Capn Smokey & The 200 MPH 3rd Gen
09-06-2007, 04:40 PM
#81
Originally Posted by capn smokey
Wow guys, Im not going to kill myself for yall and Im glad to see some people helping my case. I have a very fresh suspension setup and the car is going to be lowered about 2 inches in the next few weeks, I am waiting on a set of rims for my car so the tires will tuck when i drop it and it will be riding on Z-rated tires.
So, now on to you. If you'd like, go ahead and define "fresh suspension setup". If it is so fresh, why are you lowering it 2 inches? Won't that start messing with your geometry quite a bit? Or is that because you realized that it affects drag, and you want to make your story sound plausible?
I've even commented on how far your wheels stick out...so now you are getting new ones? But wait...you said you've already achieved high rates of speed with what you have right there in your sig. So why the change now? And what kinda rims are we talking about here?
And z-rated tires? That's a bit generic, don't you think? Care to elaborate on those? And that brings me back to my last question...I thought you had already broken the sound barrier with what you have?
Why does it sound like you are back pedaling already?
09-06-2007, 09:49 PM
#82
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Okinawa, Japan/Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MeentSS02
For some odd reason, this post right here makes you sound like a troll that doesn't know what is going on. You just have to understand...trolls like you have been around before...you remind me of the guy from back in the day that claimed he had C5R heads that he dug out of the garbage, and his car was geared for top speed runs. Then one day his story became a bit too fantastic, and someone called him on it. He couldn't back pedal fast enough.
So, now on to you. If you'd like, go ahead and define "fresh suspension setup". If it is so fresh, why are you lowering it 2 inches? Won't that start messing with your geometry quite a bit? Or is that because you realized that it affects drag, and you want to make your story sound plausible?
I've even commented on how far your wheels stick out...so now you are getting new ones? But wait...you said you've already achieved high rates of speed with what you have right there in your sig. So why the change now? And what kinda rims are we talking about here?
And z-rated tires? That's a bit generic, don't you think? Care to elaborate on those? And that brings me back to my last question...I thought you had already broken the sound barrier with what you have?
Why does it sound like you are back pedaling already?
So, now on to you. If you'd like, go ahead and define "fresh suspension setup". If it is so fresh, why are you lowering it 2 inches? Won't that start messing with your geometry quite a bit? Or is that because you realized that it affects drag, and you want to make your story sound plausible?
I've even commented on how far your wheels stick out...so now you are getting new ones? But wait...you said you've already achieved high rates of speed with what you have right there in your sig. So why the change now? And what kinda rims are we talking about here?
And z-rated tires? That's a bit generic, don't you think? Care to elaborate on those? And that brings me back to my last question...I thought you had already broken the sound barrier with what you have?
Why does it sound like you are back pedaling already?
& 
09-06-2007, 10:15 PM
#83
Originally Posted by unit213
BTW...600rwhp on the hit isn't enough to propel you to 190-200mph.
I love the 3rd gen ignorance around here - its comical. My 200K mile 85 Z28 is more stable at speed than my low mile 00 TA thats in much better condition overall. And that rusted out redneck slug of a 3rd gen Fireturd you see in trailer parks and make fun of... it happens to be the most aerodynamically stable platform in the history of American automobiles.
I think capn smokey would be lucky to hit 175.
09-07-2007, 07:29 AM
#85
Originally Posted by capn smokey
The claims have been backed with hard facts and numbers, everything you say from this point is irrelevant. In other words, you have been proven wrong.
09-07-2007, 07:50 AM
#86
9 Second Club
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hell, Goliad is in October, plenty of time to register and put this all to bed. http://www.texasmile.com . BTW, there are three 80 model Camaros in the 200 MPH club there.
David Freiberger – BCBGALT - 1980 Chevy Camaro
213.442 MPH, Achieved July-Aug 2004
Tonya Turk – BCBFALT - 1980 Chevy Camaro
208.914 MPH, Achieved July-Aug 2004
(and current record holder for fastest female)
Keith Turk - BCBGALT - 1980 Chevy Camaro
205.697 MPH, Achieved July-Aug 2004
David Freiberger – BCBGALT - 1980 Chevy Camaro
213.442 MPH, Achieved July-Aug 2004
Tonya Turk – BCBFALT - 1980 Chevy Camaro
208.914 MPH, Achieved July-Aug 2004
(and current record holder for fastest female)
Keith Turk - BCBGALT - 1980 Chevy Camaro
205.697 MPH, Achieved July-Aug 2004
Last edited by wrp; 09-07-2007 at 07:57 AM.
09-07-2007, 08:00 AM
#87
I'll say this again like I said in the past posts.
The terminal velocity of the car's design will be the problem. Without any aerodynamics done to the car, it's not going to hit 200, period. I don't care if you have 1000hp, it will become a plane before 185.
And as UNIT213 has posted, your going to need more than 600whp to hit 200, even if you could keep the car down on the road.
It's like hitting a brick after 190. Even if you was spraying 200 shot. That 190-200 take more than just horsepower.
The terminal velocity of the car's design will be the problem. Without any aerodynamics done to the car, it's not going to hit 200, period. I don't care if you have 1000hp, it will become a plane before 185.
And as UNIT213 has posted, your going to need more than 600whp to hit 200, even if you could keep the car down on the road.
It's like hitting a brick after 190. Even if you was spraying 200 shot. That 190-200 take more than just horsepower.
Last edited by wickedwarlock; 09-07-2007 at 08:08 AM.
09-07-2007, 09:28 AM
#89
Originally Posted by wickedwarlock
I'll say this again like I said in the past posts.
The terminal velocity of the car's design will be the problem. Without any aerodynamics done to the car, it's not going to hit 200, period. I don't care if you have 1000hp, it will become a plane before 185.
And as UNIT213 has posted, your going to need more than 600whp to hit 200, even if you could keep the car down on the road.
It's like hitting a brick after 190. Even if you was spraying 200 shot. That 190-200 take more than just horsepower.
The terminal velocity of the car's design will be the problem. Without any aerodynamics done to the car, it's not going to hit 200, period. I don't care if you have 1000hp, it will become a plane before 185.
And as UNIT213 has posted, your going to need more than 600whp to hit 200, even if you could keep the car down on the road.
It's like hitting a brick after 190. Even if you was spraying 200 shot. That 190-200 take more than just horsepower.
Are you talking about terminal velocity in the free fall sense, or in the lift being greater than weight of the object sense? It seems youu're confusing he terminology, correct me if I'm wrong. Every object falling due to a (relatively) constant force, through a fluid (air) will reach a maximum velocity (TV) without additional outside forces working on it. I don't see how this relates to cars on roads.
09-07-2007, 09:34 AM
#90
On The Tree
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Eastern PA
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://racingarticles.com/article_racing-21.html
He would clearly need a few alterations, but aparently 600hp is capable of 200+ MPH
He would clearly need a few alterations, but aparently 600hp is capable of 200+ MPH
09-07-2007, 09:36 AM
#91
Proven wrong? With theory? Put your money where your mouth is capn smokey...put that theory to the test. Show me you can do it with your car, and I'll go back and remove every post I've made making fun of you.
You sound like a troll. The burden of proof is on you. Or you could just admit that you are full of **** (which I'm 99.9% certain you are). I'd bet even if I did know you in person, I'd consider you to be a bullshitter that has no clue about anything...they are a dime a dozen these days, mostly thanks to the internet.
You sound like a troll. The burden of proof is on you. Or you could just admit that you are full of **** (which I'm 99.9% certain you are). I'd bet even if I did know you in person, I'd consider you to be a bullshitter that has no clue about anything...they are a dime a dozen these days, mostly thanks to the internet.
09-07-2007, 09:52 AM
#92
Originally Posted by whiteghost
Are you talking about terminal velocity in the free fall sense, or in the lift being greater than weight of the object sense? It seems youu're confusing he terminology, correct me if I'm wrong. Every object falling due to a (relatively) constant force, through a fluid (air) will reach a maximum velocity (TV) without additional outside forces working on it. I don't see how this relates to cars on roads.
http://sportsfigures.espn.com/sports...y.jsp?iAm=null
09-07-2007, 10:00 AM
#93
TECH Regular
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: va beach, va
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
although im skeptical on weather or not smoky can go as fast as he claims i have noticed two things.
cj, you are a tool for starting a flame war for no reason other than your personal amusment. Smoky is full of **** and everyone thinks so. Get the **** over it already.
Unit, the fact that you let this thread live is a tarnish on you as a mod. In my opinion you (kepping in mind that you are in fact a mod) should go back and read the rules for this section. So far in the first 3 pages the following rules were broken: 1, 4, 6, 8, 9...
now, ill stress, this is just my opinion. i think you do a good job as a mod, but this thread is
.
