Lost to a 350Z...owned an Accord coupe!

[ZnusNV]

:lol1: because a smiley is all that's needed against you. please take that stick out of your ass and realize this is a message board for svt fans, not a national debate forum.

and you "guessed" wrong. there is no argument. i know what i've seen at the track and i stick by it. you can keep hugging your motor trend or computer but i enjoy real world numbers more

I came here to learn about Mustangs. I digressed for one post (initially) to provide a different perspective about a car that is seemingly foreign (no pun intended) to the individuals on this board (and I didn't even really digress because the topic was about running a Z and losing). The debates and other off-topic conversation happened when I decided to defend myself against the insults and type-casting that came as a result of myself (and others) expressing a contrary opinion.

YOU made this a debate forum. YOU are the reason that we are off-topic. YOU are the troll. YOU have taken this post somewhere that it need not be.

I was prepared to make a point and leave it there. But I won't stand idly and be insulted (or allow others with similar perspectives as mine be insulted ) just for the sake of staying on topic. If you want this to get back on topic, take it back there by discussing cars and not making personal comments. You took us off topic, how bout you be man (or woman) enough to bring us back.

Just because this is an SVT forum doesn't mean that the individual with contrary perspectives is in the wrong. Be a man and take some ownership.

I can't wait for the "just learn about Mustangs then..." comments. They'll be the ones that failed to read any of the above post.

Z

 

[ZnusNV]

my buddy has turbo now but his 350z ran 13.5 w/ intake/exhaust then 13.1 w/ intake, exhaust, intake manifold, tune.

http://videos.streetfire.net/Player.aspx?fileid=31856268-E1B1-4CB9-BB3B-C479013F3CCA

so most of the 350zs you guys are seeing at the track have shitty drivers.

:beer:

 

[drdome99]

FYI he ran 11.9 @115 w/ single turbo kit.

http://www.alteredatmosphere.com/customers/c-alberto-350z/

vid at the bottom

 

[ZnusNV]

yeah i meant to put "too," but i forgot...and no one has answered it either. imo, believing that if you don't focus mostly on going fast in a straight line is just as bad as the "ricer" mentality.

So, anyone? Why does concentrating on handling more than straight-line performance and/or power make someone a ricer?

I'd be prepared to bet that this question won't be addressed.

That is not necessarily a bad thing. It demonstrates what you and I have discussed and what many others here know privately. The word is simply a way to categorize and disparage those other car enthusiasts that don't like what they like or those that put more emphasis on one aspect of car enthusiast culture over and above another. In a remarkable bit of capriciousness, they then add the word to generally well understood "uncool" circumstances to give the arbitrary word some legitimacy.

1. "ricer" + "flyby"

I guess it could be like an adult way to re-live our grade school days. Note the similarities from middle school:

1. Deez Nuts
2. Sped (special education)
3. Bama (big time D.C. thing)
4. Queer

They don't really have meaning, it just takes on a life of its own and can be applicable to any and all circumstances.

It is no different than calling someone a "calculator." If enough people believe that it really means something bad, it will.

 

[NameBlast44]

YOU made this a debate forum. YOU are the reason that we are off-topic.

explain to me where i made this a debate forum? you're the one telling people to read logic books and you're the one throwing in magazine times. my first post to this thread - "ive seen quite a few stock 350zs at the track, never seen any of them run in the 13s". it was a simple sentence contributing to this thread, explaining that i, personally, have never seen that car run in the 13s stock. your first post? a 9 paragraph essay in which you even apologize for "jacking this thread."

YOU are the troll.

yea, i'm a troll i've been here for how long? i own what car? i've made how many posts in threads other than this one? what about you?

I was prepared to make a point and leave it there.

riiight...thats why you registered just to post in this thread. thats why you've accumulated just about all 40+ of your posts, in a weeks time, to this thread defending your car...because you wanted to make a single point and leave it there oke:

But I won't stand idly and be insulted (or allow others with similar perspectives as mine be insulted ) just for the sake of staying on topic. If you want this to get back on topic, take it back there by discussing cars and not making personal comments. You took us off topic, how bout you be man (or woman) enough to bring us back.

you've insulted others, including me, and we respond. you took us off topic when you started throwing in magazine times. this thread was initially about a REAL WORLD race, not one written in a magazine. i posted a response of what i've seen in the real world and you post mag #s.

