'96Z 396 LTx Stroker beats back Cammed/Header 5th Gen SS
08-06-2013, 07:53 PM
#306
^^^ DUDE ^^^
96 Z LTx. 396 Forged Eagle BE, AFR195s, CR 12.5:1 Comp Ultra-Pro Mag1.6 RRs, Lt-4 Intake, 42lb FI, 58mm TB, Comp 292XFI Cam, Kook LTs, PerformaBuilt Lvl-3, SS 3600, 4" DS, Spooled Strange D-60 w/5.13s, BMR K-mem & A-arms, Hotchkis out back, Mazeire, MSD Digi-6 , Nano-N2O, 75 shot: 7.28 @ 95.7 1.6 60' - New Build: NA 8.4 >2.6 60'< 90.4 Mph
8.4s NA with the new set up....
Things that make you say hmmmm he might be running his times on the bottle....
96 Z LTx. 396 Forged Eagle BE, AFR195s, CR 12.5:1 Comp Ultra-Pro Mag1.6 RRs, Lt-4 Intake, 42lb FI, 58mm TB, Comp 292XFI Cam, Kook LTs, PerformaBuilt Lvl-3, SS 3600, 4" DS, Spooled Strange D-60 w/5.13s, BMR K-mem & A-arms, Hotchkis out back, Mazeire, MSD Digi-6 , Nano-N2O, 75 shot: 7.28 @ 95.7 1.6 60' - New Build: NA 8.4 >2.6 60'< 90.4 Mph
8.4s NA with the new set up....
Things that make you say hmmmm he might be running his times on the bottle....
08-06-2013, 09:56 PM
#311
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what it means, when people are drawn to think that other people are engaged in duplicity?
What would tend to make one person think that another person would say or, otherwise imply one thing, and summarily go about doing another?
Huh…
Now some folks believe that this is due to those people being themselves, prone toward duplicity.
I wonder if there's any signs of duplicity by those currently demonstrating the tendency to suspect such in others, where there is otherwise, no evidence to warrant such?
The record clearly suggest that there is, with others having already pointed to specific examples, but one such sign might be that one would post up a signature wherein there is a relatively large photo of ONE car, which boasts one set of performance parameters and when a race is agreed upon declare that they never intended to race the car which they had advertised as their ride… but a different car.
Another might be that one would post up a video of the new car, indicating it's performance parameters, while in the process of significantly upgrading the performance of that machine into an entirely different bracket of parameters.
Another would be the questioning of the intentions of the other party; who has posted in great detail the design of its car… its present stage of development and video evidence of its performance, along with specific information regarding the standard performance marks, relevant to the measured course upon which that car was tested. This being the means by which the duplicitous personality foments an erroneous rationalization, which seeks to justify its nefarious behavior and as part and parcel of the illusion, further seeks to gain external validation for such, through some sense of popular acceptance…
Others would, of course, disagree.
Which is fine… what would be more interesting is the argument that those who disagree would bring, in trying to sustain their opposing point of view.
Anyone?
What would tend to make one person think that another person would say or, otherwise imply one thing, and summarily go about doing another?
Huh…
Now some folks believe that this is due to those people being themselves, prone toward duplicity.
I wonder if there's any signs of duplicity by those currently demonstrating the tendency to suspect such in others, where there is otherwise, no evidence to warrant such?
The record clearly suggest that there is, with others having already pointed to specific examples, but one such sign might be that one would post up a signature wherein there is a relatively large photo of ONE car, which boasts one set of performance parameters and when a race is agreed upon declare that they never intended to race the car which they had advertised as their ride… but a different car.
Another might be that one would post up a video of the new car, indicating it's performance parameters, while in the process of significantly upgrading the performance of that machine into an entirely different bracket of parameters.
Another would be the questioning of the intentions of the other party; who has posted in great detail the design of its car… its present stage of development and video evidence of its performance, along with specific information regarding the standard performance marks, relevant to the measured course upon which that car was tested. This being the means by which the duplicitous personality foments an erroneous rationalization, which seeks to justify its nefarious behavior and as part and parcel of the illusion, further seeks to gain external validation for such, through some sense of popular acceptance…
Others would, of course, disagree.
Which is fine… what would be more interesting is the argument that those who disagree would bring, in trying to sustain their opposing point of view.
Anyone?
Last edited by OVA1; 08-06-2013 at 10:39 PM.
08-06-2013, 11:25 PM
#313
I wonder what it means, when people are drawn to think that other people are engaged in duplicity?
What would tend to make one person think that another person would say or, otherwise imply one thing, and summarily go about doing another?
Huh…
Now some folks believe that this is due to those people being themselves, prone toward duplicity.
I wonder if there's any signs of duplicity by those currently demonstrating the tendency to suspect such in others, where there is otherwise, no evidence to warrant such?
The record clearly suggest that there is, with others having already pointed to specific examples, but one such sign might be that one would post up a signature wherein there is a relatively large photo of ONE car, which boasts one set of performance parameters and when a race is agreed upon declare that they never intended to race the car which they had advertised as their ride… but a different car.
