way, going on about how I can't even understand what I read, or don't have the smarts to understand yaddaa yaddadda..
I wont reply. I am not going to keep this going with you because it's pissing other people off. Let them get mad at someone else. In the end, 99-04GTs will still be able to go 13.9s consistently.
end of line.
Last edited by Ke^in; 01-03-2010 at 11:55 AM.
01-03-2010, 11:31 AM
#127
How bout everyone drops the damn 2v thing??
Can a stock 2v run 13.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock 2v, will it run 13.9? Doubtful!
Can a stock LS1 run 12.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock LS1, will it run 12.9? Doubtful!
End of story!
Oh and 5.0 is better than both.
End of story!
Can a stock 2v run 13.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock 2v, will it run 13.9? Doubtful!
Can a stock LS1 run 12.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock LS1, will it run 12.9? Doubtful!
End of story!
Oh and 5.0 is better than both.
End of story!
01-03-2010, 11:58 AM
#128
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop not sure if you are really disagree with either of us .. but ok 
The chances of seeing a stock 2v at the track is very slim anyhow
As far as the LSx comments, no one was talking about those. That was just a distraction from lemonparty.
And I agree, the 5.0 rulez.
All this needs now is a
The chances of seeing a stock 2v at the track is very slim anyhow
As far as the LSx comments, no one was talking about those. That was just a distraction from lemonparty.
And I agree, the 5.0 rulez.
All this needs now is a
Last edited by Ke^in; 01-03-2010 at 12:16 PM.
01-03-2010, 12:54 PM
#131
10 Second Club
How bout everyone drops the damn 2v thing??
Can a stock 2v run 13.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock 2v, will it run 13.9? Doubtful!
Can a stock LS1 run 12.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock LS1, will it run 12.9? Doubtful!
End of story!
Oh and 5.0 is better than both.
End of story!
Can a stock 2v run 13.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock 2v, will it run 13.9? Doubtful!
Can a stock LS1 run 12.9? It has been done!
If you go to your local track and see a stock LS1, will it run 12.9? Doubtful!
End of story!
Oh and 5.0 is better than both.
End of story!
01-03-2010, 03:37 PM
#132
11 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kansas
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm just going to throw this out there.. I've never seen a stock 2v out of the 15s. Then again, we race in a 2500+ DA on an average track.
That being said, the average LS1 car runs high 13s stock here. Stall/gear only my LS1 went 12.7s.. and mild cam/boltons/stall/gears my LS1 went 11.9s. That's just how DA effects cars.
Kevin, to clear this up, why don't you post a time slip or a video of your car doing 13.9s? If it does it consistently, it shouldn't be a problem.
Not trying to hate
This thread will be locked anyways because it turned in to a giant pissing contest.
That being said, the average LS1 car runs high 13s stock here. Stall/gear only my LS1 went 12.7s.. and mild cam/boltons/stall/gears my LS1 went 11.9s. That's just how DA effects cars.
Kevin, to clear this up, why don't you post a time slip or a video of your car doing 13.9s? If it does it consistently, it shouldn't be a problem.
Not trying to hate
This thread will be locked anyways because it turned in to a giant pissing contest.
01-03-2010, 05:55 PM
#137
12 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: NWI
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice Kill Stopsign!!!! My 2 valve was a dog it ran like a 14.6. It had exhaust and was auto. It was a cool car just not fast at all. My buddies 2 valve with 4.10's full exhuast,full bolt ons. And drag radials couldn't go past a 13.5.
01-03-2010, 10:06 PM
#138
I actually think you are attempting to get this thread locked too. Or attempting to do this, then blame it all on me so I'll be banned. Just stating that beforehand.
For future references, don't private message me trying to convince me what a nice guy you are, and how everyone else that msg'd me were hate-mongers that need to get a life. How you think I will do just fine here etc, then turn right around in the main forum and act just like all the people that msg'd me said you would. It comes off as pretentious. Fake if you will.
You keep making these statements as if you have problems with me "following along" if your rant was so just, you'd not have to revert to such shenanigans lemons. Come on, we can "debate" like adults can't we? I mean I am not getting butt-hurt by all means. But you seem to be taking this 13.9 thing a bit too seriously..
I wasn't giving a general number. My knowledge of what Fbodies run isn't up to par. So I'd never try to make any statement to the like unless it was a generic one. I know what *I* have seen them run. As far as that, no clue. So if my LS1 numbers are off, they are off because of guessing.
Being that I am not in the know about the averages of Fbodies, I will just have to take your word for it.
I said those that are mediocre drivers run low to mid 14s. (Meaning decent drivers, but haven't really figured it "out" Once they "figure it out" those 14.0/14.1 runs they make suddenly turn into 13.9s. This is what happened to me, and a bunch of other Mustang owners. Is the majority of those in Mustangs getting these times? Hell no. Most don't even race them.
AGAIN.. my comments about LS1 cars were purely from what I saw. I have no knowledge of the averages LS1 cars go. That's really why I joined this place. To learn more about LS1 cars. This debate really isn't about LS 1 cars. (I understand the comparison you are trying to make, but it just doesn't work here. Not with me anyhow. )
Wow that was some "internet" rice-boy math if I have ever seen it. For one, you'd have to agree to everything you are saying there. I don't. And no, my comments about the LS1 mean nothing. As I told you above. I have no clue about it. For your comments above to be legit, I would have. Sorry about that.
Oh I got what you were attempting to do.
Condescending and Pretentious.
You are referring to this same Artic right?
As for giving above average times for 2vs. I was. I was also using above average drivers. As for the other numbers, I more than likely said as far as I saw. If I was wrong, and someone showed me, I'd gladly say as much.
That's not what I am insinuating at all. Can you show me the link where I did this? Unless you were inferring to my OBVIOUS sarcasm.
No. AGAIN, why do you keep bringing in LS1s into the conversation? It has nothing to do with what I am referring to lemons. Hmm now what for reason would you have to do this? Hmm...
[/b]
Here we go again
[/b]
I am going against my own better judgments and rules for debate doing this, but I love it when people pull the "my car is faster than yours" in the middle of a debate that has nothing to do with it. It reminds me of that old SNL Episode with Will Farrell and his DODGE STRATUS!
Here it is (Minus Will, just as funny)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGo7kTG1Zo8
Irrelevant. BTW stop internet racing.
Now if you'd like to go back to what we were discussing (What others have told you too, that you've ignored is this.)
99-04 GTs are CONSISTENTLY capable of 13.9 times with a driver that knows what he is doing. This isn't even up for debate lemons.
Do most 99-04s runs 13.9s? Hell no! Most people don't know how to drive their cars let a lot launch them. You'll see more 14s cars than not.
Can people get a better time than 13.9 on a 2v GT? Sure. Many have. Just never twice :p
There have been LSx owners in here telling you they usually see these cars running 13.9/14.1 constantly. Yet you ignored them. Why? One even told you that he's seen a 13.7.
Why not attack these guys too? It's almost as if you believe that they can do that, you just refuse to admit it TO ME.
Which is fine. Don't. I don't care.
Just be a bit more honest with your debating, and less like the link posted.
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
The truth is lemons, if this was a real actual debate... one that gets points etc, you'd have been disqualified a week ago.
I have no reason to lie. None.
As for the rest of the forum goes, I've been treated nicely by everyone buy a few e-thugs/wonder-twins that thinks it's funny to keep mentioning the number 13.9 or referencing me in their posts. (I think they think that bothers me?) Which is to be expected being a n3wb in any forum. Then to also be a Mustang owner in a LS1 forum... Considering the circumstances, I've been treated well. To those that sent me private messages telling me not to bother with a certain someone. I should have taken your advice. I was wrong, You guys were right.
But this "No one can run 13.9s in a stock GT consistently" silliness is just that. Silliness.
I predict lemons responds to this post in an even more hostile way, going on about how I can't even understand what I read, or don't have the smarts to understand yaddaa yaddadda..
I wont reply. I am not going to keep this going with you because it's pissing other people off. Let them get mad at someone else. In the end, 99-04GTs will still be able to go 13.9s consistently.
end of line.
Just stating that beforehand. For future references, don't private message me trying to convince me what a nice guy you are, and how everyone else that msg'd me were hate-mongers that need to get a life. How you think I will do just fine here etc, then turn right around in the main forum and act just like all the people that msg'd me said you would. It comes off as pretentious. Fake if you will.
