shankgt2 time slip
#1
shankgt2 time slip
shankgt2,
Is it too much trouble to post the original scan (without bringing it into Photoshop) for the 11.149 run you did with your Stage 4 GT kit? It troubles me that your original post appears to be in error, primarily because it does not agree with the laws of physics.
People depend on this forum to get good information about our cars. It would help if you can explain this discrepancy.
Is it too much trouble to post the original scan (without bringing it into Photoshop) for the 11.149 run you did with your Stage 4 GT kit? It troubles me that your original post appears to be in error, primarily because it does not agree with the laws of physics.
People depend on this forum to get good information about our cars. It would help if you can explain this discrepancy.
#2
Timeslips
I agree.
Maybe there should be a section of the board where timeslips could be posted (with specs), so that it produces over time a set of records of various vehicle set-ups.
As for the threads in question, I'm not based in the USA so don't know any of the personalities or tuners but as a general rule I find it annoying when threads that seem to have scientific discussion starting get closed so early. Threads should be closed where abuse or stupidity is occurring, not because there is a disagreement over facts which has yet to be resolved.
I'd love to think we have GT2s in the low 11s and nearly 10s, so I'm very interested in THE FACTS (at least until I run my Ruf 550bhp GT2 on a strip and can post my timeslip).
However, I also did the maths and the last 330 feet on that timeslip were covered at an average of about 170mph, which seems unlikely, so there is an error somewhere.
A tuned GT2 should be capable of an 11.1 though, as stock GT2s have done 11.9 before.
Maybe there should be a section of the board where timeslips could be posted (with specs), so that it produces over time a set of records of various vehicle set-ups.
As for the threads in question, I'm not based in the USA so don't know any of the personalities or tuners but as a general rule I find it annoying when threads that seem to have scientific discussion starting get closed so early. Threads should be closed where abuse or stupidity is occurring, not because there is a disagreement over facts which has yet to be resolved.
I'd love to think we have GT2s in the low 11s and nearly 10s, so I'm very interested in THE FACTS (at least until I run my Ruf 550bhp GT2 on a strip and can post my timeslip).
However, I also did the maths and the last 330 feet on that timeslip were covered at an average of about 170mph, which seems unlikely, so there is an error somewhere.
A tuned GT2 should be capable of an 11.1 though, as stock GT2s have done 11.9 before.
#3
I don't get why the original thread was deleted and the second one was closed. Moist people here have no reason to doubt shank but deleting the original thread and closing the second one just makes it look like there now is something to hide.
Either way, thanks for posting the slips and a modded GT2 running an 11.1 is not unbelievable in the least.
Either way, thanks for posting the slips and a modded GT2 running an 11.1 is not unbelievable in the least.
#4
YOu know what, at this point, give it a rest. If you dont beileve it, I really dont give a ****. Two other forum members vouch its legitamacy. I posted accurate information, and as it happened. Each and every run was faster than the previous. First it was 13.5, then 12.09, then 12.023, then 11.60, then 11.1 when the ZR1 finished several car lengths behind me with a 11.7, So I guess it was a legit 11.1 run. IF for some reason it wasn't, then he didn't run an 11.7. If you want to see it, fly or drive to Chicago and I'll show it to you. This is getting annoying, and any further thread regarding this will be deleted. Again, i'm not scanning anything else, and if you want to see it, fly or drive up.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
eclip5e
Automobiles For Sale
8
04-28-2022 12:38 AM