calling out snake95\ other 5.0's!
11-10-2014, 07:40 PM
#1161
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then I guess you just lack reading comprehension, as usual. He was specifically talking about how close Ford and GM engines have always been *when there wasn't a displacement advantage." A 1.1l displacement difference is a pretty large advantage. So of course the NPI 2V and the LT1 weren't close at all, and neither were the PI 2V and the LS1. In my humble opinion, as soon as the 2V was put into the Mustang GT it should have gone to the PI setup. And then the 3V should have debuted in '99. But they obviously were just worried about selling cars.
11-10-2014, 07:45 PM
#1162
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
Then I guess you just lack reading comprehension, as usual. He was specifically talking about how close Ford and GM engines have always been *when there wasn't a displacement advantage." A 1.1l displacement difference is a pretty large advantage. So of course the NPI 2V and the LT1 weren't close at all, and neither were the PI 2V and the LS1. In my humble opinion, as soon as the 2V was put into the Mustang GT it should have gone to the PI setup. And then the 3V should have debuted in '99. But they obviously were just worried about selling cars.
11-10-2014, 07:47 PM
#1163
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed. They were torquey enough to be fun in 1st and 2nd gear, and sound wonderful, but the NPI H/C/I is all-but worthless. If the PI motor debuted in '96, the GT/F-bodies would have been very close in performance.
11-10-2014, 07:57 PM
#1165
Banned
iTrader: (1)
!["MAC"'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%237f3b59' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My step mom had a 4.6 M5 GT mustang, when i was 17 i thought it was pretty fast. It sounded amazing though with the straight pipes. Looking back now it definitely was all show and no go if you will.
11-10-2014, 07:59 PM
#1167
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then I guess you just lack reading comprehension, as usual. He was specifically talking about how close Ford and GM engines have always been *when there wasn't a displacement advantage." A 1.1l displacement difference is a pretty large advantage. So of course the NPI 2V and the LT1 weren't close at all, and neither were the PI 2V and the LS1. In my humble opinion, as soon as the 2V was put into the Mustang GT it should have gone to the PI setup. And then the 3V should have debuted in '99. But they obviously were just worried about selling cars.
11-10-2014, 08:02 PM
#1168
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop splitting hairs. The only ET gained from the wheel/tire swap was purely in being able to hook. Some of us experienced members had a discussion about this in the "Drag Racing Tech" section. Go have a read..
Quote me saying that. If you can't quote it...
Shut the **** up and go fix your broken ****. Thanks
You are correct.. the RT beam triggers the ET clock. Only problem is the RT beam started late.. Look at the slip - he had a worse RT than the guy he was racing, yet he claimed to be out front by a good bit until the 330. If you go read the thread in the "10 second club" forum you will see what his story was. He didn't claim to "keep pace" with the guy cutting 1.45 60 fts with a quicker reaction time 
While his MPH is high it seems the car is lacking in the mid range by how poorly it ETs. It's not just about the 60 ft.. It's a 10.9's car, just not a 10.7's car. If a car runs a number it should be able to back it up that same day. Any NHRA class record holders are required to make a second pass within a few hundredths of the record time. There is a reason for that.
Quote me saying that. If you can't quote it...
Shut the **** up and go fix your broken ****. Thanks
Not what I was saying. I said that the R/T beam is what triggers the ET clock. The 60-foot timer was probably inconsistent. It looks to me like a 10.71 with a 1.5x 60-foot is not unbelievable with his mph... His reaction time looks to be correct on the slip at least. Its similar to the 5.0 that he raced in the other lane. This is consistent with the story of Hio, the 5.0 guy and 92cobranotch, where Hio stayed with the guy on launch. It all looks pretty good to me. The 60-foot is obviously bullshit...
Im with you Guitar. The run may be one of those hero runs. It wasn't supported with another similar slip. But most peopple consider one of those unicorn slips as their personal best... So, I can't really say that he should throw it out... Hell I've only had one 11.3 at 120mph slip ever... But that's my personal best on a 1.72 60-foot.
Im with you Guitar. The run may be one of those hero runs. It wasn't supported with another similar slip. But most peopple consider one of those unicorn slips as their personal best... So, I can't really say that he should throw it out... Hell I've only had one 11.3 at 120mph slip ever... But that's my personal best on a 1.72 60-foot.
While his MPH is high it seems the car is lacking in the mid range by how poorly it ETs. It's not just about the 60 ft.. It's a 10.9's car, just not a 10.7's car. If a car runs a number it should be able to back it up that same day. Any NHRA class record holders are required to make a second pass within a few hundredths of the record time. There is a reason for that.
11-10-2014, 08:11 PM
#1170
11-10-2014, 08:20 PM
#1174
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't mean to come off as having a "better than" attitude... I truly am not that way. I just have little patience for people who tap there keyboard instead of practicing what they preach.
11-10-2014, 08:24 PM
#1175
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Stop splitting hairs. The only ET gained from the wheel/tire swap was purely in being able to hook. Some of us experienced members had a discussion about this in the "Drag Racing Tech" section. Go have a read..
Quote me saying that. If you can't quote it...
Shut the **** up and go fix your broken ****. Thanks
You are correct.. the RT beam triggers the ET clock. Only problem is the RT beam started late.. Look at the slip - he had a worse RT than the guy he was racing, yet he claimed to be out front by a good bit until the 330. If you go read the thread in the "10 second club" forum you will see what his story was. He didn't claim to "keep pace" with the guy cutting 1.45 60 fts with a quicker reaction time
While his MPH is high it seems the car is lacking in the mid range by how poorly it ETs. It's not just about the 60 ft.. It's a 10.9's car, just not a 10.7's car. If a car runs a number it should be able to back it up that same day. Any NHRA class record holders are required to make a second pass within a few hundredths of the record time. There is a reason for that.
Quote me saying that. If you can't quote it...
Shut the **** up and go fix your broken ****. Thanks
You are correct.. the RT beam triggers the ET clock. Only problem is the RT beam started late.. Look at the slip - he had a worse RT than the guy he was racing, yet he claimed to be out front by a good bit until the 330. If you go read the thread in the "10 second club" forum you will see what his story was. He didn't claim to "keep pace" with the guy cutting 1.45 60 fts with a quicker reaction time
While his MPH is high it seems the car is lacking in the mid range by how poorly it ETs. It's not just about the 60 ft.. It's a 10.9's car, just not a 10.7's car. If a car runs a number it should be able to back it up that same day. Any NHRA class record holders are required to make a second pass within a few hundredths of the record time. There is a reason for that.
Dude is always freakin out.
ell.....not if. He would get outran.
11-10-2014, 08:28 PM
#1176
11-10-2014, 08:30 PM
#1177
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huge ******* difference between a drag car backing up a time and a under tired m6 street car doin it on a dr. I can make the car run consistent. .....but that was nit my goal for running that day. I was trying different launches and tire pressures seeing where it led. I think I found the sweet spot.....but still tough to duplicate.
Yeak OK... So you were under the belief that your car ran 1.26 to the 60, and 10.7... but felt there was some tweaking that needed done... Maybe get you to the 1.1X range right? Riiiightt! Who are you kidding? You ******* tried hard as **** to duplicate that run, but couldn't. Get within .1 and we'll let you keep that time as legit.
11-10-2014, 08:32 PM
#1178
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hell i even raced it with a poor running engine hence my 8th mile ET and Trap speed. To think i have zero experience would be wrong. I didn't build the engine the second time merely bought the parts and helped bolt up the rest that needed to be done. I still don't have the space or the tools to do everything myself. Once the shop is built though i will. Bit that's 2 years from now. No worries man my car will be fixed soon enough.
11-10-2014, 08:33 PM
#1179
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeak OK... So you were under the belief that your car ran 1.26 to the 60, and 10.7... but felt there was some tweaking that needed done... Maybe get you to the 1.1X range right? Riiiightt! Who are you kidding? You ******* tried hard as **** to duplicate that run, but couldn't. Get within .1 and we'll let you keep that time as legit.