Horsepower

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by pwd72s

So..wow, you have a fast car and like to brag about it while saying those here who make other choices suck.

Gee, I'm sooo impressed!

Ronnie and I give each other shiet for no reason. Keep that in mind.

He has 213hp (flywheel) per dyno if I remember correctly.

[Rawknees'Turbo]

Originally Posted by pwd72s

. .

So..wow, you have a fast car and like to brag about it while saying those here who make other choices suck.

Gee, I'm sooo impressed!

Why make up hogwash that I didn't write?

I never said anything about anyone here sucking, but I think it is only natural that in a sports car forum that there will be appropriate counters to claims that driving a low horsepower machine is somehow a superior experience to driving one with power.

[Rawknees'Turbo]

Originally Posted by Bob Kontak

Ronnie and I give each other shiet for no reason. Keep that in mind.

He has 213hp (flywheel) per dyno if I remember correctly.

You do not remember correctly, bub! Too many Stones marinating yer brain, it seems!!!

[pwd72s]

Bob, you sayin' my old, slow, and obsolete Mustang could probably hang with him in the quarter? LOL!

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by Rawknees'Turbo

You do not remember correctly, bub! Too many Stones marinating yer brain, it seems!!!

So what you thinkin' you got?

I just made that up to get your attention. Pulled it right out of my you know what.

13.6 in the quarter is pretty righteous for a street car.

Say it. What you got?

Don't make me go there.

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by RWebb

I like the Mark Donohue criterion for adequate power...

You gotta have the skills to handle that though. He did. I know I don't.

[manbridge 74]

Drove plenty of Meh-atas but I suppose never long enough to want to own one.

[Bill Douglas]

90 horsepower is plenty. I wouldn't want a motorbike with anymore than at.

If I had a high horsepower car I would have got myself into way too much trouble. The SC does me fine for the sort of driving I do.

[pwd72s]

Anybody want to play pool for cheap? (a hustler opening gambit.)

Double or nothing? (His game about to improve...or maybe not, depending.)

Seriously, I doubt my honorary nephew has ever gambled at pool. That's because when he plays for money, it's not gambling.

[Rawknees'Turbo]

^^^

Bob is always down for pocket pool - anytime anywhere!

Originally Posted by Bob Kontak

So what you thinkin' you got?

A lot more than stock, but a lot less than the big ballers in the Turbo forum - maybe one day!

I am one that believes there is no such thing as too much power, and whether it is used to its potential or not is of no importance; just having it there, particularly if built with one's own hands, is plenty satisfying.

[Jeff Higgins]

Big power is fun, no doubt. In our world, that of sports cars and road racing, it can, however, be of questionable merit. It gets more guys into trouble than it helps. Especially the weekend warriors which, if we all admit it, includes all of us.

I am the proud owner of a 7.16, 188 mph official NHRA time slip. Not my car, and it took me several runs and a full day to work up to it. I cannot go into too many details, since this was not entirely by the book and the car owner would be in really, really deep doo-doo if the wrong officials found out. Suffice to say, I've known him for 40 years, we have spent a good deal of time wrenching on each other's projects over the years, and we trust each other. He has gone out as "me" in my 911 on some lapping days as well - he held the SIR lap record in his go-kart for awhile, so I know he knows his way around.

Anyway, the kind of power his car puts down is great good fun on a drag strip, on big wrinkle walls, with VHT all the way down to the traps. In a road race car? NFW - someone would die.

[ted]

Originally Posted by Rawknees'Turbo

^^^
I am one that believes there is no such thing as too much power, and whether it is used to its potential or not is of no importance; just having it there, particularly if built with one's own hands, is plenty satisfying.

You lose momentum with a turbo you can bog.
An older turbo is a real driver challenge.
if you like big turbo power No AX for you, you need a roval.
If you don't have video of your turbo on a roval you still don't suck.

The Miata and the slogan are lost on me.
Momentum and a real race car still important, 740 hp on a roval.

[madcorgi]

I spent 20 years in the right seat, too many of which were with people who wanted to run before they could walk. Power hides a lot of technical errors, right up until it kills the driver. Now we have cars that pretty much drive themselves, at least from a car control standpoint, so the skills I spent a lot of years learning are now handled by a computer. And I've hung up my helmet, because computerized crs on a track suck.

A far cry from this, which perfectly illustrates what I am talking about.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by madcorgi

I spent 20 years in the right seat, too many of which were with people who wanted to run before they could walk. Power hides a lot of technical errors, right up until it kills the driver. Now we have cars that pretty much drive themselves, at least from a car control standpoint, so the skills I spent a lot of years learning are now handled by a computer. And I've hung up my helmet, because computerized crs on a track suck.

Boy, do I ever hear you, Terry. I'm about done. At least with the PCA. I find myself surrounded by less than capable people in way too capable cars. I have had way, way too many "moments" with impatient, unskilled drivers who seem to feel they have somehow purchased the "right" to drive inappropriately, to show the slow guy in the old car just who owns the place. It's gotten much worse since you left. I'm not sure it's worth it anymore. I wish there was some "old car" venue for those of us without the latest GT3 RS or something.

[Rawknees'Turbo]

So in summary:

Newer cars suck, just because (unless they have tiny engines).

Drivers of newer cars are spoiled and unskilled, and they suck.

Roadrace cars with powerful engines suck, because they cockblock the little engined guys who need to keep an almost constant, wide open throttle state in order to get around the track at something other than a sundial pace.

Long live the clown cars!


Is that that about right?!?!

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Rawknees'Turbo

So in summary:

Newer cars suck, just because.

Drivers of newer cars are spoiled and unskilled, and they suck.

Roadrace cars with powerful engines suck, because they cockblock the little engined guys who need to keep an almost constant, open throttle state in order to get around the track at something other than a sundial pace.

Long live the clown cars!


Is that that about right?!?!

Distilled down to your level, yes, it is. Much like the art of the "sweet science" vs. the redneck, fornicating, ball grabbing, lite beer swilling world of UFC.

[speeder]

This is my kind of internet argument. Everyone seems a little bit drunk and not really responding to each other but just saying what they want to say, like we're all in a bar and the band is really loud so you can't really hear what the other guy said, anyway.

And PWD is talking about shooting pool, no matter what the actual topic is/was.

[911boost]

I’ve seen just as many dildos driving like idiots in older slower cars as well.

Currently having both sides of the spectrum in my garage (78 VW Westy and ‘10 GT3 RS) each has its merits and they are both fun to drive at legal speeds.

[911boost]

I agree with the newer cars been super capable and do have the ability to hide a lot of driver error.

One of my previous 911’s was a 964T with the single turbo and no computer nannies. That car could easily bite you right in the rear if you didn’t respect it.

[rattlsnak]

Originally Posted by Jim Bremner

10 pounds per hps the minimum. I like cars to be in the sub 7 pounds per hps range and sub 5 gets my blood pressure up

Mine is @ 5.10 and it's not enough.. lol.