Hot Rod Forum banner
61 - 80 of 200 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #61 ·
I don't disagree with any of the last few posts. Getting of the line and reaction time plays a large part in this equation, the G-Tech removes this very important aspect. Taking a car like mine to 120 mph is no big deal, but keeping your foot in it for the entire 1/4 with a trap speed of around 160 mph is a big deal and true, I haven't done that. I don't have the option of running at the strip because I'm not going to add all the stuff for the 8.99~9.99 bracket.

Besides, the most important point is I've never said I've run a 9.7 at the strip, but have always qualified that my consistent 9.7 times were produced on the G-Tech. I did run a 10.8 at the strip (with 140 less hp) and was told I wouldn't be allowed to run again until my ride passed tech inspection for that time bracket. With the new engine the safety equipment would be much more than the old engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
811 Posts
I covered that here http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/stick-shift-drag-racing-347257-3.html post #43

Most folks accept the 1/4 times that the car magazines post, and they use a G-Tech to generate these times, same as me.

I have two links to videos on that thread. One was shot doing a 2 second uphill romp from 40 mph to 80 mph with the 427. The other was for comparison with the 383 which produced 206 hp less. It was throttle down for much longer than 2 seconds on a flat highway and netted 110 mph. Just use the video display clock to determine the duration of time vs speed. If you are unable to extrapolate the acceleration potential just from watching and comparing those two videos, there isn't anymore I can do for you. Except it or not, doesn't matter to me, but I've done many runs with the G-Tech and with the 427 get a consistent 9.7, with the first engine, the 355, a 10.8 confirmed on the track and with the 383 an 11.3.

I just re-watched the video with the low hp 383, took 6 seconds to go from 58 mph to 112 mph. I can tell you firsthand there is a world of difference between that engine and my current engine, a 206 hp increase in a 1790 lb car is a big difference.

Just plug my hp and weight (526 @ flywheel, 1790 lbs) into a 1/4 mile calculator 1/4 Mile ET Calculator
And you're damn sure not "Wild Willie Borsch" or Leon Fitzgerald for that matter.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,051 Posts
Just plug my hp and weight (526 @ flywheel, 1790 lbs) into a 1/4 mile calculator 1/4 Mile ET Calculator
The calculator will get you close IF everything does what it SHOULD DO...(off the line)

What happens off the line will either make your time or break your time...NOT HOW HARD SHE PULL'S...;)
 

·
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
Joined
·
16,429 Posts
There is no guessing when you stop to pick up your slip.... I will say it AGAIN...
you have the motor...
you also have the trans.....
But the car is NOT set up to run in the 9's...Sorry and all the punching in the #'s don't mean **** without passing through the lights....


I'm not saying the G-TEC or what ever it is, Is wrong,,, I'm saying the G-TEC does NOT know what YOUR car will do OFF THE LINE.....dead start..

I have seen it time and time again at the track, People get there hearth's broken ..

WHEN THEY PICK UP THE TRUTH (THE SLIP)... :D

Is your car fast ???? I know it is... But leaving off the line FROM A DEAD STOP is a whole different world...;)

LOL, the guy at the booth handing them out must see some amazing reactions all day long. The guy who finally broke a number he had been trying to rejoicing and the guy who can't believe he can't do it, over and over, the reactions must be hilarious! I know I would think I made some awesome run only to be disappointed when I read that time slip.

And it would be so deceiving by things like the car you are racing. You move past that car and the illusion is created that you are going faster than you really are because you THINK that car is going a faster than it is.

The first 60 feet are HUGE, which is why in later years they added the "60 ft time" to the slip. It REALLY helped seeing that and comparing with your friends runs.

Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEW INTERIORS

·
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
Joined
·
16,429 Posts
I don't disagree with any of the last few posts. Getting of the line and reaction time plays a large part in this equation, the G-Tech removes this very important aspect. Taking a car like mine to 120 mph is no big deal, but keeping your foot in it for the entire 1/4 with a trap speed of around 160 mph is a big deal and true, I haven't done that. I don't have the option of running at the strip because I'm not going to add all the stuff for the 8.99~9.99 bracket.

