You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
Location: Where gunshots are more common than birds chirping
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by avlon06
how did no one notice both power adders?
What surprises me the most is how long he was probably getting away with this. Only one racer called him on it and that was ONLY because he noticed that Halfacre's times weren't consistent with his after the 330' mark and small puffs of "smoke".
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
__________________
Responsible for 38.6+1% of the complaints in OT
Actually, one of the crew from the team protesting looked at the car during another event and noticed a third high pressure line running from the CO2 bottle. It's purpose was questioned. Hence the specific request of the petition. The protest simply requested that all lines running from the CO2 bottle be checked.
His back half times did not make sense, actually his back half times were more consistant with a Pro-outlaw car. Add in the fact that the car would run 7.6* during some nice weather and good air then in the heat of the day run 7.43 @ 199.....it was enough to make someone wonder just a bit. It was also noted that his 60' was soft, unlike AJ powell running close to the same ET's yet his 60' was 1.19-1.18, that makes sense....also keep in mind that Aj was running the same Et's with a 188 mph trap speed. Do you have any idea how much HP it takes to excellerate a car in the back half of the track and post a 199 trap speed?
It was a culmination of things that lead to the protest. I think to many people have over simplified it.
Location: Where gunshots are more common than birds chirping
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by PLstang
Actually, one of the crew from the team protesting looked at the car during another event and noticed a third high pressure line running from the CO2 bottle. It's purpose was questioned. Hence the specific request of the petition. The protest simply requested that all lines running from the CO2 bottle be checked.
His back half times did not make sense, actually his back half times were more consistant with a Pro-outlaw car. Add in the fact that the car would run 7.6* during some nice weather and good air then in the heat of the day run 7.43 @ 199.....it was enough to make someone wonder just a bit. It was also noted that his 60' was soft, unlike AJ powell running close to the same ET's yet his 60' was 1.19-1.18, that makes sense....also keep in mind that Aj was running the same Et's with a 188 mph trap speed. Do you have any idea how much HP it takes to excellerate a car in the back half of the track and post a 199 trap speed?
It was a culmination of things that lead to the protest. I think to many people have over simplified it.
Good post. Alot of that is news to me. I just heard this as a rumor on yellowbullet and I posted here. Good that you could verify.
__________________
Responsible for 38.6+1% of the complaints in OT
I should add that the car was protested-simply questioned exactly what a line was doing. Were there suspicions, yes. However, it was not proven that Jarret actually was cheating. He was in violation for having the NOS Solenoid on his turbo car. However, since he halted the inspection once it was found tech was unable to verify its purpose. It is his act of failing to comply with a tech tear down requeste that has brought about his suspension.
We can make guesses and conjectures all day about why Jarret did what he did? However, no one will really knows the truth but Jarret and his crew.
Old stock car builder named Smokey Yunnick. Would take the rule book and say " What does this book not say." For instance, must have an 18 gallon fuel tank. Said nothing about the filler neck. So he made the neck 18 inches in diameter. Held 2 gallons of gas.
However having two power adders when the book clearly states one, blatent cheating
__________________
2006 GT 5 sp, vista blue, K&N filter only, SCT tuner, pine scented air freshener, those chrome door lock plungers, chrome valve caps
13.51 @ 102.75
Location: Where gunshots are more common than birds chirping
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by buster
Old stock car builder named Smokey Yunnick. Would take the rule book and say " What does this book not say." For instance, must have an 18 gallon fuel tank. Said nothing about the filler neck. So he made the neck 18 inches in diameter. Held 2 gallons of gas.
However having two power adders when the book clearly states one, blatent cheating
Wait; so the total volume of the tank including the cylindrical volume of the filler neck was 18 gallons, but since you don't fill the neck it's actually only a 2 gallon tank?
__________________
Responsible for 38.6+1% of the complaints in OT
Vehicle: 4000 - 0 -.5 Yes, thats right. I tied half a race.
Location: IL
Posts: 9,407
No,it said the tank itself must be 18 gallons and made no mention of the diameter od size of the filller neck itself. So he made it 18 inches in diameter and however long. It ended up holding 2 more gallons of fuel. There is a differance between blatant cheating and "reading between the lines" of a rule book. If the book clearly states that there is not to a nitrous solonoid on the car, then having one is a clear infraction and the offending racer should be punished. The thing that gets me about this is that if he was going to cheat and hide a kit, why not do it right and REALLY hide it. I mean it's a race car with tons of lines and tubing running everywhere, hell I have hidden kits better on street cars.
__________________
GET IN THE RING!
RIP tripsevn7
4/1/77 - 7/27/08
Location: Where gunshots are more common than birds chirping
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD1969
There is a differance between blatant cheating and "reading between the lines" of a rule book. If the book clearly states that there is not to a nitrous solonoid on the car, then having one is a clear infraction and the offending racer should be punished.
So would a solenoid in any general respect be tolerated, or was it not tolerated due to the branded manufacturer labeled on the solenoid itself?
i.e. - Paintball guns use solenoids nearly identical in nature and operation of compressed co2 gas to operate the internal mechanisms. Would retrofitting one of these to operate a poweradder system be a blatant infringement of the rules?
PS - I'm just asking because I'm curious. Nothing more. Oh, and also, I misunderstood the filler neck situation, I thought he wanted to get rid of the fuel weight, not add more so that he could go longer in a race. I was thinking drag vs open track.
__________________
Responsible for 38.6+1% of the complaints in OT
Last edited by 35thAnni99GT; 08-13-2008 at 12:31 PM.
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
