Close

Activity Stream

Filter
Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 07:10 PM
    donR, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 25 view(s)
  • nbrigdan's Avatar
    Today, 02:44 PM
    I love how the roll racing is pretty much always done in the wrong gear, but almost certainly at too low of a speed as well. What's the point of doing a roll where the speed is so low that you're going to get wheel spin anyways....isn't the whole reason you do a roll to avoid that problem?
    6 replies | 419 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 02:31 PM
    The Audi C7 S6 continues to show what a performance tuning value it is. This C7 S6 EA824 4.0 TFSI V8 is running the Dyno Spectrum DS1 Stage 1 pump E85 tune. That is it. No additional custom tuning or fueling upgrades here. The result? A very nice 11.3 @ 120.02 software only: Now, the car is not far off breaking into the 10's but it will likely take some fuel system upgrades to get there. It certainly will be interesting to see if a C7 S6 or S7 do break into the 10's on the factory turbochargers. The platform certainly is on the doorstep.
    5 replies | 342 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 11:37 AM
    If you are driving around in a bright yellow Lamborghini Urus do you really need more attention? Well, if you do Vorsteiner is where you can go to in order to make your $250k+ Lamborghini SUV stand out even more. It would embarrassing pulling in to pick the kids up after a soccer game next to another stock Urus, wouldn't it? Here are the pieces: UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO BONNET CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $9,495 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO DECKLID SPOILER CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $2,095 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO FENDER FLARES CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $5,295 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO FRONT AIRDUCTS CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $1,595 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO FRONT SPOILER CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $5,295 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO REAR AIR DUCTS CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $1,395 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO REAR DIFFUSER CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $6,295 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO ROOF SPOILER CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $3,195 UX-07 EDIZIONE AERO SIDE BLADES CARBON FIBER PP 2X2 GLOSSY Carbon MSRP: $6,295 That sure adds up in a hurry. Is it worth it? You be the judge.
    1 replies | 87 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 10:17 AM
    Penfolds is just sublime. It's what immediately comes to mind when thinking of Aussie wine. I have yet to try the Grange... it's like a white whale that eludes me.
    1456 replies | 431792 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 10:01 AM
    The LT5 from GM and the Predator V8 from Ford are the two powerplants at the top of the domestic game. The LT5 has an advantage in time on the market but considering both of these motors have TVS2650's from the factory we are going to see massive power from both in the aftermarket. The ZR1 does have an advantage in that it is lower weight. The GT500 has an advantage in that it has a dual clutch transmission and revs higher which means it can get aggressive with the gearing. LMR tuned this C7 ZR1 with their LMR1000 package which includes a cam upgrade. Let's just say it is roughly at 1000 crank but who knows the truth. With the GT500 we have a fairly good idea of its output. It's in the low 8XX wheel horsepower range tuned on E85 with more to come. Skip all the nonsense to the 13:00 minute mark to see the runs. The ZR1 is definitely quicker and pulls hard up top but the GT500 hangs in there in the lower gears initially and you can probably thank shift speed for that. It is going to be fun to watch these platforms go head to head as they evolve. Who will win? The person who spends the most money of course...
    0 replies | 130 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 09:46 AM
    The LT5 from GM and the Predator V8 from Ford are the two powerplants at the top of the domestic game. The LT5 has an advantage in time on the market but considering both of these motors have TVS2650's from the factory we are going to see massive power from both in the aftermarket. The ZR1 does have an advantage in that it is lower weight. The GT500 has an advantage in that it has a dual clutch transmission and revs higher which means it can get aggressive with the gearing. LMR tuned this C7 ZR1 with their LMR1000 package which includes a cam upgrade. Let's just say it is roughly at 1000 crank but who knows the truth. With the GT500 we have a fairly good idea of its output. It's in the low 8XX wheel horsepower range tuned on E85 with more to come. Skip all the nonsense to the 13:00 minute mark to see the runs. The ZR1 is definitely quicker and pulls hard up top but the GT500 hangs in there in the lower gears initially and you can probably thank shift speed for that. It is going to be fun to watch these platforms go head to head as they evolve. Who will win? The person who spends the most money of course...
