check these times
#1
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: July 19, 2004
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
go here.... http://www.jmschip.com/bullet.php
#3
They make no mention of adding rear tires to the equation. In their video, it appears the car is running larger tires than stock on the rear.
Anybody else's opinion? Larger tires or stock?
Anybody else's opinion? Larger tires or stock?
#4
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: November 21, 2004
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wild stray@February 6, 2005, 4:55 PM
They make no mention of adding rear tires to the equation. In their video, it appears the car is running larger tires than stock on the rear.
Anybody else's opinion? Larger tires or stock?
They make no mention of adding rear tires to the equation. In their video, it appears the car is running larger tires than stock on the rear.
Anybody else's opinion? Larger tires or stock?
They say they are stock, there no reason to believe that they arent. Trying to tell just by looking at the tires is tuff. You could go both ways. They are not slicks though.
#7
[quote=joeuser42,February 6, 2005, 3:43 PM]
It doesn't say they are stock tires it says they are street tires and therefore could be wider or stickier than stock.
I hate it when an advertiser omits pertinant facts. :notnice: Makes for info that is worthless.
It doesn't say they are stock tires it says they are street tires and therefore could be wider or stickier than stock.
I hate it when an advertiser omits pertinant facts. :notnice: Makes for info that is worthless.
#9
It was not stock tires. It was wearing 17" ET streets. JMS freely admitted this on corral net.
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=603509
Look for post with the timeslip attached, still very impressive !!
http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=603509
Look for post with the timeslip attached, still very impressive !!
#10
[quote=mm49,February 6, 2005, 6:10 PM]
It was not stock tires. It was wearing 17" ET streets. JMS freely admitted this on corral net.
Look for post with the timeslip attached, still very impressive !!
Thanks for clarifying!
It was not stock tires. It was wearing 17" ET streets. JMS freely admitted this on corral net.
Look for post with the timeslip attached, still very impressive !!
Thanks for clarifying!
#13
Originally posted by 2k5 pony@February 6, 2005, 10:12 PM
Can someone explain what the charge motion plate does???
Can someone explain what the charge motion plate does???
Yeah, the "street tires" thing is a bit lame but hey, the thing still traps 107 with a filter/maf housing, pullies and a re-flash. Oh, and those charge-motion delete spacers.......assuming they do anything.
#15
Pretty impressive......I thought we were getting 26rwhp with the MMR/Steeda CAI and SCTXcalibrator w/o adding pullys? I had read a bit about the "Charge Plates" and was wondering what they were for. I did see them for sale individually - IIRC it was Steeda?
#17
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that this proves that gears do a majority of the performance by numbers at the track. We all have seen cars with tunes/intakes that make 26rwhp increase and know that most 1/4mi times have been in the low 13's. Others have changed only gears to 4.10 and been in the low 13's. Looks like 4.30's and some tires with a decent bite at the track are the perfect combo.
#18
Good point. Seems like the 4.30's would let you wind out 4th gear better than the 4.10's.
Also, as pointed out by others, 4.30's in the '05 are just about equivalent to 4.10's in the previous model years, which was the optimal ratio for street/track use.
Also, as pointed out by others, 4.30's in the '05 are just about equivalent to 4.10's in the previous model years, which was the optimal ratio for street/track use.