How many TT Gallardo's had issues at TX2K? - Page 3 - 6SpeedOnline

Mar 23, 2012 | 10:08 AM

#31

AverageJoe

Registered User

Joined: Jun 2011

Posts: 240

From: FL

Rep Power: 27

Quote:

Originally Posted by unvmy996

we know the G can make crazy power etc , but i havent heard much on the TT murci's, how much power are they making , or are capable of making ? can they out gun the G ?

They don't make as much power and they're alot heavier than a G.

Mar 23, 2012 | 11:18 AM

#32

str8blst

Thread Starter

Registered User

Joined: Aug 2004

Posts: 2,200

From: NJ

Rep Power: 343

Quote:

Originally Posted by unvmy996

wow vagisil anyone ? really... you have 3 posts and rush to chime in accusing allen of trying to stir the pot, str8blast has been a member for years and years ! and you dont know him, cuase if you did you would know he meant no harm by is his post, cuase hes not the type to create drama by any means.

Thanks bro! Really appreciate that...

Mar 23, 2012 | 12:50 PM

#33

jhbchess

Registered User

Joined: Mar 2012

Posts: 121

From: Katy, TX

Rep Power: 23

Quote:

Originally Posted by unvmy996

you have 3 posts and rush to chime in accusing allen of trying to stir the pot,

No, just a subtle distinction here, it was other posters who said variations of "making this thread stirs the pot". They then asked who was the source of the statement, and op said "anonymous source." I hate seeing that defense, and my comment was: unless it's something extreme (Watergate), then claiming anonymous source is bad, because the 'anonymous source' defense makes the original statement unverifiable, unaccountable and unfair to the target of the comment. Sorry if that came off as attacking str8, it wasnt meant to, I was cokcing off about the argument itself.

Last edited by jhbchess; Mar 23, 2012 at 01:21 PM.

Mar 23, 2012 | 01:18 PM

#34

unvmy996

Registered User

Joined: Sep 2006

Posts: 7,481

Rep Power: 707

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhbchess

No, just a subtle distinction here, it was other posters who said variations of "making this thread stirs the pot". They then asked who was the source of the statement, and op said "anonymous source." I hate seeing that defense, and my comment was: unless it's something extreme (Watergate), then claiming anonymous source is bad, because the 'anonymous source' defense makes the original statement unverifiable, unaccountable and unfair to the target of the comment. So sorry if that came off as attacking str8, it wasnt meant to, I was cokcing off about the argument itself.

gotcha, no worries....