It seems some people make this section a mockery by posting unrealistic times or estimates....including the #1 time that states it was run in his driveway! This 'member' has 0 posts!!! Another lists a 13.000 @ 14.000mph. These are the obvious ones but others appear to be fishy. Anything we can do to tighten things up a little?

:smilies-3

You make a good point. It is nothing to get worked up about, but I like to think of this site and respectable and honest, and that sort of silliness does not reflect that. It's not a big deal, but I agree that it makes us appear a little less respectable.

I'm on it. Thanks for the heads up. Just send me or Joey PM's regarding this stuff and we'll handle it.

I handled that one......deleted the entry as it was clearly fale.


The rest look credible to me.......

Alright, I'm going to come right out and call :bsflag: on some.
#5 (13@14mph is legit?), #6 (guestimate, 13.6@78 means he coasted over the line, 4195 lbs means a lot of junk in the trunk), #12 (wishful thinking guestimate, no way that car pulls a 14.6 without 5-speed, or heads, or power-adder and especially on street tires), #14 (another wishful thinker with 0 posts, that car as described is lucky to break into the 15's), #15 (guestimate, though a realistic one based on mods listed...no real data or track gives it away). The timeslip gallery is a valuable resource for all who mod their cars for performance. Having bogus or approximate times is useless to all and reflects negatively on this message board and it's members. #2 is a member here (with 0 posts) but this is a message board for lincolns and cadillacs and a timerun with a mustang seems out of place. I do not post my data on the mustang boards I belong to. Sorry for the :soapbox: Joey!!!

:ban:

John

Although I'm not big into racing my car, I agree with Jsev...still. Your last post was well put, and I think the ability to challenge a time slip would be beneficial. Maybe that is something Joey can work in? Something like "report this time slip to the administrator" and the ability to state why you feel it is bogus. Just an idea.

Use "Sort By: Cars w/ proof of ET"?

Actually, most forums require some form of time slip verification and some go so far as to require witnesses of such runs along WITH the time slip. In practice most timeslip gallery postings are legit. I agree it is more useful as a tool to weigh different mods if the rif-raf if checked at the door.

Jsev22, what I want to know is how you got that pig of yours to come in at 14.4 with a 2.2+ 60 foot time? I obviously don't know everything I need to know when looking at time slips. The mods list of "tranny/converter, gears, bolt-ons, heads" doesn't help much either, 'bout like mine of "Chip, Exhaust, Gears". :tongue:

Someone removed the 11 second CTS?

That one is real. There are videos of it's run on the internet.
Uses a supercharged Grand National engine.

Someone removed the 11 second CTS?

That one is real. There are videos of it's run on the internet.
Uses a supercharged Grand National engine.
I really doubt it was, he said the track he ran was "his driveway" and there were a few other numbers that didnt make sense. All round numbers - no timeslip copy posted, and he never made a post on the board. Just looked too fishy. He can repost it if he likes, but it just didnt look legit in anyway and the guy hasnt been back here since he posted it.

IM not gonna delete any more though. Im not going to try and second guess. You can upload a cpoy of the timeslip so I suggest everyone add credibility by doing so.

I really like this one:

89 Town Car 1989 Lincoln Towncar N/A 140.0 10.000 11.000@12.00 13.000@14.00

LMAO

I still think it would be better to be a little more stringent. But, Joey, you're the boss, so the decision is obviously all yours! ;)

All times should have some proof attached to remain, be it a timeslip or video...

Use "Sort By: Cars w/ proof of ET"?

Actually, most forums require some form of time slip verification and some go so far as to require witnesses of such runs along WITH the time slip. In practice most timeslip gallery postings are legit. I agree it is more useful as a tool to weigh different mods if the rif-raf if checked at the door.

