Just curious since I had my wedding to be at... believe me I was with you guys in Spirit

 

Me thinks me hears the faint sounds of whips... mwa ha ha ha ha...

Just kidding...

best times in the sig now... mind you these are day/humid times, I wonder what night/dry runs would do for us...

On another note, I think the ignition upgrade/tune up did its job. As calculated it takes about 200 Engine HP to accelerate to around 90 mph for a 3600 lb car.

Given the weight of my car is 3390 give or take 50 lbs, and my slim 230 lb lmao, its 3600 lbs.

With the standard drivetrain loss I should be at 175 RWHP which would be right on track to getting close to that 30 hp gain I was aiming for since last dyno day. Let's see how the next dyno day turns out. I was on track to making the flywheel numbers my rw numbers so it'd be interesting to see if I acheived my goal.

 

hahahah........

well i could only manage a 15.60 @ 90.59 mph........well off my best of 15.32. but it was a fun afternoon. plus i left my numbers on the car from last friday and got in free cause they thought i had been in earlier in the day. now i dont feel so bad about taking part of the afternoon off work. there were some very nice cars there.

 

rt .897
60 ft 2.144
330ft 6.155
1/8 9.493
1/8 73.62mph
1/4 14.735
1/4 95.20mph

 

My timeslip was convieniently destroyed at the bar last night... but I hit a 14.6x. I got alot more in it, but I need some traction. Trigger can prolly get you the rest of the numbers if you need them .

 

I've got 14 timeslips, pick one lmao...

 

.............me..........................................jonny iroc

rt.........0.897......................................0.69
60 ft....2.144......................................2.498
330ft...6.155......................................6.608
1/8......9.493......................................9.764
1/8......73.62mph...............................79.10mph
1/4......14.735....................................14.638
1/4......95.20mph................................99.75mph

 

Trigger, have you had any PROM work done yet?

 

Make sure you come out September 21!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I ran 15.6 on average through 12 runs.

My best time was 15.551.

My best mph was 90.

That's with a stock 305 TPI engine. Check my sig for mods.

 

no. why?

got some ideas on how to make me faster?

i started shopping for a set of headers today

 

headers and a chip will do amazing things to your car. My car was choking on the big end just like yours before I got my headers.

What makes/brands are you considering at this point?


Acceld Z: If a car can hit 100MPH in the 1/4 mile, what ET should it be capable of with good traction? Carm was telling me about some formula to figure it out, but I lost it.

 

all of them! i will research this to death and then choose what i will buy

you got the hedmans right? what did you use for a y pipe?


Acceld Z any ideas?

 

I got the hedmans with the hedman Y-pipe. They are 1 5/8" primaries, 3" collectors... but the Y-pipe is 2 1/2" (SLP Y is 2 1/4"). The only advantage I see to the Edlebrocks is the 3" Y, but if you are dumping like I recommend, it isn't necessary.

I've heard people say they have to drop the A-arm or something insane with the Edlebrock Y... I doubt this is true.

I also heard you have to lift the engine and all kinds of crazy stuff for Hedmans, but mine dropped straight in.

Here is a picture before I stuffed it all in:

 

Johnny...if you ran a 99mph trap, your good for a 14.0 easily.

You put some decent tires on there and i'm sure you'll have no probs.

You seem to have a slight mid-range lag.......do you have gears yet?

Awesome man! You are definetly gonna get your #'s this year.

 

How does that equation work?

 

My old 85 Z28 would turn 13.8-14.0's at 100mph with consistant 1.9 60 fts.

If you can get your 60s down to 2.0s you should see low 14's no problem.

 

I am on the other side of the country right now (Vancouver) so don't have my slips.

Going from memory -- my best time was 15.101 and I think it was 92.32mph. I thought it/I would be faster than that ? I was expecting high 14s. I know the car is off abit cause I farted around with the gap on my plugs (I think they are at 65 right now) but I don't see that accounting for 2/10s even with the Jacobs to make it better/worse.

I also had a tough time not breaking out (I know excuses, excuses) cause my clutch is acting up randomly. I was getting .8xx reaction and 2.4xx 60 foot. Just couldn't hook up it went sideways when I didn't expect it.

Does anyone know about 'corrected times' ? How do they work and if they apply ? I overheard some tbfm guys who said they were "correcting for 2-3/10s" due to the heat.

Slade -- with 3.42 gears and 3350lbs can you figure the estimated hp and/or torque for my run ? I'd like to compare the mathematical calc with the dyno day results.

AcceldZ, Daz -- I am planning on headers, a custom chip and 1.6 rrs and thats all for engine tuning. This is not going to get me into the low 14s can I do something with the suspension to help that 60 foot time ? I am wondering if I can shave something off that 2.4xx 60 foot time to get me to low-mid 14s ???

thx in advance,
RP.

 

The stock suspension was good enough to get 1.9s ~ 2.0s with the approx 275 crank hp my 85 Z28 was making. I had a set of SFC welded in and they dropped my 60ft times by a good .1, and I was able to get some high 1.8s with the car. I had an automatic, stock stall and posi rear w/4.10s with 265/50/16 BFG Radial TAs (not drag radials). Even with the open rear w/3.08s 2.0s weren't a problem.