You keep making these statements as if you have problems with me "following along"
if your rant was so just, you'd not have to revert to such shenanigans lemons. Come on, we can "debate" like adults can't we? I mean I am not getting butt-hurt by all means. But you seem to be taking this 13.9 thing a bit too seriously.. I wasn't giving a general number. My knowledge of what Fbodies run isn't up to par. So I'd never try to make any statement to the like unless it was a generic one. I know what *I* have seen them run. As far as that, no clue. So if my LS1 numbers are off, they are off because of guessing.
Being that I am not in the know about the averages of Fbodies, I will just have to take your word for it.
I said those that are mediocre drivers run low to mid 14s. (Meaning decent drivers, but haven't really figured it "out" Once they "figure it out" those 14.0/14.1 runs they make suddenly turn into 13.9s. This is what happened to me, and a bunch of other Mustang owners. Is the majority of those in Mustangs getting these times? Hell no. Most don't even race them.
AGAIN.. my comments about LS1 cars were purely from what I saw. I have no knowledge of the averages LS1 cars go. That's really why I joined this place. To learn more about LS1 cars. This debate really isn't about LS 1 cars. (I understand the comparison you are trying to make, but it just doesn't work here. Not with me anyhow.
)Wow that was some "internet" rice-boy math if I have ever seen it. For one, you'd have to agree to everything you are saying there. I don't. And no, my comments about the LS1 mean nothing. As I told you above. I have no clue about it. For your comments above to be legit, I would have. Sorry about that.
Oh I got what you were attempting to do.
Condescending and Pretentious.
You are referring to this same Artic right?
As for giving above average times for 2vs. I was. I was also using above average drivers. As for the other numbers, I more than likely said as far as I saw. If I was wrong, and someone showed me, I'd gladly say as much.
That's not what I am insinuating at all. Can you show me the link where I did this? Unless you were inferring to my OBVIOUS sarcasm.
No. AGAIN, why do you keep bringing in LS1s into the conversation? It has nothing to do with what I am referring to lemons. Hmm now what for reason would you have to do this? Hmm...
[/b]
Here we go again
[/b]
I am going against my own better judgments and rules for debate doing this, but I love it when people pull the "my car is faster than yours" in the middle of a debate that has nothing to do with it. It reminds me of that old SNL Episode with Will Farrell and his DODGE STRATUS!
Here it is (Minus Will, just as funny)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGo7kTG1Zo8
Irrelevant. BTW stop internet racing.
Now if you'd like to go back to what we were discussing (What others have told you too, that you've ignored is this.)
99-04 GTs are CONSISTENTLY capable of 13.9 times with a driver that knows what he is doing. This isn't even up for debate lemons.
Do most 99-04s runs 13.9s? Hell no! Most people don't know how to drive their cars let a lot launch them. You'll see more 14s cars than not.
Can people get a better time than 13.9 on a 2v GT? Sure. Many have. Just never twice :p
There have been LSx owners in here telling you they usually see these cars running 13.9/14.1 constantly. Yet you ignored them. Why? One even told you that he's seen a 13.7.
Why not attack these guys too? It's almost as if you believe that they can do that, you just refuse to admit it TO ME.
Which is fine. Don't. I don't care.
Just be a bit more honest with your debating, and less like the link posted.
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html
The truth is lemons, if this was a real actual debate... one that gets points etc, you'd have been disqualified a week ago.
I have no reason to lie. None.
As for the rest of the forum goes, I've been treated nicely by everyone buy a few e-thugs/wonder-twins that thinks it's funny to keep mentioning the number 13.9 or referencing me in their posts. (I think they think that bothers me?) Which is to be expected being a n3wb in any forum. Then to also be a Mustang owner in a LS1 forum... Considering the circumstances, I've been treated well. To those that sent me private messages telling me not to bother with a certain someone. I should have taken your advice. I was wrong, You guys were right.
But this "No one can run 13.9s in a stock GT consistently" silliness is just that. Silliness.
I predict lemons responds to this post in an even more hostile way, going on about how I can't even understand what I read, or don't have the smarts to understand yaddaa yaddadda..
I wont reply. I am not going to keep this going with you because it's pissing other people off. Let them get mad at someone else. In the end, 99-04GTs will still be able to go 13.9s consistently.
end of line.
No doubt...
Just check any posts made by him, sure to be a minimum of 5-6.
