Notices
Drag Racing Find out the best way to launch and see what kind of times other people are posting. No posting of street racing related stories!

Video of 12.01 run

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:06 AM
  #31  
ldstang50's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
From: CT
Originally Posted by EVOONYOASS
You do understand that Buschur only built the block for added protection. He could've done the same times/power level on a stock block. It was included in his budget build because he didn't want to have issues at an event like this when he knew his block was bulletproof over the stock block.
yes i am aware of this. i was up to date on his postings of building the car. nothign wrong with what he did. but its still more money spent. as far as hp gained with pistons and rods, i don't know if there is any gain.
Originally Posted by EVOONYOASS
:

The cams and EMS would be the determining factor for a better tune over what Warrtalon is doing. Warrtalon is limited to a flash and tuning with the S-afc with no cams, BUT he is using race gas over pump. Not having the cams makes a huge difference, but being able to use race gas over pump gas IMO would make it a wash. With race gas Warrtalon can run more boost and make up for the power the cams would add on pump gas. If Buschur was doing 22psi on pump and Warrtalon is running 24-26psi on race gas...
Originally Posted by EVOONYOASS
:
porting and polishing make a difference. but still being on the stock turbo you are limited to the max spool of the turbo which is the same whether you are ported or not

Also as far as the gas is concerned, making more or the same power on pump gas that somebody else is making off of race gas says a lot.

Don't get me wrong, what Warrtalon is trying to do is very hard. It sounds like he is making good power with the s-afc. I would venture to guess around 340-360whp on race gas tune. It just goes to show, if you learn how to tune an safc you can make good power. My old Eclipse made 330whp on an safc, 16G, and pump gas.
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:18 AM
  #32  
gkania's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
From: Deltona
Why did you only raise it to 7800? Wouldnt it have been better to go higher for the "just in case" 200 more rpm is not enough? How long are you actually bouncing off the revlimiter before crossing the 1/4?
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:28 AM
  #33  
Warrtalon's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 20,790
Likes: 2
From: Long Island, NY
Originally Posted by gkania
Why did you only raise it to 7800? Wouldnt it have been better to go higher for the "just in case" 200 more rpm is not enough? How long are you actually bouncing off the revlimiter before crossing the 1/4?
Yeah, that was actually an oversight on my part. In preparing for the flash, I had considered asking for an 8000rpm limit, but when Al was actually sitting in the car doing it, I completely forgot to ask for it. It may come back to haunt me, but I will at least get that 200rpm buffer, which should be good for another 2mph or so (enough to drop from 12.01 to 11.99?). Another thing was that I was worried about revving to 8000rpm in 4th without any headwork. I know others have done it, but it's not really something I'd like to risk. 7800 is within my personal comfort zone, so I think I'm ok.

It's hard to say how far out I am when I hit the rev limiter. It's a significant enough distance that the it hits the limiter 5-7 times before I cross the line. On my 12.01 run, it was so drastic that I went from reeling in the Camaro next to me who ran 11.89 at 113 to me falling back immediately. It was the first time I had a car in front of me that was really close when hitting the rev limiter, and it gave me a better idea of how much hitting the rev limiter is affecting me.

Basically, on my next run, if I STILL hit the rev limiter before the traps, I will know that I was hauling ***, because it would mean I'm hitting 113+ before hitting the rev limiter, which is still before hitting the traps. It means I'm making great power that is not completely dying off at the top of 4th despite no cams. Depending on what happens, I may need to get it raised to 8k after this weekend. I think Al would do that for me...
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:39 AM
  #34  
gkania's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
From: Deltona
Gotcha, if it helps ease your mind at all, I'm running the 280s with stock springs and retainers for the past 8 months with no worries at an 8200 rpm rev limit. My car lives in 7-8k territory.
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:40 AM
  #35  
ldstang50's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
From: CT
you have proven to me clayton that the 10.5 is far superior than the 9.8 i have. I put down 351whp with everythign you have plus cams and cam gears. i do however have 375wtq. i think its absolutely amazing what you have done.
the stock head will hold 8000rpm, i know because i did
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:42 AM
  #36  
gOt BoOsT's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
From: sAc, cA
good launch
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:51 AM
  #37  
Warrtalon's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 20,790
Likes: 2
From: Long Island, NY
Originally Posted by ldstang50
you have proven to me clayton that the 10.5 is far superior than the 9.8 i have. I put down 351whp with everythign you have plus cams and cam gears. i do however have 375wtq. i think its absolutely amazing what you have done.
the stock head will hold 8000rpm, i know because i did
I'm not so sure, Liam. I only dyno'd 294/270 with these mods. On race gas, I'm probably around 340/330 at best. If you add cams to my car on 93oct, I'd only be in the 320-330whp range in both whp and torque (more torque from the new flash). I can't imagine even getting CLOSE to 375wtq. Where did you get those dyno figures? That torque is insane...

Perhaps I will send my ECU to Al to get that 8000rpm limit after all...
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 11:54 AM
  #38  
ldstang50's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
From: CT
you are easily 330whp on 104 octane which you'be been using (i think) remember i used 110 to get my numbers. i suspect you would easily trounce my 350 number with cams and 110. you are already pretty close to that with no cams and lower octane
my dyno was on pruven's dyno up in CT. as you remember thats where i'm from and where Al is from. I think my whole torque issue has everything to do with my cam gear settings
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 12:02 PM
  #39  
gkania's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
From: Deltona
Yep, the new 05's are doing way better than I did stock. Maybe if I can convince someone to buy a gt35 then I can steal their 10.5 turbo
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 12:06 PM
  #40  
Warrtalon's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 20,790
Likes: 2
From: Long Island, NY
Originally Posted by ldstang50
you are easily 330whp on 104 octane which you'be been using (i think) remember i used 110 to get my numbers. i suspect you would easily trounce my 350 number with cams and 110. you are already pretty close to that with no cams and lower octane
my dyno was on pruven's dyno up in CT. as you remember thats where i'm from and where Al is from. I think my whole torque issue has everything to do with my cam gear settings
Oh, I thought your dyno numbers were on pump gas. Oops. No wonder...

The confusion with my octane is that I calculate the octane based off the mix I use. I have yet to use straight race gas in any of my trips to the track, because I don't carry the things I need for draining the pump gas out. Each time, I just end up mixing the available race gas with whatever is in my tank. For the 12.01, I had 4gals of 110 mixed with about 2gals of 93, which equals to 6gals of 104. So, I was actually using 110oct, but it wasn't pure race gas. Still, though, I agree that I'd probably be closer to 370/370 on full race gas with cams...
Reply
Old Oct 13, 2005 | 12:17 PM
  #41  
ldstang50's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
From: CT
I had maybe a gallon of 93 when i dumped in 5gal of 110 for my dyno. its too bad my tranny took a crap after that. i would have really liked to get a good run with her.
on my first pass with those numbers i couldn't hit any gears at all. i'd go to shift and it wouldnt' go it so i'd have to wait then try again. my best run was 13.1@111 and she was pulling like mad...and that was on a 1.66. i do need to get new tires as i'm spinnign way too much and getting sideways out of the hole... still pulling mid 1.6s
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Tmosser
For Sale - Interior / Exterior / Sound / Styling
0
Jun 9, 2016 09:03 PM
Tmosser
For Sale - Suspension / Brakes / Handling
3
Mar 18, 2016 01:06 PM
Tmosser
For Sale - Cars For Sale
29
Jun 24, 2015 01:20 PM
xRoguex
ECU Flash
9
Apr 12, 2010 02:46 PM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:05 PM.