Jsev22, what I want to know is how you got that pig of yours to come in at 14.4 with a 2.2+ 60 foot time? I obviously don't know everything I need to know when looking at time slips. The mods list of "tranny/converter, gears, bolt-ons, heads" doesn't help much either, 'bout like mine of "Chip, Exhaust, Gears". :tongue:

You're just jealous 'cause my pigs faster than your pig :D

Here is most of the details:

65mm tb, 75mm MAF, Cobra intake w/(home) ported lower, plenum spacer, 24lb injectors, 1 5/8" shortys, Holley heads, 1.7 rockers, pullies, poly mounts, Bassani X-pipe w/cats, 2 1/4" Dynomax cat-back, fenderwell C.A.I., 255 lph pump, 4.10's, Art Carr AOD w/wide ratio and 2600 non-lockup, ext. cooler, deep pan, poly bushings all riding on 95 Cobra's w/ Nitto DR's

If I can get a good (<2.0 60' time) launch I should be close to if not in the 13's. Car with 1/4 tank and me weighed 3975 after my posted run. :D

:dj:

Gothicaleigh, if you are refering to Jsev22, he has a time slip posted.

What type of heads do you have on it? How many miles are on the engine? Is the 270HP an estimate?

I really doubt it was, he said the track he ran was "his driveway" and there were a few other numbers that didnt make sense. All round numbers - no timeslip copy posted, and he never made a post on the board. Just looked too fishy. He can repost it if he likes, but it just didnt look legit in anyway and the guy hasnt been back here since he posted it.

IM not gonna delete any more though. Im not going to try and second guess. You can upload a cpoy of the timeslip so I suggest everyone add credibility by doing so.

How about a place to call people out and have other board members vote to decide if they find the poster legit or not....maybe in the track times and triumphs section. If voted out then the time is removed.....I know at fordvschevy that most all times are legit as most know they will get flamed for posting bs times. just a thought.......

Gothicaleigh, if you are refering to Jsev22, he has a time slip posted.

What type of heads do you have on it? How many miles are on the engine? Is the 270HP an estimate?


Holley Systemax aluminum heads w 2.02/1.6 valves. The short block has over 113k. 270 hp is an estimate that I derived from different horsepower calculators. I will be running the car on a dyno second/third week of August to tune and verify RWHP.

Joey and I will discuss and come up with a reasonable solution. OK? I too am in favor of having a legit timeslips section, otherwise, why have it? So we will see what we can do. I sent out some emails to offending parties and am waiting for their reply. They are not very frequent here so I will give it a few days and then we will see. Deal???

Joey and I will discuss and come up with a reasonable solution. OK? I too am in favor of having a legit timeslips section, otherwise, why have it? So we will see what we can do. I sent out some emails to offending parties and am waiting for their reply. They are not very frequent here so I will give it a few days and then we will see. Deal???

If you show me some pics of your v-10 tt monster mark it's a done deal :D :eek2:

Holley Systemax aluminum heads w 2.02/1.6 valves. The short block has over 113k. 270 hp is an estimate that I derived from different horsepower calculators. I will be running the car on a dyno second/third week of August to tune and verify RWHP.
Very cool. Can't wait to see the results of the dyno!

Be happy to when it gets done. I don't believe in posting picks of cars in disassembly mode and then having to endure a year of "when is it going to get done posts". There currently is no front support for the AC and rad cores and with the motor out, is not a pretty site. I have been documenting all the way through though so I can post a complete history of the car when finished.



If you show me some pics of your v-10 tt monster mark it's a done deal :D :eek2:

So you are thinking that it will be another year in the works before it is done? It sounds like quite a feat!

All times should have some proof attached to remain, be it a timeslip or video...

Agreed, but realize, timeslips can be altered as well.

I wish I had a foolproof way - I cant think of one. I actually felt bad about deleting that one, because I cannot say with 100% certainity that it was bogus, but it sure looked it to me. I just hate deleting anyones posts.........

How far do we take this? what if someone posts bogus info in their sig? People brag all the time -- some are fish stories -- its no different cause they put it down on the internet.

You're just jealous 'cause my pigs faster than your pig :D

Here is most of the details:

65mm tb, 75mm MAF, Cobra intake w/(home) ported lower, plenum spacer, 24lb injectors, 1 5/8" shortys, Holley heads, 1.7 rockers, pullies, poly mounts, Bassani X-pipe w/cats, 2 1/4" Dynomax cat-back, fenderwell C.A.I., 255 lph pump, 4.10's, Art Carr AOD w/wide ratio and 2600 non-lockup, ext. cooler, deep pan, poly bushings all riding on 95 Cobra's w/ Nitto DR's

If I can get a good (<2.0 60' time) launch I should be close to if not in the 13's. Car with 1/4 tank and me weighed 3975 after my posted run. :D

:dj:

Dam straight I'm jealous! :Beer I've worked hard to get my 60 foot times down to where they are and can't wait for DR's!

