Discussion
not sure on the status of this variant but they are looking for a designer..
http://forum.cg-cars.com/showthread.php?t=7211
http://forum.cg-cars.com/showthread.php?t=7211
NorWitch69 said:
not sure on the status of this variant but they are looking for a designer..
http://forum.cg-cars.com/showthread.php?t=7211
Look at the second following post, from a 1-post, just joined, newbie. Somewhat suspect. There was something similar at the bottom of Mr Pink's carefully cropped screenshot, another 1-post, just joined newbie. I've heard of viral marketing, this must be the opposite, viral slagging off.http://forum.cg-cars.com/showthread.php?t=7211
Trouble is, it's so bloody obvious. It loses all credibility.
Looks like the car was still one of the quicker cars at the track though,even though it only did 78 laps, I remember seeing a Peugeot have a chassis failure at Le Mans this year with only two and a half hours run...crap happens to even the good teams...ask our Nigel about Le Mans 2010.....
LMRACER said:
but lap 19 only took 1 min 55.823
http://www.nasaproracing.com/results/norcal.html?m...
they could use that information to tell the Road status inspectors when looking for compliance...http://www.nasaproracing.com/results/norcal.html?m...
NorWitch69 said:
the only thing that has lost credibility is the SLC.
maybe they thought the "25" meant "seconds"!
sorry...laughing stock!
Everyone knows you and your crew have no love lost for RCR- but anyone who isn't a hater can see that the car was natively very fast. It just suffered from a lack of preparation- having only run 6 laps total under it's own power before starting the race.maybe they thought the "25" meant "seconds"!
sorry...laughing stock!
Actually, the car garnered a lot of positive attention from people at the race, especially as it lapped the class-leading car a couple of times in one session. The pro drivers both were very pleased with the speed, balance and consistency in all conditions.
Everyone who was actually there was very impressed with the car- both with the level of build, and the speed it showed. With normal race car development, it will clearly be a contender for overall wins in races, not just class wins.
Starting a 25 hour enduro with a new car was clearly a leap- but the car itself did pretty well, even as the results might not show it to the casual observer.
All of the problems were due to non-RCR subsystems; everything RCR built was spot-on, with no failures.
That's a pretty good start for the first SLC in such serious competition.
not bashing for bashing sakes....its had quite a few years to do some of the following...
a very simple scenario:
"completely" finish of the product yourself, test and develop and then get a car road registered somewhere worldwide with continuous closed loop improvements
and/or
enter a race, test and more test, compete with like for like and then come back with proper race results and not third from bottom from 70 cars.
at the moment it aint road car and it aint race car....we are STILL waiting.
(we accept it may be a kit car but that depends on everyones perception of what a "kit" would be and what they wanted out of it)
a very simple scenario:
"completely" finish of the product yourself, test and develop and then get a car road registered somewhere worldwide with continuous closed loop improvements
and/or
enter a race, test and more test, compete with like for like and then come back with proper race results and not third from bottom from 70 cars.
at the moment it aint road car and it aint race car....we are STILL waiting.
(we accept it may be a kit car but that depends on everyones perception of what a "kit" would be and what they wanted out of it)
not bashing for bashing sakes....its had quite a few years to do some of the following...
a very simple scenario:
"completely" finish of the product yourself, test and develop and then get a car road registered somewhere worldwide with continuous closed loop improvements
and/or
enter a race, test and more test, compete with like for like and then come back with proper race results and not third from bottom from 70 cars.
at the moment it aint road car and it aint race car....we are STILL waiting.
(i accept it may be a kit car but that depends on everyones perception of what a "kit" would be and what they wanted out of it)
a very simple scenario:
"completely" finish of the product yourself, test and develop and then get a car road registered somewhere worldwide with continuous closed loop improvements
and/or
enter a race, test and more test, compete with like for like and then come back with proper race results and not third from bottom from 70 cars.
at the moment it aint road car and it aint race car....we are STILL waiting.
(i accept it may be a kit car but that depends on everyones perception of what a "kit" would be and what they wanted out of it)
NorWitch69 said:
not bashing for bashing sakes....its had quite a few years to do some of the following...
a very simple scenario:
"completely" finish of the product yourself, test and develop and then get a car road registered somewhere worldwide with continuous closed loop improvements
and/or
enter a race, test and more test, compete with like for like and then come back with proper race results and not third from bottom from 70 cars.
at the moment it aint road car and it aint race car....we are STILL waiting.
(i accept it may be a kit car but that depends on everyones perception of what a "kit" would be and what they wanted out of it)
There are several track cars in use right now, and several cars on the street, licensed and registered, as anyone who bothers to read the GT40s site knows.a very simple scenario:
"completely" finish of the product yourself, test and develop and then get a car road registered somewhere worldwide with continuous closed loop improvements
and/or
enter a race, test and more test, compete with like for like and then come back with proper race results and not third from bottom from 70 cars.
at the moment it aint road car and it aint race car....we are STILL waiting.
(i accept it may be a kit car but that depends on everyones perception of what a "kit" would be and what they wanted out of it)
The "continuous improvement" comment is amusing, because every time RCR makes such an improvement, the whiner crew tries to play it as a fix to some supposed terrible problem.
RCR has sold lots of SLCs, and they are on the road, and on track.
And how's that Aspira thing going? I guess you must have them all over the world by now, as you have had almost "quite a few years" to do so. You are probably way ahead of the game, since you didn't have to actually spend any time or money creating the Aspira name or logo.
Do tell.
Comedy.
Mr.in-the-Pink, Craig, and Norwitch's continued attempts to try and belittle RCR and the SL-C are comical. Just because you bought an SL-C, ripped-off a company name, logo and idea to develop the car into a business and discovered that you would no longer continue to receive support for doing so isn't anybody's fault but your own. At least you got a great looking and blindingly fast ride out of it, regardless if you were able to write-off the costs as a loss for tax purposes (assuming you can do that on you little island like here in the U.S.).
The company whose idea you've plundered http://www.rapiercars.com/index.html has a few registered vehicles and look fantastic, at least judging by the photos. Who knows if it will be a successful model but I'm sure it helps that they have the support of the manufacturer, unlike you clowns.
Fwiw, I was at the 25 hour race and that car is a very potent machine. Laugh now and prove yourself a fool later.
Mr.in-the-Pink, Craig, and Norwitch's continued attempts to try and belittle RCR and the SL-C are comical. Just because you bought an SL-C, ripped-off a company name, logo and idea to develop the car into a business and discovered that you would no longer continue to receive support for doing so isn't anybody's fault but your own. At least you got a great looking and blindingly fast ride out of it, regardless if you were able to write-off the costs as a loss for tax purposes (assuming you can do that on you little island like here in the U.S.).
The company whose idea you've plundered http://www.rapiercars.com/index.html has a few registered vehicles and look fantastic, at least judging by the photos. Who knows if it will be a successful model but I'm sure it helps that they have the support of the manufacturer, unlike you clowns.
Fwiw, I was at the 25 hour race and that car is a very potent machine. Laugh now and prove yourself a fool later.
RXHeven said:
Mr.in-the-Pink, Craig, and Norwitch's continued attempts to try and belittle RCR and the SL-C are comical.
Indeed they are. This one didn't got the way they hoped eitherhttp://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
I can understand he/they/whatever feel they have a grudge against RCR but it's evident that it is one the rest of the world doesn't share.
Normally I would report a name and shame thread like this, but it's not really worth it, it's so ineffectual and clumsily done that it is, indeed, comical.
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff