|
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 655
Likes: 676
Liked 181 Times in 56 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Not bad for a bogus combination, huh? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Conway, AR
Posts: 1,739
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts
|
![]()
Dennis said, "Not bad for a bogus combination, huh?."
and, previously.... >>>>>>>"Sour grapes is what I hear from you, sir." Dennis; those "sour grapes" seem to be proliferating.... LOL! Bill (maybe we should make some wine???)
__________________
Bill |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 655
Likes: 676
Liked 181 Times in 56 Posts
|
![]()
Bill, all I'm saying is that you defended your disdain for a "bogus factor" with a bogus combination. Am I the only one who sees the irony?
I have been following class cars for many years and am fascinated by them. I also know that sometimes you can make a lot better combination with a pen than you can a dyno. I see Stinnett already moved into AA/SA. Time will take care of everything. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Milford, MI
Posts: 147
Likes: 13
Liked 8 Times in 5 Posts
|
![]()
What bogas combination are you talking about, the Challenger or the Savoy ?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Conway, AR
Posts: 1,739
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts
|
![]()
Bigshow,
If you've been following class racing for as long as you say you have, I'm sure you realize that the only time a bogus combination results in a situation where other races are victimized is when the NHRA mandated "factor" allows it. If the '67 Shelby GT500s had been properly factored, they would have slipped though totally unnoticed, and people wouldn't still be talking about the "paper cars" that could run so unbelieveably far under the indexes. It's never JUST the "bogus" cars...its the factors that sometimes come along with them. NHRA strapped extra horsepower on the NASCAR Hemi before they ever got to see one run, so intent were they on making sure they didn't go out and dominate like the Shelbys did. They didn't allow it to go into battle with the horsepower than Mopar had reported it had; NHRA upped the ante (and, the weight) before anyone got a chance to see if that figure was in the ballpark. Not so, the CJ's. Ford said 425, and NHRA said, "SO BE IT!!!" They run well, these NASCAR Hemis, but I am not at all sure that they are any faster than Henson's "street Hemi" motor in Ronnie West's GTX. Nitro Joe might know... But, the contention that the NASCAR Hemi car is "bogus" has no pertinenence in the argument about the 2008 CJ's because the ~only~ real argument against the CJ's is the outrageously soft factor NHRA awarded them. That wasn't done for the NASCAR Hemi motor. Different deal, altogether. Looks like apples and oranges to me.... No irony there. My cent-and-a-half... Bill
__________________
Bill Last edited by bill dedman; 02-28-2009 at 02:50 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Milford, MI
Posts: 147
Likes: 13
Liked 8 Times in 5 Posts
|
![]()
Very well said.
The factory will try to get the best performance rating they can for a vehicle combination introduction. Its the racers that will cause the HP hit by exploiting the combination and running way too fast. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 786
Likes: 2,876
Liked 370 Times in 101 Posts
|
![]()
Bill, how many of those " paper car" 67 Shelby GT500 mustang's are out there running so unbelievebly far under their indexes ?
__________________
Jerry Heath I/S '93 Cobra FS/J 2010 Mustang "Ebay CJ" |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|