The key is really in the launch. I know an auto is alot easier to get off the line than a stick car, but the theory is the same. Off the line, I'd brake torque the car to about 1800 rpms or so, then when the last yellow came on, I'd let off the brake and gradually (but quickly, just don't mash the pedal) get on the gas, as soon as the nose of the car came up, I'd have it to the floor. This usually netted the best 60ft for me. The key is to try and get the weight of the car transferred to the rear before really getting on the gas.

As far as mods go, I'd go with RLCA, then the anti-squat brackets, then a torque arm. SFCs and good tires will also help. If you have a suspect clutch, any increase in traction off the line will compound slipping issues.

Hope this helps!

 

Johnny i was just thinking today....what springs are in your distributor? Are you using a lighter combo or heavier? Seems your car is spinning but after it grips it bogs a bit down low?

Am i right? Just comparing your timeslip to Trigger's & thats what i can come up with.

 

Hey Carm.... I have one Yellow (Light) and one Silver (medium) in my Distributor right now. My damper is degreed, so I can see the mechanical advance all the way in by 2,000 RPM.

I think what you are seeing in the #s is me still spinning. I spin for EVER... but once I grab, I'm GONE.... ask trigger

My car doesn't squat at ALL on the launch (cut springs), so we are making relocation brackets this weekend. I've got BFG Comp T/A's... they are an A rated tire. I'm seriously looking for POSI... I thought I found a 9 bolt, but it fell through.

I WILL break into the 13s by the end of summer.


BTW: This is still on a non-ported LG4 intake & modified Q-jet.

 

Palric:

It takes 213 Engine HP to acheive 92.32 MPH in the 1/4 mile. This is an accurate calculation for sub 100 mph cars, after that it underestimates the hp...

Vehicle weight also includes driver, I don't know so I put in 150 lbs. For every 50 lbs add an extra 2 hp... roughly...

[ (0.00426 x 1/4 MPH ) ^ 3 ] x Vehicle Weight (lbs) = Flywheel HP

(0.00426 x 92.32) x (0.00426 x 92.32) x (0.00426 x 92.32) x 3500 lbs = 212.9 Flywheel HP

This does not reflect maximum Dyno HP but is not far off from it either. Traction is not taken into consideration for this equation. Nevertheless if you didn't max out your engine in 3rd by the end of the 1/4 mile, this number isn't even close to dyno numbers.

Provided you ended in a 1:1 ratio at the max rpm ie highest point in the hp curve in the quarter mile this may actually be closer to the max hp you'll see on the dyno.

For RWHP its

RWHP = Weight / [ ( ET / 5.825 ) ^ 3 ]

According to the equation you should have 200 rwhp. We'll see if the number is correct on the dyno.

You should do the calculation with the highest speed achieved in the 1/4 mile for accurate results. So basically what's your best speed in the 1/4 mile, and what's your best time? They don't have to be on the same slip.

Max torque I'm not sure of at the moment.. gotta check up on that...

Based off those equations I have 178 rwhp and 200 flywheel hp... its no wonder I ran stock tpi times...

 

Palric,

I would get tires first if you want instant results..At least drag radials..DOT slicks would be my choice..If you want to keep your tires I would go for LCARs,SFCs,LCAs..I have these three and it didnt help me one bit..I shouldve gotten the tires first...Then again our engine torque curves are probably different..Either way all those things should help..In my case my 60' got worse because of the tires(from 50 series 16" SZ50's to cheap 40 series 17" Kumhos)..Im more consistent now though...Its also worth mentioning that my best 60' times were when the swaybar were loosened...

Daz

 

No offense but your calculations means jack shyt..First of traction is a big part of the race..Second besides traction you need the proper gearing/shifts..to match those HP numbers...IMHO diddling with high school physics dont do much in the track...Run it,make adjustments run it again...You also didnt mention about peak horsepower vs. torque curve vs. peak torque vs. elevation vs. temprature etc etc..I guess my peeve was people being concerned about .5 - 5 horsepower when we need at least a hundred to two hundred just to compete..And then squeeze more out of it by tuning(the hard part)..

Daz

 

Geez Daz I said in there that traction isn't taken into account in the equation and I also said that we'll see on dyno day how close the numbers really are.

These aren't highschool physics calculations either!

I don't trust the rear wheel numbers given by the standard equation at all.

Traction plays a big part in the rear wheel numbers. I imagine the only way for this equation to be correct is if there was 100% traction for the whole 1/4 mile.

IMHO, dyno numbers are a good guage of power, but track times reflect the whole car.

These are all estimated numbers remember that geez... he wanted a rough idea of what his track times reflect on power, I didn't say that these numbers are absolute.. lighten up...

You also can't determine peak torque from these equations as I recall... there's too many unknowns... the only way for us to figure peak hp is from having a peak that's also a flat line torque curve which would then give a constant acceleration and then based off weight and gear ratios would actuallyt give a good torque number.

 

I guess I was beating around the bush too much..

