[David Holmberg]

Originally Posted by johnta1

Especially back to back, like 'round robin'?

Come right back to line to race after crossing finish line.

I think Jeff has proven that his Nitrous Pontiac can round robin and run like a bracket car, on a little radial tire.

I've been involved with enough heads up racing to know that ANY form of poweradder can and will blow the tires off without warning.

JMHO, Justin has the potential to make a lot more power than Lil Jack. Given the fact that both cars have to make it down the track on a given day, the race is a pick to me.

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by johnta1

Stan, no one has told them that Pontiac HP is the same as any other brand HP.

Power adder HP is the same as NA HP.
NOS HP is the same as Blower HP.

It's all in how you make the HP that tells the story.



PS: In the ET of the car, it only shows what HP it used to make that ET, not the total HP of the engine.

Quoted for the ridiculous ignorant post it is. While hp is hp may be true. make 800hp that peaks at 6500 rpm and compare it to 800 hp that peaks at 9500rpm and compare them in the same car both na with no other changes. Let us know how it works out....

I truly think you know better than this. you just really want jack to lose or be wrong. You may get to see him struggle for a bit with a new combo. for a while. but he will figure it out. If he hits it outa the park right outta the gate are you gonna need counseling?

[johnta1]

Quoted for the ridiculous ignorant post it is. While hp is hp may be true. make 800hp that peaks at 6500 rpm and compare it to 800 hp that peaks at 9500rpm and compare them in the same car both na with no other changes. Let us know how it works out....

I truly think you know better than this. you just really want jack to lose or be wrong. You may get to see him struggle for a bit with a new combo. for a while. but he will figure it out. If he hits it outa the park right outta the gate are you gonna need counseling?

What are you drinking?

[Travis Q]

Originally Posted by johnta1

What is his HP and weight?

If you want a rough number, just take Rod's 6.27@228, which was run at 2760 lb, and then change the weight to 3500 lb.

Jack's car is going to FLY. He has eliminated one of the big roadblocks that have plagued nitrous powered Pontiacs. I fully expect the car to run mid-low 7s when sorted out. More power to him!

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mike leech

Quoted for the ridiculous ignorant post it is. While hp is hp may be true. make 800hp that peaks at 6500 rpm and compare it to 800 hp that peaks at 9500rpm and compare them in the same car both na with no other changes. Let us know how it works out....

I truly think you know better than this. you just really want jack to lose or be wrong. You may get to see him struggle for a bit with a new combo. for a while. but he will figure it out. If he hits it outa the park right outta the gate are you gonna need counseling?

Mike,
Can you please explain your physics to me.

Mine goes like this.

800 HP @ 6500 = 646.4 torque

800 HP @ 9500 = 442.2736842105263 torque

What is important is what we can delivery to wheel to accelerate the car.

9500 / 6500 = 1.461538461538461

1.461538461538461 * 442.2736842105263 = 646.3999999999997

So at 6500 axle RPM they both produce torque of 646.4

Now if you want to talk about 2 engines producing the same torque but at different RPM you are on to something.

Stan

[Aaron Quinton]

I agree with your post. I think Justin was referring to how many runs can be made back to back before the bottles have to be refilled. My guess is it's less than 3.

Originally Posted by David Holmberg

I think Jeff has proven that his Nitrous Pontiac can round robin and run like a bracket car, on a little radial tire.

I've been involved with enough heads up racing to know that ANY form of poweradder can and will blow the tires off without warning.

JMHO, Justin has the potential to make a lot more power than Lil Jack. Given the fact that both cars have to make it down the track on a given day, the race is a pick to me.

[Aaron Quinton]

That should put Justin in a ~7.1 sec @ ~190 mph. I'd say there's a lot more in it. I didn't realize his engine was a duplicate of the engine in Rod's car. Very cool.

Originally Posted by Travis Q

If you want a rough number, just take Rod's 6.27@228, which was run at 2760 lb, and then change the weight to 3500 lb.

Jack's car is going to FLY. He has eliminated one of the big roadblocks that have plagued nitrous powered Pontiacs. I fully expect the car to run mid-low 7s when sorted out. More power to him!

[David Holmberg]

Aaron, on Ben's Malibu we're running two 10lb bottles and change them after 2 passes, but there is enough left for another pass. Jack can run two 20lb bottles, if needed.

Besides, if Jack wins the first two there is no need for a third.

Like I said its a pick. Either car has the chance to beat the other on any given day. IMHO

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Mike,
Can you please explain your physics to me.

Mine goes like this.

800 HP @ 6500 = 646.4 torque

800 HP @ 9500 = 442.2736842105263 torque

What is important is what we can delivery to wheel to accelerate the car.

9500 / 6500 = 1.461538461538461

1.461538461538461 * 442.2736842105263 = 646.3999999999997

So at 6500 axle RPM they both produce torque of 646.4

Now if you want to talk about 2 engines producing the same torque but at different RPM you are on to something.