    0 replies | 17 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 08:53 AM
    Hey herbon: :text-welcomewave:
    0 replies | 87 view(s)
  • Bowser330's Avatar
    6 replies | 419 view(s)
  • Roadkill12r's Avatar
    Today, 02:11 AM
    Not only the roll-on races with the wrong gear, the brake test is a joke as well. They should use real test equipment to measure the actual distance.
    6 replies | 419 view(s)
  • richpike's Avatar
    Today, 01:27 AM
    :facepalm: I see reading comprehension is not your strong suit. I said nothing about the Mustang’s ride and specifically said I’d prefer a track test. And just to make your head explode, show me a stock ZL1 putting down these numbers: https://www.boostaddict.com/showthread.php?96699-2020-Ford-Shelby-GT500-hits-the-dragstrip-10-6-133-1-4-mile-stock https://www.boostaddict.com/showthread.php?97251-Quickest-stock-2020-Ford-Shelby-GT500-Mustang-record-set-with-10-66-132-96-pass The car is anything but a disappointment and in another league compared to the ZL1. -Rich
    12 replies | 244 view(s)
  • Batman's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:01 PM
    In a performance oriented sports or track car, what is the point of innovation and unique parts if it doesn’t improve performance over your competitors or closest rival? If you’re going to innovate and you have 7 years to do so, you make damn sure you dominate the competition. No excuses! Prior to this comparison test, I was all in on the Mustang, despite it costing almost $20,000 more. I still wish it was offered with a manual transmission but I was willing to overlook that fact. In my opinion, the CFTP is a joke considering the performance to dollar benefit. When you analyze the details of the CFTP, part of the improved performance over the non-CFTP Mustang is attributed to the Michelin Pilot Cup Sport 2 tires and rear seat delete. The non-CFTP Mustang has a back seat and runs Michelin Pilot 4S tires. If the non-CFTP ran the same Michelin Pilot Cup Sport 2 tires, I believe the performance difference would be less. Wait a minute. We’re looking at a comparison test of two track monsters duking it out against each other to determine which car offers the ultimate performance, and you’re more concerned about the Mustang having a “Cadillac” ride compared to the Camaro??? Yeah. Right. Got it!
    12 replies | 244 view(s)
  • Batman's Avatar
    12 replies | 244 view(s)
  • richpike's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:47 PM
    I tend to like Carwow - they get a lot of fun cars. But I do agree that their testing could be better, especially the stupid kick down. -Rich
    6 replies | 419 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:58 PM
    No it isn't. Sometimes they start in the right gear, sometimes they don't. Sometimes they do kickdowns, sometimes they don't. It's all over the place and a mess. Non-prepped is fine but finding the dustiest area (what, they don't have brooms?) to exaggerate is nonsense. And why they didn't use the C4S. It isn't like Porsche doesn't have AWD. When you go to ATCO you expect to drag race. When they line up these two cars, they are drag racing. Notice how they immediately thought to heat the tires? Well, why didn't they edit out the first race then and say when the Porsche wasn't prepped the tires spun? They intentionally left the race in where the Porsche loses and set the title intentionally to 'shocking' for clicks. This is deceptive and done on purpose. Even without launch control 0-60 is in the low 3's. I've launched these cars plenty of times on the street. I've never spun like that with more torque when I was trying to launch. The rear weight bias is incredible. Even when actually spinning on the dragstrip I still ran an 11.6. They were trying to make it as bad as possible for their sensational title. The Porsche traps 12 miles per hour higher. It only took that long because they had it out of boost. The damn car hits 45 in first gear. I've been in gear waiting for a P100D at speed. Took me no time at all to pass and that thing is much faster than the Model 3. Porsche is higher commission but much lower volume.
    6 replies | 419 view(s)
  • Batman's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:12 PM
    The CFTP improves performance. In my opinion, they could have used cheaper materials on the Carbon Fiber wheels then used the savings to put wider wheels or tires on the car.
