The "Good Old Days" of Drag racing, as it once was done. About 1968, well before the OH&S arrived on the scene to "protect" people from imaginary dangers, and spoil everybody's fun! Falcon XT GT 302 and Monaro HK GTS 327 , I think.Cheers
Totally different situation, in case you hadn't noticed, and over 50 years after 1968. Sorry to confuse you, but I'll elaborate later if I can find time. Cheers
yobarr said
12:30 PM Sep 19, 2022
Santa wrote:
"Imaginary dangers"
Do you mean like this?
Perhaps you spoke in jest, although I doubt it, but these two situations are vastly different. Firstly, the Australian cars were almost stationary, having just moved off the start line. Although they were the muscle cars of the day, with 230HP and 250HP respectively, by today's standards they were slugs. My Commodore road car, presently parked-up while I travel, develops 530HP. The Falcon and the Monaro had 1/4 mile times around 15-16 seconds, with relativaly low speed at the end of the dragstrip. The American car that crashed is of a type that does the 1/4 mile in less than 7 secs at maybe 200mph. (Guess) Huge difference. The chances of a driver losing control of his car at over 200mph are surely much higher than they are at 20mph? To present any danger to spectators present, the Australian cars would have to jump sideways, highly unlikely given their lack of power and the poor traction provided by the "bicycle" tyres of the day? Anybody with an IQ above 27 would understand the risks involved in allowing children to stand 15 feet from a racetrack where cars are travelling at very high speeds, as was the case in the subject accident. Seems that common sense is increasingly uncommon, but it was a different world back then, when there were no office-bound pen-pushers dreaming up huge numbers of "safety" laws to be "enforced" by an Army of self-important Tin Gods with little sense. Who was it who said "Accidents are nature's way of eliminating stupid people". Cheers
-- Edited by yobarr on Monday 19th of September 2022 12:35:52 PM
-- Edited by yobarr on Monday 19th of September 2022 12:48:40 PM
Car do need more HP to move. Like the population cars have put on a lot of weight!
yobarr said
02:53 PM Sep 19, 2022
Santa wrote:
Nope! not jesting, not prepared to argue the point with anyone who feels they need a 530 HP road car.
Sorry to disappoint, but there is nothing to argue about here, as these are two completely different situations. Surely you understand that a car that is almost stationary presents a lot less danger to bystanders than does a car travelling at 200mph? Nice video you posted, but perhaps irrelevant in this situation? Nice little quote you posted too. This has been my practice for many years, and I have actually posted that very quote on here previously. Cheers.
rgren2 said
02:59 PM Sep 19, 2022
Santa wrote:
Nope! not jesting, not prepared to argue the point with anyone who feels they need a 530 HP road car.
I love to have a 530 HP car. Probably wouldnt be able to afford to feed it though.
yobarr said
03:11 PM Sep 19, 2022
rgren2 wrote:
I love to have a 530 HP car. Probably wouldnt be able to afford to feed it though.
Thanks Rod. Yeah, it's great fun to drive as I've done the suspension and brakes to cope with the power. Might be the oldest hoon in town! Had it up to indicated 270kmh, but only while I'm alone on deserted roads. As far as fuel goes, I wouldn't gave a clue what it uses, as I take the view that if you can't afford the fuel, you can't afford the car. Safe travels. Cheers.
rgren2 said
03:25 PM Sep 19, 2022
yobarr wrote:
rgren2 wrote:
I love to have a 530 HP car. Probably wouldnt be able to afford to feed it though.
Thanks Rod. Yeah, it's great fun to drive as I've done the suspension and brakes to cope with the power. Might be the oldest hoon in town! Had it up to indicated 270kmh, but only while I'm alone on deserted roads. As far as fuel goes, I wouldn't gave a clue what it uses, as I take the view that if you can't afford the fuel, you can't afford the car. Safe travels. Cheers.
Guess Ill have to stick with my 6.5L GU.
yobarr said
03:41 PM Sep 19, 2022
rgren2 wrote:
yobarr wrote:
rgren2 wrote:
I love to have a 530 HP car. Probably wouldnt be able to afford to feed it though.
Thanks Rod. Yeah, it's great fun to drive as I've done the suspension and brakes to cope with the power. Might be the oldest hoon in town! Had it up to indicated 270kmh, but only while I'm alone on deserted roads. As far as fuel goes, I wouldn't gave a clue what it uses, as I take the view that if you can't afford the fuel, you can't afford the car. Safe travels. Cheers.
Guess Ill have to stick with my 6.5L GU.
They're great cars too. Mate had one that he went all over Oz in, crossing deserts etc, and loves it. Checked out a couple but bought the 79 instead. Horses for courses. Cheers
Clarky 1 said
08:38 PM Sep 19, 2022
My dad had a 327 HK 2door Monaro.
What a magnificent car, as was the Ford as well.
Dad would not let me drive it unless he was with me.
I just do not know why he would not let me take it out on a Saturday night.
Some time ago I had a XB Coupe 302 and that was a great car as well.
deverall11 said
08:14 PM Sep 20, 2022
yobarr wrote:
.......
Thanks Rod. Yeah, it's great fun to drive as I've done the suspension and brakes to cope with the power. Might be the oldest hoon in town! Had it up to indicated 270kmh, but only while I'm alone on deserted roads. As far as fuel goes, I wouldn't gave a clue what it uses, as I take the view that if you can't afford the fuel, you can't afford the car. Safe travels. Cheers.
Reminds of the guy who asked the salesman about the fuel consumption on the Ferrari he was about to buy.
Reply was: 'If you're concerned about fuel, this is not the car for you sir' .
The "Good Old Days" of Drag racing, as it once was done. About 1968, well before the OH&S arrived on the scene to "protect" people from imaginary dangers, and spoil everybody's fun! Falcon XT GT 302 and Monaro HK GTS 327 , I think.Cheers
"Imaginary dangers"
Do you mean like this?
https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2021-10-23/drag-racer-slams-into-spectators-in-texas-2-killed-5-hurt
"Imaginary dangers"
Do you mean like this?
https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2021-10-23/drag-racer-slams-into-spectators-in-texas-2-killed-5-hurt
Totally different situation, in case you hadn't noticed, and over 50 years after 1968. Sorry to confuse you, but I'll elaborate later if I can find time. Cheers
Perhaps you spoke in jest, although I doubt it, but these two situations are vastly different. Firstly, the Australian cars were almost stationary, having just moved off the start line. Although they were the muscle cars of the day, with 230HP and 250HP respectively, by today's standards they were slugs. My Commodore road car, presently parked-up while I travel, develops 530HP. The Falcon and the Monaro had 1/4 mile times around 15-16 seconds, with relativaly low speed at the end of the dragstrip. The American car that crashed is of a type that does the 1/4 mile in less than 7 secs at maybe 200mph. (Guess) Huge difference. The chances of a driver losing control of his car at over 200mph are surely much higher than they are at 20mph? To present any danger to spectators present, the Australian cars would have to jump sideways, highly unlikely given their lack of power and the poor traction provided by the "bicycle" tyres of the day? Anybody with an IQ above 27 would understand the risks involved in allowing children to stand 15 feet from a racetrack where cars are travelling at very high speeds, as was the case in the subject accident. Seems that common sense is increasingly uncommon, but it was a different world back then, when there were no office-bound pen-pushers dreaming up huge numbers of "safety" laws to be "enforced" by an Army of self-important Tin Gods with little sense. Who was it who said "Accidents are nature's way of eliminating stupid people". Cheers
-- Edited by yobarr on Monday 19th of September 2022 12:35:52 PM
-- Edited by yobarr on Monday 19th of September 2022 12:48:40 PM
Nope! not jesting, not prepared to argue the point with anyone who feels they need a 530 HP road car.
Car do need more HP to move. Like the population cars have put on a lot of weight!
Sorry to disappoint, but there is nothing to argue about here, as these are two completely different situations. Surely you understand that a car that is almost stationary presents a lot less danger to bystanders than does a car travelling at 200mph? Nice video you posted, but perhaps irrelevant in this situation? Nice little quote you posted too. This has been my practice for many years, and I have actually posted that very quote on here previously. Cheers.
I love to have a 530 HP car. Probably wouldnt be able to afford to feed it though.
Thanks Rod. Yeah, it's great fun to drive as I've done the suspension and brakes to cope with the power. Might be the oldest hoon in town! Had it up to indicated 270kmh, but only while I'm alone on deserted roads. As far as fuel goes, I wouldn't gave a clue what it uses, as I take the view that if you can't afford the fuel, you can't afford the car. Safe travels. Cheers.
Guess Ill have to stick with my 6.5L GU.
They're great cars too. Mate had one that he went all over Oz in, crossing deserts etc, and loves it. Checked out a couple but bought the 79 instead. Horses for courses. Cheers
My dad had a 327 HK 2door Monaro.
What a magnificent car, as was the Ford as well.
Dad would not let me drive it unless he was with me.
I just do not know why he would not let me take it out on a Saturday night.
Some time ago I had a XB Coupe 302 and that was a great car as well.
Reminds of the guy who asked the salesman about the fuel consumption on the Ferrari he was about to buy.
Reply was: 'If you're concerned about fuel, this is not the car for you sir' .
Might've lost a sale there.