Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Connecticut CrazyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT.
    Posts
    8,134
    +1
    1,050

    Interpretation???

    OK, we always hear "comparing apples to apples" which got me to thinking, what exactly in your mind constitutes "apples to apples"?

    Is it overall engine size?
    Is it overall HP?
    Is it overall money spent on entire machine?
    Is it overall money spent just on added mods?
    Is it NA vs. NA motors and Boosted motors vs. Boosted motors?

    I have my ideas, but I want to hear yours.

    I only ask because I've been thinking that it would be nice to know where everybody's heads are at with this subject.

    What got me to thinking about this was a scenario something like this in my mind....

    Guy A buys a used GPR for cheap money. Spends exactly what it takes to make it run 70mph dead even. We'll say he got a deal, boat has high hours and he picked it up for $3500. Say he spends $1500 more on mods and settles in at 70mph dead even. Total investment $5000.

    Guy B buys a brand new RXP that hits 70 dead even right out of the box for $11,000. Total investment $11,000.

    Boats are running exactly the same speed over and over, race after race.

    So there you have it.

    One machine is older, one is brand new.
    One machine is modded, one was delivered from factory as is.
    One machine has more CC's than the other.
    One machine is NA, one is Boosted.
    One machine is assumed to have more HP.
    One machine cost a lot more than the other. (overall)
    Both machines are running dead even with each other.

    In the above scenario, are we "comparing apples to apples," and more importantly, why or why aren't we?

    Again, I have my twisted opinion all figured out in my head, but I want to hear yours first!!!

    Thanks guys and enjoy the day!!!
    Last edited by CrazyA; 06-28-2006 at 05:33 AM.


  2. #2
    Resident Jicky Jack Jeff C's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    1,153
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyA
    OK, we always hear "comparing apples to apples" which got me to thinking, what exactly in your mind constitutes "apples to apples"?

    Is it overall engine size?
    Is it overall HP?
    Is it overall money spent on entire machine?
    Is it overall money spent just on added mods?
    Is it NA vs. NA motors and Boosted motors vs. Boosted motors?

    I have my ideas, but I want to hear yours.

    I only ask because I've been thinking that it would be nice to know where everybody's heads are at with this subject.

    What got me to thinking about this was a scenario something like this in my mind....

    Guy A buys a used GPR for cheap money. Spends exactly what it takes to make it run 70mph dead even. We'll say he got a deal, boat has high hours and he picked it up for $3500. Say he spends $1500 more on mods and settles in at 70mph dead even. Total investment $5000.

    Guy B buys a brand new RXP that hits 70 dead even right out of the box for $11,000. Total investment $11,000.

    Boats are running exactly the same speed over and over, race after race.

    So there you have it.

    One machine is older, one is brand new.
    One machine is modded, one was delivered from factory as is.
    One machine has more CC's than the other.
    One machine is NA, one is Boosted.
    One machine is assumed to have more HP.
    One machine cost a lot more than the other. (overall)
    Both machines are running dead even with each other.

    In the above scenario, are we "comparing apples to apples," and more importantly, why or why aren't we?

    Again, I have my twisted opinion all figured out in my head, but I want to hear yours first!!!

    Thanks guys and enjoy the day!!!

    Crazy:

    Apples to apples means to me that the models are the same, the mods are the same and the race conditions are the same.

    Just because the end result is that they run the same speed, does not constitute an apples to apples comparison.

    It would be like saying

    GuyA:
    Has a 05' RXP with a very badly running 25,000 HP F-15 rocket motor in it, and it tops out at 70 mph

    GuyB:

    Has a 05' RXP with a good running stock motor that tops out at 70 mph.

    The end result is the same, sure......... But the technology used to get there is very different.

  3. #3
    Connecticut CrazyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT.
    Posts
    8,134
    +1
    1,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff C
    Crazy:

    Apples to apples means to me that the models are the same, the mods are the same and the race conditions are the same.

    I understand that, really I do... but that never happens in watercraft grudge racing, yet we still throw the term around.

    Just because the end result is that they run the same speed, does not constitute an apples to apples comparison.

    I understand that too. I wrote it up that way on purpose because I figured that it would make a better scenario.

    It would be like saying

    GuyA:
    Has a 05' RXP with a very badly running 25,000 HP F-15 rocket motor in it, and it tops out at 70 mph

    GuyB:

    Has a 05' RXP with a good running stock motor that tops out at 70 mph.

    The end result is the same, sure......... But the technology used to get there is very different.

    Exactly. Just trying to get some different views on the subject.
    .

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rydal, Georgia U S A
    Posts
    3,936
    +1
    14

    Talking

    Apples for apples, I'll take the Rxp across lake Superior and let some one else take the OTHER ski, We'll see who gets there first... or who makes the trip

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    965

    Apples are like Women

    They come in all different shapes and sizes and colours,
    They all taste a little different,
    They're all good for you,
    They are better when not blemished,
    They need sunshine are care,
    They keep the Doctor away,
    They are worthy of respect because they out number us,
    And, most importantly having to do with PWC, everybody has they're fav. flavour so comparing them will only cause you heartach and grief.
    Eat what's in front of you.
    Ride what's in your driveway.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Need a CANDOO expert to interpret my error message
    By tornado34 in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-24-2014, 02:31 PM
  2. 1988 Yamaha WR500 - Ran Great Then Died (Need help interpret Troubleshooting Results)
    By vintageboater in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (2-stroke)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-31-2012, 08:44 PM
  3. 1988 WR500 - Electrical Troubleshooting NEED HELP Interpreting RESULTS
    By vintageboater in forum Yamaha Old School Skis
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-25-2012, 09:57 AM
  4. MSX 150 trouble code interpretation...!
    By Rocky_Road in forum MSX/Matrix
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-24-2008, 11:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •