i didnt see the first oh hold on. Let me use right grammar. I did not see the first VW Golf run a 14 second anything. They were all 13 as i mentioned before in a previous post. Like I have already said, you can take it as you want or how you want but they run 13's and the audi was in the 12 and 11 range. Ok here is your scenario; this car is AWD and has probably about 400 awhp or so. What do you think it would run. A heavy buick grand national runs 12 to 13 and does not have as much horsepower and is about a thousand pounds heavier. It does not matter to me what your buddy runs or some poor driver on the net runs. It matters not to me if you or any of the people of this forum believes it. I simply put the math there you can calculate it compared to other cars that you know are "worthy" of running that low of an E.T. If you really want to check me then give them a call and just ask them. I am sure they have a toll froo 800 humber that you can reach them at. I am not scared to show you that I am not lieing but it is your choice to believe it or not.

 

Pomansouth, buddy, did you not read/understand my last post? If not, re-read it. What I'm saying is that I found an index of quarter mile times, 1.8T powered cars, and their modifications. Two (and only two) of the cars on that list are stock beside an ECU upgrade. Those two cars happen to be in the 13's. Therefore, I'm putting MY foot in MY mouth.

 

Sorry man I was just waking up and kinda annoyed by the post about my grammar by lude and dc. Sorry man i feel like a real ass now. wow, it is amazing how you can just say too much sometimes. Just another learning experience. I guess now I must eat my own carrots to get up.

 

Unauthorized advertising removed by moderator.

 

Please do not bring up dead threads about ECUs just to make the link to your ECU business in your sig more noticed.

We try to keep the nature of our vehicle-specific and tech forums non commercial. If you are interested in advertising on this site, please contact one of the admins.