[ItBites]

I'd agree with driver error. Should have taken it off the track when the needle started to bounce. Certainly their fault and I'd be pi$$ed.

However, if the other cars did not suffer from the same malady, is your car really up to the same task as the others? I understand there was a reason for its sub-comparable performance in the area of keeping the engine together, but they cannot compare an imaginary "could have been" car to the other real cars present.

As far as the 80 HP, what you are talking about is "bench-racing", even if the pronouncement of being handicapped by 80 HP came from Peter. We can all bench-race, but what counts is what happens at the track. Being down 80 HP was not proven to C&D, but only told to them by one of the folks with a vested interest.

And expensive is expensive, even if there are reasons. An expensive noise is an expensive noise. Roush engines are more pricey per HP than some others, maybe with good reason, but that is the trend.

As far as track prepped goes, I did not see where the other cars intake tracts were modified to gain 80 HP, as you wish you had done. I am sure the other principals in the test could have gained another 80 Hp with mods as well, but they were tested as they were delivered, as was yours.

I won't continue to bust your chops, but it still seems you are saying "if my car were different, it would have performed different" Duh... True of your car and the others present as well. The article and test was designed to test the performance of the car present that day, same as any contest or race and it was not a good day for your car...