90CamaroTBI

Guys, I was just wondering what one car length difference equals to in quarter mile times? So basically if you win or lose by one car length, how much faster or slower are you in the 1/4? Thanks guys.

This ad is not displayed to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on ThirdGen!

urbanhunter44

depends on what speeds you're trapping at. In mid 12-mid 13 second cars it's about a tenth, maybe two.

90CamaroTBI

probably between two cars that run low 15's to high 14's.

urbanhunter44

I'd have to say 2 tenths.

DrivinVA305

If your doing 100 miles per hour than 100/60 would be 1.6666 miles per minute. Dividing that again by 60 would be .027777 miles per second. 1 mile is equal to 5280 feet, soooo .027777 * 5280 would be 146.6666 feet per second. Now say you have about a 20 foot lead, 20/146.6666 = .13636 second lead.

So if you want to know your lead in seconds and you know your speed and your distance lead than just follow this formula:

speed/60 = x
x/60 = y
y*5280 = z
y/z = how much you lead in seconds

I just thought this up real fast so it might be wrong but it seems sound to me.

superGMman

Like me I doubt anyone will really have the patience to even consider thinking about what you just said.

Asdfga3

*does math*

Looks good, except for the last line. Should be "lead in feet/z" not "y/z"

Using the numbers from your example in the equation you wrote out, it would be miles per second / feet per second which would make no sense at all.

Edit: Far warning, I suck at math, so I don't guarantee anything I wrote there.

superGMman

DrivinVA305

Yeah your right, good catch. Maybe this is better? I dunno I'm pretty much just making it up as I go. Not really anything better to do at the moment.

speed/60 = x (miles per minute)
x/60 = y (miles per second)
y*5280 = z (feet per second)
lead in feet/z = your lead in seconds

ShiftyCapone

I did and it is a simple way to determine where you are in relation to your opponent. This simple math is assuming you are at constant velocity with no time variable at some point X on the track.

superGMman

That did kinda sound dickish


I hate math.

phoenix305

when did they start using letters? lol j/k

Asdfga3

Somewhere after we all stopped paying attention in class.

The damndest thing is that I understand math, but I despise it. Too confusing.

slohand

Shifty is right.

i wondered the same thing and sat down and did the math and after i figured it out..........i realized it was wrong.

did the other car get a jump and pull away evenly? did the lead stay static? is the other car catching up?

you may get an idea but there are more variables than i can figure out how to plug in.

DrivinVA305

The formula is right for a snapshot in time. It's just a rough estimate to get you in the ball park when you talk about quarter mile times. It also gets more accurate if you have two cars that run about the same times. For example, if I were to race a top fuel dragster in my L03 I would have to get about an 11 sec head start for it to be close. If by some chance he finishes the 1/4 mile one car length behind me, then there is no way that dragster is going to cover a car length in .1 sec when he's doing 300+mph. To make a better estimate you would have to know the distance between the two cars, both of the cars' speed, and the acceleration of both the cars. This still would not be exact because the cars acceleration is not going to be a constant rate of change due to any number of factors. At the end of the track one car could be pulling harder than the other, the wind might change, or someone might hit a moose. Anything could happen. It was just a formula off the top of my head to try to ballpark an answer to 90CamaroTBI's question.

slohand

Drivin,

i just want to say i meant no disrespect. just to point out some of the variables in the event.

funny thing is i used nearly the same "method" you did trying to get the number only to realize it didn't work.

just beat the other guy and then you don't have to worry about it.

DrivinVA305

Oh no, I didn't take any offense to what you said, sorry if it sounded like it. I completly agree with everything you guys said. I just wanted to clear up and explain why what I posted earlier was completley useless.

slohand

B]why what i posted earlier was completley useless[/b]

LMAO!! well, i wouldn't say that......look at all the posts that resulted from it.

DrivinVA305

oh yea that's right. I think I doubled my posts just on this one thread, that's not saying much but still...

slohand

sorry, i'm still chuckling over that.

so, since we are off subject, when you gonna dump that 305 and put a 350 in that rs?

DrivinVA305

As soon as I can get the money together for a ZZ4 and T56. Right now i'm just doing suspension and stuff that can work with a 350 like headers, subframe connections, and a 3.73 posi rear. I'm just undecided with what kind of injection system to go with.

slohand

O>I>C.

money, where is Home Boyz Shopping Net Work when you need them.

an artilce i tried to get posted, you may be interested in, is on
gmhightechperformance.com(same folks have super chevy)

find the one where they rebuilt a 350 and put a stealth ram on it.
i believe you can find it with a search under tpi or stealth ram. they used and 86 iroc.

got that bad boy doin 12.364 at 109.93 yeeeee haaaa!! not to shabby for a 3rd gen.

good luck with your car!!!

DrivinVA305

Sweet, I think that pretty much made up my mind. Seeing the HSR drop .7 off their ET is pretty promising . I'm just not sure if it'll work with my 8746 ecm. Oh well, guess I'll get to searching on the EFI board. Thanks!

slohand

glad you liked it. i have a couple of other things to do before i get the hsr.

kinda sux, thunder just had a 10% off sale. shame but the timing was off for me. got a super ram and some large tube runners to sell first. (kinda gettin to much stuff layin around!!)

let us know how it's going with your project from time to time!!!