[NOS2Go4Me]

Marction,Dec 22 2004, 03:18 PM Wrote:no...you seem to be simply confusing a car DEPENDENT on high octane to run properly with cars that BENEFITS from high octane.  Neither of those scenarios has anything to do with the term "dyno queen" anyway.  Many people build a track-only car that can only run on race gas or that sucks ass on the street.  So what?  That's STILL not a "dyno queen".

Jay and Tom are right on here.

Dyno Queen = high #s on the dyno that don't play out accordingly in performance on the track/strip.

eg. 500whp Mustang running similar times to a 700whp Mustang...great...700whp is impressive...but it means virtually nothing other than to produce impressive #s on a dyno and demonstrate some engineering/tuning cleverness to squeeze out more power.  That would be a dyno queen, IMHO. 

The type of fuel used is pretty much irrelevant.  All anyone should really do, for comparitive purposes, is post the fuel they used when they did their dyno run.
[right][snapback]76016[/snapback][/right]

*Smashes head off desk, goes into coma*

I don't really give a dam about dyno queens, my argument is that daily drivers aren't feasible in pretty much anywhere that isn't in close proximity to a racetrack when they DEPEND on race gas. Jay was defending that type of tune saying it was possible, when in reality, he could never leave town with it.

That's not a daily driver, that's a bicycle-car. Great around town, never leaves town. Or, we could call it the Jekyll-and-Hyde Mr. Bean-mobile. Same concept.

Christ, why is it so hard to understand that? FFS, I wish some people would take two seconds to R-E-A-D what the dam I write, and then make a sensible and informed response.

F-U-C-K me, the lack of forethought and follow-through here astounds me.