Hello, Mr.Sakaki! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dave1185 11:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the future please notify involved editors when there is discussion involving them at ANI or 3RR or other such places. I have done this for you. But it is important that all involved parties are aware of where the pertinent discussions are taking place. Thanks.--Adam in MOTalk 11:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. The M/T recorded 1/4 mile time is NOT the best recorded 1/4 mile ET "ever recorded by a magazine". MM&FF went 10s with a stock FGT.
2. I have not taken ownership of the article, what I was trying to do was prevent daily changes to the performance stats and keep the stats consistent to a single test. Note the article history, 0-60 is changed weekly.
3. The FGT tested in that article wasn't a "ringer" as you continually claim. It made power right on par with FGTs delivered into the hands of owners. 525-550 rwhp is completely typical of the cars. TheBalance (talk) 04:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My response is on your talk page. Mr.Sakaki (talk) 10:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. MM&FF is a major US publication that is distributed nationally, it is no less valid a source than C&D or M/T. Trap speeds are HIGHLY variable. Density altitude has a dramatic impact on power production which in turn impacts trap speed, even compounded with a PD supercharger as boost can increase with denser air. Driver error/driver skill can have nearly as big an impact on trap speed as it does on ET, I've seen it many times.
2. Why not include any of the more impressive 0-60 mph times? Too concerned with including slower 1/4 mile times to make your import brand of choice (Porsche/Ferrari?) look better in comparison?
3. You included 128 mph trap speeds, a 3 mph trap variation isn't statistically significant when talking about ~130 mph cars. The MM&FF car also went over 130 mph with 540 SAE corrected horsepower. Completely typical of dyno numbers seen by as delivered FGTs, which as I've already stated typically fall within the 525-550 rwhp range. If this FGT was indeed a "ringer" (via a tune or pulley swap) it should have picked up notably more than 3 mph. Tune/pulley [only] FGTs have trapped over 140 mph. These cars come from the factory with a ~10.0:1 A/F and 8 degrees of max timing at WOT, rather; such a minor variation is better attributed to driver skill and run conditions (which sometimes can not be corrected with DA corrections with complete accuracy).