Another might be that one would post up a video of the new car, indicating it's performance parameters, while in the process of significantly upgrading the performance of that machine into an entirely different bracket of parameters.
Another would be the questioning of the intentions of the other party; who has posted in great detail the design of its car… its present stage of development and video evidence of its performance, along with specific information regarding the standard performance marks, relevant to the measured course upon which that car was tested. This being the means by which the duplicitous personality foments an erroneous rationalization, which seeks to justify its nefarious behavior and as part and parcel of the illusion, further seeks to gain external validation for such, through some sense of popular acceptance…
Others would, of course, disagree.
Which is fine… what would be more interesting is the argument that those who disagree would bring, in trying to sustain their opposing point of view.
Anyone?
What would tend to make one person think that another person would say or, otherwise imply one thing, and summarily go about doing another?
Huh…
Now some folks believe that this is due to those people being themselves, prone toward duplicity.
I wonder if there's any signs of duplicity by those currently demonstrating the tendency to suspect such in others, where there is otherwise, no evidence to warrant such?
The record clearly suggest that there is, with others having already pointed to specific examples, but one such sign might be that one would post up a signature wherein there is a relatively large photo of ONE car, which boasts one set of performance parameters and when a race is agreed upon declare that they never intended to race the car which they had advertised as their ride… but a different car.
Another might be that one would post up a video of the new car, indicating it's performance parameters, while in the process of significantly upgrading the performance of that machine into an entirely different bracket of parameters.
Another would be the questioning of the intentions of the other party; who has posted in great detail the design of its car… its present stage of development and video evidence of its performance, along with specific information regarding the standard performance marks, relevant to the measured course upon which that car was tested. This being the means by which the duplicitous personality foments an erroneous rationalization, which seeks to justify its nefarious behavior and as part and parcel of the illusion, further seeks to gain external validation for such, through some sense of popular acceptance…
Others would, of course, disagree.
Which is fine… what would be more interesting is the argument that those who disagree would bring, in trying to sustain their opposing point of view.
Anyone?
08-06-2013, 11:26 PM
#314
On The Tree
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wilmywood NC
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lawhead already had most of the parts for his car before this call out ever happened and he already had planned on having the nitrous on the car.
I think y'all are scared that a built 396" will get out ran by a stock 281 c.i bolt on Cobra with a touch of gas
I think y'all are scared that a built 396" will get out ran by a stock 281 c.i bolt on Cobra with a touch of gas
08-06-2013, 11:37 PM
#315
On The Tree
Well, FWIW, I think you are the only one that was duped. I fully understood his posts, and what he was saying/implying. It is no ones fault but your own, that you just looked at his Sig, and made an assumption. Heck, even your signature is outdated, maybe you are trying to "dupe" someone yourself. Who knows? He has even made a statement as such.
That being said, "Who Cares"? I was right there with you on the first page or three, but when the hating seemed to subside, you just stayed on your soap box. It really does seem that you are trying just a weeeee bit too hard to articulate your posts and sound as if you are intelligent. And, you know what they say......but who is they, you ask? The people on this forum that you are so hard trying to impress. And before you state that you don't care to impress, why are you posting on a public forum about your conquests?
You seem to want to show these Whippersnappers a thing or two. Fine, no problem, and I am sure the "Mustank" as you so put it won't put up much of a fight in the 1/8th mile. But, it does seem as though the addition of the nitrous kit being added to his car
is getting you a bit worried, as you should be, because with all your infinite wisdom and bantering, your car is after all, currently an underachiever. You are given the considerable advantage based upon what your car "should" do, but currently does not.
That being said, "Who Cares"? I was right there with you on the first page or three, but when the hating seemed to subside, you just stayed on your soap box. It really does seem that you are trying just a weeeee bit too hard to articulate your posts and sound as if you are intelligent. And, you know what they say......but who is they, you ask? The people on this forum that you are so hard trying to impress. And before you state that you don't care to impress, why are you posting on a public forum about your conquests?
You seem to want to show these Whippersnappers a thing or two. Fine, no problem, and I am sure the "Mustank" as you so put it won't put up much of a fight in the 1/8th mile. But, it does seem as though the addition of the nitrous kit being added to his car
is getting you a bit worried, as you should be, because with all your infinite wisdom and bantering, your car is after all, currently an underachiever. You are given the considerable advantage based upon what your car "should" do, but currently does not.
08-07-2013, 06:20 AM
#319
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly, it doesn't…
But it does speak to a prevailing and oh so consistent theme, bringing me to formally ask my worthy competitor:
Lawman, is it your position that for our race, we are running what we 'had designed for, planned to run and/or had already purchased for installation, or that which was already in the cars during the runs recorded and offered as a video demonstration of the car's performance, but which was deactivated, thus not being used in the above noted videos or data stated in example of our performance, prior to our having agreed to the race and this without regard to the performance parameters established by the respective datum provided in the process of coming to the agreement; all of which is aside from the normal processes of preparing one's car for such a contest?