    12 replies | 244 view(s)
  • Bowser330's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:00 PM
    In regards to the 992 slipping, Carwow is consistent in its testing, always using a non-prepped surface, it is what it is and is why as you pointed out the awd car has the advantage. Surely you’ve heard of no-prep racing which is supposed to simulate real world roadway conditions and be closer to street racing as opposed to track racing on a scraped washed dried and re-gripped (prepped) surface. Racing times on different surfaces can’t really be compared right? This site regularly points out the difference between drag racing tracks like ATCO surely we can expect no-prep to be different than prep. I think all the video shows in one example is that a 992 carrera s could lose to a model 3 performance without launch control on a prepped surface or without being in the optimal gear and performance mode for the starting speed. They claimed the Tesla won even after the Porsche pulled past it because the roll race was to 110mph for the point, then they extended the test to see at what speed the Porsche would pull past it. 126mph when the Porsche started in 2nd gear at 30mph. I agree I think the speed was too low. They should have tested it at different starting speeds and gears to see how much a difference it makes, that would have been informative and more interesting. On another note.... how does carwow make money besides views and ads on YouTube? I think they also get commission for selling cars, affiliate marketing. I would expect a Porsche sale to make them more income than a model 3 sale, no?
    6 replies | 419 view(s)
  • Sticky2's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:54 PM
    You know he's a pedophile and general lunatic, right? Dude is wayyyy off his rocker. If you haven't seen this gem:
    5563 replies | 1756486 view(s)
  • richpike's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:43 PM
    Sadly, too many people listen to idiots like this and aren’t knowledgeable enough to make their own decisions. The only positive on this is this guy followed his own advice. -Rich
    5563 replies | 1756486 view(s)
  • richpike's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:39 PM
    If you don’t understand why the Camaro wins from a dig, I’m not sure I can help you. Skid pad and braking (and traction from a dig) are largely driven by tires (and weight). The Camaro apparently rides like shit which is likely helping it in the skid pad too. In the end, let’s see them around a track. And from a roll. And with equal tires from a dig. My money is on the GT500 in all those instances. And that 7-years they spent developing a bunch of unique parts and innovating. Chevy was clearly spending their money on the C8 (which is innovative for sure). -Rich
    12 replies | 244 view(s)
  • Batman's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:22 PM
    Whether it be a Parts Bin Special or having a unique engine, isn't it still about performance? And as much as we hate to admit it, price and cost is part of the equation. Performance per dollar. If you don't know what I'm talking about, please feel free to check out the 2020 Nissan GTR Nismo. It has unique materials and a unique engine, and only costs $213,000+ and offers equivalent or worse performance than the Camaro or Mustang. Despite the $18,500 CFTP on the Mustang that includes carbon fiber wheels (exotic "unique" materials), the Camaro is still accelerating better from a dig, is pulling more Gs on the skid pad, and braking better! The shocking thing here is that the Camaro is doing all this with it's parts bin special. Ford had 7 years to develop and build the Mustang. Did Ford forget to benchmark the Camaro (it's main rival) against the Mustang during development? Ford had time to develop this Mustang. There is absolutely no excuse on why the Camaro should perform this well against the Mustang.
    12 replies | 244 view(s)
  • quattr0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:33 PM
    $224 better be good lol Not a big fan of Shiraz but this is good.
    1456 replies | 431792 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:43 PM
    Finally got on the list for Quilceda Creek after I don't know how many years. Ordered the 2017: It's pretty good stuff: Vintage Wine Advocate Issue Date Reviewer 2001 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 98 #154, Aug 2004 P. Rovani 2002 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 100 #164, Apr 2006 P. Rovani 2003 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 100 #164, Apr 2006 P. Rovani 2004 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 99 #172, Aug 2007 J. Miller 2005 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 100 #177, Jun 2008 J. Miller 2006 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 99 #185, Oct 2009 J. Miller 2007 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 100 #190, Aug 2010 J. Miller 2008 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 99 #196, Aug 2011 J. Miller 2009 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 99 #207, Jun 2013 J. Dunnuck 2010 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 98+ #207, Jun 2013 J. Dunnuck 2011 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 96 #213, Jun 2014 J. Dunnuck 2012 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 98 #219, Jun 2015 J. Dunnuck 2013 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 99 #225, Jun 2016 J. Dunnuck 2014 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 100 #231, Jun 2017 J. Dunnuck Vintage JebDunnuck.com Issue Date Reviewer 2015 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 99 April 2018 J. Dunnuck 2016 Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 98+ April 2019 J. Dunnuck This represents an average score of 98.9 points over 16 vintages, with three different reviewers.
    1456 replies | 431792 view(s)
More Activity