I'm simply pointing out you should not assume anything you should use the facts and in this case you don't know them. You are trying to prove the value of your product against a single timeslip a car ran without knowing how the car was set up on that pass. Yes his car is a race car no one argues that but if you know his car or pay attention to the results you would know that isn't even close to an all out pass. Till this event he held the record at 10.39 at 130 so obviously that 10.83 @ 122 was his qualifying pass on very low boost. In the final he went 137.53.No offense, but I am simply going by the results posted on the NMRA website, if they are incorrect they should post the correct results. Also I mean lets do what that post was intended to do. Put things in perspective, thats all. Brads car i s a FULL OUT race car, stripped, no exhaust, no downpipe, full slicks, skinnies, transbrake, the list can go on. Marks car drives to, and from the track on this tune, and gets 20+ MPG while doing so, and is running very similar ET's. That was the point simply perspective, not knocking what was accomplished at the shootout, as Brad's car is bad ass.
I just take a lot of pride in these results, and as some big names (that will remain unnamed)on this platform did everything they could to bash this turbo, and steer people away from buying it. To prove it is not only the most cost effective option, but it can put you solidly in the 10's without a lot of money invested in the car is something we are very happy about. :clap2:
A better comparison would be to find a car running a comparable turbo kit where you know they are running hard at near the same boost levels and compare Mark's accomplishments to that. That will be where your turbo will shine the most since you don't have to change anything out but the turbo not install a completely new kit. The vendors bashing it usually have an alternative agenda so the best way to squash that is with a solid comparisons that can't be debated.
Sponsored