I just spoke to the car owner/builder. He didn't really offer much other than he was a little disappointed with the numbers. He has since changed to a Tremac 5 sp and Ford 9 in rear. He said he would like to go back to the dyno and check again but probably wouldn't because it " really does not matter". I offered my opinion that the article did a disservice to him but he didn't have much to say. I have since noticed something in the article that pisses me off. For those who have the article, notice Fig,22. Dyno chart for hp that shows FI hp reaching 256 hp at 5,000 rpm, then starts to fall. The carb hp reaches 236 at 4,900 BUT notice the chart line for the carb engine ,,, it is on the way up but the the run was aborted at that point and hp reading at 5,000 is N/A. None of this crap makes any sense. The numbers should have sent red flags waving and bells going off to the owner , dyno shop and Hilborn Co. Chassis dynos are used to measure and tune much more powerful cars than this one. I can't imagine Hilborn not following up on this. Who would pay $8,000 to buy their product with this type of improvement? Drivability is one thing but one expects some significant performance gain also. It will be interesting to see if this is the end of the subject or will Super Chevy do a follow up.