Just because this is an SVT forum doesn't mean that the individual with contrary perspectives is in the wrong. Be a man and take some ownership.

funny you should mention that, seeing as YOU were the one who gave me magazine times to prove me wrong

 

[ZnusNV]

explain to me where i made this a debate forum? you're the one telling people to read logic books and you're the one throwing in magazine times. my first post to this thread - "ive seen quite a few stock 350zs at the track, never seen any of them run in the 13s". it was a simple sentence contributing to this thread, explaining that i, personally, have never seen that car run in the 13s stock. your first post? a 9 paragraph essay in which you even apologize for "jacking this thread."


yea, i'm a troll i've been here for how long? i own what car? i've made how many posts in threads other than this one? what about you?


riiight...thats why you registered just to post in this thread. thats why you've accumulated just about all 40+ of your posts, in a weeks time, to this thread defending your car...because you wanted to make a single point and leave it there oke:


you've insulted others, including me, and we respond. you took us off topic when you started throwing in magazine times. this thread was initially about a REAL WORLD race, not one written in a magazine. i posted a response of what i've seen in the real world and you post mag #s.


funny you should mention that, seeing as YOU were the one who gave me magazine times to prove me wrong

When I made my "You," comments, I was referring to the instance of our continued conversation that persists with me writing this message.

Magazine times are just as legitimate a contribution. In addition, I posted times that I have witnessed. That is not off-topic.

I have insulted noone. And I stand by that. I have made it a point to be respectful, and even when I feel a personal insult is justified, I refrain.

YOU and some others have insulted.

YOU are a troll because you have taken my legitimate comments (magazine times, my personal observations and otherwise) and used them to insult, sabotage, and make irrelevant the current course of communication.

I did not register simply to post on this topic. The registration was a given. It was hastened by what I perceived to be misinformation concerning the Z.

Wanna try again?

 

[kennebellblower]

good race but you could have had him

 

[NyteByte]

I have lost nothing. In fact I have come out victorious.

Only in your mind man.. Only in your mind.

Keep posting though because I'm really enjoying watching you get hammered on every post. :loser:

 

[Beetle6986]

When I made my "You," comments, I was referring to the instance of our continued conversation that persists with me writing this message.

Magazine times are just as legitimate a contribution. In addition, I posted times that I have witnessed. That is not off-topic.

I have insulted noone. And I stand by that. I have made it a point to be respectful, and even when I feel a personal insult is justified, I refrain.

YOU and some others have insulted.

YOU are a troll because you have taken my legitimate comments (magazine times, my personal observations and otherwise) and used them to insult, sabotage, and make irrelevant the current course of communication.

I did not register simply to post on this topic. The registration was a given. It was hastened by what I perceived to be misinformation concerning the Z.

Wanna try again?

Here are some magazine times for you....
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104196/pageId=62010
What ever gave you the idea that the Z handles better than the Cobra or 05 GT? :bash:

 

[DVan8504]

Here are some magazine times for you....
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104196/pageId=62010
What ever gave you the idea that the Z handles better than the Cobra or 05 GT? :bash:

How does that prove your point? It says...
'05 GT Slalom Speed: 62.5 mph
'05 350z Slalom Speed: 63.9 mph

It also says the 350z outbrakes the mustang gt, but that's not really handling.

 

[NameBlast44]

Magazine times are just as legitimate a contribution. In addition, I posted times that I have witnessed. That is not off-topic.

magazine times in my eyes are not legitimate. i take them with a grain of salt, as do a lot of people. that is my opinion yet you couldn't handle it. do you remember saying "Nameblast44...it figures you wouldn;t care what a magazine says. Thats because it disproved your contention and you have nowhere left to go but towards denial." you could have left me with my opinion that magazine times were bs but instead you subtly insult me. you are a hypocrite to the core.

I have insulted noone. And I stand by that. I have made it a point to be respectful, and even when I feel a personal insult is justified, I refrain.

you don't have to be called a moron for it to be considered an insult, "bro". a subtle insult is still an insult.

YOU and some others have insulted.

funny, so have you

YOU are a troll because you have taken my legitimate comments (magazine times, my personal observations and otherwise) and used them to insult...

the fact that i see magazine times as bs isn't an insult towards you. can you not comprehend this? your snide rebuttals insulting the validity of what i've seen with my own eyes caused me to "insult" you

...sabotage...

yea, that's what i'm trying to do :bored: sabotage someone who registered to this site just to post in this thread. sabotage someone that only posts in this single thread. sabotage someone as widely known as you. yea, that's it :whine:

I did not register simply to post on this topic. The registration was a given. It was hastened by what I perceived to be misinformation concerning the Z.

you're right, you've contributed SO MUCH to other threads. lets see, of your 47 posts so far, made in less than a week, a whole 8 of them have been directed to other threads. such a contributor!

Wanna try again?

try what? point out the obvious? here's an :idea: , get a clue

 

[opticshadow123]

Here are some magazine times for you....
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104196/pageId=62010
What ever gave you the idea that the Z handles better than the Cobra or 05 GT? :bash:

Wait, are you serious? Did you read the article that you posted?

