Quote:

I suggest your reread the initial unedited OP, it only mentioned acceleration and heavy braking, both normally found in the here on moparts in the very prominent 1/4 mile crowd. Of course the OP might have inadvertently left out the INO very important element of cornering, but I am not not clairvoyant enough to make that conclusion, hence the simple, direct, and in your opinion "snarky", question. The post IMO started out somewhat incomplete and without a great deal of thought, and deserved the same effort in response. The post did of course evolve, after prodding by others.



Some members can see that the sloshing of fuel can be both fore-and-aft and side-to-side without being clairvoyant.

Forcing a poster to clarify before deigning to answer the core question is an example of the "lack of inclusiveness" complaint.

First, prove to me that this is a cornering question and not a 1/4 mile crowd question, then maybe I'll give you my full attention.

How does this NOT turn someone off?
Answering a question or politely seeking clarification is the way to increase hits, replies, and new threads in this forum. Ultimately, that is what will keep it around longer. There are worse things than answering what you perceive as a slightly off-topic question. Are you having trouble wading through the bazillion pages of threads on this forum, or otherwise being frustrated that your topic is getting pushed down too quickly?

I had briefly considered [and then decided against] starting a thread here on "my preferred alignment specs". I was thinking that a thread with that title in a slower-churning forum might provide some value to those who seem perennially to ask that question in Q&A. I envisioned also giving lip service to specs for those who DON'T seek to make their classic car into an auto-crosser (think negative camber), trying to make the thread a big tent. Then I decided not to, for some of the reasons already cited.

Down to just a blue car now.