whose says ls1 is better?
4th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,687
RE: whose says ls1 is better?
ORIGINAL: RS.Camaro.SS
Yeah, but you didnt ask him the track temp, or possibly if the track was even treated ... everyone here is quick to call bs without the full story ... kind sad i think [sm=smiley19.gif]... plus you missed his point all together, he was just comparing the two engines with similar work done to them
Yeah, but you didnt ask him the track temp, or possibly if the track was even treated ... everyone here is quick to call bs without the full story ... kind sad i think [sm=smiley19.gif]... plus you missed his point all together, he was just comparing the two engines with similar work done to them
1st Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 168
From:
RE: whose says ls1 is better?
ORIGINAL: JD1969
If the track conditions were really bad his MPH would still be in the ballpark of where it should be. You need to realize that some of usare long time track vets and can spot when things just don't add up. These forums are about use full info , not sitting around the campfire and singing Kumbaya
ORIGINAL: RS.Camaro.SS
Yeah, but you didnt ask him the track temp, or possibly if the track was even treated ... everyone here is quick to call bs without the full story ... kind sad i think [sm=smiley19.gif]... plus you missed his point all together, he was just comparing the two engines with similar work done to them
Yeah, but you didnt ask him the track temp, or possibly if the track was even treated ... everyone here is quick to call bs without the full story ... kind sad i think [sm=smiley19.gif]... plus you missed his point all together, he was just comparing the two engines with similar work done to them
Ninja Administrator
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,172
From: Potato
RE: whose says ls1 is better?
I have always known JD to be levelheaded and give good advice and information. The thing we are trying to say is that with the numbers all messed up, and with the comparrison that was TRYING to be made, the "full story" is then moot. It doesnt matter how the track was or what conditions were run, because if the cars are not hitting intuitive numbers then SOMETHING is wrong, and that something has so many variables you would need a room full of monkeys and a slide rule to keep it under control.
the longtime track vet remark was simply to say that some people have seen enough timeslips that they can look at a ET and a MPH and say "yes" or "no".
the longtime track vet remark was simply to say that some people have seen enough timeslips that they can look at a ET and a MPH and say "yes" or "no".
4th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,687
RE: whose says ls1 is better?
ORIGINAL: SpecterGT260
I have always known JD to be levelheaded and give good advice and information. The thing we are trying to say is that with the numbers all messed up, and with the comparrison that was TRYING to be made, the "full story" is then moot. It doesnt matter how the track was or what conditions were run, because if the cars are not hitting intuitive numbers then SOMETHING is wrong, and that something has so many variables you would need a room full of monkeys and a slide rule to keep it under control.
the longtime track vet remark was simply to say that some people have seen enough timeslips that they can look at a ET and a MPH and say "yes" or "no".
I have always known JD to be levelheaded and give good advice and information. The thing we are trying to say is that with the numbers all messed up, and with the comparrison that was TRYING to be made, the "full story" is then moot. It doesnt matter how the track was or what conditions were run, because if the cars are not hitting intuitive numbers then SOMETHING is wrong, and that something has so many variables you would need a room full of monkeys and a slide rule to keep it under control.
the longtime track vet remark was simply to say that some people have seen enough timeslips that they can look at a ET and a MPH and say "yes" or "no".
