eh.. speaking of weight reduction.. i think you should take out back seat, carpet, passanger seat, inner door pannals, dash pannals... then i think now you can feel the difference!

 

i am already feelin the difference....u can ask my ECLC members...dey know how my car moves

 

so have we been seing faster times without the test pipe???? that would be interesting

 

i have the test pipe

 

ok

 

I don't think that's the case. Auto tranny will be always slower about 1.5 secs from Porsche to any econobox cars.

Has anyone seen an auto LS run?

On average stocker, manual is mid 17's and auto around mid to low 18's. Then again, there are always people cheating by taking off R/T on their final ETA. Those are the people who won't admit their deeds.

As for the G-tech, it is always faster, not slower. People cheat on that too by fudging the weight equation by putting Gross Vehicle Weight. If it's too light, it will show slower time. Then again, there are those people who will swear up and down it's the best thing right next to running a real track, completely accurate. Go figure.

See I have shown two ways people can fudge their result, making themselves look good in front of others. It's up to the individual to those possible skewed data or not.

 

why would people take off their R/T from their E/T??? i dont get it. your R/T has NOTHING to do with your E/T because the time doesnt even start till you break the light beam. and i also have the G-tech but i dont have it totally accurate yet, so i dont post anything from that.

 

as for auto lancers, i beleive a stock would run a mid to high 18. thats about what mine ran. i took it down to the track, and i ran a 17.71.. i was getting faster, but i stopped. i have a GReddy cat-back, Injen SRI, A'Pexi SAFC, thats all for performance. i need to get faster.

 

Ill be heading out tomorrow without the test pipe in, ran 16.7 before so we will see what the new time is. As for petey pab saying that stock lancers run 16.9 I have never seen a stock lancer anywhere close to that. Last weekend when i ran there was a chic out there who I know can drive better than me, and she ran 17.4. I will be gunning for that 15 sec mark we will see ill post up tomorrow night.
Ryan

 

damn, i dunno? i just read that in motor trend, and from all my experiences i thought that was right. when i was basically stock (just a muffler) i was runnin 16.7's. good luck tho, cause i would think you would be runnin way faster than me. just work on your launches cause i think thats where your problems are. or maybe your clutch could be burned? have it checked out.

 

See you on Wednesday Pab?
See if I can get the RA to be in the 15's with just CAI and exhaust. Mid 15's hopefully. Never been to the track so probably not but we'll see.

 

YOU KNOW! yeah, ill be there. i wanna race you too. so get ready!!! lol

 

Newbie mistake or trying to hide ugly time slips. You see such circumstances all over the net that includes cars on the 1/4. Honesty isn't a prerequisite. Of course, they never post their 60 foot . . . no one can really fudge that data.

Example: someone runs a 18.3 w/ an RT of 1.5 sec. Mistake or no mistake: a 16.8 looks a lot better than 18.3 sec. Thereby, gaining cool pts amongst their peers.

 

What about pjal? He's got the RPW stage 1 cam, 5 spd tranny I think. I wonder what his times are.

 

Bahamut, I don't know what track you've been to, but at professional tracks you're reaction time is not included in your quater mile time. Butt it can cause you to loose. ex: you run a 15.5 with a reaction of .6 and a dial in of 15.1, the guy next to you runs a 15.2 with a 1.2 reaction and a dial in of 15.0, you win.