Rich Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 We've NEVER SAID the slip was doctored....we've said it's wrong and that's that. Something caused the timing beams too trigger early. End of. right !thats it ,Im trading the supra in for a GTO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I've just viewed Jim's video. One slip is the one we've already seen, the other shows (as far as I can make out through the blur) a 60 foot time of 1.931 seconds. What happened to this : 0-60 ft times in all my 3 runs only diff was hitting rev limiter and missing a gear all had under 1 sec 60ft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letmeshowyou Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 it's just occurred to me... for the run on the slip... th car pulled 6+ G to get to 99mph by the 60ft point. He then *slowed down* as he was gunned at 83mph at the 1/8th mile and then accelerated again to do 104 as he crossed the line. This USC DVD might be worth getting to see that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I smell bull shit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 http://www.max-boost.co.uk/stuff/BullRepellent.jpg Might come handy around the new airfilter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letmeshowyou Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Come on Jim... only 2 posts left. Why did you slow down between the 60ft and 1/8th mile points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dee_rz Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 right. I'm bored of this now. Can someone verify my (very approximate) maths please... 60ft = 0.0099 miles 0.858seconds (jims time) = 0.0002hours To cover that distance at a constant velocity you'd have to be travelling at 49.5mph. Assuming linear acceleration (we know this was done from a standing start) this would mean at the 60ft point you were doing 99mph jim. Strange that you only see 4 seconds 0-60 on the g-tech and even stranger that for the remainder of the 1/4 mile you only accelerated by a further 5 miles per hour. Did you take your foot off and maintain a constant speed? I would have thought that was pretty easy to verify on this dvd we're all supposed to buy. Are you sure the timing gear can't be at fault? yep thats the money maker lol what a load of bull, i have seen the pods timing system throw hissy fit before, seen a pulsar or something run a 9 second 1/4 mile once and it looked like it done a 15+ it does happen, i think the proof more is the fact that he has a slip saying a late 1.9, i'm almost certain that is what he'll constantly get aagin and again, he should be proud of the 13.1 for a gto that is damn quick i only seen one and know of a guy who has just over 400bhp one that i raced and his best was 13.4 i did a 13.0@111mph on 0.8 bar he was running way over 1 bar, this thread has made me pee myself with laughter, made my day thank you all and god bless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Good old maths. 60ft from a standing start = 99mph, no arguments or timing slips on the planet can refute that. I can't believe he's still arguing against the underlying laws of physics of the universe. He's a tryer* -Ian *I meant fuckwit - the keys are, like, next to each other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersizejim Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 gb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letmeshowyou Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 fast to 30... about a quarter of a second according to my calculation earlier... how do you not black out pulling that sort of G? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Who says he doesn't? Does this thread not tip you at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letmeshowyou Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Just one last thing are you not noticing my 1/8th mile times? at 7.283 sec and 8.47 1/8th mile time for fully laden car. they are of good times too, My cars fast to 30 very fast . thats it cant you work out how times have happend? its called af timing gear fault or something doesnt add up ffs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 fast to 30... about a quarter of a second according to my calculation earlier... how do you not black out pulling that sort of G? didnt you know? hes a trained fighter pilot as well as a pro superstar drag racer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letmeshowyou Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 sadly no one has yet commented from the GTR forum. Jamie can we have a link to the post on the GTO one please matey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doughie Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I've just done the maths too. I studied Physics at University so i know a little about calculating moving-object dynamics. My figures come out almost exactly the same as letmeshowyou : 60 feet = 18.288metres = 0.011366miles (distance travelled) (there are 1609metres in 1 mile). 