Hahahaha. Nice edit.
Also, thanks for coming in here and starting personal bashing. What a great admin you are. You have no experience or knowledge to add to this thread, so out comes the bashing.
I'll just watch this thread until car discussions actually continue.
You continue to argue as well.
You are just as guilty.
And personally, nick is a great moderator of this forum, has helped me multiple times, and even in person.
Professional garage...?Lulz... I said after its runs, meaning after it goes to the track, makes however many passes they feel like that day it goes home, to a professional garage, and then they tear it down and replace the parts. I never said after "EACH" run. That would just be rediculous, and you both are stupid for taking it that way.
Show me 1, just 1 video of ZZPs car at the track and something breaks. It doesn't because as with most CORPORATE SPONSORED cars, they are re-built so they don't break down. Nothing looks worse than a big $$$ car breaking on the track because they ran it too hard 3 months prior.
Same with NASCAR and most pro-racing builds, it gets rebuilt to make sure it can do what its suppose to.
If you think I am wrong, please show me proof.
Lulz... I said after its runs, meaning after it goes to the track, makes however many passes they feel like that day it goes home, to a professional garage, and then they tear it down and replace the parts. I never said after "EACH" run. That would just be rediculous, and you both are stupid for taking it that way.
Show me 1, just 1 video of ZZPs car at the track and something breaks. It doesn't because as with most CORPORATE SPONSORED cars, they are re-built so they don't break down. Nothing looks worse than a big $$$ car breaking on the track because they ran it too hard 3 months prior.
Same with NASCAR and most pro-racing builds, it gets rebuilt to make sure it can do what its suppose to.
If you think I am wrong, please show me proof.
Bros, don't you know?
If it runs for 100 miles, that's the equivalent of forever in 3800 terms.
Shift kits never seem to be a good idea on stock transmissions. You'll probably break it weather you put DR's on or not.
Hum... My 253k mile trans with a shift kit and no input shaft issues might have to disagree with you..
Hum... My 253k mile trans with a shift kit and no input shaft issues might have to disagree with you..
that guy has some firm beliefs that a shift kit is bad for a stock trans. people have been running shift kits in all sorts of applications for years and years. HP breaks parts, not a shift kit.
and a shift kit can and will prolong the life a trans thats driven like a human as well.
beating on it will kill it no matter what you've done to it. burn outs, repeated hard launches. those lovely 30 mph roll launches, modded engine doing the listed abuse as well as stock.
im the kind of person who likes to feel each shift, even driving nice and easy i still feel a fast firm shift. with my shift kit in a stock trans.
if i turn off the perf shift, it shifts rather normal.
@ GTPpower your the only person ive ever heard saying a shift kit is bad in a stock trans. and i know a few trans shops mechanics.
I would invite you to back-up what you just said.
Excluding what I have done with my cars, and cars I've tuned, I can show countless other examples where underpowered cars are breaking hard parts.
So what ur telling us is that all the research and time building trannys that TEP has done isn't correct...that their shift kit research is wrong?
Sent from my pager using Morse code. ... .. ... ....
I would invite you to back-up what you just said.
Excluding what I have done with my cars, and cars I've tuned, I can show countless other examples where underpowered cars are breaking hard parts.
I would invite you to back-up what you just said.
Excluding what I have done with my cars, and cars I've tuned, I can show countless other examples where underpowered cars are breaking hard parts.
I didn't say anything of the sort. Please elaborate.