OK guys...help me out here...

[Chevy454]

OK...here is some reading for those of you curious what I am talking about.

Here is the current thread: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...6c6741,11&ic=1

Now, here is a thread from about a month or two ago, the one I mentioned earlier: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...7b89f8,73&ic=1 (This one starts off talking about late model cars, but turns into "muscle car bashing" real quick.)

These are from the archives at Google, so they can only be read there. To post, you have to sign up for the newsgroup.

[Edited by Chevy454 (05-18-2001 at 07:16 AM).]

[COPO PETE]

The unfortunate thing about all the old drag tests is that most if not all were before 60' times were available. In the MCR issue where we tested my COPO Nova, we could'nt get better than a 13.5 et., with a 2.3 60'. The time I got 13.22 we managed a low 2.1 60. One time at the Supercar Showdown it's was'nt till the last round we finally got the car to go 13.99. Different days and different tracks make for big differences. Alltitue is also a big factor. So there you have the same car, same driver, and same state of tune on three different ocations going very high 13's, mid 13's and a low 13. If some of these old tests showed a 2.3 short time and ran low 13's, on a different track or someone that could launch the car to a 1.9 short time, than you would have a easy 12 second run. Just my observation.
Peter

[Chevy454]

Pete:

I totally agree. But, if you read the second thread above (the thread from about a month ago) they believe the 60s-70s road test are gospel, where as a lot of todays tests are garbage. Someone even said they thought the older road tests were more accurate. They see it only as a one way street.

I went to Edmunds.com and spent about 2 minutes finding some road tests of cars they said could "whip" a lot of older cars, and they cried foul. Said I went and found the slowest tests I could, as most of the LS-1 cars they claimed would run 12s stock were inthe mid-high 13s. They don't realize there are too many variables to consider (like you said Pete), and that the older cars are less consistent than the newer "idiot proof" cars.

Hey, Pete, did you get the fax?

[Chevy454]

Well, Google has made it possible now for you to post messages to the newsgroup via the archive and your browser. It will be like posting to a message board...sort of. Just find the message you want to reply to, and click "Post a follow-up to this message" after the message. Pretty straight forward.

There is all kinds of info on the newsgroups, so it is worth it to check out Google.com, as you can search for just what you want to see. Enjoy!

[Belair62]

I gotta hand it to you Rob. You sure keep your cool with some of the crap you are taking from a particular guy on google.You may have to explain what AMA specs are ! Looks like he is just having trouble dealing with facts.Best of luck on the Certified Stock races. No matter what you do someone will come up with some off the wall reason why your car shouldn't be that quick.I'm gonna go have my crank polished so I can pick up 1/2 second....geez

[Chevy454]

Yeah, that one guy is giving me some grief, to say the least. It's kind of a shame, too, as there are actually some people trying to be civilized and are just wanting to talk cars, while that guy does his usual "jr. high flame war" routine. He's a usual pest over there, so I am somewhat used to it, I guess...

And, thanks for the "good luck"...I'm gonna need it, as I'm gonna be under the gun trying to get the engine put back together and running after the certified stock tech. Should be interesting.

[Edited by Chevy454 (05-20-2001 at 09:14 AM).]