wkr77 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 No problem... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazmachine69 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 McCrum, Glad I could help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waddell Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 longhorn driver 4 years sas driver i year 17 feature wins out of 23 11 in a row nuff said waddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lloyd#5 Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 colgate i dont know who you are but you're full of [edited by Nick Holt, 6/23/04]. the 5 car was totally legal for this race under tsrs rules. i wish they would have allowed protests for this race because i could have made some more money when jealous people like you would have protested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colgate Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 you cant till me the car was for this race. we will see if it is the next sas race for the tsrs. hint,hint, carb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colt15 Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 not really trying to get involved but i was just was wondering why lloyd didnt drive this race since he normally drives the car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNAR Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 ok time to put up or shut up GUNDAR. oates was on 10". your comment on the laped car. it was oates that made it 3 wide. we come down to let himgo. ok to the 5 car if it was tsrs car why was there no protest on it. if you look at the line up the only tsrs car that started to top 12 was the 1 car. i will be the first to say it . HE WAS NOT LEAGLE FOR THIS RACE. IT was a tsrs car with SAS rules IT was posted on the car TSRS... any questions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! look colgate its over, talk about something else. please????//Iwas going to respond to the above mentioned, but at this point it not worth the effort. lloyds car was legal, they just did there homework let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lloyd#5 Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 colt i didnt race because i had a kidney stone the sunday before the race and was told by doctors that i shouldnt get dehydrated for a couple weeks and i didnt have the money to buy the tires for this race so i got a deal worked out with brandon and frankie. and to [edited out by Nick Holt, 6/23/03] colgate the carb that was on the car was the same one we run for tsrs. since they checked it twice last weekend i dont think it was illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh42 Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Who is colgate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUNAR Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Josh what up dude, I think he is has something to do with the 27 car that raced san antonio last saturday, his earlier post leave me to believe that anyway, anyway when isyour next race and do you still have the truck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rookie49 Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 I noticed that Cindy, I assume that is Ms. Oates, stated that Jason ran on 10" tires. I would like to retract my previous post that said he was on 8" and with that I stand corrected. Gunar, I agree with your statements about your previous car and experience. I think I misunderstood you the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ups88john Posted June 24, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 my team races against lloyd#5 in tsrs, and i also help them out when i can. that car is legal, carb is legal, jack has checked it 3 or 4 times this year, motor is legal, guess that sums it up, it was a legal car for THIS race. tsrs car, 3100 lbs, 10" tires. i agree that a 19.18 is an unheard of time as well as kinda un believeable. brandon knows what he is doing, and knows what he likes the car to do. he flat out whipped the competition, and honestly if my team was there, no way in the world would we have attemped to run 8" tires. i guess what im trying to say is alot of people are mad cause they got beat, i would be too, but if the car passed tech, how is it illegal? big john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txtom Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 Let's see, you take a car that belongs to a family that has raced for what seems like forever around here, add a driver that is currently one of the benchmarks for Texas Drivers, put him on his home track, and when he wins, it is because he's cheating? Some of ya'll would do well to give some credit where it is due. The Alexander team is as good as any around here, and Brandon doesn't need to prove anything to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krusty_rusty Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 thank you tx tom, but the the only way people can argue the fact that brandon won the race is because he was cheating, heck ive heard that brandon put is romco engine in lloyds car for this race, mainly if that was the fact as many of yall think their would be laps in the 18's not 19's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colgate Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 I do agree with big john. it is anunheard of time for a tsrs car . that is all I am getting at. I am not bashing anyone or any team. Lloyd you said the car went through tech 3 time that race weeked, I sorry there was no tech. before during or after the race. Just weighing the car is all the did. But me opinion is my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacecar Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 From my knowledge and observation of the #5 car, there was nothing illegal about that car. If there would have been, I would have been the first to say something to Lloyd and Brandon. I can accept finishing second place, as long as I know that I got beat fair and square. My goal was to win the first place $3000 prize, and I wouldn't have knowingly allowed the #5 car to have an technical advantage. When I looked at the #5 car, it had the vortec heads on it, legal headers, legal carb, legal TSRS shocks (I had wondered if they would have slipped some remote reservoir shocks on it), legal 2045 tires (not any soft 2035 tires), and plenty of lead bars hanging off the right side frame rail. Sincerely, The first loser #23. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishracer Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 Oh yeah, FYI Barkers two wins were in his SAS latemodel(wrecked TSRS car early in season). Boy how everyone can get their technical info crossed up. And he told one person, and she told one person and so on and so on.................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerjim2 Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 congradulations to all that competed last saurday everyone did a good job getting a handel on the cars with short notice.Brandon you and your crew have it going on with some great setups for the cars you win in.I can only remember two october fast races Brandon has not won.congradulations to Brandon and his crew on winning in another style of car. I would like to see the SAS,TSRS,AND THR late models all running on the same tire with the same left side and toal weight and the same carb. the houston late models i do think need some consessions because of the crate motors. Oh one time at band camp Brandon was swinging cows over his head by the tail.LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Definitive Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Oh?Did he ever let go of one?If so,what kind of damage did it do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerjim2 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 heck no Brandon would never do that to a inocent cow.LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrss1 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 i have nothing to do with any competitors that were in this race. am i wrong or did an earlier post say that brandons car had 10 inch tires. i thought TSRS had to run their tires, did they run it under SAS rules. perimeter frame and all that jazz. i was not even at the race but i am curios thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 thrss1, This was posted before the race... You may use 10" Hoosier 2045 tire/wheel combination or if you chose you may use the Hoosier 8" F53 tire/wheel combination. You cannot exceed the track width as stated in the rules package that you are running. Mike Some did some didn't. Mel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrss1 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 thanks Mel i knew i would not be able to go so i did not follow all the technical "blah blah" that close and was confused as to why a TSRS car was running 10 inch tires. now i know thanks again dale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerjim2 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 dale ypur not the only one that misunderstood the rules the talk in the pits was that there were several teams that did not understand that you could race on the 10" tires if you wanted to not take advantage of the weight break Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatboyracing7 Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 i think Barker's first win was in his TSRS car but he got DQ because of the rules about yellow flags counting and the weight at the end of the race or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.