Besides, the most important point is I've never said I've run a 9.7 at the strip, but have always qualified that my consistent 9.7 times were produced on the G-Tech. I did run a 10.8 at the strip (with 140 less hp) and was told I wouldn't be allowed to run again until my ride passed tech inspection for that time bracket. With the new engine the safety equipment would be much more than the old engine.

Exactly, and that 140 more hp may not mean much. Because that hp is stuck in that motor, getting it to do something where the tire meets the track is another story! Running 10.80 is CRAZY impressive, but when you start going that fast, every 10th is HUGE, dropping a whole second, that is asking an awful lot! Guys kill for a second like that building motor after motor and changing tires and gears...etc.

Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEW INTERIORS

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,403 Posts
u might make one pass

at the local strip in maryland i could have made a pass, but i feel the time slip would have waved me for a second one without the safety stuff.. then again maybe i could have made 10 passes as long as i stayed out of the 12 sec bracket. attended alot of shows and the best part was putting kids in the drivers seat so mom/dad could take a pic of them... now that was fun..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,051 Posts
I don't disagree with any of the last few posts. Getting of the line and reaction time plays a large part in this equation, the G-Tech removes this very important aspect. Taking a car like mine to 120 mph is no big deal, but keeping your foot in it for the entire 1/4 with a trap speed of around 160 mph is a big deal and true, I haven't done that. I don't have the option of running at the strip because I'm not going to add all the stuff for the 8.99~9.99 bracket.

Besides, the most important point is I've never said I've run a 9.7 at the strip,


THANK YOU....:thumbup:

This has to be the best post I ever seen you make here...;)

Like I said... Your car is fast, I'm not saying it isn't..... But saying a car is a 9 second without passing through the lights is wrong.... By all means.. I'm Not putting your car down,,, And I'm not as old as most here... But I have been around the track long enough to know what it takes... And Have also been down that same track a few times...
 

·
Hotrodders.com Moderator
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
I can feel the resistance of the flat wind shield at 70. Cant imagine what it would be like at 100, I am sure the car would be very difficult to hold on to. I do break a lot of hearts off the line though :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,051 Posts
People put BIG money into the motor to go fast to later find out they lack in the right suspension...:D
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #70 ·
Again, I agree with the above posts. I also agree with NorthstarT (haven't got to say that lately) when he says "Every guy should own a T bucket at least once in his life, for no other reason than they are FUN."

And this is why. If you have a bucket that the previous owner didn't goober the engine like what this thread was all about, and it produces an honest 400 hp, you will accelerate at the same rate as say a '68 mid size car like a Fairlane running 800 hp.
 

·
Brian Martin,Freelance adviser
Joined
·
16,429 Posts
Again, I agree with the above posts. I also agree with NorthstarT (haven't got to say that lately) when he says "Every guy should own a T bucket at least once in his life, for no other reason than they are FUN."

And this is why. If you have a bucket that the previous owner didn't goober the engine like what this thread was all about, and it produces an honest 400 hp, you will accelerate at the same rate as say a '68 mid size car like a Fairlane running 800 hp.
This is true, and who says they don't do that once in a while?

Brian
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,051 Posts
Again, I agree with the above posts. I also agree with NorthstarT (haven't got to say that lately) when he says "Every guy should own a T bucket at least once in his life, for no other reason than they are FUN."

And this is why. If you have a bucket that the previous owner didn't goober the engine like what this thread was all about, and it produces an honest 400 hp, you will accelerate at the same rate as say a '68 mid size car like a Fairlane running 800 hp.
It doesn't take 400 HP to do that in a t-bucket...Sorry..:nono:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #75 · (Edited)
It doesn't take 400 HP to do that in a t-bucket...Sorry..:nono:
Reread your high school physics. Force = Mass x Acceleration
Acceleration = Distance / Time

If force (hp) is doubled and Mass (weight) is doubled, acceleration remains the same.

In my example I was pitting a 2000 lb T against a 4000 lb car.

In my case, my acceleration would match a 3580 lb car that was running 1,052 hp. My engine is more street friendly @ 526 hp than an engine built to produce 1,052 hp. And that is why I like my T, it doesn't take a snarling, temperamental, peaky engine to make it go like stink. You all heard the idle and the rpm range on that freeway merge video, a rather mellow sounding engine don't you agree?
 

·
Hot Rods are Built, not Bought
Joined
·
829 Posts
I hate to admit it but my rant applies to a lot of T owners. There is no other automotive group that I know of that builds an engine to look fast and not be fast. ...
When I quote on this forum my 1/4 times, it is met from certain members with a resounding "BS"...
Besides, the most important point is I've never said I've run a 9.7 at the strip, but have always qualified that my consistent 9.7 times were produced on the G-Tech.
And that is why for generating my 1/4 mile times using the G-Tech, it is a 2~4 second romp in 2nd gear to peak hp rpm (as the G-Tech manual suggests). If the road surface offers good bite, then the 9.7's are very repeatable.
Can you grasp the irony here?
You disparage the majority of T owners, saying their cars aren’t “fast”, then use a calculator to determine a theoretical ¼ mile time of your car, that is based on a 2-4 second romp?
Back it up with some actual time slips. Do you really think your car has the aero package needed to be stable enough to run the top end speed for the 9.7 second pass?

Most folks accept the 1/4 times that the car magazines post, and they use a G-Tech to generate these times, same as me.
If you are unable to extrapolate the acceleration potential just from watching and comparing those two videos, there isn't anymore I can do for you.
I don’t think you speak for “most folks” but I do know one thing, your words here indicate you are an arrogant snob.

When it comes to Hot Rods, you don’t “extrapolate” when talking about performance. Again, ya gotta prove it, especially if your going to disparage other folks for not meeting your "lofty" standards.

Curious, where were you driving when you took the over 100 mph photo?

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,051 Posts
Reread your high school physics. Force = Mass x Acceleration
Acceleration = Distance / Time

If force (hp) is doubled and Mass (weight) is doubled, acceleration remains the same.

In my example I was pitting a 2000 lb T against a 4000 lb car.

In my case, my acceleration would match a 3580 lb car that was running 1,052 hp. My engine is more street friendly @ 526 hp than an engine built to produce 1,052 hp. And that is why I like my T, it doesn't take a snarling, temperamental, peaky engine to make it go like stink. You all heard the idle and the rpm range on that freeway merge video, a rather mellow sounding engine don't you agree?
LOL....:D:rolleyes:

You can put a 1000 hp in a go kart, But if you can't leave worth a dam you don't have **** !!!!

Just when I talk good about you,,, You take a nose dive..:rolleyes:


Stay out the book's, and off the calculator ,, It is making people laugh at you...for god sake :nono:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #78 ·
Lakeroadster,

Didn't I say I've never gone to what the trap speed of a 9.7 pass would be? That would be around 160 mph. I can say from experience at 120 mph all is fine and stable but admit I don't want to kill myself finding that I didn't have enough downforce to keep it planted at 160.

As to extrapolation, those videos should tell a knowledgeable gearhead the capabilities of my ride, just use the video run clock to tick off the seconds.

But back to playing with numbers that Randy doesn't seem to remember his high school physics, think mass, think force and know that acceleration is simply distance/time. Play with these numbers, my last ship that I served on was less displacement (mass) at 32,000 tons than most the others and had 30,000 hp. Pretty slow acceleration. The fastest ship I served on had 65,000 hp but would take one hour to go from "full ahead" (14 kt) to my final engine order of "full ahead sea speed" at 19 kt.

Maybe it is my old work environment of extremely slow acceleration that has me embracing the performance of my T.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,051 Posts
All the force in the world WON'T do you any good IF You can't put it to the ground...FROM A DEAD STOP...:rolleyes::drunk:

Have fun... I forgot I have CARS to build...:drunk:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #80 ·
LOL....:D:rolleyes:

You can put a 1000 hp in a go kart, But if you can't leave worth a dam you don't have **** !!!!

Just when I talk good about you,,, You take a nose dive..:rolleyes:


Stay out the book's, and off the calculator ,, It is making people laugh at you...for god sake :nono:
Lets get this straight. If traction and launch isn't an issue, and if one car has 50 hp and weighs 2000 lbs and the other has 100 hp and weighs 4000 lbs so it isn't an issue, do you agree their respective acceleration would be the same?

In my case if I'm on a good road surface with minimum crown, my traction is good for all of 2nd gear, and needless to say all the higher gears too.
 
61 - 80 of 200 Posts
Top