Stan

Quoted for (I'm trying to be nice)Ignorance. Any person that portrays themselves as smart as you do, KNOWS the point of my post. In the real world the car that peaks higher has 2 advantages 1,higher average power 2,more power "events". It will go faster in a "REAL" car unless the person running it is a dolt.
The problem with calculator racing is you can manipulate the inputs to try and make your point or outcome whatever you want. The parameters were engine rpm not torque at the tire at axle rpm. Using your "brilliant" calculations why would they not have the same torque at 9500 axle rpm? They will NOT perform the same and if you and john think so...get a room at the CV1 notel, where fantasies abound and everyone hates Jack and believes whatever they like is true.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mike leech

Quoted for (I'm trying to be nice)Ignorance. Any person that portrays themselves as smart as you do, KNOWS the point of my post. In the real world the car that peaks higher has 2 advantages 1,higher average power 2,more power "events". It will go faster in a "REAL" car unless the person running it is a dolt.
The problem with calculator racing is you can manipulate the inputs to try and make your point or outcome whatever you want. The parameters were engine rpm not torque at the tire at axle rpm. Using your "brilliant" calculations why would they not have the same torque at 9500 axle rpm? They will NOT perform the same and if you and john think so...get a room at the CV1 notel, where fantasies abound and everyone hates Jack and believes whatever they like is true.

Mike,
Thank you for your reply. It shows your clear ignorance of the laws of physics and the relationship between between HP, RPM and torque. Also stop swinging from Jack's balls and put away your clear CV-1 BS. While I did not do the Photoragphy, they did have my name so it could be listed in the article. I have no head preference, but I post up a response when people like you post up BS about someone's product.

Stan

[cgeise]

Originally Posted by David Holmberg

I think Jeff has proven that his Nitrous Pontiac can round robin and run like a bracket car, on a little radial tire.

I've been involved with enough heads up racing to know that ANY form of poweradder can and will blow the tires off without warning.

JMHO, Justin has the potential to make a lot more power than Lil Jack. Given the fact that both cars have to make it down the track on a given day, the race is a pick to me.

And a High HP NA car would'nt do the same thing to the tire as a PA car --- ???? explain your reasoning please?????

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Mike,
Thank you for your reply. It shows your clear ignorance of the laws of physics and the relationship between between HP, RPM and torque. Also stop swinging from Jack's balls and put away your clear CV-1 BS. While I did not do the Photoragphy, they did have my name so it could be listed in the article. I have no head preference, but I post up a response when people like you post up BS about someone's product.

Stan

You sir are lost on the reality of the topic. If you truly believe its the same you are lost on practical application of physics. Matters not how great you are at designing simulators. I understand all about how the horsepower is calculated and torque is measured. You aren't the only one with an engineering background. The NUMBER is the same, not the usable power when applied over seconds of the engine running and doing work. If your point is valid then why do all engine builders in corporate a higher rpm into their engine designs when trying to improve or maximize et potential in a vehicle? So they can spend more money and increase the work load on parts only to achieve the same results. I'm not ignorant of physics at all Stan, but if you think that saying that makes it so then I understand why you think what you do about this any many other subjects.
As far as swinging from jack. I do t think anybody does that. I think jacks upgrades will take some trial and error to achieve the results he expects. And I'm not and never have bashed a product.... Just the nut swingers that all jump on the band wagon for emotional reasons. Sorry you fit right in with the group. Feel free to help an na car of similar weight and your beloved c 1 wool my a$$. I'll accept defeat with grace.

[LiL Jack]

Originally Posted by mike leech

Quoted for (I'm trying to be nice)Ignorance. Any person that portrays themselves as smart as you do, KNOWS the point of my post. In the real world the car that peaks higher has 2 advantages 1,higher average power 2,more power "events". It will go faster in a "REAL" car unless the person running it is a dolt.
The problem with calculator racing is you can manipulate the inputs to try and make your point or outcome whatever you want. The parameters were engine rpm not torque at the tire at axle rpm. Using your "brilliant" calculations why would they not have the same torque at 9500 axle rpm? They will NOT perform the same and if you and john think so...get a room at the CV1 notel, where fantasies abound and everyone hates Jack and believes whatever they like is true.

I LMAO @ CV notel !!!!!!

[David Holmberg]

Originally Posted by cgeise

And a High HP NA car would'nt do the same thing to the tire as a PA car --- ???? explain your reasoning please?????

Absolutely, it happens to Langer from time to time.

I didn't include NA in the post because we were discussing a Turbo VS Nitrous car.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mike leech

You sir are lost on the reality of the topic. If you truly believe its the same you are lost on practical application of physics. Matters not how great you are at designing simulators. I understand all about how the horsepower is calculated and torque is measured. You aren't the only one with an engineering background. The NUMBER is the same, not the usable power when applied over seconds of the engine running and doing work. If your point is valid then why do all engine builders in corporate a higher rpm into their engine designs when trying to improve or maximize et potential in a vehicle? So they can spend more money and increase the work load on parts only to achieve the same results. I'm not ignorant of physics at all Stan, but if you think that saying that makes it so then I understand why you think what you do about this any many other subjects.
As far as swinging from jack. I do t think anybody does that. I think jacks upgrades will take some trial and error to achieve the results he expects. And I'm not and never have bashed a product.... Just the nut swingers that all jump on the band wagon for emotional reasons. Sorry you fit right in with the group. Feel free to help an na car of similar weight and your beloved c 1 wool my a$$. I'll accept defeat with grace.