0.8secs = 0.000222hours. To travel that 18.288mtr distance at a constant velocity you need to travel at 51.1mph. So, yes, assuming the rate of acceleration was constant (reasonable) and starting at 0mph, the final speed at 60foot line would need to be 102.3mph. Additionally, the average acceleration for that to be achieved is 5.8g (*constant* 5.8g). [(using equation s=ut + 1/2 a t^2), where s=distance travelled, u=initial velocity, a=average acceleration, t=time. I know for a fact that Top Fuel dragsters running on Nitromethane have about 5500bhp (some have 6000bhp) and do 0-100mph in 1second or slightly less, so the 0.8secs to 60ft line is about what a Top Fuel dragster can do, and that ties in with my calculation of final speed at 60feet line (102.3mph). I don't care how much traction Jim's car has, it cannot and will not do 0-102mph in 0.8secs. And it cannot and will not accelerate at an average G of 5.8G. That is fact now, the calculations show it. CONCLUSION: Either Jim isn't telling the truth, or there was a glitch in the timiing system for that run. I'd give Jim the benefit of the doubt and say it was a timing system glitch. Doesn't matter it was FIA-ratified, all electronics systems can and do fail, all computer programs have bugs in them. If it was a glitch then Jim as an experienced drag racer *SHOULD* have realised that the time was a glitch. But a glitch doesn't sound as impressive down the pub as 0-102mph in 0.8secs.. Argument over. - It didn't happen, end of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letmeshowyou Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 I did do a fair bit of rounding Doughie - thanks for the verification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 ..That is fact now, the calculations show it. ... Come on man, did you need to do the calculations to see that it was waaaaay off? As for the 'experienced dragracer', well, 19" axis rims? Hello? Axis of Evil? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Only one post left I'm gonna miss old Jimbo. Still, at least he did the decent thing and posted the video that proves he's a complete dreamer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Maybe there's a Jimbo inside all of us (220 posts and counting!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dee_rz Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 right. I'm bored of this now. Can someone verify my (very approximate) maths please... 60ft = 0.0099 miles 0.858seconds (jims time) = 0.0002hours To cover that distance at a constant velocity you'd have to be travelling at 49.5mph. Assuming linear acceleration (we know this was done from a standing start) this would mean at the 60ft point you were doing 99mph jim. Strange that you only see 4 seconds 0-60 on the g-tech and even stranger that for the remainder of the 1/4 mile you only accelerated by a further 5 miles per hour. Did you take your foot off and maintain a constant speed? I would have thought that was pretty easy to verify on this dvd we're all supposed to buy. Are you sure the timing gear can't be at fault? that's the money maker right there lol love it, you have all have all made my day i have seen the santa pod timing gear throw hissy fits many a time it's not unheard of i have seen golf tdi's do 10 second 1/4 miles... yeah not really, go to show there are two slips in that pdf file the cocked one and the one reading 60ft time of 1.9 which sounds right, and 13.1 he should be proud of thats damn good but don't bullshit, except reality i know a guy with a 440bhp gto that i race and know that does a 1.9 60ft and 13.4 1/4 at 105 and thats very good, most gto's i see do 14.0+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gto owner Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 hi :D what a funny thing this has been to read , he must have watched to many films http://3sforum.com/albums/xwing/MOV00540.mpg http://www.3sforum.com/vids/jackt-1.wmv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKEYmark Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 wow not been here for a while.just read all 15 pages.i used to have a gto tt that was slightly modded with hks induction,hks drager,hks bov. i had it for 10 months.it was faster than my stock supra.when i had exhaust put on my supra and a couple of other bits supra was way faster.the gto to me did not seem sure footed on road as i would have thought with been 4wd 4ws. it seemed to have long gears 1st 40 mph 2nd 80 mph 3rd 110 mph never really tried to push it more over that.just a test to see how long it would hold in each gear. the manual box was a bit notchy for me.seems like it was too heavy to be fast. my best time was at pod in supra on full weight car with race fuel and drag tyres.never reset ecu so dont know if the race fuel was been used.was more peace of mind.i did a best of 1.730 60 foot on stock 17" wheels.you sure know when you launched it well as you get butterflys.so god only knows what it must be like to do a 0.8 60 foot. i would not have thought jims car could hold up to a decent bpu supra. surely i bet jim would have ques of people all wanting to beat his car.there is a lad with a red gto that has done mid 12`s at one of the elvington meets and they do launch hard off the line. but most of them are slow.it must be hard when you have a fast looking car doing corsa times. what a funny thread,think jim should get free membership Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Do you think we could use Jim's GTO for manned space missions to Mars? If it can get to 102mph in 0.8seconds, how quickly could it get there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letmeshowyou Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Mark, you might be right. Must be difficult getting paid for a living with thinking like that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts