what ET on stock rx-7s
#101
Heh hey Mr. Troll you said repeatedly you proved it wrong. I just read through the entire thread again and couldn't find any of this "proof". I did find this gem which is the first very basic mistake in your entire theory.
"This right here makes me seriously question your knowledge of drag racing. 60' is the number one most important determining factor in getting an e.t.. Your car is almost always going to make consistent power, it'll go up and down depending on heat etc., but more or less stay in the same ballpark and as long as you correct for altitude there's not much left. "
DOH! No your car won't always make consistent power. Gee what happens when your RPM's dip too low? OMG you're no longer making consistent power and you destroy the whole theory. Okay tell me where you proved that wrong again. I have to go home.
Kevin T. Wyum
"This right here makes me seriously question your knowledge of drag racing. 60' is the number one most important determining factor in getting an e.t.. Your car is almost always going to make consistent power, it'll go up and down depending on heat etc., but more or less stay in the same ballpark and as long as you correct for altitude there's not much left. "
DOH! No your car won't always make consistent power. Gee what happens when your RPM's dip too low? OMG you're no longer making consistent power and you destroy the whole theory. Okay tell me where you proved that wrong again. I have to go home.
Kevin T. Wyum
#102
Originally posted by MI_SS_IL
Hmmmm, I thought you finally admitted it. I'll hunt around tomorrow and see if I can find something, but I'm going to bed soon so I won't be doing it tonight.
Chris
Hmmmm, I thought you finally admitted it. I'll hunt around tomorrow and see if I can find something, but I'm going to bed soon so I won't be doing it tonight.
Chris
#103
Originally posted by SSSteve
Hmmm... ya' see a lot of them up there in Binghamton, NY?
Hmmm... ya' see a lot of them up there in Binghamton, NY?
You never said of what year???
Yeah, great so there is a million F-Body cars, it this a good thing?
#104
Originally posted by ZeroBanger
Chris, your friends on LS1.com can say they run 12's bone stock till they are blue in the fact I just don't buy it.
Again, I'm WAITING for you to show where I said LS1 cars can run 12's stock or I'd like you to retract your statement.
Your claimage (omg talking like bush) that I said LS1 Fbodys CAN run 12's damages my repuation as a troll on your forum. I want proof or a retraction on both rx7club.com and LSLost.com.
Have a nice day.
Chris, your friends on LS1.com can say they run 12's bone stock till they are blue in the fact I just don't buy it.
Again, I'm WAITING for you to show where I said LS1 cars can run 12's stock or I'd like you to retract your statement.
Your claimage (omg talking like bush) that I said LS1 Fbodys CAN run 12's damages my repuation as a troll on your forum. I want proof or a retraction on both rx7club.com and LSLost.com.
Have a nice day.
Chris
#105
Originally posted by the_glass_man
No, I see one everyday, that weighs a few hundred pounds less and makes more horsepower, whats your point???
No, I see one everyday, that weighs a few hundred pounds less and makes more horsepower, whats your point???
I wonder how many I'd be likely to encounter in a lifetime of driving in the US?
Originally posted by the_glass_man
You never said of what year???
You never said of what year???
Is that what you see everyday? A 2000 RX-7?
Originally posted by the_glass_man
Yeah, great so there is a million F-Body cars, it this a good thing?
Yeah, great so there is a million F-Body cars, it this a good thing?
Not that I wouldn't mind the relative obscurity of a nice FD as well.
#106
Originally posted by MI_SS_IL
Was this 13.3 run in a 2000 RX7? No? Yeah, thanks for coming out. If everyone made a point the way you do arguing wouldn't even be a challenge.
It doesn't need to make sense to you? That's great ... really.
Chris
Was this 13.3 run in a 2000 RX7? No? Yeah, thanks for coming out. If everyone made a point the way you do arguing wouldn't even be a challenge.
It doesn't need to make sense to you? That's great ... really.
Chris
You never asked me about a model year, or a 13.3 second pass, maybe you should go back and read your post???
There is no challenge, you asked a question, I gave the answer.
Yes there is stock 12 second RX-7's, don't cry to me about it.
#107
Please tell me where you proved this. Puhhhlease!! You said you proved at least 3 times but WHERE. I'm not very bright it seems because I can't find it. Please help me.
Kevin T. Wyum
P.S. I assume it's a safe bet that you drive an Automagic right?
Kevin T. Wyum
P.S. I assume it's a safe bet that you drive an Automagic right?
#108
Originally posted by MI_SS_IL
Zero, you remember how I told you you're the master of question avoidance? Now I see where you get it from. This Kevin guy could teach lessons in how to avoid a question ... very similar to you. In that whole quote above there you skipped the whole last paragraph and didn't bother to answer about the RX7's e.t.. So let me ask it again, do you believe the time of 13.3@105 with a 2.2 60' makes sense in the logical world? Bring yourself out of magic land for a second and tell me if that 60 foot time adds up to that e.t. in a stock RX7 (a North American RX7 for the other guy who will surely make some comment about currently produced cars).
Chris
Zero, you remember how I told you you're the master of question avoidance? Now I see where you get it from. This Kevin guy could teach lessons in how to avoid a question ... very similar to you. In that whole quote above there you skipped the whole last paragraph and didn't bother to answer about the RX7's e.t.. So let me ask it again, do you believe the time of 13.3@105 with a 2.2 60' makes sense in the logical world? Bring yourself out of magic land for a second and tell me if that 60 foot time adds up to that e.t. in a stock RX7 (a North American RX7 for the other guy who will surely make some comment about currently produced cars).
Chris
I have answered that 100 times. While I may be the master of avoidance, you have yet to master the obvious.
I have said a million times in this thread that I know that all FD's did NOT run 10lbs boost from the factory. While mazda intended that, some have as poor as 8 or as high as 11 or 12. Now with that said, 2 extra lbs of boost, can bring an FD to over 300 HP and in that case YES it makes total sense.
Do I think an rx7 that is running the way mazda intended can run 13.3 with a 2.20 60'? Let me think about it and I'll post my answer when you pull up my quote saying that I believe a F body can run 12's stock.
BTW what do you run stock?
#109
Originally posted by Kevin T. Wyum
Heh hey Mr. Troll you said repeatedly you proved it wrong. I just read through the entire thread again and couldn't find any of this "proof". I did find this gem which is the first very basic mistake in your entire theory.
"This right here makes me seriously question your knowledge of drag racing. 60' is the number one most important determining factor in getting an e.t.. Your car is almost always going to make consistent power, it'll go up and down depending on heat etc., but more or less stay in the same ballpark and as long as you correct for altitude there's not much left. "
DOH! No your car won't always make consistent power. Gee what happens when your RPM's dip too low? OMG you're no longer making consistent power and you destroy the whole theory. Okay tell me where you proved that wrong again. I have to go home.
Kevin T. Wyum
Heh hey Mr. Troll you said repeatedly you proved it wrong. I just read through the entire thread again and couldn't find any of this "proof". I did find this gem which is the first very basic mistake in your entire theory.
"This right here makes me seriously question your knowledge of drag racing. 60' is the number one most important determining factor in getting an e.t.. Your car is almost always going to make consistent power, it'll go up and down depending on heat etc., but more or less stay in the same ballpark and as long as you correct for altitude there's not much left. "
DOH! No your car won't always make consistent power. Gee what happens when your RPM's dip too low? OMG you're no longer making consistent power and you destroy the whole theory. Okay tell me where you proved that wrong again. I have to go home.
Kevin T. Wyum
I will not tell you anymore where I proved you wrong, go back a few pages and read it, there's no need for me to keep repeating it. In fact, I am finished with you until you start answering some questions. I've answered every question everyone has asked of me on here ... I haven't avoided any ... but I will answer no more of yours until you answer mine.
Have a good night.
Chris
Last edited by MI_SS_IL; 12-19-02 at 11:48 PM.
#111
Originally posted by ZeroBanger
both threads will be locked by then. I'll take this as your admission that you are wrong.
both threads will be locked by then. I'll take this as your admission that you are wrong.
Chris
#112
I'm just waiting for the_glass_man to come back and tell me what year RX-7 he sees everyday.
Please tell me it isn't just another ratty old, 93, 3rd-engine, leakin' apex-sealed, leakin' coolant, bugs and crap in that nasty mess of vacuum hoses and in those Bose-speaker tubes, no-door-handle-havin', stereo flyin' out of the dashboard, runnin' 23 seconds one day, 13 flat the next , has-been.
...oh... I mean "magical" has-been.
Please tell me it isn't just another ratty old, 93, 3rd-engine, leakin' apex-sealed, leakin' coolant, bugs and crap in that nasty mess of vacuum hoses and in those Bose-speaker tubes, no-door-handle-havin', stereo flyin' out of the dashboard, runnin' 23 seconds one day, 13 flat the next , has-been.
...oh... I mean "magical" has-been.
Last edited by SSSteve; 12-19-02 at 11:42 PM.
#113
Originally posted by SSSteve
I'm just waiting for the_glass_man to come back and tell me what year RX-7 he sees everyday.
Please tell me it isn't just another ratty old, 93, 3rd-engine, leakin' apex-sealed, leakin' coolant, bugs and crap in that nasty mess of vacuum hoses, has-been.
I'm just waiting for the_glass_man to come back and tell me what year RX-7 he sees everyday.
Please tell me it isn't just another ratty old, 93, 3rd-engine, leakin' apex-sealed, leakin' coolant, bugs and crap in that nasty mess of vacuum hoses, has-been.
thats mean, your *** can banned on this forum for that ****. Hell I got a warning for putting a "T" between the "S" and the "U" in the "SUPRA". one more time and I'm banned!!!!!
