Jeff, I guess I can understand "a different kind of respect"
. But for me, not more or less. Any 10.5 to me is impressive and respect goes out for anyone who had the foursight in planning such a beast.
(I'm not saying anyone is, but...) I don't want anyone to get offended b/c maybe they've put in a lot of hard work to get a N/A mustang running 9s or whatever, I want everyone to understand that I'm not belittling their hard work, but still it all comes down to 1) Preferences, and 2) Money. I will respect anyone who puts tons of hard work into their car (except ricers...
), just don't expect me to give a N/A car owner more respect than a supercharged car owner...........
HotRoddin, Heh, heh....in your illustration, you put a N/A car running 11s with a lawnmower motor against a blown car running 11s with a V8. Of course "finagling" enough horses out of a lawnmower motor would be beyond impressive.
. But seriously, you can't just bolt up a blower with 30 lbs of boost (or 350 shot nitrous) to a bone stock 5.0 without blowing up the motor, tranny and drivetrain (and possibly the driver
). Moreover, a TON of engineering goes into constructing a well-mad supercharger or unnatural aspiration system, but in most cases, the consumer gets the advantage of bypassing some of that--- yet, that still doesn't reduce the amount of work that went into making and adapting the system. If we're talking about comparing 12 sec N/A car to a 12 sec blown car, yeah, you
DO have a point there, but a LOT of planning has to go into building any low 11 or especially faster car and both take a lot of money.
And I totally don't agree that a car that goes 9s blown is equally as impressive as a car that goes 11s N/A
But I do agree, yes, it's that element of weight saving that makes the big diff as well.
For me, it's more like what
rwhite65 said.
Look at this as well, you get a car running mid 10s N/A with comp of 15:1. Well, compare it to a car running mid 10s blown with a comp of 8.5:1 and 15lbs of boost, which is more "impressive"???