|
Author
|
Topic: 60' times.
|
DeleteThisAccount
¯
Member # 94
|
posted
 
 
Question...
The last time I ran my cobra @ sac, w/ a set of borrowed nitto DR's, that were practically bald, except on the outsides, I was able to run a 1.82 while bogging the car.
I know I could have gotten a high 1.7x out of that car the way it was on treaded DR's.
Why the hell do people always run the SAME, if not worse, on ET streets? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
And don't say HP, because there are cars w/ WAY More HP than my car running these times.
-Mike
Posts: 1263 | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
hidnn.o.s.
¯
Member # 1219
|
posted
I ran 1.77 in my 93 Cobra with nothing but nos and streets?
--------------------
R.I.P. Willie G. You are missed on this forum
Posts: 15950 | Registered: Apr 2002
| :
|
|
I like to race
¯
Member # 1484
|
posted
Yeah I know what you mean. I 60' a 1.90 with T/A radials and a one legger, it's kind of mind boggling that someone would only 60' a 1.8 with slicks.
Basically the reason is... horsepower. Slicks are overkill for anything with less than 400 hp. Drag Radials should be good enough.
Posts: 87 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Jul 2002
| :
|
|
Spellbound
¯
Member # 1553
|
posted
My bfg dr's hooked better when the tread was just worn down enuff to look like a slick.
--------------------
Duane
2K1 WS6
2K2 ZO6
Posts: 36 | From: Diamond Springs | Registered: Jul 2002
| :
|
|
Yellow94GT
Mr. 60 FT
Member # 431
|
posted
"I Like to Race" is on the right track here. The reason that low horse power cars will run 1.8 short times with DR's and only slightly improve with slicks is the wheel spin they are losing.
The lower HP cars need that little bit of tire spin to get them going, hence that good 60ft. Most of the time when someone puts slicks on a car like that for the first time they don't realize that the car is going to dead hook and bog. The only way to qure the bog is with RPM in there case and most peopole aren't will to launch over 4k to help the situation. ![[patriot]](graemlins/patriot.gif)
P.S. Horse Power does wonders for 60fts!
--------------------
AED
1994 GT Bucket that will likely never run
1999 SLOLEEN Twin Turbo Coyote
2008 F250 580 RWHP 1129 RWTQ
Posts: 5990 | From: Cameron Park, Ca | Registered: Sep 2001
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
weren't you ripping off 1.9/2.0 60's on a "slipping clutch" your last several times out?
what would a disinterested 3rd party think if they saw that?
and I don't think 400 hp is a "requirement" for slicks. There are countless stock motored 5.0s running 1.6x 60's with slicks.
I ran 1.72 60's on ET Streets with a stock motor, hardly spectacular, but decent for a 3.73 gear.
Actually, I think there are guys 60' in the high 1.5x with little more than a totally stock motor.
[ July 30, 2002, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: shade-tree ]
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
hidnn.o.s.
¯
Member # 1219
|
posted
Mine was with stock 308 gears. Drag radials NEVER would have hooked with the bottle from the line.
--------------------
R.I.P. Willie G. You are missed on this forum
Posts: 15950 | Registered: Apr 2002
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
I little N20 should cure that bog problem.
When you shock your tires less, sure you are more likely to bog, but you could just launch higher. Anyways I don't see why 3.08s + N20 wouldn't hook with drag radials if 4.10s and a stock motor with drag radials will. It's probably in the same ballpark as far as rwtq depending on launch rpm.
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
.
[ July 30, 2002, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: shade-tree ]
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
hidnn.o.s.
¯
Member # 1219
|
posted
whole nother league.... 308's with a 175 shot on a 93 cobra.... 410's on a stock motor wouldn't equal the same torque curve at all.
--------------------
R.I.P. Willie G. You are missed on this forum
Posts: 15950 | Registered: Apr 2002
| :
|
|
DeleteThisAccount
¯
Member # 94
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by shade-tree:
weren't you ripping off 1.9/2.0 60's on a "slipping clutch" your last several times out?
what would a disinterested 3rd party think if they saw that?
