Evo8,SRT10,TransAm,240sxTurbo(I got spanked all night!)(Vids)
03-28-2007, 04:17 PM
#51
Senior Member
Thread Starter
O wow. Plz dont use magazine racing to determine who "should have" won. There are too many factors to be taken into consideration. Like tranny type, elevation, passengers, extra stuff in the car, what type of gas theyre using ( theres a noticable difference between 91 and 93 octane in our cars ), skill level, problems with the vehicle ( aka boost leak ), etc...
Plz no ricer racing to determine who "should have" won. Its ok to say, well this car is "capable" of getting mid 13's, but it is not certain because the same EXACT test conditions were not used. For all you know he could be a crappy driver and runs 14's, 15's, etc.
Perfect example, Ive seen a basically stock honda civic beat a lotus at a race track. According to ricer math, the honda should have been beaten. According to real life, it wasnt.
Plz no ricer racing to determine who "should have" won. Its ok to say, well this car is "capable" of getting mid 13's, but it is not certain because the same EXACT test conditions were not used. For all you know he could be a crappy driver and runs 14's, 15's, etc.
Perfect example, Ive seen a basically stock honda civic beat a lotus at a race track. According to ricer math, the honda should have been beaten. According to real life, it wasnt.
I hear ya on all the different factors that come into racing, but according to what your saying, there really isn't a point to comparing statistics on vehicles.
I think it is important to acknowledge the possibility of factors that may have swayed the outcome of the race, but in the end what a specific car is "capable" of, is a major factor in determining the possible outcome of a race.
If you had been in the race you mentioned(civic vs lotus) and you were the driver of the civic, would you have put money on yourself to win? I hope not. But in the end, the civic won. That is an amazing feat, but obviously surprising. If it wasn't for the factors you mentioned, that civic should have lost. And that is what I was trying to say by my "magazine racing" comment.
I guess I agree with you, that we shouldn't use statistics to say who should or shouldnt have won, but can't we still use that info to guide us on what the possible outcome would most likely be(barring the factors)? If we can't use the statistics to help guess the outcome, then what can we use?
To me, it seems like you are saying that we should never make predictions of races based on a cars statistics. But what I would say, is that we should never bet anything of value on a race when you only know the cars statistics. Neither of which is the case here. All I was trying to do, was defend my driving skills, because I was bascially told that the reason I lost the race was because I suck at driving, and not because the 240 was faster. It is hard to make that kind of decision, when you don't know anything about my driving skills, and you don't know anything about the 240 I was up against.
03-29-2007, 04:10 AM
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-04-06
Location: Camp LeJeune, NC
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey dude, Im not gonna get on here and flame you at all. The SRT-10 thing was kinda funny, but hey if you didnt know you didnt know.
Looked like a fun night nd the camera man did a good job!
Keep it up dude!
Looked like a fun night nd the camera man did a good job!
Keep it up dude!
03-29-2007, 10:29 AM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-01-06
Location: Raleigh NC
Posts: 1,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Give me till the end of may and we will go for a race promise 
car is getting some shhh mods done to it and I am waiting for my next bonus to finish them up (if i get my next bonus that is) if not I will still be stock and we can still go for a race.
car is getting some shhh mods done to it and I am waiting for my next bonus to finish them up (if i get my next bonus that is) if not I will still be stock and we can still go for a race.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post