If you dont know the torque curve then you wouldnt know how it will run..Your equation assumes that power and acceleration are directly proportional so values will be linear..But in reality some combination are flat and some are pointed like a pyramid..Thats why torque curve/horsepower AVERAGE..is more important than peak numbers..And what if the peak arrives at 2K RPM and dies at 4K RPM what do you think the result will be??Even getting dyno numbers..IMO power numbers mean nothing if you dont get results...

The 14 seconds/92mph guess is a rule of thumb
Daz

 

Well now that I have times and dyno numbers to reference...

here's the numbers you play around with the meaning...

check bottom of sig...

Between the dyno and the track run there is a tune up with wires, coil, cap, rotor and 4-6 degrees timing advance over 0 stock.

I know I have fairly decent 60 ft times 2.2-2.25 meaning traction was not as much of a factor as say on Palric's car.

Calculation says 200 HP and 178 RWHP, common sense and experience says otherwise...

Dyno said 150 RWHP prior to tune up...

My estimation is next dyno will say 160 RWHP +- 5 HP... Last dyno day I guessed based off calculations that I had 145 RWHP +-5 HP and I got 150 RWHP on the dyno... My calculations were not that far off before.. let's see if I'm on again...

 

First......get a chip. The MAF system will learn the new engine but only to a certain extent. Second......get the headers. If you can afford it, get the SLPs. If not, get the Hookers with the y-pipe. Third......get a good torque converter.

I'm not a good example. My car runs like *** and it won't do much more than spin it's tires.

If I make an event this year you can make a few runs using my chip if you'd like. It was burned for an engine combo almost identical to yours (355, 10.5:1, 210/220 cam, SLP runners). Hell, if you can find someone to copy it, you can have your own.

 

thank you for your generous offer witht the chip.

i am to to sure about buying SPL. I keep asking myself if the little extra gains is worth the BIG extra price. ($ per HP they just does not make sense) the ones that i was looking at were the edelbrock. how do they rate agianst the hooker?

as for the TC i will just keep it for now. this winter should see a T-56 going in and the 700r4 going out

 

I owned a set of the Edelbrocks briefly. I took them out of the box, then i put them back in the box and sold them. If given the choice, i'd get the Hookers.

Heheh, i'm planning a swap this winter as well. I'm gonna swap cars around my engine

 

5 hp? Are you serious??You could gain or lose 20 horspower in just a change in humidity/temperature..It also depends on what kind of gas went in..yup theyre not all the same even if they were taken from the same place with the same gas type..Common sense say that with all the variables that are out of control,You will never get the correct horspepower if you guessing between the plus or minus 5 horsepower..mod1+mod2+tuneup doesnt equate to 10+10+5 horsepower..

Daz

 

Calculations only tell you so much... but some of it just comes down to plain feeling...

I dunno how to explain it really. I am not your typical person that just goes mod 1 = 5 hp mod 2 = 5 hp so I get 10 more hp...

I go more out of feeling when I drive and push the car to its limits. Its an odd sense you get after you've done a good 150000 kms in a car as its driver.

I know full well humidity, traction, fuel type mixture hell different fill ups give different numbers... what I can tell you is if a fuel mixture is not up to par, I get the feeling of roughly how much hp is sapped from me.

It's like having a set of 1000 variables running thru my head and starting off a base of what the engine is from factory I kinda add/subtract given numbers vs felt numbers.

If and when I do a real calculation be assured this is no simple 1+1=2... I come from an engineering background where numbers are analyzed crunched tossed and mixed until they are as close to what the real numbers actually are... Anything that can be quantified can be put into equation. The complexity of the equation determines its accuracy. Anything you see me post is just the quickie 1 min equations I can do almost instantanously with a pen paper calculator on hand...

That's why when I guessed my hp a month ago, I was sure about that number down to posting a standard deviation. I've worked on this car from top to bottom and gotten into each and every crack. I know its strengths, its weaknesses and its faults. Some of them on a technical level.. some of it purely by feeling.

Rest assured when I do get around to building it to a sub 15 sec/30 mpg car, it WILL be...

Anyone else got this kind of car relationship or am I nuts?

 

were you agreeing with me??lol

So you know that your HYPOTHESIS is faulty since you only covered less than half of the variables for determining your"calculated horsepower"..Why make pointless assumptions??Getting 5 horsepower from a tune-up??riiiiight...Either way gaining 5 CALCULATED horsepower shouldnt be glorified IMO.Thats a ***** trait..BTW 15 sec/30mpg is nothing remotely close to being special..IMO set your goal a little more worthwhile like high 12's at 25mpg..Half of new cars on the road can probably do 15 sec/30..



Daz

 

We're talking from a TBI remember? Stock 16-17's??? These things are the hated despised little bitches of most thirdgen owners... That's why the littleest things give these engines a significant boost... they start with the least of everything... so they gain the most from mods than any other engine...

When I first saw this thing my thoughts on it were "the only thing this shares in common is the camaro name and the fact its a v-8, other than that its a complete pos"...

My dad said give it a chance, his point was remember all my other f-body cars? Then I figured there must be something different about this car than any of the others because the others don't exist anymore in the remote sense of the word car...