HP Adjustments

[Ed Wright]

And your driver said you were heavy for C/SA while running B/SA. You were the guys that were going to race straight up and not sandbag. How long did that last?

[Tony Janes]

Las Vegas is an altitude strip, 1.25 under sea level index to get instant horse power, I think we have been to this dance before. End of story

[Dgal]

Originally Posted by Salty Dog

I don't think that is called sandbagging. Just change to the C/SA index and see how fast they were. Sandbaggers lift and hide their weight. Keith was honest. He is a heck of a credible drag racer and has nothing to hide.

That car is as close to the definition of sandbagging as one could get. Heck, it even meets the term if they were using sand instead of steel.

Ed is applying the C/SA index to see how fast they were. If they were running the true weight of B/SA and not lifting then the horsepower figures would have stuck. They either lift or run extra weight to avoid getting the hit. They ran extra weight which is sandbagging.

Our car was there running their spare motor and it ran fantastic. We were within the weight range for C/SA and qualified just fine. The most impressive C/SA car at Vegas was Carson Pedigo's Chevelle. Not the Drag Pak eventhough it was in B/SA, but it ran at a heavy C/SA.

Every time one of the Drag Paks ran you would see people at the starting line shaking their heads in disgust. You should have heard some of the comments when they were pounding on the legit fast cars in the heads up races.

There were guys in the lanes that were talking about the "what ifs" they came up against one in future rounds. None of them felt the need to take their car to the go fast mode. None of them had a favorable comment of the Drag Paks or Cobra Jets as classified.

And none of them post here.

Don

[Eric Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Salty Dog

Keith stated that they couldn't get any more weight out, so there really wasn't the option to take the weight out. I don't think 131 mph is lifting either. Who was running their spare motor? You refer to a "legit fast car"....as opposed to...non-legit fast cars? What were the comments? Who was whining? Please share. Everyone would like to hear. Maybe they should post here...or...maybe just quit whining because the DP's and CJ's are not going anywhere. 2011 and 2012 models are already being approved.

10.009 @ 112.11 holy batman brake malfunction!...maybe a "mandump" as described by Scotty Richardson!.....Thats cutting it close....Tire smoke?

[Dgal]

Originally Posted by Salty Dog

Keith stated that they couldn't get any more weight out, so there really wasn't the option to take the weight out. I don't think 131 mph is lifting either. Who was running their spare motor? You refer to a "legit fast car"....as opposed to...non-legit fast cars? What were the comments? Who was whining? Please share. Everyone would like to hear. Maybe they should post here...or...maybe just quit whining because the DP's and CJ's are not going anywhere. 2011 and 2012 models are already being approved.

Funny how you think that an opposing opinion is whining. I would call Koppien's Camaro a legit fast car. It never had a chance against a cherry picked parts car. No one has asked that the Drag Paks or Cobra Jets be eliminated or "go anywhere" like you said. We have just asked for proper classification for these Factory Experiments.

My buddy's last name is Ratcliff and he qualified just fine with his spare motor. We were pleased with the results and anxious to see what the better piece may offer after this winter. It looks like he picked up about 26 from Vegas.

Do you race? I don't, but I am involved with his car and help where I can. And we compete against these factory experiments. Do you? Will you? Or you just adept with the ad hominem.

Don

[Larry Curtis]

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

And your driver said you were heavy for C/SA while running B/SA. You were the guys that were going to race straight up and not sandbag. How long did that last?

Sandbaging: definition;
Keith LynchRuns 10.009/112.110mph

[Jeff Lee]

There is something seriously wrong with their tune-up! My 1320/MPH calculation shows a 112.11 MPH run as being "optimum" with an 11.77 ET! That means they "somehow" picked up 1.68 seconds. A 10.09 would seem impossible. Must be one of those toads setting off the beams at the finish line. Hope nobody squished the poor toad!

[Andys dad]

I call it dumb luck. We went 10.29 and as I worked by Keith's car I said you will be in the 9s he said boy I don't want to do that. Good driving guess or real good luck. He is good

[Eric Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Larry Curtis

Sandbaging: definition;
Keith LynchRuns 10.009/112.110mph

Inconclusive.....so many things can go wrong, right off the top of my head....

ran out of gas/fuel pump death/filter clog?
Computer gremlin ie loss of voltage to ECU
throttle petal malfunction.....yes it happens.....
Misfire.....ie coil pack going south, valve spring lets go, dead hole.
slick puncture
window regulator malfunction causing windows to come down
opponent crossing the center line
torque convertor letting go
tranny slip
Pinion breaking
hood malfunction...
And more!

or you could be dead on.

[Jack Matyas]

Originally Posted by Eric Merryfield

Inconclusive.....so many things can go wrong, right off the top of my head....

ran out of gas/fuel pump death/filter clog?
Computer gremlin ie loss of voltage to ECU
throttle petal malfunction.....yes it happens.....
Misfire.....ie coil pack going south, valve spring lets go, dead hole.
slick puncture
window regulator malfunction causing windows to come down
opponent crossing the center line
torque convertor letting go
tranny slip
Pinion breaking
hood malfunction...
And more!

or you could be dead on.

Many other possibilities -- charley horse in right leg- had to lift

Farted and foot came off gas ( no pun intended )

Hot dog wrapper blew thru the lights

I could go on but i'm laughing too much ...........