+1
cj, you are a tool for starting a flame war for no reason other than your personal amusment. Smoky is full of **** and everyone thinks so. Get the **** over it already.
Unit, the fact that you let this thread live is a tarnish on you as a mod. In my opinion you (kepping in mind that you are in fact a mod) should go back and read the rules for this section. So far in the first 3 pages the following rules were broken: 1, 4, 6, 8, 9...
now, ill stress, this is just my opinion. i think you do a good job as a mod, but this thread is
.+1
09-07-2007, 10:14 AM
#94
Originally Posted by Pharm0r
although im skeptical on weather or not smoky can go as fast as he claims i have noticed two things.
cj, you are a tool for starting a flame war for no reason other than your personal amusment. Smoky is full of **** and everyone thinks so. Get the **** over it already.
Unit, the fact that you let this thread live is a tarnish on you as a mod. In my opinion you (kepping in mind that you are in fact a mod) should go back and read the rules for this section. So far in the first 3 pages the following rules were broken: 1, 4, 6, 8, 9...
now, ill stress, this is just my opinion. i think you do a good job as a mod, but this thread is .
+1
cj, you are a tool for starting a flame war for no reason other than your personal amusment. Smoky is full of **** and everyone thinks so. Get the **** over it already.
Unit, the fact that you let this thread live is a tarnish on you as a mod. In my opinion you (kepping in mind that you are in fact a mod) should go back and read the rules for this section. So far in the first 3 pages the following rules were broken: 1, 4, 6, 8, 9...
now, ill stress, this is just my opinion. i think you do a good job as a mod, but this thread is
.+1
09-07-2007, 12:24 PM
#95
Originally Posted by Pharm0r
Unit, the fact that you let this thread live is a tarnish on you as a mod. In my opinion you (kepping in mind that you are in fact a mod) should go back and read the rules for this section. So far in the first 3 pages the following rules were broken: 1, 4, 6, 8, 9...
now, ill stress, this is just my opinion. i think you do a good job as a mod, but this thread is .
+1
now, ill stress, this is just my opinion. i think you do a good job as a mod, but this thread is
.+1
09-07-2007, 01:02 PM
#96
Teching In
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: north georgia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
damn, i just read this thread and am lol. idk if the car will do 200mph, and im sure no one will ever find out, the only part i disagree with is that he said his car is more aerodynamic than the c6zo6.
09-07-2007, 01:57 PM
#98
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Okinawa, Japan/Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Marc 85Z28
I must have missed how he is putting 600HP to the wheels... With the engine listed in his sig, he would need a LOT more than a 160 shot! I doubt it would hit 300rwhp in NA form!
I love the 3rd gen ignorance around here - its comical. My 200K mile 85 Z28 is more stable at speed than my low mile 00 TA thats in much better condition overall. And that rusted out redneck slug of a 3rd gen Fireturd you see in trailer parks and make fun of... it happens to be the most aerodynamically stable platform in the history of American automobiles.
I think capn smokey would be lucky to hit 175.
I love the 3rd gen ignorance around here - its comical. My 200K mile 85 Z28 is more stable at speed than my low mile 00 TA thats in much better condition overall. And that rusted out redneck slug of a 3rd gen Fireturd you see in trailer parks and make fun of... it happens to be the most aerodynamically stable platform in the history of American automobiles.
I think capn smokey would be lucky to hit 175.
09-07-2007, 04:47 PM
#100
Originally Posted by capn smokey
I am not quite 600whp but easily at 600fwhp. A stock zz4 would easily put 300 to the wheels so what makes you think that mine with all of its mods wouldnt make around 400-420whp through a T-56? I dont have a dyno on it so you can call bs if you want but I have beat numerous 400whp+ 4th gens.
Secondly, I've built several SBCs, and while I haven't built your specific combo, I know enough to say that you have a 400HP engine there - and I'm not talking wheel HP! A relatively low compression, 180cc runner, 230 duration cam just isn't going to make impressive power.
I think if you actually put that car on a dyno or ran it on a quarter mile, you'd think differently about its power output. I really hate to do this, but you're claiming 100-120 more rwhp over a stock ZZ4 (that's roughly 150 more engine HP) with heads that flow 30cfm more and a cam 10 degrees bigger!?
Finally, I'd say you're 400-420rwhp estimate is a pretty decent one, WITH THE SPRAY.