Tires for IS 350 stock 18 wheels
01-31-11, 09:37 PM
#32
The last time you insisted you knew what the deal was it was to claim the Joe Z intake didn't actually have anything to back the +5hp claims, and I had to correct you with the independent dyno sheets.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/per...ml#post6092335
Then the time before that it was tires... where you again claimed the Hankooks (and several others) weren't good for performance and instead suggested PS2s... and I had to correct you again to point out the Hankooks outperform the PS2s.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/per...ml#post6071157
Then before that you claimed ECT-Power held gears longer... and I had to correct you yet again to explain that ECT-Normal actually shifted higher
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/is-...ml#post6030757
So what's your "secret info" this time?
01-31-11, 09:52 PM
#33
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why?
The last time you insisted you knew what the deal was it was to claim the Joe Z intake didn't actually have anything to back the +5hp claims, and I had to correct you with the independent dyno sheets.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/per...ml#post6092335
Then the time before that it was tires... where you again claimed the Hankooks (and several others) weren't good for performance and instead suggested PS2s... and I had to correct you again to point out the Hankooks outperform the PS2s.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/per...ml#post6071157
Then before that you claimed ECT-Power held gears longer... and I had to correct you yet again to explain that ECT-Normal actually shifted higher
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/is-...ml#post6030757
So what's your "secret info" this time?
The last time you insisted you knew what the deal was it was to claim the Joe Z intake didn't actually have anything to back the +5hp claims, and I had to correct you with the independent dyno sheets.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/per...ml#post6092335
Then the time before that it was tires... where you again claimed the Hankooks (and several others) weren't good for performance and instead suggested PS2s... and I had to correct you again to point out the Hankooks outperform the PS2s.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/per...ml#post6071157
Then before that you claimed ECT-Power held gears longer... and I had to correct you yet again to explain that ECT-Normal actually shifted higher
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/is-...ml#post6030757
So what's your "secret info" this time?
seriously just cause you have no life and post on every single thread here doesnt mean everything you suggest if true....... since you have so much time on the computer go figure out why the EVO12 is not the best tire out there if you want the max peformance for your car
02-01-11, 12:43 AM
#35
it held gears longer before shifting up... not the shift point at redline.
seriously just cause you have no life and post on every single thread here doesnt mean everything you suggest if true....... since you have so much time on the computer go figure out why the EVO12 is not the best tire out there if you want the max peformance for your car
seriously just cause you have no life and post on every single thread here doesnt mean everything you suggest if true....... since you have so much time on the computer go figure out why the EVO12 is not the best tire out there if you want the max peformance for your car
I mean Kurtz is only suggesting the v12 cause is affordable, and is one of the top summer tires out there right now. Is not the best, but for its price and performance.. is the "best bang for the buck", ya dig? 
02-01-11, 04:27 AM
#36
If it shifts at a lower rpm, and it doesn't get to that RPM any slower than normal mode, explain how it holds the gear "longer" exactly? Because at the time in the thread you sure seemed like you had no idea about what I had to explain to you.
Last time you tried to offer tire advice you suggested a demonstrably inferior tire to one already suggested... this time you offer even less by simply knocking down one of the suggestions without offering an alternative at all (and still offering no evidence of your knock down).
If you have a better solution to offer the OP (ideally something actually correct, unlike the last 3 times you tried this) then by all means, offer it. Ideally with something to actually support your claim.
Last edited by Kurtz; 02-01-11 at 05:46 AM.
02-01-11, 09:45 AM
#39
I assumed that would've been pretty obvious to anyone who reads both forums... especially when I answer questions about commonly asked stuff like optioning or maintenance.... pretty sure I've even cross-linked for answers in those cases a few times. Was on there first and name was taken here so I used a different one.
But just some quick math- I've got 4757 posts here (including this one) and I've been a member since mid-2007.
That's 3.74 posts per day.
While there's certainly a few exceptions where I might have to invest 10-15 minutes of research, a typical post on here doesn't take but 2-3 minutes....
So that's about 10 minutes a day spent posting, on average.
(and I suspect if someone looked they'd find 3 outta 4 of those minutes come during the hours I'm at work anyway, so it's not like I'm doing much of this when I could be out doing other things away from the computer)
Even if you assume I spend 5 times as much time reading as I do posting (and I'm a fast reader so I doubt it's that much) that's still, total, about 1 hour a day... and most of that while I'm in front of a computer for work anyway.
meanwhile the average american spends 5.03 hours a day watching TV (I spend massively less time than that on television personally... but heck, just skipping the commercials with a tivo carves more time out of a 1 hour show than I spend posting a day).
So I can't figure out where this idea I or anyone else who makes 3 or 4 posts in a day must spend some crazy amount of time on the forums, to the point where they'd have no time for anything else, comes from.
now, if we could just get back to tires before a mod comes and spanks us all...
But just some quick math- I've got 4757 posts here (including this one) and I've been a member since mid-2007.
That's 3.74 posts per day.
While there's certainly a few exceptions where I might have to invest 10-15 minutes of research, a typical post on here doesn't take but 2-3 minutes....
So that's about 10 minutes a day spent posting, on average.
(and I suspect if someone looked they'd find 3 outta 4 of those minutes come during the hours I'm at work anyway, so it's not like I'm doing much of this when I could be out doing other things away from the computer)
Even if you assume I spend 5 times as much time reading as I do posting (and I'm a fast reader so I doubt it's that much) that's still, total, about 1 hour a day... and most of that while I'm in front of a computer for work anyway.
meanwhile the average american spends 5.03 hours a day watching TV (I spend massively less time than that on television personally... but heck, just skipping the commercials with a tivo carves more time out of a 1 hour show than I spend posting a day).
So I can't figure out where this idea I or anyone else who makes 3 or 4 posts in a day must spend some crazy amount of time on the forums, to the point where they'd have no time for anything else, comes from.
now, if we could just get back to tires before a mod comes and spanks us all...
Last edited by Kurtz; 02-01-11 at 10:00 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
