Heathcote # 2

[Adam]

As I'm sure alot of you have read already a few of us had a run at Heathcote today. Now while my times aren't as impressive as Adam's I'm happy, and a little confused aswell.

I had 4 runs today:

60ft: 2.18 ET: 13.12 MPH: 108.49

60ft: 3.17 ET: 15.28 MPH: 104.36 Launching at 2200rpm... Wheelspin anyone?

60ft: 2.26 ET: 12.28 MPH: Not shown

60ft: 2.19 ET: 13.27 MPH: 106.66

Now as you can probably see the 12.28 is heaps quicker than anything I've ever ran before. The time slip in a little more detail is:

60ft: 2.26 660ft: 7.78 660ft MPH: Not shown ET: 12.28 MPH: Not shown

I asked the timing office if there's any chance that it was wrong and they said no, despite the MPH not being recorded. The car beside me ran a 12.57 @ 108.46 MPH with a 60ft time of 1.84. From what I could see he defineately got away on me quicker because I was more concerned on launching rpm. In the last half of the run I was clearly catching him and he just beat me across the line. Which adds support to the time being correct I think and the other guys there tended to agree.

So what do you guys think did I really run a 12.28 or not?

I MUST APOLOGISE TO DAVE. THE TITLE IS SURPOSED TO SAY "DAVE'S NOT THE ONLY ONE WITH A PB" SORRY BUDDY!

Edited 01/08/05 01:17 AM by Cro

[geea]

After looking at all the slips and comparing different runs I think you got the 12.2. If possible post up a few of your slips including the 12.2 and maybe Dave can do the same. I think this will confirm the time.

Geea.

[macka'sxr6t]

I dunno

All this ET and mph and rwkw still confuses the crap out of me. But if I had to make a choice I'd have to say no. Just because it stands out so much compared to the other times slips which are consistant. A second is a big improvement without know the mph

macka

[jEtONiT]

I reckon u possibly did run the 12.. if your sure u caught up to him at the end

[Goldbullet]

After looking at all the slips and comparing different runs I think you got the 12.2. If possible post up a few of your slips including the 12.2 and maybe Dave can do the same. I think this will confirm the time.

Geea.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This might help I had the following:

60" 1.97Sec @ 89.86 MPH 1/4 12.20 @ 115.98 MPH

60" 1.97Sec @ 91.37 MPH 1/4 12.06 @ 119.81 MPH

I think after looking at it and Adams best MPH @ 108 you would be pushing to get a 12.2 being some 7 MPH back from my 115.98 for me to get a 12.2 and I had a 1.97 60"

So what can you work out from this ?

Dave.

[Adam]

I dunno

All this ET and mph and rwkw still confuses the crap out of me.  But if I had to make a choice I'd have to say no.  Just because it stands out so much compared to the other times slips which are consistant.  A second is a big improvement without know the mph

macka

I'm not so surprised to see a big difference in my times Macka. I'm still new to all this stuff and last time I went and had a run my times ranged over a second. One thing that did happen the same was that last time I had a run I ran my quickest time by along way after letting the car cool for quite along time. It was the same today, there was 2 hours in between runs for the car to cool down. Maybe that has something to do with it, maybe not.

[geea]

After looking at all the slips and comparing different runs I think you got the 12.2. If possible post up a few of your slips including the 12.2 and maybe Dave can do the same. I think this will confirm the time.

Geea.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This might help I had the following:

60" 1.97Sec @ 89.86 MPH 1/4 12.20 @ 115.98 MPH

60" 1.97Sec @ 91.37 MPH 1/4 12.06 @ 119.81 MPH

So what can you work out from this ?

Dave.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dave can you give us your 660' times please and we can see how they compare with Adam's 7.78

Geea.

[Guest]

id say 12.2

[jetute]

adam... I hope you did run that time... but a 12.2 with 255 rwkw in a ute?... if that's what you ran its one tough 255 rwkw

hope my scepticism is wrong though

[Goldbullet]

After looking at all the slips and comparing different runs I think you got the 12.2. If possible post up a few of your slips including the 12.2 and maybe Dave can do the same. I think this will confirm the time.

Geea.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This might help I had the following:

60" 1.97Sec @ 89.86 MPH 1/4 12.20 @ 115.98 MPH

60" 1.97Sec @ 91.37 MPH 1/4 12.06 @ 119.81 MPH

So what can you work out from this ?

Dave.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dave can you give us your 660' times please and we can see how they compare with Adam's 7.78

Geea.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

7.83 & 7.94 so Adam might be right, just seems a huge difference in MPH but could be right I dont know how to wotk it out

Dave