Buschur Racing EVO 0-60mph ...
Jun 30, 2004 | 10:11 AM
#62
Evolved Member
iTrader: (23)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: NJ
Originally Posted by ShapeGSX
Actually, it is a net reduction in torque at the wheels with every gear shift. Power remains the same on both sides of a gear mesh. But torque gets multiplied.
- Steve
Jun 30, 2004 | 10:19 AM
#63
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Los Angeles
Originally Posted by DynoFlash
Its a facinating intelectual concept indeed!!! I think the best way to test the 0 - 60 time is with a radar gun
I know iy has to be damm fast as I am doing very low 7 sec 1/8ths in the mid 90 mph range - which much yield a very very low 0 - 60
BTW - my buddies who built my last motor who are master ferrari techs and who have driven Enzos confirm that my Evo would chew up ANY ferrai to about 80 mph - then the Enzo would come blowing by like a jet plane and after 130 or so it would start to disapear very quickly
AWD is a great advantage off the line but only goes so far
Wonder what the new Bently GT will do at the drag strip - bit heavy though
I know iy has to be damm fast as I am doing very low 7 sec 1/8ths in the mid 90 mph range - which much yield a very very low 0 - 60
BTW - my buddies who built my last motor who are master ferrari techs and who have driven Enzos confirm that my Evo would chew up ANY ferrai to about 80 mph - then the Enzo would come blowing by like a jet plane and after 130 or so it would start to disapear very quickly
AWD is a great advantage off the line but only goes so far
Wonder what the new Bently GT will do at the drag strip - bit heavy though
I mean, other EVO's running 11.6's are nowhere near the 2.6 second mark for 0-60 times . . .
Jun 30, 2004 | 10:37 AM
#64
Evolved Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: CA
Originally Posted by jotan82
2.6 is very possible
there is no way you are spinning tires to 60 mph... so wheel spin would be minimal, and not a factor
awesome times
there is no way you are spinning tires to 60 mph... so wheel spin would be minimal, and not a factor
awesome times
Jun 30, 2004 | 10:53 AM
#68
Newbie
iTrader: (2)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Milwaukee/sucha.PL
Originally Posted by mhutch
Not SO unbelievable 
See
http://www.car-stats.com/stats/shows...seby.aspx?by=3
and
http://www.maxpages.com/corvettehome/0_to_60_mph_times
notice that these cars are running 3+ 0-60 and 11.8+ 1/4. With the awd I would say it is possible.
I saw the thread right after he posted and checked it out. Unbelievable, yes... impossible.. no. Add in a couple of 10ths for error and it seems reasonably possible to me...
see the physics of a perfect world
s(t)-s(0)=v(0)t+1/2*a*t2
s(t)=60'
s(0)=0
v(0)=0
t=1.6
acceleration then = 41 ft/s^2
v(t)=a*t
a= 41 ft/s^2
t=2.6s
velocity at 2.6 seconds = 107 ft/sec *3600/5280 = 72 mph
reducing for non-constant acceleration and driveline drag this doesn't seem so out of whack.
my 2 pennies
See
http://www.car-stats.com/stats/shows...seby.aspx?by=3
and
http://www.maxpages.com/corvettehome/0_to_60_mph_times
notice that these cars are running 3+ 0-60 and 11.8+ 1/4. With the awd I would say it is possible.
I saw the thread right after he posted and checked it out. Unbelievable, yes... impossible.. no. Add in a couple of 10ths for error and it seems reasonably possible to me...
see the physics of a perfect world
s(t)-s(0)=v(0)t+1/2*a*t2
s(t)=60'
s(0)=0
v(0)=0
t=1.6
acceleration then = 41 ft/s^2
v(t)=a*t
a= 41 ft/s^2
t=2.6s
velocity at 2.6 seconds = 107 ft/sec *3600/5280 = 72 mph
reducing for non-constant acceleration and driveline drag this doesn't seem so out of whack.
my 2 pennies
1,61s / 0-100 km/h
= 
Last edited by evorent; Jun 30, 2004 at 11:00 AM.
Jun 30, 2004 | 11:04 AM
#69
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Sub-Chi-Town
does anyone remember the lingenfelter vette that did a 0-60 in 2 sec. and that was RWD so an awd with the Amount of HP buschur is puttin down i dont know why people are doubting it. lets remember people if they really want to show off they can just bring out the RWD talon that is the fastest DSM out their.
