The biggest result on the track would be cranking your 60' lower than 2.2 sec. You'll be hanging with the GSR, SI, and Neon R/T (if they still exist on the road) guys. You can get almost all the power in the world and spin a whopping 2.5 sec on the 60', you're not getting the job done.

Then again, it's gtech time.

 

https://www.evolutionm.net/registry/...me.php?tid=101

I was just browsing over the times section and discovered this.

You really expect me to believe you ran a 16.2 with a 2.447 60 foot? With the mods you have that is impossible. Sorry plain out impossible. I'm not trying to start a war here but when you have real track times then post up in the times section. I have pictures of my slips as well as Petey of our "actual" slips.

WADAD

 

OK guys here's a few screenshots from the PASS RR System that I got with my GTech Pro RR. In each graphs there are four runs that are listed across the top. Each of these are displayed in all graphs. Runs 1 (shown as "Main Run"), 2 and 3 are all done ofter a complete and accurate calibratino process. The 4th, was done using only a quick calibrate, which distorted the HP and TQ measurements ONLY! None of the other times are measurements were effected in any way by this "quick set-up process. The graphs are as follows:

HP and TQ vs. RPM's


HP vs. Time


RPM's


Speed


G's


Distance



Any questions please feel free to post them up.

~ Nick ~

 

Wadad, it is not a track run, but a GTech run...

I think that is where the confusion comes in. Unsure if those parameters are correct, in terms of weight with driver, yadda yadda yadda.....

BUt what do I know... I run 7 sec 60foot (with my Nike Air Max as my rubber)....

 

That's the thing about Gtech. There isn't a general consensus amongst us on the accuracy of the product. There are those who believe it's the next best thing to going to the track or better than on-track experience. Then, there will be doubters like me thinking the general weight/data on the car can be hedged to fit within a certain perimeter, ie too much weight or too less weight. I'm not saying the product is flawed like heck, but it can have a placebo-like effect. To me, there are too many variables that someone can skew the data.

Silly example:
A drug co. is making a cancer-fighting pill.

In one experiment, there are some deaths amongst rats from the pill.

Scientists decided to throw out stats on the dead rats and reveal their "wonderful drug" to the FDA that it has no negative side effects. Or changed the scenario of the experiment that the pill has no harmful side effects.

Best example: creative accounting practices of Enron. People fudged data to show what he or others wanted to see.

 

Just from my experience at the last two times at the track.

I had a 2.417 60' for a 16.461 that was without the PB.
2 weeks earlier I had a 2.356 60' and ended up with a 16.616.

My point is your car at this point in your NA build would have to be way more powerful than mine with the only difference being a fuel pump and a highflow cat? Once you get under track conditions things are different.

Anyway post all the Gtech stuff you want to if it makes you feel better.
I really hope you are not disappointed when you hit the strip.

WADAD

 

Baha:
1) the GTech has internal accelerometers, and doesn't rely on the atmospheric and car data that the auterra datalogger does. Technically, if you have a 12V power supply, you could use one on your bicycle.

2) your "example" sounds surprisingly like the aspartame "studies" that were conducted before the product was released to the US market .... scary stuff.....

Wadad: he said the piece of road he went to "looked pretty level" it's entirely possible that it's not. I'd challenge him to run both directions at least twice in the same general area and tell us what the result is.

 

have the g-tech on while doing an actual run at a track. good way to test the accuracy.

 

man, i gotta get me one of those gtechs

 

i thot the gtech had a garuntee or your money back