 

[DVan8504]

Wait, are you serious? Did you read the article that you posted?

lol :thumbsup:

 

[drdome99]

Hey if any of you cobra guys in the maryland area are looking to run a turbo'd Z, I got a buddy dying to get a highway pull against one. PM Me.

Just friendly runs of course, he just wants to see how his car compares from a roll against a stock or modded cobra.

he puts down 390whp, 3300 lbs, runs 11.9@115 on crapitol.

 

[ZnusNV]

magazine times in my eyes are not legitimate. i take them with a grain of salt, as do a lot of people. that is my opinion yet you couldn't handle it. do you remember saying "Nameblast44...it figures you wouldn;t care what a magazine says. Thats because it disproved your contention and you have nowhere left to go but towards denial." you could have left me with my opinion that magazine times were bs but instead you subtly insult me. you are a hypocrite to the core.


you don't have to be called a moron for it to be considered an insult, "bro". a subtle insult is still an insult.


funny, so have you


the fact that i see magazine times as bs isn't an insult towards you. can you not comprehend this? your snide rebuttals insulting the validity of what i've seen with my own eyes caused me to "insult" you


yea, that's what i'm trying to do :bored: sabotage someone who registered to this site just to post in this thread. sabotage someone that only posts in this single thread. sabotage someone as widely known as you. yea, that's it :whine:


you're right, you've contributed SO MUCH to other threads. lets see, of your 47 posts so far, made in less than a week, a whole 8 of them have been directed to other threads. such a contributor!


try what? point out the obvious? here's an :idea: , get a clue

Come on BRO. I was starting to develop some respect for you as you have diligently point-by-pointed my posts. but you are becoming predictable and, again, mistaking volume for value.

Your most recent post can be summed up in four succinct sentences:

1. You think that I somehow insulted you by referencing magazine times; as if somehow any acknowledgement of an outside source other than you, myself or any other on this board de-legitimizes your observations.

2. You are concerned where I concentrate the majority of my post count.

3. You feel justified in your insults because I insulted you (by implication) when I addressed your observations.

4. You feel that my addressing your observations was insensitive of your opinion.

My response:

If you step away from your position for ONE moment and look at the dialog as it exists independently of you, myself or your allegiance to Ford you'll notice one incontrovertable point. Just as you witnessed a run time accomplished by the Z, I did too. So did the guy who published his performance numbers in the magazine.

I'm unsure where you arrive at this idea that somehow my responding to your point about the capabilities of this car is an insult. I"M NOT CALLING YOU A LIAR!!! YOU ARE ENTITLED TO YOUR OPINION. I never refuted it. You said (paraphrasing) "I have not seen a Z run a 13..." In response, I supplied evidence that ran counter to your observations. That is not being offensive, nor is it not entitling you to your opinion. It is a simple refutation that you can accept (which I hope you will considering the independent source of the information) or not. But to call it "insulting" because I am challenging what you have observed with evidence in contention is downright sophomoric. I don't to be funny when I say this but essentially what you have done is this:

Person A: The sky is bluish/white.

Person B: From what I've seen, the sky is whitish/blue.

Person A: Well I think the sky is bluish/white and here is some evidence in support.

Person B: I don't care about the evidence.

Person A: You should at least respond to it if it is contrary to your opinion. And if you don't, maybe you just don't want to admit that it could be accurate.

Person B: Why do you have to be argumentative and challenge my position? Why can't I be left to have my own opinion? You are insulting me.

Person A: What?!?! I'm trying to have a dialog and have you respond to what I have found. That is the basis of any good and substantive conversation. But if you really want to be technical about your equating opining with insulting, you responded to my write-up about the sky so you were the first to (by your definition) insult. In other words...Why couldn't you leave me with *my* opinion? And since you didn't (following your logic) you insulted me.

Do you see how silly that is?

Come on man, I don't know you but that seems really hypersensitive.

Hypocrite huh??? Well since your basis for calling me a hypocrite was predicated on your perception of being "insulted," which I thoroughly addressed above, I don't need to address this any further beyond saying: Read the above. I didn't insult you. I did what anyone does on a public forum board subsequent to a response...I responded.

And it matters not what posts I have devoted more time and attention to. I have considerably more posts here because I have to respond to both the legitimate comments and the insults. The fact that you have brought this up represents one of the worst kinds of logical fallacies. It's called a NON SEQUITUR. Specifically, you are affirming the consequent. To school you on this:

Yes I post more here.
Yes I started posting with this thread.

What does that have to do with my value to this forum? What does that have to do with the legitimacy of my claim concerning the Z?

