ba-autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S.

To: "Talley, Brooks" <brooks@frnk.com>, <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S.
From: "James Creasy" <james@thevenom.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:30:59 -0700
oh, and how about the rx7 TT published 0-60 time of 5.5 seconds when 4.8 was
more realistic!

i drove a supra TT and a 98 z28 back to back once and boy the supra felt
faster!

-james
OSP - Old School Power

----- Original Message -----
From: "Talley, Brooks" <brooks@frnk.com>
To: <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 10:12 PM
Subject: RE: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S.


> Not to mention 4th gen F-bodies, which typically get the "crank" rating
> at the wheels (I haven't kept up, but when I got my 99 it was rated at
> 305 crank and turned 303 at the wheels, which would suggest roughly 355
> at the crank; later years increased by 5rwhp/year or so).
>
> It's not unusual, probably for two reasons: 1) they want to guarantee
> that even the most off-spec car they produce generates the power they
> advertise so nobody can complain, and 2) marketing often enters into it
> (the f-body thing is largely considered to be because they didn't want
> to tell everyone that you could get within 5hp of a vette for half the
> price [and 400lbs more weight]).
>
> Cheers
> -b
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Creasy [mailto:james@thevenom.net]
> > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 10:14 PM
> > To: ba-autox@autox.team.net; Jake Hodges
> > Subject: Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S.
> >
> >
> > GRM dyno tested a mini and a mini S and got hp at the wheels
> > that was pretty close to the published crank figures.  its
> > not a lightweight car so clearly theres been a little monkey
> > business with the figures.  two other cars i know had similar
> > discrepencies: the 1st gen probe GT (rated 145, actual 190),
> > and the supra TT (rated 326, actual 360+).
> >
> > -james
> > OSP - Old Serpent's Pasttime
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jake Hodges" <jake@codeworm.com>
> > To: <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:52 PM
> > Subject: RE: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S.
> >
> >
> > > I'm curious about your proposal, Rich.  Can you share
> > details?  Or did
> > > you already share details when I had my head under a rock?
> > >
> > > And, Peter, flattery will get you nowhere.  When you look at other
> > evidence
> > > regarding both the del Sol and the Mini, it points strongly
> > to the car
> > > and not to me.  I just barely managed to best Alan in my own car at
> > > Round 17, although I got him by a healthy margin in his
> > ailing Civic a
> > > few times after I got race tires.  I suspect the final
> > evidence would
> > > be Stan's
> > video
> > > of my fastest run which shows me ABSing out of control and way off
> > > line in the GGF gravel.  Even I could have done much better.
> > >
> > > Frankly, I love competing with Stan no matter what he brings.  He
> > tolerates
> > > my swollen head and bad Ali impressions, and Alan verified
> > that Stan
> > > was
> > in
> > > the coolest movie ever.  Alan, on the other hand, has admitted
> > > considering hitting me on the swollen head with his torque
> > wrench on
> > > several occasions.  Dan needs to get race tires.
> > >
> > > Finally, I wasn't clear on one thing...  The curb weight of Dan's
> > > Prelude is 2600 lbs, which his 105hp just makes FEEL like 3700 lbs.
> > >
> > > It's interesting that those specs are so close to what Mini
> > claims for
> > > their car.  Why is it so much better?  A Mini fanatic
> > coworker made a
> > > wild claim substantiated only by hearsay that their published power
> > > specs were at the wheel.  It sure FELT more powerful than
> > my car when
> > > I was flailing through the slalom.
> > >
> > > Jake
> > >
> > > By the way, did anyone else see that beautiful launch out of
> > > Vandenberg tonight?  It sure looked like the interceptor was
> > > successful.
> > >
> > > http://home.earthlink.net/~kd6nrp/vafbsked.htm
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 12:10 PM 10/14/2002 -0700, Thana, Peter {High~Palo Alto} wrote:
> > > > >Anyway, for regional-only folks, basing the classes on
> > nationals is
> > > > >of limited meaning.
> > >
> > > >...
> > >
> > > >The current system isn't perfect, but at least it tries to base the
> > handicap
> > > >on the car.  The very top of each class at most national
> > level events
> > > >is fought for by drivers who can consistently get closer to the
> > > >potential of the car under the rules as they are written
> > than you or
> > > >I could.  ...
> > > >
> > > >Peter

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>