Re: Possible Trolls?
 

Mike Romain proclaimed:


> If so then the article I read must have been out of date. It said the
> MDS wasn't used in the pickups because of load and reaction time
> issues.

Would be easier to believe it was because of no mileage standards in
pickups...yet. As for the reaction time, the switch back to 8 cyl
mode is under 3/4 of a rev, making it under half of an ignition
cycle. Haven't seen any mentions of hemi hesitation in any of
the road tests of the hemi GC...which turns mid 6's to 60 in any of
the tests I've seen.
>
> It would be interesting to know what he modified for the gain and if it
> was a top or bottom end gain. Maybe there is a way to shut the sucker
> down and stay in V8 mode?
>
> I come from the muscle car days too and something like that really
> messes with the 'Hemi' idea. Wayyyy too many parts and crap. Sounds
> like there isn't even a gas pedal cable or linkage. All electronic. No
> more shoe lace trail fixes. LOL!

I come from the old muscle car era as well, having had the pleasure of
owning more than one engine over 7 liters with compression ratios in
in the 12:1 range. Although the thundering torque was a lot of fun,
a much smaller modern engine with modern engine management systems
does much better except in dim memories. Granted it was a lot easier
to hop up the old rat motors, wedge heads, etc. without a PhD, but
then again you actually *had* to do this to get anywhere near the
advertised performance except on a very few purposely underrated
homologation special models.

>
> Man, next they will be using microsoft in the ECU.
>

Hmmm, ya think that is what is causing the hesitation?

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

Lon your memory is failing, or you have never felt the power of a stock
427" or 426". Otherwise, you'd know none of these puny computer
controlled engines could ever deliver the horse power needed to topple
the records set back in the sixties:
http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lon wrote:
>
> Would be easier to believe it was because of no mileage standards in
> pickups...yet. As for the reaction time, the switch back to 8 cyl
> mode is under 3/4 of a rev, making it under half of an ignition
> cycle. Haven't seen any mentions of hemi hesitation in any of
> the road tests of the hemi GC...which turns mid 6's to 60 in any of
> the tests I've seen.
>
> I come from the old muscle car era as well, having had the pleasure of
> owning more than one engine over 7 liters with compression ratios in
> in the 12:1 range. Although the thundering torque was a lot of fun,
> a much smaller modern engine with modern engine management systems
> does much better except in dim memories. Granted it was a lot easier
> to hop up the old rat motors, wedge heads, etc. without a PhD, but
> then again you actually *had* to do this to get anywhere near the
> advertised performance except on a very few purposely underrated
> homologation special models.
>
> Hmmm, ya think that is what is causing the hesitation?

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

Lon your memory is failing, or you have never felt the power of a stock
427" or 426". Otherwise, you'd know none of these puny computer
controlled engines could ever deliver the horse power needed to topple
the records set back in the sixties:
http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lon wrote:
>
> Would be easier to believe it was because of no mileage standards in
> pickups...yet. As for the reaction time, the switch back to 8 cyl
> mode is under 3/4 of a rev, making it under half of an ignition
> cycle. Haven't seen any mentions of hemi hesitation in any of
> the road tests of the hemi GC...which turns mid 6's to 60 in any of
> the tests I've seen.
>
> I come from the old muscle car era as well, having had the pleasure of
> owning more than one engine over 7 liters with compression ratios in
> in the 12:1 range. Although the thundering torque was a lot of fun,
> a much smaller modern engine with modern engine management systems
> does much better except in dim memories. Granted it was a lot easier
> to hop up the old rat motors, wedge heads, etc. without a PhD, but
> then again you actually *had* to do this to get anywhere near the
> advertised performance except on a very few purposely underrated
> homologation special models.
>
> Hmmm, ya think that is what is causing the hesitation?

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

Lon your memory is failing, or you have never felt the power of a stock
427" or 426". Otherwise, you'd know none of these puny computer
controlled engines could ever deliver the horse power needed to topple
the records set back in the sixties:
http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lon wrote:
>
> Would be easier to believe it was because of no mileage standards in
> pickups...yet. As for the reaction time, the switch back to 8 cyl
> mode is under 3/4 of a rev, making it under half of an ignition
> cycle. Haven't seen any mentions of hemi hesitation in any of
> the road tests of the hemi GC...which turns mid 6's to 60 in any of
> the tests I've seen.
>
> I come from the old muscle car era as well, having had the pleasure of
> owning more than one engine over 7 liters with compression ratios in
> in the 12:1 range. Although the thundering torque was a lot of fun,
> a much smaller modern engine with modern engine management systems
> does much better except in dim memories. Granted it was a lot easier
> to hop up the old rat motors, wedge heads, etc. without a PhD, but
> then again you actually *had* to do this to get anywhere near the
> advertised performance except on a very few purposely underrated
> homologation special models.
>
> Hmmm, ya think that is what is causing the hesitation?

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

As a street-racer spectator, I have to agree with Bill. I've seen dozens of
"rice rockets" with every performance mod on the market try and touch some
of the big muscle cars on the 1/4 and not even come close. I remember one
night in particular ...I *think* it was a Cuda (or Camaro SS maybe) took on
all of the imports that showed up and never lost ...never even came close.