Predictable...in the worst way.

So how about this, if you're going to respond, no more non sequiturs, Ignoratio elenchis (irrelevant conclusions), proof by verbosity, style over substance, appealing to force, ad hominems or the host of other fallacies you use to make a point.

Just address the issues. You don't like Zs, fine. You haven't seen them run 13s, cool. I provided you a counter point (the magazine article). You don't think the "time" is legitimate.....

O.K....here is what we have been getting to...

1. WHY DO YOU NOT THINK IT IS LEGITIMATE?

You're running out of space arguing with me. You're resorting to recycling the same baseless arguments, namecalling and incoherent conclusions. The funny thing is, once you complete your responses, you feel some sense of satisfaction. I guess when you read it, it seems to be forceful. It isn't. I can point out logical fallacies and deconstruct arguments with ease. That is what I do for a living.

Now you can acquiesce and just address question #1 above. Or you can continue to allow me to *practice* my deconstruction techniques on your vapid replies.

I would advise the former. Cause listening to NyteByte is not getting you anywhere. He knows the power of my dialectic. That is the reason he contributes 2 sentence declarative statements concerning particpants accomplishing something (hammering me on every post) that, heretofore, has not been accomplished...and will not be accomplished henceforth.

If you do choose the latter, though, please reply to all of what I have said...the logical fallacies, the issue of opining/replying = insulting, my issue with the opining=insulting thing...EVERYTHING. Don't pick one thing, or recycle old things, and then feel satisfied because you got some "last word." And don't respond with the classical "this is a waste of my time...I don't need to respond..." Choose one or the other. Lets get back to cars, or continue being deconstructed.

Stop being Sisyphus, Nameblast44. :nonono:

Z (Na área de debate escrito e lógica, eu sou o melhor.)

 

[ZnusNV]

Hey if any of you cobra guys in the maryland area are looking to run a turbo'd Z, I got a buddy dying to get a highway pull against one. PM Me.

Just friendly runs of course, he just wants to see how his car compares from a roll against a stock or modded cobra.

he puts down 390whp, 3300 lbs, runs 11.9@115 on crapitol.

What part of Maryland? Would it happen to be in Frederick. And the guy wouldn't happen to be an anesthesiologist driving a 04 Silver Z with a single turbo setup?

Anyways, I would love to see such a run...if it could be set up. I'll gladly bring a vid camera. I'm in and around Columbia, MD by the way.

Probably should have PM'ed, sorry.

 

[ZnusNV]

Here are some magazine times for you....
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104196/pageId=62010
What ever gave you the idea that the Z handles better than the Cobra or 05 GT? :bash:

Answer:

The guys who drove the cars in the road test link you provided:

"The 350Z is not only the best handling car in this comparison test, it's one of the best corner carvers on the road today. A total absence of body roll, amazing lateral grip and razor-sharp handling made tossing this car through the canyons an absolute joy. We're talking exotic sports car handling at a bargain-basement price."

"Unfortunately, all-out handling performance doesn't come without compromise. The Z is downright uncomfortable on bumpy roads, and the heavy clutch became painful after an hour of stop-and-go driving on a clogged L.A. freeway. The bolstered bucket seats are great for gripping your posterior in the canyons, but get uncomfortable on long drives."

I love reading those last two sentences in the first paragraph. I even included the bad part of the handling bit for you guys who think I'm partial.

 

[NyteByte]

How does that prove your point? It says...
'05 GT Slalom Speed: 62.5 mph
'05 350z Slalom Speed: 63.9 mph

While we're talking handling and slalom speeds, I thought I'd throw this out there:

Slalom Speeds (from Motortrend):
'03 Mach 1 - 63.6 mph
'03 Cobra - 64.3 mph
'03 Bullit - 66.0 mph

They also said:

But man does not live by thrust alone. In fact, SVT Cobras have always emphasized handling, and they stand among the fastest-ever street cars through our high-speed slalom test.

 

[DVan8504]

While we're talking handling and slalom speeds, I thought I'd throw this out there:

Slalom Speeds (from Motortrend):
'03 Mach 1 - 63.6 mph
'03 Cobra - 64.3 mph
'03 Bullit - 66.0 mph

They also said:

Interesting...although as you know it's difficult to compare two different sources. I'd like to see their test for the 350z if you have access to that.

 

[opticshadow123]

While we're talking handling and slalom speeds, I thought I'd throw this out there:

Slalom Speeds (from Motortrend):
'03 Mach 1 - 63.6 mph
'03 Cobra - 64.3 mph
'03 Bullit - 66.0 mph

They also said:

And since we are no longer talking about base model cars,
350 z-tune - 73.0 mph