Makes me feel good that if I ever want to make my '91 LSC beater into a project, it CAN outrun the '93! That's a nice list of mods you got there. Obviously an effective combo. :headbang:

I still can't get over the 60 foot time vs. the 1/4 mile ET. Must be in the cams? Or is it simply a traction issue? When I have serious traction issues, I get poor 60 foot times along with poor 1/4 ET's.

Good luck on your quest for 13's! :biggrin:

Agreed, but realize, timeslips can be altered as well.

I wish I had a foolproof way - I cant think of one. I actually felt bad about deleting that one, because I cannot say with 100% certainity that it was bogus, but it sure looked it to me. I just hate deleting anyones posts.........

How far do we take this? what if someone posts bogus info in their sig? People brag all the time -- some are fish stories -- its no different cause they put it down on the internet.
Personally I feel that the Timeslip gallery is different than a sginature. The gallery is there for comparison as well as showing off. It is a designated area, for a set purpose. On the other hand, the signature is an option, and open to whatever creativity you instill upon it. It is often used to show off cars, but is also utilized for several other things, or not even used at all.

Again, only speaking for myself, I think that only the blatantly misrepresented timeslip posts should be removed. These are easy to pick out buy the lack of effort. Things like Jsev22 mentioned, like the 11.00@12.00 sort of stuff, or the race track being listed as "my driveway" and the like. If someone takes the time to "make up" a run that looks legit, there isn't much that I feel can be done. But the obvious ones should be cut.

My 2¢

Dam straight I'm jealous! :Beer I've worked hard to get my 60 foot times down to where they are and can't wait for DR's!

Makes me feel good that if I ever want to make my '91 LSC beater into a project, it CAN outrun the '93! That's a nice list of mods you got there. Obviously an effective combo. :headbang:

I still can't get over the 60 foot time vs. the 1/4 mile ET. Must be in the cams? Or is it simply a traction issue? When I have serious traction issues, I get poor 60 foot times along with poor 1/4 ET's.

Good luck on your quest for 13's! :biggrin:

Thanks man, I'm hoping to get a try tomorrow night :D Between the better first and second gear ratio, 4.10's and tiny converter I'm a low gear junky. I'm also running the stock cam which helps quite a bit with my low end torque. I have no problem with traction, I can't seem to make the car launch agressively enough to make good use of the DR's. When I figure out how to make it jump from the hole look out!

Line lock that sumbitch! :D

Thanks man, I'm hoping to get a try tomorrow night :D Between the better first and second gear ratio, 4.10's and tiny converter I'm a low gear junky. I'm also running the stock cam which helps quite a bit with my low end torque. I have no problem with traction, I can't seem to make the car launch agressively enough to make good use of the DR's. When I figure out how to make it jump from the hole look out!

I've not run my VII any at the track, so I'm in the dark on preferred launch techniques. With stock cam on the 5.0 you may need to play with different launch rpms for the stall converter you have? Possibly, you may need a higher stall. :steering

Ah heck, just put a five speed in and be done with it! :Beer

Both the lineloc and higher stall have crossed my mind :D Maybe add a mod to give me more hp across the board..... :gr_devil:

btw driller, check out http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?p=10327#post10327
:D

John

Line lock that sumbitch! :D
I thought that a line lock would not work with ABS.

Who says ya gotta keep the ABS? :D

Who says ya gotta keep the ABS? :D
Touché

You DON'T say! :p

yeah freakin hit the post quick reply by mistake and viola blank 'free' post ;)

edit: If I have to edit my signature out of my posts one more time I'm going postal :give

What about the 2 Cobras now listed in the timeslip gallery? I thought this was a Lincoln & Cadillac site. If we start allowing "toys" to be posted, my LS is sure to fall off the 1st page! Then I'd HAVE to replace it w/ my "toy". :biggrin:

Bringing this up again....it seems we have more 'guestimaters' and we still have the bogus times I called out before!

Bringing this up again....it seems we have more 'guestimaters' and we still have the bogus times I called out before!