That being said ...there are a lot of higher end new cars that would
generally win on a straight 1/4 ...Corvette, Viper, and BMW M5 can take most
stock muscle cars. Then again, we're not talking about "puny
computer-controlled engines", are we?


"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:41C91A9F.61EAE35F@cox.net...
> Lon your memory is failing, or you have never felt the power of a stock
> 427" or 426". Otherwise, you'd know none of these puny computer
> controlled engines could ever deliver the horse power needed to topple
> the records set back in the sixties:
> http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

As a street-racer spectator, I have to agree with Bill. I've seen dozens of
"rice rockets" with every performance mod on the market try and touch some
of the big muscle cars on the 1/4 and not even come close. I remember one
night in particular ...I *think* it was a Cuda (or Camaro SS maybe) took on
all of the imports that showed up and never lost ...never even came close.

That being said ...there are a lot of higher end new cars that would
generally win on a straight 1/4 ...Corvette, Viper, and BMW M5 can take most
stock muscle cars. Then again, we're not talking about "puny
computer-controlled engines", are we?


"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:41C91A9F.61EAE35F@cox.net...
> Lon your memory is failing, or you have never felt the power of a stock
> 427" or 426". Otherwise, you'd know none of these puny computer
> controlled engines could ever deliver the horse power needed to topple
> the records set back in the sixties:
> http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

As a street-racer spectator, I have to agree with Bill. I've seen dozens of
"rice rockets" with every performance mod on the market try and touch some
of the big muscle cars on the 1/4 and not even come close. I remember one
night in particular ...I *think* it was a Cuda (or Camaro SS maybe) took on
all of the imports that showed up and never lost ...never even came close.

That being said ...there are a lot of higher end new cars that would
generally win on a straight 1/4 ...Corvette, Viper, and BMW M5 can take most
stock muscle cars. Then again, we're not talking about "puny
computer-controlled engines", are we?


"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote in message
news:41C91A9F.61EAE35F@cox.net...
> Lon your memory is failing, or you have never felt the power of a stock
> 427" or 426". Otherwise, you'd know none of these puny computer
> controlled engines could ever deliver the horse power needed to topple
> the records set back in the sixties:
> http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

There is a newer car holding a record, a stock C class Fuel Injected
'96 Corvette with an 10.66 ET, 126.68 MPH set in March of this year, BUT
we all know that stock engine is based on the original 1955 265" V8,
what we now call their 350" small block:
http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html But, it'll be a cold day in
Hell before we see a Chrysler Viper V10 or their new fake Hemi design
with enough power to set a record.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

griffin wrote:
>
> As a street-racer spectator, I have to agree with Bill. I've seen dozens of
> "rice rockets" with every performance mod on the market try and touch some
> of the big muscle cars on the 1/4 and not even come close. I remember one
> night in particular ...I *think* it was a Cuda (or Camaro SS maybe) took on
> all of the imports that showed up and never lost ...never even came close.
>
> That being said ...there are a lot of higher end new cars that would
> generally win on a straight 1/4 ...Corvette, Viper, and BMW M5 can take most
> stock muscle cars. Then again, we're not talking about "puny
> computer-controlled engines", are we?

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

There is a newer car holding a record, a stock C class Fuel Injected
'96 Corvette with an 10.66 ET, 126.68 MPH set in March of this year, BUT
we all know that stock engine is based on the original 1955 265" V8,
what we now call their 350" small block:
http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html But, it'll be a cold day in
Hell before we see a Chrysler Viper V10 or their new fake Hemi design
with enough power to set a record.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

griffin wrote:
>
> As a street-racer spectator, I have to agree with Bill. I've seen dozens of
> "rice rockets" with every performance mod on the market try and touch some
> of the big muscle cars on the 1/4 and not even come close. I remember one
> night in particular ...I *think* it was a Cuda (or Camaro SS maybe) took on
> all of the imports that showed up and never lost ...never even came close.
>
> That being said ...there are a lot of higher end new cars that would
> generally win on a straight 1/4 ...Corvette, Viper, and BMW M5 can take most
> stock muscle cars. Then again, we're not talking about "puny
> computer-controlled engines", are we?

Re: Possible Trolls?
 

There is a newer car holding a record, a stock C class Fuel Injected
'96 Corvette with an 10.66 ET, 126.68 MPH set in March of this year, BUT
we all know that stock engine is based on the original 1955 265" V8,
what we now call their 350" small block:
http://www.nhra.com/stats/stk_record.html But, it'll be a cold day in
Hell before we see a Chrysler Viper V10 or their new fake Hemi design
with enough power to set a record.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

griffin wrote:
>
> As a street-racer spectator, I have to agree with Bill. I've seen dozens of
> "rice rockets" with every performance mod on the market try and touch some
> of the big muscle cars on the 1/4 and not even come close. I remember one
> night in particular ...I *think* it was a Cuda (or Camaro SS maybe) took on
> all of the imports that showed up and never lost ...never even came close.
>
> That being said ...there are a lot of higher end new cars that would
> generally win on a straight 1/4 ...Corvette, Viper, and BMW M5 can take most
> stock muscle cars. Then again, we're not talking about "puny
> computer-controlled engines", are we?