|
Nice!!11.0 with only 123MPH!Some good driving!Any video?
|
|
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
(Post 4343959)
10.6 @ 123 is either brakes at the end of the 1320 or much weight reduction and 1.3-1.4 60' times.
|
My reason for posting this old post is to point out that not all posts by all of us are going to be 100% accurate. They are OPINIONS and nothing more in many cases. The above post was concerning OKIX's which stated that an earlier run by someone was a 10.6 at 123 mph. The above post was trying to say that it wasn't possible unless the brakes were used or a super low 1.3-1.4 60, etc. Well, OKIX did it with a boost leak, so the point is, don't always take someones expert opinions as fact. Go your own way and do your own thing. You'll be glad you did.
|
Originally Posted by 9sec9
(Post 5547262)
Some things come back to roost. OKIX recently ran 10.6 at 123 mph. Guess that makes this post look stupid. By the way, HE DIDN'T HIT HIS BRAKES AND HE DIDN'T HAVE A 1.3 OR A 1.4 60' TIME. It was called a boost leak, but the fact is, it CAN be done and making ALL knowing posts like this shows underlying reasons or poor evaluation.
10.6 @ 123 is either brakes at the end of the 1320 or much weight reduction and 1.3-1.4 60' times. Posting proof sources to support posts always weighs highly with readers. (i.e.- timeslip of said 10.6@123) |
You had a conjuntion in that statement. The word AND is important. Also, the posts at the time were related to the low mph we were running. OKIX gave the example of the 10.6 at 123, you then made the post to disprove his post. I simply am showing that an all out effort with given parameters CAN and DID produce exactly the same times and mph. You were wrong and this is simply my proof.
|
This is just an example of closing your mind and being too quick to disprove someone for biased reasons. I was also told very early in our racing that I was simply trying to find a 'record' for my boy. Well, history speaks for it's self. Would you like for me to find that post? I've just grown tired of the biased posts by some as the 'expert has spoken', when in reality, they're just another post to discredit or undercut someone. If these newbies can produce the results that we have, others certainly can too. Putting down the newbie posts should become a thing of the past. Had we bowed down to the experts, we'd be running the exact same times as them and NEVER ahead. Always behind. This post is just to finally disprove the 10.6 @ 123 mph falacy that it was something like getting on the brakes OR 1.3-1.4 60's AND much weight reduction. It's the intent of the post.
|
I would like to take this opportunity to say to those who read the above posts to please NOT confuse the fact that I highly respect the tuning and accomplishments of TTPEngineering. His accomplishment and abilities are beyond reproach. Much has been added by many of the Vendors and TTPEngineering is certainly right there with the best of them. I don't confuse my emotions with reality. My previous posts deal solely with a biased intention, not with his ability nor his accomplishments, they clearly speak for themselves.
|
Wow, dug up an old thread!
I guess the original post makes me feel better about trapping 119mph on my Green w/ 93 pump, no meth, and stock cams... now if only I could drive like OKIX (I ran 12.1 @ 119... terrible launches!) |
Originally Posted by 9sec9
(Post 4322698)
Last night my son and I took his car to the track for only his second time on the drag strip. First time (about 3 weeks ago, his FIRST PASS EVER, let alone driving an Evo IX, he went 1.77-60ft, 92.5-1/8th, 11.76 @117 mph 1/4. Not too bad for his first pass EVER. Tune on the car was by me, so I knew that his mph was a little low, as well as the times were'nt the best for what it has. Again, though, this is his first pass. He also went 11.78 - 12.0's that day.
Conditions that day: 82 degrees with 81% humidity. Altitude about 1900 feet with steady 35-40mph winds into the front of the cars. Not good. Very proud of his first pass ever being well into the 11's. Now, on to LAST NIGHT. Yesterday, I began looking for the mph problem. Cars Mods: 2006 IX RS with EvoGreen Turbo ported be me, 9sec9. Ported Exhaust Manifold by me, Stock Intake manifold, stock tb, 3" BR turbo back, Twin Disc, Cerametallic Exedy, BR intake, Snow Performance 2d Water/Meth, HKS exhaust (272), 680 injectors, BR deluxe IC, My own custom LICP, BR UICP, Stock DV (still haven't changed to the Forge we have). Tuned by 9sec9 with original conservative Street Tune by DynoFlash. Thanks Al for your help in getting me started. Boost is 30psi, not sure where it's tapering to (Newby Driver has his hands full to pay attention to his driving) Again, NO C16, just pump 101 and water/meth. Last Night Tony had (3) 1.6 second 60's with first pass being 11.60 at 116.5 and missing 4th twice. Hmmmm. Then he went 11.52 at 119.75, then 11.62 at 120.85, THEN: 11.31 at 121.03mph. Not too shabby for a 29 year old newby driver. Still more left in the car. He decided to call it quits after that. Conditions last night were 77 degrees, 75+ humidity, no wind, same track. At sea level, cooler air, less humidity he would easily be 11.teens. Sorry for the long winded post, but I had to boast about my son's first times to run his car. By the way, the mph was down, due to the meth coming full on by 6000 and AFR going to 10.4-10-6. Still running 11.2. http://s43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...nt=TVRtony.flv i run 11.70 @121mph -1.82 60ft on 93oct nitto drag tires. regards, Ronald |
Holly mothe**** 10.6 2 123mph !!!
wow... very impresive numbers!!! what is the weight of your son evo? wow 10.6 @123mph.... wowww 123??? what happend?? |
Originally Posted by speed club p.r.
(Post 5551986)
Holly mothe**** 10.6 2 123mph !!!
wow... very impresive numbers!!! what is the weight of your son evo? wow 10.6 @123mph.... wowww 123??? what happend?? |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:28 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands