Bolt on evo going 11.8 at 116 on pump
Sep 8, 2006 | 08:43 AM
#46
Originally Posted by saywhen
I don't understand simply because I track the car often enough to have seen 100's of evo's run the 1/4 and in so. cal and las vegas those numbers do not happen. Everytime I take my car to the track it is as fast or faster then any other evo with a stock turbo. Hell I don't care if you have every bolt on possible on pump gas I am not feeling 11.7. And warr even if you had dropped 300 pounds I don't see your 12.0 going to 11.7. The shift to 5th would have killed you. You have said before you car bounced off the rev limiter, and you were not on pump gas for your 12.0. With race gas or alky injection I would be wow, nice times but not on 93.
Sep 8, 2006 | 08:51 AM
#47
Account Disabled
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: NY
Originally Posted by Noogles
LOL, DA is Air Density Altitude, it's a measure of Barometric Pressure, Air Temp, Humidity and Elevation. Not the Track Layout.
Since E-town is below Sea level and has Amazing Conditions 99% of the time is generally has a negative DA.
A better explination would be is the elevation of track "x" is 1000ft above sea level and it's a 90 degree day with 60% humidty the DA could be 4000ft, or the equivalent of racing on a 4000' Track.
E-town is an amazing track, your lucky to have it near by.
Since E-town is below Sea level and has Amazing Conditions 99% of the time is generally has a negative DA.
A better explination would be is the elevation of track "x" is 1000ft above sea level and it's a 90 degree day with 60% humidty the DA could be 4000ft, or the equivalent of racing on a 4000' Track.
E-town is an amazing track, your lucky to have it near by.
You know the correction factors that the NHRA publishes are only applicable to normally aspirated cars, right?
For the record, Atco and Cecil County are both faster tracks than E-town.
Sep 8, 2006 | 08:53 AM
#48
Originally Posted by 10SecS4
There wasn't a negative DA at E-town on Weds night according to my calculations. E-town isn't at below sea level either.
You know the correction factors that the NHRA publishes are only applicable to normally aspirated cars, right?
For the record, Atco and Cecil County are both faster tracks than E-town.
You know the correction factors that the NHRA publishes are only applicable to normally aspirated cars, right?
For the record, Atco and Cecil County are both faster tracks than E-town.
thanks for cleaning those things up!!!
Sep 8, 2006 | 09:01 AM
#49
Originally Posted by CAD EVO
wow, the tarmac black 05's must be the best, cant wait to hit up the track
My tarmac black 05 went 11.8 with a best trap of 118 with the stock ecu and turbo with an afc....They rock lol
Sep 8, 2006 | 09:10 AM
#50
Evolving Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
From: Kemp, Texas
I think that your times are possible for I went a 12.0 with stock turbo, intercooler, cams. Although I don't think that it is going to be possible to hit the 1.3 or 1.4 60' times that you are claiming. It would be nice to see some time slips.
Sep 8, 2006 | 10:22 AM
#51
Originally Posted by 10SecS4
There wasn't a negative DA at E-town on Weds night according to my calculations. E-town isn't at below sea level either.
You know the correction factors that the NHRA publishes are only applicable to normally aspirated cars, right?
For the record, Atco and Cecil County are both faster tracks than E-town.
You know the correction factors that the NHRA publishes are only applicable to normally aspirated cars, right?
For the record, Atco and Cecil County are both faster tracks than E-town.
Believe it or not DA also effects Boosted car as much as NA cars the only ones that don't really suffer are Nitrous cars because they just put in bigger jets.
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:15 PM
#52
Originally Posted by saywhen
I don't understand simply because I track the car often enough to have seen 100's of evo's run the 1/4 and in so. cal and las vegas those numbers do not happen. Everytime I take my car to the track it is as fast or faster then any other evo with a stock turbo. Hell I don't care if you have every bolt on possible on pump gas I am not feeling 11.7. And warr even if you had dropped 300 pounds I don't see your 12.0 going to 11.7. The shift to 5th would have killed you. You have said before you car bounced off the rev limiter, and you were not on pump gas for your 12.0. With race gas or alky injection I would be wow, nice times but not on 93.
