hey i know a guy in a e36 m3 that ran a bone stock time of 13.6/7 and people claimed that was impossible.

neal ran a 14.5 in a bone stock car with winter tires or something on it.

some other guy just ran a 4th gen to a 13 sec time with two different brand and size tires on the front of his car.

certain cars on certain days at certain tracks will yeild you some great numbers if driven correctly. nothing is truely impossible if it is still in the realm of practical physics

 

You make good arguments, but Neal running a 14.5 was believable given the rest of the numbers. As Dave points out, a 1.7 60' simply isn't happening. It's just not possible. Your comparison there with Bauer is apples to oranges.

 

This is all you need to know.
/argument

 

I'm going to say according to the track he ran the times. Were the calculations off? I'm going to say yes. Will he ever be able to do it again? Hell no.

 

Clearly you've never been around the drag strip nor understand the physics at play. A 1.71 60' in that car IS NOT HAPPENING no matter what track it is or conditions. A 1.99 60' would be an amazing feat in that car and is possible under the most extreme circumstances. A 1.71? Impossible. Period. Ever seen what a car looks like yanking a 1.6 or 1.7 60'?

This is what a 1.67 60' looks like: http://videos.streetfire.net/video/G...bra_149855.htm

 

Look, if Jim can only pull a 1.87 on slicks with a lot more power, there is NO WAY a 1.71 is possible from this stockish car. Not possible.

 

i didnt compare bauer, i dont even kno what he drives. neals time has never been duplicated by anyone else in a bone stock full weight 4th gen max, yet people have no problem with it even though its a good .2-.4 faster stock then anyone i know of. i think the op's time is not for us to claim false or real if we werent there.
so because i dont share you point of view you feel the need to discredit me by assuming i havent been around a drag strip? physics is something i am pretty good at so i dont see why you need to discredit me on that either.

i said his time is way outside the norm, but i fail to see why something is impossible just because you say so. i dont need you to tell me what a certain 60' looks like either. i have many yrs at drag strips in proper rwd car since i was a kid. ive seen nasty 60's and many of them are still in debate today


i dont know the op, nor do i really care about his time. i just dont see where people have a leg to stand on when it comes to say someone is lying or wrong when we werent there to see the circumstances.


i dont think he will ever run a 13 again let alone cut under 2 sec 60' but we dont know anything about this guy or his car. he could have tranny mods that he is unaware of if he bought the car used. he may even have engine mods that he is unaware of. he may be a great drive from another fwd platform and 1.7's are normal to him. maybe his car is very under weight.

all i am saying is we havent even seen a picture of his car let alone asked him where he got his car or if an org member had it before.

 

Well if that were truly the case then you'd know that a 1.71 60 foot or even a 1.8 or even low 1.9 60 foot would be impossible with that setup. Yes, impossible on planet earth. Like stated already, the ET/MPH to 60' all matches perfectly, but that car didn't post those numbers. No way in hell.

We're not debating what Neal has done plus he's never posted insane 60 foots. Additionally, his famous NA 4th gen was only able to grab lower 1.8 60 foots on 26" slicks and a high rpm launch.

 

Unless the car has 400whp, slicks and a TC, 1.71 just isn't possible. You can pose all the hypothetical situations you want, but that doesn't mean any of them are reasonable. If Jim (Jime), one of the most consistent and hard-core drag racers on this site can only pull a 1.87, you must surmise that a 1.71 in a nearly stock car just isn't possible.

 

The Bauer comment wasn't specifically directed at you, sorry. The reason Neal's time is believable is because he's been pushing the limits of stock Maximas on the drag strip for a while and is an extremely good driver. It's also a 5-speed, which changes the game totally when it comes to the driver and the car's capabilities.

 

Congrats on a mean a** 60' foot and E.T. ! Nice!

 

 

 

WTF? If he ran those numbers it is what it is Congrats again on a mean a** run!

 

I have to agree. With the OP's combo of car/mods/time etc you're well beyond the difference that can be made by driver, track prep etc. My best sixty foot is a 1.759, with a manual tranny, in a 4th gen, on slicks, and a well glued track... and for consistency/back up I have many slips showing 1.7x and low 1.8x sixty foots.

There's a rule in drag racing, your best time is worthless unless it's backed up with subsequent passes that are equivalent or very close. Timing equipment can malfunction, and you can get given someone else's slip occasionally too.

 

well i cant knock anybody's times but the only thing that dont match to me is MPH through the 1/4........... 1sexyleo (girl) IIRC did 13.8 2.0 60' @ 99.xx.. while i've seen lower mph get better or same 1/4 mile times i cant see 3mph less at 13.7, though 60' kinda have me saying otherwise

 

...... was the 4th gen stock???

 

It makes total sense if you're talking about something like a basic bolt-on 5.0 Stang with some deep gears and slicks. For this Maxima? No way.

 

As i have said who cares if why or who saw it. He did it has a slip to prove it .

 

And yes it was bone stock hell its his winter beater.

 

Is he a member here?

 

Well, I have a slip that says I ran a 9.56 at 188. Does that mean my car is that fast? Slips can be wrong.

 

Who, Neal? Nealoc187.

 

I thought he was asking if the guy that ran 13's with different sets of tires was bone stock.

 

Sweet dude! Congrats on the run. I think that's a record. Since you've got the slip it has to be true

 

O ma bad man i didnt know. Yes it was Neal.

 

may he was staging with his rear wheels. sometime people do that and don't realize that.

 

Doesn't that really mess with the et? I assume a guy with a 3' head start will have a much better 60', and thus the rest of the race. So basically, if you go over the line and backup to the line you will have a nice head start on everybody.

 

Exactly. To even set a new NHRA record, you need a back-up run within 1% of the time or trap or it doesn't count.

 

My first thought after reading this post is that he definitely staged with the rear wheels. That would explain the improved 60' and et.

 

Exactly, ive been thinking this for a while and even in the threads where members post time slips. Does that time really mean anything with out a subsequent time to back it up to make sure its not a fluke? Since when does doing something ONCE mean it can be duplicated?
If someone makes a shot from mid court in basketball can i count on him to hit that shot every game? Yeah right.

 

i still cant believe it but given the guy has the slip for it...i cant even argue! congrats on ur 13 sec run PUNJABI....although last year when i was bone stock and used to run 15.5s with my 96 auto, i once ended up with a 15.48 and 123mph 1/4 mile pass...

 

Wheres Neal at? i just noticed he hasnt even posted anything in this thread once!

 

I went to the track with the same drivetrain mods plus suspension work and I couldent do better than 2.3s. So it sounds like your first set of times were more on point. That being said it was a slick track and I felt like I had less traction than when launching on your avg street. Prob with a great track I may have been able to get down to the 2.1 range but deff not sub 2.0, no way.

I am shooting for 1.6 60's with my 500whp rx7 project on 275 drag radials in a 2500lb car.. I'll prob only be abel to get it into the 1.7s.. Trust me, if you've been to the track you will quickly see how hard it is to cut those 60's.

What Jime and Dave B said should pretty much sum it up

 

i avoided this thread at first, i saw it right after he posted it but i didn't want to rain on his parade and then i forgot about it. what i was going to say though has now already been said by others - impossible.

 

i see u

 

is this 4 speed auto right?

 

If ths was an automatic maxima I'm not gonn say the OP is lying but I do believe there was an error on times, could possibly be the previous cars that ran and some how the computers malfunctioned a bit, I've ran plenty of times where when its time to pick up my slip they said the times were messed up lol.... and I really hope ppl are not really thinking an automatic maxima (stock) is running 13.7, especially not a 1.7 on street tires, unless nismo hid a n2o setup in your car.... track error bro but hey, have fun with it, I would lol

 

Who bumped this thread??... WTF man, if he said he had a DR mod what do u think?... ...

 

U R N Idiot

Nice thread revive