If you sort by cars with proof of ET and toss out non-Lincolns/Caddys - we're number one and number two! :steering

about the only thing I can do to knock out bogus times is require a scan of the timeslip



Bringing this up again....it seems we have more 'guestimaters' and we still have the bogus times I called out before!

I can't believe you guys are sweating this issue. Posting E.T.s is SO easy to fake. I mean hell, even if someone posts a scanned slip, who's to say it's their slip? A lot of people ARE posting bogus info for sure, I've seen plenty on here but face it, guys are always gonna "color up" their performance stats just like they talk about how many girls they've been with. Guys have been doing it for decades, you'll never stop them. And as for calling timeslip data useful for comparing mods etc, that's pretty useless too. It takes VERY controlled conditions before you could even THINK of using this data as you suggest. This is one reason why all credible sources use "corrected" data. There's SO MANY variables involved.
A couple things that are probably confusing the E.T. data are the fact that some people are running 1/8 mile, and some are posting info from a G-Tech or similar instrument. These things are useful for comparative reasons when used on the same car/driver/track/ambient conditions but are hardly a true representation of an actual track time.
Personally, I think posting E.T.s are fun but I don't take any of them seriously. What I take seriously is what happens if I line up next to somebody at the track or on the street. To be honest, the street's the best test because there's no time to run and get racing fuel, pull a lot of crap out of the car to lighten it up, or add/remove components, or make special tweeks just for the race. That's why I run my car at the track with a full tank of pump gas, on street tires, and nothing added or removed to give me an "edge". Yeah, I'm sure I could "play" around a little and grab an extra couple tenths or maybe even more but, in my mind it's just not true.

I can't believe you guys are sweating this issue. Posting E.T.s is SO easy to fake. I mean hell, even if someone posts a scanned slip, who's to say it's their slip? A lot of people ARE posting bogus info for sure, I've seen plenty on here but face it, guys are always gonna "color up" their performance stats just like they talk about how many girls they've been with. Guys have been doing it for decades, you'll never stop them. And as for calling timeslip data useful for comparing mods etc, that's pretty useless too. It takes VERY controlled conditions before you could even THINK of using this data as you suggest. This is one reason why all credible sources use "corrected" data. There's SO MANY variables involved.
A couple things that are probably confusing the E.T. data are the fact that some people are running 1/8 mile, and some are posting info from a G-Tech or similar instrument. These things are useful for comparative reasons when used on the same car/driver/track/ambient conditions but are hardly a true representation of an actual track time.
Personally, I think posting E.T.s are fun but I don't take any of them seriously. What I take seriously is what happens if I line up next to somebody at the track or on the street. To be honest, the street's the best test because there's no time to run and get racing fuel, pull a lot of crap out of the car to lighten it up, or add/remove components, or make special tweeks just for the race. That's why I run my car at the track with a full tank of pump gas, on street tires, and nothing added or removed to give me an "edge". Yeah, I'm sure I could "play" around a little and grab an extra couple tenths or maybe even more but, in my mind it's just not true.

No sweat here. We'd just like to keep it as clean as possible. I don't mind as I just use the filters to see where I really stand. I know some of the guys so I figure their posts to be credible. I do believe mods are comparable to a certain degree, as well as I believe some claims of ETs are incorrect simply by the list of mods and knowing what the cars are capable of. But that's not going to compare any ET down to the 1/10th of a second.

Anyone who runs at a track knows there are times any evenly matched pair can flip a coin for .1, .2 or even .3 seconds between runs. Given that, it usually comes down to driving skills and repeatability to be a consistent winner. I don't look to win every time, but I sure do try to get the best out of the car and myself as well. I have beaten cars that were faster than me many times, and by the same token, those same cars have beaten me quite a few times as well.

As far as race prep, I don't do hardly anything at the track. The trunk has the spare tire and tools, I don't use race gas, no weight reduction, no tweaking(except tire pressures). If you run against me at the track, chances are it's gonna be the same on the street. But I respectfully disagree with your assessment the street is the best test. The street is NO place to be racing. :L

I know what you mean about the street thing. I'm not saying that street racing is safe or even smart (not that it can't be) but I meant that it gives a more realistic idea of a car's capabilities in the "real world".