Who was that aimed towards? Me or Drew? ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Anyways, I have run in the 1.9x on street tires as well, and seen a couple guys, luke87gt being one, even run in the 1.8x on street tires.
I just wonder why people aren't running 1.5 or 1.6 all day long on ET's. Even when I see people launching from the moon, I don't see them pulling those times. I just wonder, that's all.
-Mike
Posts: 1263 | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
I'm just remembering some post from like a year ago where you went to the track, couldn't get out of the 13's, and were blaming it on the clutch or whatnot ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
lol, good memory ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) ![[worship]](graemlins/worship.gif)
--------------------
1984 Ford Tempo AOD--- RIP
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
I like to race
¯
Member # 1484
|
posted
Shade Tree, you 60ed a 1.72 with slicks, what did you 60 with DR?
Also I highly doubt stock motors 60' 1.5x, my buddy's 2800 lb nova with 550 hp, 4200 stall and trans brake pulls the wheels and only 60 foots a 1.55 with NO TIRE SPIN. He also has 4.33s and only a 26" tall quick time pro.
60' times are just like ETs, it's easy to go from 13s to 12s, not very hard to go from 12s to 11s, kinda hard to go from 11s to 10s, very hard to go from 10s to 9s and you get the idea. Same thing with 60' times, 2.0 to a 1.9 is EASY, 1.9-1.8 10 times harder, 1.8-1.7 100 times harder, 1.7-1.6 1000 times harder. It's exponential, the lower you go, the harder it is to cut more time off.
Why haven't you ever 60' a 1.5x? Put on some DOT slicks and report back.
Posts: 87 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Jul 2002
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
I've never run a true slick. I'm just a recreational dragger. couple weeks ago ended up with some mid 1.6s on basically stock-motor type power (I think I was running on 7 or worse). I've never run a drag radial either, *shrug*.
I've never seen it myself (stock motor 1.5x 60'), but the recipe is basically 4.30 gears and 28" slicks and the standard bolt-ons. Ask around on a larger message board like the corral--- or on the NMRA factory stock message board. Anyone competitive is down towards 1.5x 60's.
Here's a 1.63 60' which misses the cutoff by a shade over 3 hundredths of a second, stock motor, standard bolt-ons, 28x9 slick and 4.30s
couple weeks back I ran a 1.65 60' without even trying with trap speeds awfully low indicating mediocre power (102 mph!) with only a 3.73 gear and a launch that was just trying to re-learn how to drive. As to why I haven't gotten a 1.5x, think stock axles . One of these days I'll throw in some real parts back there and I bet it will happen.
I wouldn't judge one person's success against all others, different combos, different weight, different weight bias, etc. A transbraked car has virtually nothing in common with a 5-speed at the line. I agree though, that type of car can give an insane launch, but at the 200-300 rwhp level it probably gives up a lot of ET.
[ July 30, 2002, 03:23 PM: Message edited by: shade-tree ]
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
hidnn.o.s.
¯
Member # 1219
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by shade-tree:
I'm just remembering some post from like a year ago where you went to the track, couldn't get out of the 13's, and were blaming it on the clutch or whatnot
lol, good memory
You are reffering to 93snake right?
--------------------
R.I.P. Willie G. You are missed on this forum
Posts: 15950 | Registered: Apr 2002
| :
|
|
DeleteThisAccount
¯
Member # 94
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by hidnn.o.s.:
quote:
Originally posted by shade-tree:
I'm just remembering some post from like a year ago where you went to the track, couldn't get out of the 13's, and were blaming it on the clutch or whatnot
lol, good memory
You are reffering to 93snake right?
Yeah...375rwhp, stock clutch, 123k miles. Bad combo.
The clutch wouldn't hold to over 5k rpms, so my times were around 13.0x @ 109 or so. Short shifting every gear.
Oh well.
-Mike
Posts: 1263 | Registered: Dec 2000
| :
|
|
hidnn.o.s.
¯
Member # 1219
|
posted
lol, gotcha
--------------------
R.I.P. Willie G. You are missed on this forum
Posts: 15950 | Registered: Apr 2002
| :
|
|
Team SOLO
Chevy Powered Stang
Member # 722
|
posted
I used to have just a boatload of bolt-ons on my 91 GT and ran a 1.72 sixty foot with bone stock uppers n lowers with a 26 inch tall slick, car weighed 2600 lbs, stick with stock cluth...that day ran a best of 12.29 @ 110
eventually got factory five uppers n lowers, lakewood traction bars and a 28 inch tall slick, 300 rwhp on the dyno on motor, a ten point cage and lightened it up to 2700lbs, with a stick got a 1.58 sixty foot. When I went to C4 with a 4000 stall, matched the 1.58 but was consistent 1.59 1.60 running 12.0 ET's at 112mph on motor.
when i slapped a 175 dry shot (jetting), wasn't a true 175 shot because I only went from a 112 mph to a 123, was able to get the car to do a best of a 1.46 sixty on my 10.85 pass. Was always 1.47-1.49 sixty on the jug...wired to the transbrake.
Greg
[ July 30, 2002, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: Team SOLO ]
--------------------
'88 Mustang Coupe: 8.02 @ 170
Posts: 3887 | From: Santa Clara | Registered: Jan 2002
| :
|
|
I like to race
¯
Member # 1484
|
posted
quote:
A transbraked car has virtually nothing in common with a 5-speed at the line
WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?????????????????????????
How is leaving on the transbrake any different than dumping the clutch????????????????????????????????????????????
I've never been so confused in my LIFE.
Posts: 87 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Jul 2002
| :
|
|
2000BlackGT
Loyalty
Member # 283
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by shade-tree:
I'm just remembering some post from like a year ago where you went to the track, couldn't get out of the 13's, and were blaming it on the clutch or whatnot
lol, good memory
quote:
Originally posted by Blown93Snake:
I hate cars. Although, I suppose 13.2 @ 111 in 100 degree weather and not being able to get above 5K rpms isn't bad... ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Dammit.
Posts: 2833 | From: Chico, CA | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by I like to race:
WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?????????????????????????
How is leaving on the transbrake any different than dumping the clutch????????????????????????????????????????????
I've never been so confused in my LIFE.
ok man, whatever. you disagree that's fine.
I've launched tranbraked cars a few times and 5-speeds maybe 100 times. The style of getting the 'hook' down is completely different.
Disagreeing is perfectly ok with me, just don't be a dick about it.
--------------------
1984 Ford Tempo AOD--- RIP
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
sfGi8nt
¯
Member # 1068
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by shade-tree:
Disagreeing is perfectly ok with me, just don't be a dick about it.
Well its kind of hard for this guy to do that.
His name is Dick Dickerson ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
--------------------
Silver 97 M6 Z28
Hurst Shifter-Flowmaster-3.42's-Cutout-!CAGS-K&N FIPK-TB Airfoil-TB Bypass-160 Stat-Manual Fan Switch-
271rwhp & 304rwtq
13.64 @ 102.26 w/ 2.09 60'
Black & Orange 97 A4 Z28
FOR SALE!!!!
Posts: 479 | From: Bay Area | Registered: Mar 2002
| :
|
|
I like to race
¯
Member # 1484
|
posted
You still didn't alleviate any confusion, maybe if you could explain these differences in "getting the hook down" then I might go along with what you're trying to say.
Tone, it's not my fault, blame my parents.
To everyone else in the world, I'm still looking for a 1.5x bone stock motor 60' time slip. That does not include professional racers in the NMRA running 11s in factory stock. The question was why can't EVERYONE get super low 60's with slicks.
[ July 31, 2002, 02:29 AM: Message edited by: I like to race ]
Posts: 87 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Jul 2002
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
Looks like you're asking about two seperate things.
#1 Why do newbie racers "suck"
and
#2 Why don't experienced racers "suck"
ask around about Gorobgo for your 1.5x timeslip. He's local.
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
JoeT
¯
Member # 298
|
posted
Oh I think I get it now. The point of contention I believe involves the "third" pedal, and I'm not talking about a "dead" pedal.
Posts: 6785 | From: San Jose | Registered: Jun 2001
| :
|
|
Email this post to someone!
Printer friendly view of this Ford topic
