Quote:
Originally Posted by 69NMYSS
Reliability and streetability absolutely plays a part in the game. Sorry, but one pass in the 9's is not worthy of mentioning if it cannot maintain for a reasonable time frame. Also when comparing builders, who cares who gets there first. When comparing times apples to apples, I and I assume many others would pay a large premium to have the reliability and streetability vs. not. Running 9's on the stock driveline and stock suspension without NOS is pretty darn amazing. Running 9's with rebuilt suspension, NOS and 20lbs of boost at the cost of streetability is respectable at most.
|
Oh I agree 110% my friend. However, to me, I think it's unreasonable to expect a solid 9 second car to be streetable in a conventional sense. Repeatable, sure, but "streetable," no. And like I said before, these 9 second runs are for publicity. Open any mustang magazine from the past 6 years (which most here will not do lol) and it won't take much searching to find a JPC, Lethal or Evo advertisement claiming "First XXX Mustang into the 11's, 10's, 9's, etc" or a variation of that. These shops are expecting to grenade a motor or two for the sake of being able to claim "First." But don't take that to mean that the cars or shops can't handle the power it takes to run those times because they certainly can. These particular shops are sacrificing reliability so that they can make quick easy power and get that "First Into #'s" title. Sure, if it was my car, or anyone else's private commuter car, we'd probably go about making power a little differently.