Right!?! All the data and equipment that had a separate trailer and with massive antenna have be replaced by a single laptop, GPS module, and high tech ECM. 30 years of tech difference is amazing.
@@bankspower y'all need to get it back out and hit something light like 300mph now. Flex on your old record, maybe use a new version. I know y'all can do it too!
We're going for the Pikes Peak next year. Also, not sure if you've seen it, our Trans Am did 283mph in 1987. Check it out 👉🏻 official.bankspower.com/project/custom-projects/banks-twin-turbo-gt-trans-am/
@@bankspower fun marketing idea, introducing “THE B” factor THE Banks performance solution equation + T Torque + H Horsepower + E Efficiency = B Banks Want THE B? Got THE B. THE Banks Performance Solutions simply add up. “THE B” factor explained: Two type of people Those that got THE B Those that want THE B Go ahead get THE B Best, KP Colorado Springs, CO
1990 I was a freshman in high school, if a revisit to back up those numbers today is made it would be a video series to see. The GMC Canyon has a duramax 3.0 and to see gale bank’s version to hit salt flats to make a statement again would be a head turner😊😊😊😊
The fact they were able to bore and stroke a GM 4.3 V6 to get an extra 700 cc’s displacement out of it, increase the C.R. To north of 14:1 and have it all hold together making 570hp at north of 7200 RPM is just a testament to how advanced Banks and GM performance were even back in the early days of electronic fuel injection. For those who don’t know the 4.3 was an inherently “shaky” engine, even the later vortec models with a balance shaft weren’t particularly smooth idlers and the early carbureted and TBI units even with a perfect tune-up would shake noticeably at idle. Needless to say this doesn’t make for an engine that’s particularly stable at high RPM’s even with the factory stroke length. I’m certain a LOT of time and energy went into balancing that rotating assembly and developing the strongest components possible to get the two 5.0 V6 race trucks (the other was a nearly identical ex-cab S-15 with a nearly identical engine however with different tuning and 5.13 gears out back to make it a more effective 1/4 mile drag truck) to run like they did and last while doing it.
Nah, they're not Utes - utes are based solely off of a passenger car platform - Falcon, Valiant, Kingswood, Commodore. These are pickup trucks, the basis for these goes right back to the Ford Model A, which came in Passenger car and Light Truck variants, the latter evolving in to larger delivery trucks and eventually pick-ups. These are based off a larger full chassis design. Ute's can do, up to 500kilos in the bed. Pickups are in the 500kilo to 3500kilo load in the bed range, and small Trucks are 4 metric tons and above. We didn't get Pickups imported by the manufacturer here 'till recently, with the exception being locally assembled F100's from Ford.
@@silkyjohnson5976 Automotive history, and the weight requirement - initially (and I'm talking 1890's here) a "Light Car" was anything under 10 tons, and a 'Truck' or 'Traction Engine' was over that - which is what led to the naming of the "Light Car Club" in the UK during the same period. The very first 'Road Trains' were Traction Engines pulling several carriages, each the size of a small bus. Here in Oz, you need a "Truck License" for anything over about 6 tons GVM now. You're right on the El Camino, it's a Ute, because it was based off a passenger car platform, same as the four I mentioned before. Subaru Brumby falls in to the same class, but a Chevy LUV doesn't, even though it's a Mazda, they were made as small commercial vehicles.
Holy shit, I guess American auto makers have been falsely advertising trucks this entire time😂 We need you in Detroit immediately to spread the word🤣🤣🤣
What transmission(4L60?) and mods to it were you running.. And cool that only 549hp would run 210mph.But your 1800 hp firebird would only run about 287mph...Must be aerodynamics limitations..