Jun 30, 2004 | 12:50 PM
#70
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: chicago
for what its worth to you guys.....
i have buschurs stage 4 kit on pump gas and i have made several runs with my g-tech pro.
the best 60ft. time i have managed was 1.60. on that run my 0-60 was 4.1 seconds. my best ever 0-60 time was 3.95 but have only cracked 3's that once, so i got lucky...
usually my 0-60 time is is between 4.2-4.4 seconds. my average 60ft. time is around 1.70-1.73...
if the trans would allow me to slam it into 2nd gear the way it should, i would probably be in the 3's every now and then.
thats real world stage 4 on pump gas, with cat, and cusco twin disk carbon clutch.
stock suspension and tires.
i have buschurs stage 4 kit on pump gas and i have made several runs with my g-tech pro.
the best 60ft. time i have managed was 1.60. on that run my 0-60 was 4.1 seconds. my best ever 0-60 time was 3.95 but have only cracked 3's that once, so i got lucky...
usually my 0-60 time is is between 4.2-4.4 seconds. my average 60ft. time is around 1.70-1.73...
if the trans would allow me to slam it into 2nd gear the way it should, i would probably be in the 3's every now and then.
thats real world stage 4 on pump gas, with cat, and cusco twin disk carbon clutch.
stock suspension and tires.
Jul 2, 2004 | 02:32 PM
#71
The car when it ran those 0-60 mph times had our complete Stages 1-4 on it, the Exedy twin disc clutch and the AEM EMS for fuel management.
The car also had race gas in it. On pump gas we ran a 12.0 at 114 mph.
Shiv is not a drag racer, he will tell you that. I don't know who drove his car but whatever it was had a slower spooling turbo on it than the stock turbo we ran our 11.65 with. This would greatly reduce the 0-60mph times. What I am trying to say is if they ran 3.3 to 60 mph then that just makes our times even more believable.
David Buschur
www.buschurracing.com
The car also had race gas in it. On pump gas we ran a 12.0 at 114 mph.
Shiv is not a drag racer, he will tell you that. I don't know who drove his car but whatever it was had a slower spooling turbo on it than the stock turbo we ran our 11.65 with. This would greatly reduce the 0-60mph times. What I am trying to say is if they ran 3.3 to 60 mph then that just makes our times even more believable.
David Buschur
www.buschurracing.com
Jul 2, 2004 | 02:56 PM
#72
Evolved Member
iTrader: (58)
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Princeton, NJ
you guys are putting much faith in production car... you have to remember production cars are just that, cars made to run on PUBLIC roads and there will be some compromises in performance no matter how small..
in the other hand these modded cars are sacrificing alot in street drivability/reliability to stuff as much power as possible... you just cant say a buschur evo is BETTER then an evo or vise versa...
so anything is possible once you modify a production car...
in the other hand these modded cars are sacrificing alot in street drivability/reliability to stuff as much power as possible... you just cant say a buschur evo is BETTER then an evo or vise versa...
so anything is possible once you modify a production car...
Jul 2, 2004 | 03:42 PM
#73
Evolved Member
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Danville/Blackhawk, California
Originally Posted by davidbuschur
Shiv is not a drag racer, he will tell you that. I don't know who drove his car but whatever it was had a slower spooling turbo on it than the stock turbo we ran our 11.65 with. This would greatly reduce the 0-60mph times. What I am trying to say is if they ran 3.3 to 60 mph then that just makes our times even more believable.
We saw some pretty awesome machinery....shiv
Jul 2, 2004 | 03:52 PM
#74
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Los Angeles
Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu
I'm no drag racer. And neither is the person who drove the car (Paul Gerrard). Although he did very well given the conditions. The 3.3s 0-60 time this past weekend was done with a GT35R running pump gas (as enforced by C&D's SuperTuner Challenge rules) and street tires on smooth concrete (not VHT or even asphalt.) Traction was a problem even for the EVO as the front tires were smoking all though first and second gear. The Twin Turbo Hennessey Viper and twin turbo Lingenfelter Z06s were running 0-60s in the low 4 range with wheelspin all the way through 3rd gear. I think they were trapping in the 140-145mph range We saw some pretty awesome machinery....
shiv
We saw some pretty awesome machinery....shiv
Thats insane that a car can enough power to trap into the 140's but can't manage a 0-60 in under 4. Waaaay too much power, not enough traction.
Jul 2, 2004 | 04:50 PM
#75
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Penn State University
You have to remember this. A properly prepped drag strip is designed to give you traction like no other surface, and with someone who can launch an AWD car at it's max, it's going to go. Now the big question is, with VHT and the prepped surface isn't so much the time, it's breaking parts.