No offense but someone needs to learn how to crop a picture. http://9sec9.com/shop/page/6?shop_param=

 

@DB: Actually im reading the post very well. It clearly says that the car went 150mph for the particular 656whp 36psi boost run, which was what 9sec9 car was running when it went 149.5mph (36psi 656whp). The 156mph run was achieved at higher boost and thus it doesn't count in this comparison!

Regarding the wheels spinning, this clearly shows on the ET 9.75sec but has very little to do with the trap speed.

If like has been said the pt6262 was running out of breath at abt 36psi, then the fpblack flows more than the pt6262 as it still didn't run out of breath when tested by DB on an engine of his (both turbo's were tested on DB engines).

 

Maybe thats the whole issue. Don't believe everything you read. I can tell you our car went 156 on the same whp that there car claimed to have when they went 149.
Our car also went 97 mph but I don't count that just like I wont count the 150 mph pass because it was not a full pass.

-Em

 

sounds like a lot is going to be cleared up in the 2010 season. period.

 

Paging Tom Powel to the courtesy phone...

 

Dave B, Emery, and Mike.
Might you all have something better to do on this Holiday weekend than to nit pick through a non-competing vendor's site? Furthermore, one that even you yourself has claimed is not capable of tuning engines? Odd eh?

I'm sure Tom has enough money to keep putting shortblocks in his car and keep the car running all season... I'm not sure the same could be said for all of you. Whether you feel threatened by Tom and Indy or you're just being extremely competitive to the point of being antagonists... you guys need to keep your panties on. It's December.... and it's kind of cold outside.

The Cobb dyno has been suspect for years as to the amount of power it makes (could be due to the weather station and Mustang's innacurate compensation for humidity) I know that making engines pass cert at SwRI can sometimes be difficult because of the ambient conditions...

I personally feel that it's not "scientific" to compare two different cars on two different dyno's with different setups etc. The permutations are endless... If you want to compare the two dyno's... same car... different dynos. You're all bench racing dyno's at this point... WHICH I KNOW YOU ALL LOVE TO DO. Seems the Mustang Dyno owners are quite defensive about their "low" reading mustang dyno numbers and it shows by seeing the three most prominent MD Evo t00ners complaining the Sunday after Christmas...

Emery,
I guess you can hold the fastest 6262 MPH trophy... and Tom can hold the quickest 6262 ET trophy. Woopty do.

I'm tired of reading about you vendors *****ing and complaining. Why don't you go back into your workshops and worry about YOUR racecars and not someone elses. Let your actions and ET's do the talking... not your posts on Evom. I don't dislike any of you vendors regardless of what some of you might think (Dave B) I just think you guys need to be more professional in the way you conduct yourselves in a public forum.

Do you ever see Lucas or Aaron on here calling out people because they claimed an extra 40whp on their dynochart? No. Why not? I don't think they care. They're too busy working on their own cars, project cars, and customers cars to read through competitors websites on Christmas day looking for errors or exaggerations. Un freaking real guys.

 

 

^^ You call it vendor bashing I call it correcting misleading info. If no one took the time to make these types of corrections there would be a lot of people out there spending money and not getting what they are promised.

Please take the time to read what Tom posted. All I am saying is, in no way are they making the same power on an FP black that we are on the 6262.

And by me saying that I am also saying that the MD they are using reads higher than ours.

-Em

 

Pissing matches don't contribute anything to the forums.

 

i think i can see the point emery is trying to make about real numbers. kinda like someone saying they have 520whp, and then run 11.140@128.88

 

You're all guilty of being misleading to the Evom community. Either by being clever with your weight reduction, claiming MPH, ET, or defending power claims based on MPH with a beer canned evo. Get off your thrones... none of you have 3200 pound Evo's like WE the customer have. Oh yeah... 3200+ the driver's weight.

I see it two ways...and two ways only.

If don't want to mislead the customer... why don't you build a car like the customer?

If you want to build a racecar... why don't try and best AMS's 8.42? I really don't care what minute record ANY of you vendors claim to set, unless you're going after AMS's car. You guys have to make up records just to fill your signatures...SERIOUSLY... it's become THAT pathetic. Why not go after what people REALLY care about. WORLD'S QUICKEST/FASTEST EVO 8/9. You're fighting for table scraps left over from AMS's records.

 

That's what a REAL, street driven, FULL weight, street tire, Evo9, that makes 520whp on a Dynojet runs. Not what a professional driver can do in my car after it's been beer canned and put on slicks.

Get real marrrk.

 

i was just trying to make a point, even on a dj 520 sure seemsa little high for 3150 full weight? i mean no disrespect, you do some exellent work i just hate hp claims that don't add up. good luck to everyone this year, let your times do the talking

 

i agree with everything you just said i also dont wanna be mislead and go around with a black thinking that i can run around with a 6262 or other larger t3 framed turbos people ask what the fastest a evo has ever ran not whats the the fastest a evo ever ran with santa driving it with a sack of gifts in the back and two cookies and a glass of milk in the front i think this fourm should stick to the basics and not be so cut throat and **** about every single thing another person says.

 

What was the point of this thread?

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...irst-post.html