Im on my what...5 th s/n at ls1.com? they cant seem to figure out how to get rid of me either, lol.
#114
Originally posted by SSSteve
I'm just waiting for the_glass_man to come back and tell me what year RX-7 he sees everyday.
Please tell me it isn't just another ratty old, 93, 3rd-engine, leakin' apex-sealed, leakin' coolant, bugs and crap in that nasty mess of vacuum hoses, has-been.
I'm just waiting for the_glass_man to come back and tell me what year RX-7 he sees everyday.
Please tell me it isn't just another ratty old, 93, 3rd-engine, leakin' apex-sealed, leakin' coolant, bugs and crap in that nasty mess of vacuum hoses, has-been.
Yeah you're right it would never compare to something as Grand as a 98 SS.
#115
Originally posted by the_glass_man
You asked if, a stock 7 could run 12's. Well you got the answer that you asked me, just not the answer you were looking for. Sorry.
You asked if, a stock 7 could run 12's. Well you got the answer that you asked me, just not the answer you were looking for. Sorry.
Again, thanks for coming out. So far you haven't added an intelligent point to the whole thread. Your only purpose is to flame or belittle. How about getting into the argument and contributing something? Oh ... that's right ... you don't care if anything makes sense or not.
Chris
#116
Originally posted by Kevin T. Wyum
Please tell me where you proved this. Puhhhlease!! You said you proved at least 3 times but WHERE. I'm not very bright it seems because I can't find it. Please help me.
Kevin T. Wyum
P.S. I assume it's a safe bet that you drive an Automagic right?
Please tell me where you proved this. Puhhhlease!! You said you proved at least 3 times but WHERE. I'm not very bright it seems because I can't find it. Please help me.
Kevin T. Wyum
P.S. I assume it's a safe bet that you drive an Automagic right?
Chris
#117
Originally posted by the_glass_man
No, more like a mint 400 hp RX-7 with coil overs, stand alone ecu, 5 points, etc...
Yeah you're right it would never compare to something as Grand as a 98 SS.
No, more like a mint 400 hp RX-7 with coil overs, stand alone ecu, 5 points, etc...
Yeah you're right it would never compare to something as Grand as a 98 SS.
Glad it isn't the type I feared...
Still - Not a stock 2000 running 12's... My grand, stock 2000 SS is still safe from any stock 3rd gen RX7s in the surrounding 2000 miles or so.
Last edited by SSSteve; 12-19-02 at 11:47 PM.
#118
Originally posted by SSSteve
I was invited to this party a little late - but...
Ahhhh... big deal. At least as many factory stock LS1 f-bodies have run under 13.0 as have factory stock FD's run under 13.3.
I was invited to this party a little late - but...
Ahhhh... big deal. At least as many factory stock LS1 f-bodies have run under 13.0 as have factory stock FD's run under 13.3.
#119
Originally posted by MI_SS_IL
I've told you, you can start answering some questions ... hell answer 1 question ... then I'll get back to you on your questions. Until then I really have nothing more to say to you.
Chris
I've told you, you can start answering some questions ... hell answer 1 question ... then I'll get back to you on your questions. Until then I really have nothing more to say to you.
Chris
#121
Originally posted by ZeroBanger
if you would bother to read some of the things I said earlier.....
I have answered that 100 times.
if you would bother to read some of the things I said earlier.....
I have answered that 100 times.
Chris
#123
Originally posted by MI_SS_IL
You have not answered this question once. DOES THE TIME OF 13.3@105 with a 2.1 60' TIME MAKE SENSE TO YOU. I don't care what Mazda intends it to run or anything else. It's a yes or no question so answer it with a yes or no. I won't answer anything else from you either until I have that question answered (and you know I have no trouble answering every question that is put to me).
Chris
You have not answered this question once. DOES THE TIME OF 13.3@105 with a 2.1 60' TIME MAKE SENSE TO YOU. I don't care what Mazda intends it to run or anything else. It's a yes or no question so answer it with a yes or no. I won't answer anything else from you either until I have that question answered (and you know I have no trouble answering every question that is put to me).
Chris
I ran a 13.0 @ 106 with a 2.03 60'. sounds similar to my experience.
#125
Originally posted by ZeroBanger
Are you stupid? I said it makes sense depending on how much HP is in the car. thats where my "intended" statement came in. CAN YOU READ??????
I ran a 13.0 @ 106 with a 2.03 60'. sounds similar to my experience.
Are you stupid? I said it makes sense depending on how much HP is in the car. thats where my "intended" statement came in. CAN YOU READ??????
I ran a 13.0 @ 106 with a 2.03 60'. sounds similar to my experience.
I may be stupid but I can answer a yes or no question with a yes or no. Can you?
Chris