whats up guys i would really love to know the answer to this question.. can people help me out on this one? and state if your maxima is an se auto or manuel and or gle auto or manuel.. thank u very much guys

 

Not on your topic, but according to the scales on the track, my 03' 6MT with the fuel light on tipped in at 3133lbs, sans driver of course.

 

dam good time with just intake.. and thats without u in the car right?

 

Yup.

 

3159 for my 03 SE with automatic

 

ok so as far as i can tell so far the 04 se max fully loaded auto with elite pachage is 3362 so its 200 pnds hevier which isnt that big of a jump.. so i would say it might be 2 tenths slower in the 1/4 than an 02 or 03 stock for stock

 

Remember, that one tenth of a second equals roughly a car length's difference in the 1320.

 

i thaught it was two tenths is a car length? and who knows the new se has a 5spd auto who knows that might help

 

Its one tenth equaling roughly a car length. As for its slushbox tranny, well, its not a manual, so I couldn't help you there.

 

true true

 

Mine is a tank I weighed in at 3500, thats with 18's all my mods, leather, auto, and system. 2000se

 

my registration shows 3109... i have an 02 SE 6 speed with just a sunroof, no hlsd

btw you cant really calculate how many car lengths a tenth is, reaction time and 60' time factor in too much... i beat someone at the track by a car or 2 and his 1/4 mile was about .3 or so lower than mine on that specific run, because he had a slow reaction and a bad launch i suppose

 

 

now read the rest of my post

 

So, you are telling me, that given two cars, (even though RT doesn't affect the time as the timer doesn't start till' the car moves) that given a comparitive, that said cars, cannnot make a rough baseline for distance with varying factors?

Applying that, saying two equally matched cars--who share basically the same specs, and roughly the same track conditions, cannot be made to compare distance through their times, through the use of basic math? Gee, the ten years I've been running in the 1320 tells not only me, but everyone else I know different. Please expound to me on your theory, even though I have used the descriptive roughly more than a few times here.

 

the only thing that one car length for .10 signifies is that your car will be 1 car ahead of where it would be if you were .10 slower.... if youre comparing it to racing someone it has nothing to do with it... thats also why street racing doesnt really mean much... if the other guy gets a quicker reaction off the line you could be dead even with him but yet you can run .5 faster than him.. im talking about the reality of the difference of one car length for every .10 lower. so if one guy runs a 15 flat and another runs a 14 flat, are you saying that there will be a 10 car gap between the 2 cars? i beg to differ

btw i know that rt does not affect the time, but youre talking about distance between the cars thats why im brining that into play

 

The crux of the now skewed conversation was based upon relative distances when comparing two cars. Kicking that conversation around, if two cars were basically matched, and their traps were roughly the same, yuo can discount the 60's and ignore the RT's and go by what each car trapped at-again, for a rough comparitive. Nothing more.
I am not talking about street racing, and if I ever have in this conversation, please show me. I am talking about racing in the quarter mile, and when I cut 14.1's running against a IS300 who is cutting 15.6's I can assure you, there were quite a few buslengths between us, but that comparitive is moot.
Please note the multitude of times I used the term roughly I never once stated that I spoke of the Bible truth, more simply I am drawing by the ten years of experience I have by being around, and driving at 1/4 mile tracks, where you get your information, I am not too sure of--I can appreciate your notions, but just like you, I am drawing from what I know. Yes, there are a cavalcade of variables you can factor in, but the premise of the entire thought at hand was stated with the verbiage, roughly was it not?
Hmmm, so the big block cars that I have run against that are trapping high 11's in the low hundreds aren't actually as far as they look to me as they are in front of me? Is that what you are telling me?
You shouldn't have mentioned the RT as a factor then. I am talking about the relative distance between cars, using a rough calculation thats been passed down for years, and years, and years, at quarter mile tracks. For kicks, what do you run in the quarter, just so I can see how I compare to you.

 

i understand the concept youre talking about, but it didnt seem like you understood what i was talking about... im talking about a real life situation... people go around thinking that if they weigh 100 pounds less, they will keep even with the guy that was a car length ahead of him at the track last week, thats not true, thats why i threw in the run i had where i beat the guy but his ET was better than mine... thats the best i could explain what i was trying to say, and hey i guess its natural for you to argue things out since youre an attorney

 

Again, I appreciate all your points, and yes, sometimes, I tend to argue

 

its all good, im the same way... i was just trying to say that that theory is correct if youre driving down the 1/4 mile alone, but if you have someone next to you its a different story..i have work in 7 1/2 hours though, so im done debating for the night lol, have a good one

 

im sorry guys the whole point of my topic here was weight not distance in the 1/4 by how many car lengths. who knows what it is, the only thing that really matters is whos got the better time at the end of the 1/4 right?