- I was hitting the rev limiter back when I ran 12.015 with an SAFC and no flash, so my limiter was stock at 7600rpm. Once I raised it to 7800-8000, I never hit it again, but only managed a 12.000. Going from 113-116mph, I still would not have hit the limiter, however...
- With stock cams, I didn't make much power up that high, so although dropping 320lbs would help me to hit higher traps and lower ETs, it's possible that my power dropoff up at 7800-7900rpm would have been too much to get the typical gains seen with weight reduction (100lbs = .1s = 1mph)
- Yes, I was on race gas (50/50 mix of 110/93), but I also had stock cams and a mail-in flash. I'm thinking that's about equivalent to his car on 93oct with cams. He also has an FMIC, but I just had my stg1 mods (bov/tbe/mbc/flash/fuel pump).
Just clearing things up and reiterating how 300lbs makes a world of difference. For instance, if you add 300lbs to this 11.8@116, it puts him around 12.1@113. Still pretty good for pump gas, but not awe-inspiring. But that's what Mike's plan was all along. I think it's foolish, and I warned him that he was going down a path of destruction due to his poor influences (e.g. 10SecS4 who should get banned again for creating a new account). I told him he'd end up running into trouble with the law, and lo and behold, that's exactly what happened. He doesn't quit, though, which is a shame. He's probably nice teenage kid but he's in with the wrong crowd. Oh well.
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:19 PM
#53
Yes, DA of course affects turbo'd cars, too, but it is true that it's full effect and resultant calculations are designed for N/A cars. FWIW, my 12.30@108 up here in Colorado was with a DA of 8800', woot!
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:21 PM
#55
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
Sorta.
- I was hitting the rev limiter back when I ran 12.015 with an SAFC and no flash, so my limiter was stock at 7600rpm. Once I raised it to 7800-8000, I never hit it again, but only managed a 12.000. Going from 113-116mph, I still would not have hit the limiter, however...
- With stock cams, I didn't make much power up that high, so although dropping 320lbs would help me to hit higher traps and lower ETs, it's possible that my power dropoff up at 7800-7900rpm would have been too much to get the typical gains seen with weight reduction (100lbs = .1s = 1mph)
- Yes, I was on race gas (50/50 mix of 110/93), but I also had stock cams and a mail-in flash. I'm thinking that's about equivalent to his car on 93oct with cams. He also has an FMIC, but I just had my stg1 mods (bov/tbe/mbc/flash/fuel pump).
Just clearing things up and reiterating how 300lbs makes a world of difference. For instance, if you add 300lbs to this 11.8@116, it puts him around 12.1@113. Still pretty good for pump gas, but not awe-inspiring. But that's what Mike's plan was all along. I think it's foolish, and I warned him that he was going down a path of destruction due to his poor influences (e.g. 10SecS4 who should get banned again for creating a new account). I told him he'd end up running into trouble with the law, and lo and behold, that's exactly what happened. He doesn't quit, though, which is a shame. He's probably nice teenage kid but he's in with the wrong crowd. Oh well.
- I was hitting the rev limiter back when I ran 12.015 with an SAFC and no flash, so my limiter was stock at 7600rpm. Once I raised it to 7800-8000, I never hit it again, but only managed a 12.000. Going from 113-116mph, I still would not have hit the limiter, however...
- With stock cams, I didn't make much power up that high, so although dropping 320lbs would help me to hit higher traps and lower ETs, it's possible that my power dropoff up at 7800-7900rpm would have been too much to get the typical gains seen with weight reduction (100lbs = .1s = 1mph)
- Yes, I was on race gas (50/50 mix of 110/93), but I also had stock cams and a mail-in flash. I'm thinking that's about equivalent to his car on 93oct with cams. He also has an FMIC, but I just had my stg1 mods (bov/tbe/mbc/flash/fuel pump).
Just clearing things up and reiterating how 300lbs makes a world of difference. For instance, if you add 300lbs to this 11.8@116, it puts him around 12.1@113. Still pretty good for pump gas, but not awe-inspiring. But that's what Mike's plan was all along. I think it's foolish, and I warned him that he was going down a path of destruction due to his poor influences (e.g. 10SecS4 who should get banned again for creating a new account). I told him he'd end up running into trouble with the law, and lo and behold, that's exactly what happened. He doesn't quit, though, which is a shame. He's probably nice teenage kid but he's in with the wrong crowd. Oh well.
sorry warr but i didnt go down any wrong path, there is more resoneing to why the law is looking at me not for the resone of gutted theres more to the story i do not wish to tell. also i have a mail in flash i do not have a custom tune yet. and also the cams did nothing for my car as far as the dyno read. so im going to get biger cams and a custom tune for pump and race gas, so then im hoping to hit off some . of a sec off of the time now, i knew i can as of right now if i get my 60 foot back down to were i was doing befor, i think i can run a 11.6 as i sit just need new tires. and then with new cams and custom tune i think i can hit 11.5 11.4 on pump and hoping to hit 11 on race gas. i want to set a stock turbo stock motor recored.
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:23 PM
#56
Originally Posted by mcwop23
do cams count as mere bolt-ons?
well seems like every evo does it so its like a bolt on and its not hard to install them. its like in every stage package in the beginaing
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:25 PM
#57
I know what you "think" and hope for, but you're a bit out of your mind. The cams definitely helped a lot. There's no other way to gain 26mph on the back end as I'm sure (or at least hope) you know. You never trapped 116 before the cams on pump gas, so obviously they are helping whether you saw it on the dyno or not. Hell, you ran 115mph on race gas, so who knows what crazy stuff you've done or are doing to the car. Your ETs and MPHs are never consistent from one day to the next, so there's likely more to the story than we know.
Ok, so your law troubles have nothing to do with the car yet you have said 3 times now that the reason you've added stuff back to the car is because of the law. Hey, it's your business, but from our perspective, it's all very very fishy. You definitely are with the wrong crowd, and you even admitted it to me on AIM months and months ago, but I guess you forgot. People rarely see the bad position they're in until something bad happens and they get a reality check.
Ok, so your law troubles have nothing to do with the car yet you have said 3 times now that the reason you've added stuff back to the car is because of the law. Hey, it's your business, but from our perspective, it's all very very fishy. You definitely are with the wrong crowd, and you even admitted it to me on AIM months and months ago, but I guess you forgot. People rarely see the bad position they're in until something bad happens and they get a reality check.
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:27 PM
#58
Originally Posted by mcwop23
do cams count as mere bolt-ons?
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:30 PM
#59
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
I know what you "think" and hope for, but you're a bit out of your mind. The cams definitely helped a lot. There's no other way to gain 26mph on the back end as I'm sure (or at least hope) you know. You never trapped 116 before the cams on pump gas, so obviously they are helping whether you saw it on the dyno or not. Hell, you ran 115mph on race gas, so who knows what crazy stuff you've done or are doing to the car. Your ETs and MPHs are never consistent from one day to the next, so there's likely more to the story than we know.
Ok, so your law troubles have nothing to do with the car yet you have said 3 times now that the reason you've added stuff back to the car is because of the law. Hey, it's your business, but from our perspective, it's all very very fishy. You definitely are with the wrong crowd, and you even admitted it to me on AIM months and months ago, but I guess you forgot. People rarely see the bad position they're in until something bad happens and they get a reality check.
Ok, so your law troubles have nothing to do with the car yet you have said 3 times now that the reason you've added stuff back to the car is because of the law. Hey, it's your business, but from our perspective, it's all very very fishy. You definitely are with the wrong crowd, and you even admitted it to me on AIM months and months ago, but I guess you forgot. People rarely see the bad position they're in until something bad happens and they get a reality check.
the last time i went 11.8 at 115 was with the utec on race gas and that is when i had the cams in, i went to dyno befor cams and then after on stock ecu and they did nothing, dyno 315hp both times, and then when tune the car with utec on pump made about 320 and then with race gas made 350hp so the cams i went with did nothing, thats why i will go biger and i will show you the times when i get them warr dont dout my little guy.
Sep 8, 2006 | 01:31 PM
#60
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
No, they don't. It doesn't matter if they're in every package, they are not merely a bolt-on. A bolt-on does not require taking the head apart.
its the valve cover so does not count, lol