Why are the Pickett's running a 428 ci engine and shifting at 10000 plus RPM?

Oh Oh Oh Oh I know. They want to run Tom's race.

Which is based on Pounds per Cubic Inches

Stan

PS - So you are Ass hurt by CV-1s

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Why are the Pickett's running a 428 ci engine and shifting at 10000 plus RPM?

Oh Oh Oh Oh I know. They want to run Tom's race.

Which is based on Pounds per Cubic Inches

Stan

PS - So you are Ass hurt by CV-1s

Are you serious? Riddle me this riddle me that,Stan just had a SMART ATTACK!

So if the Pickets had a choice to make as much as they could with the inches they chose to make weight with. Why run it to 10000 rpm? It makes like 920, it was likely possible To do that at a lower rpm. Why would they want to run that rpm Stan? They did not want to run the race they wanted to win it!

Are you trying to make my point?

The only a$$ hurt I have regarding cv1s is sore gluteus muscles from having it work my foot back out of there a$$. It took a little to extract it after I was able to finally get my foot outa the shoe. Keep to shoe.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mike leech

Are you serious? Riddle me this riddle me that,Stan just had a SMART ATTACK!

So if the Pickets had a choice to make as much as they could with the inches they chose to make weight with. Why run it to 10000 rpm? It makes like 920, it was likely possible To do that at a lower rpm. Why would they want to run that rpm Stan? They did not want to run the race they wanted to win it!

Are you trying to make my point?

The only a$$ hurt I have regarding cv1s is sore gluteus muscles from having it work my foot back out of there a$$. It took a little to extract it after I was able to finally get my foot outa the shoe. Keep to shoe.

Mike,
Since you are the smart one here. Why don't you show KRE and the Pickett's how to make the same HP at a lower RPM with the same cubic inches. I am sure that they would appreciate the help and the money saved. There is no question more power cycles (RPM) and more mass flow makes more HP no one was question that. 800 HP @ 6500 vs 800 HP @ 9500 was the discussion and no where's did cubic inches or car weight come into the discussion.

Stan

[johnta1]

Quoted for (I'm trying to be nice)Ignorance. Any person that portrays themselves as smart as you do, KNOWS the point of my post. In the real world the car that peaks higher has 2 advantages 1,higher average power 2,more power "events". It will go faster in a "REAL" car unless the person running it is a dolt.
The problem with calculator racing is you can manipulate the inputs to try and make your point or outcome whatever you want. The parameters were engine rpm not torque at the tire at axle rpm. Using your "brilliant" calculations why would they not have the same torque at 9500 axle rpm? They will NOT perform the same and if you and john think so...get a room at the CV1 notel, where fantasies abound and everyone hates Jack and believes whatever they like is true.

You sir are lost on the reality of the topic. If you truly believe its the same you are lost on practical application of physics. Matters not how great you are at designing simulators. I understand all about how the horsepower is calculated and torque is measured. You aren't the only one with an engineering background. The NUMBER is the same, not the usable power when applied over seconds of the engine running and doing work. If your point is valid then why do all engine builders in corporate a higher rpm into their engine designs when trying to improve or maximize et potential in a vehicle? So they can spend more money and increase the work load on parts only to achieve the same results. I'm not ignorant of physics at all Stan, but if you think that saying that makes it so then I understand why you think what you do about this any many other subjects.
As far as swinging from jack. I do t think anybody does that. I think jacks upgrades will take some trial and error to achieve the results he expects. And I'm not and never have bashed a product.... Just the nut swingers that all jump on the band wagon for emotional reasons. Sorry you fit right in with the group. Feel free to help an na car of similar weight and your beloved c 1 wool my a$$. I'll accept defeat with grace.

Are you serious? Riddle me this riddle me that,Stan just had a SMART ATTACK!

So if the Pickets had a choice to make as much as they could with the inches they chose to make weight with. Why run it to 10000 rpm? It makes like 920, it was likely possible To do that at a lower rpm. Why would they want to run that rpm Stan? They did not want to run the race they wanted to win it!

Are you trying to make my point?

The only a$$ hurt I have regarding cv1s is sore gluteus muscles from having it work my foot back out of there a$$. It took a little to extract it after I was able to finally get my foot outa the shoe. Keep to shoe.

Quoted for stupidity.

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Mike,
Since you are the smart one here. Why don't you show KRE and the Pickett's how to make the same HP at a lower RPM with the same cubic inches. I am sure that they would appreciate the help and the money saved. There is no question more power cycles (RPM) and more mass flow makes more HP no one was question that. 800 HP @ 6500 vs 800 HP @ 9500 was the discussion and no where's did cubic inches or car weight come into the discussion.

Stan

You are the one who brought their CID and tried to divert the conversation to axle torque instead of usable power and its application.

2 DOUBLE FACE PALMs. Two for Stan and two for John.

[mike leech]

Originally Posted by johnta1

Quoted for stupidity.

That really hurt coming from you. I'm crying here.