REALLY? I'm gonna have to call you out on this.
01-02-2006, 03:28 PM
#1
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sauk Centre, MN
Posts: 5,459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
REALLY? I'm gonna have to call you out on this.
Ok, who was it?
I'm running low 11'*. What'* wrong with YOUR car
Here'* the trick: Switch to a METRIC clock. 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour, and so on. Your times are gauranteed to improve
Here'* the trick: Switch to a METRIC clock. 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour, and so on. Your times are gauranteed to improve
01-02-2006, 03:33 PM
#2
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Elberton, GA
Posts: 5,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: REALLY? I'm gonna have to call you out on this.
Originally Posted by OLBlueEyesBonne
Ok, who was it?
I'm running low 11'*. What'* wrong with YOUR car
Here'* the trick: Switch to a METRIC clock. 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour, and so on. Your times are gauranteed to improve
Here'* the trick: Switch to a METRIC clock. 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour, and so on. Your times are gauranteed to improve
01-02-2006, 03:39 PM
#3
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 1,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think that reasoning is wrong, if an hour is still the same amount of time but you break it down into 100 instead of 60 than what was 5 minutes in a 60 minute hour would be about 8 or 9 minutes in a 100 minutes hour, same goes for the second sin a minutes but each minute would be even less time now, itstoomuch math for me to bother, any engineers wanna figure it out?
01-02-2006, 04:40 PM
#5
Senior Member
True Car Nut
I don't know who it was, but I DO know that that is not a METRIC clock. It'* a BASE 100 clock.
And...NERV is right. Following that (incorrect) line of reasoning, you would want to use a BASE 50 clock with 50 "minutes" to the hour and 50 "seconds" to the minute. That way, your 13.2 real time could look like an 11.0 time.
Why am I doing this anyway?!??
And...NERV is right. Following that (incorrect) line of reasoning, you would want to use a BASE 50 clock with 50 "minutes" to the hour and 50 "seconds" to the minute. That way, your 13.2 real time could look like an 11.0 time.
Why am I doing this anyway?!??
01-02-2006, 05:31 PM
#7
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-02-2006, 06:05 PM
#8
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I am missing something as usual, but nothing changes....we are talking seconds here...so who cares if there are 100 seconds in a minute? Arg, what am I missing :?:
01-02-2006, 06:14 PM
#9
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sauk Centre, MN
Posts: 5,459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Logan
Maybe I am missing something as usual, but nothing changes....we are talking seconds here...so who cares if there are 100 seconds in a minute? Arg, what am I missing :?:
Joke is on WIll.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
harofreak00
Detailing & Appearance
29
12-20-2006 06:41 PM
BonnieBrougham
Lounge
3
12-16-2004 05:38 PM
