attn:all lancers
Apr 9, 2002, 03:25 AM
#31
Evolved Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lewisville, Tx
Posts: 1,293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was a quarter mile... however....
As I said in another post about this same thing... This was a new track. The only reasons I didn't question the time was two fold:
1) Civics were running similar times on the same day.
2) I was unaware of the average track time for the Lancer.
Due to the response about this, I can only assume this time was due to track error, and as such, I retract my time, pending further tests and times. After some minor mods, I plan on taking a trip to Ennis, and getting a more trustworthy time, at which point, I will gladly post again, this time with confidence.
As I said in another post about this same thing... This was a new track. The only reasons I didn't question the time was two fold:
1) Civics were running similar times on the same day.
2) I was unaware of the average track time for the Lancer.
Due to the response about this, I can only assume this time was due to track error, and as such, I retract my time, pending further tests and times. After some minor mods, I plan on taking a trip to Ennis, and getting a more trustworthy time, at which point, I will gladly post again, this time with confidence.
Apr 9, 2002, 10:56 PM
#32
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by StreetLancer
It was a quarter mile... however....
As I said in another post about this same thing... This was a new track. The only reasons I didn't question the time was two fold:
1) Civics were running similar times on the same day.
2) I was unaware of the average track time for the Lancer.
Due to the response about this, I can only assume this time was due to track error, and as such, I retract my time, pending further tests and times. After some minor mods, I plan on taking a trip to Ennis, and getting a more trustworthy time, at which point, I will gladly post again, this time with confidence.
It was a quarter mile... however....
As I said in another post about this same thing... This was a new track. The only reasons I didn't question the time was two fold:
1) Civics were running similar times on the same day.
2) I was unaware of the average track time for the Lancer.
Due to the response about this, I can only assume this time was due to track error, and as such, I retract my time, pending further tests and times. After some minor mods, I plan on taking a trip to Ennis, and getting a more trustworthy time, at which point, I will gladly post again, this time with confidence.
What new track are you talking about? Did someone build a new 1/4 mile track around Dallas?
It was a definite timing mistake on the track then. Let's say your putting down 104, 105 whp. With your mods (guessing) lets say you added 15hp. That brings it up to 120whp. I don't think you'll be seeing 14's anytime soon let alone low 15's. Especially racing at Ennis...I will guarantee you'll bust 16's all night long.
Ennis happens to be one of the worst tracks for most cars and drivers.
Apr 9, 2002, 11:12 PM
#33
Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: 14.21????????????
Originally posted by evoorsti
How much HP are we talking about with the turbo kit? 100hp? So, if the stock Lancer puts out 120 crank HP with a 15% drivetrain loss of 18hp. That's 102WHP. Now add 80-100HP onto that...low 14's should be easily do-able. However, what are Lancer turbo kits putting down with stock internals? After all the moneys spent on a regular Lancer...Lancer EVO looks really good considering there's far more potential.
How much HP are we talking about with the turbo kit? 100hp? So, if the stock Lancer puts out 120 crank HP with a 15% drivetrain loss of 18hp. That's 102WHP. Now add 80-100HP onto that...low 14's should be easily do-able. However, what are Lancer turbo kits putting down with stock internals? After all the moneys spent on a regular Lancer...Lancer EVO looks really good considering there's far more potential.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when a car is tested for HP it is done at the wheels. They have published HP at the Crankcase since the 60's
Apr 10, 2002, 01:35 PM
#35
Evolved Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: nj
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: low 15's on 1/4
Originally posted by lanceroz84
i seen lancer oz run the 1/4 mile at the low 15's 15.3's&15.4's in new jersey.
i seen lancer oz run the 1/4 mile at the low 15's 15.3's&15.4's in new jersey.
Apr 11, 2002, 07:29 PM
#36
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: 14.21????????????
Originally posted by cdooley
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when a car is tested for HP it is done at the wheels. They have published HP at the Crankcase since the 60's
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when a car is tested for HP it is done at the wheels. They have published HP at the Crankcase since the 60's
What are you talking about? I stated the Lancer makes 102 FWHP. Stating a loss of 15% loss from the crank 120 HP.
Apr 11, 2002, 07:34 PM
#37
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: low 15's on 1/4
Originally posted by lanceroz84
i seen lancer oz run the 1/4 mile at the low 15's 15.3's&15.4's in new jersey.
i seen lancer oz run the 1/4 mile at the low 15's 15.3's&15.4's in new jersey.
I HIGHLY doubt it. Unless your running 50-70 more HP at the wheels from stock. Honestly, do the math. 104 WHP HP in a 2700 lb car WILL not get you low 15's. GS-R's run about that time with a few less pounds with 170 hp at the crank!
Seriously though, If there are Lancer's running that time, there's something Mitsubishi didn't advertise in these cars.
Apr 11, 2002, 09:23 PM
#38
Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Roswell, New Mexico
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Lancer ES
yeah my 2002 lancer ES is stock and ive gteched at a 17.3 but i know i can get it to about a 17.0 i just need to get everything down right i plan to add a weapon r short ram intake to it and a B2 bomb muffler with catback exhaust and 2 1/2 inch piping ill post my time then but i know it wont be in the 14's
Apr 11, 2002, 09:52 PM
#39
EvoM Staff Alumni
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 7,701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The laws of physics do not apply in NJ. 
There's no way a stock Lancer is doing 14's. I highly doubt very many people on the boards even, if any have 14 sec Lancers...and they certainly wouldn't be the same as they were out of the dealership.
There's no way a stock Lancer is doing 14's. I highly doubt very many people on the boards even, if any have 14 sec Lancers...and they certainly wouldn't be the same as they were out of the dealership.
May 7, 2002, 12:14 PM
#40
Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1320's
wow! you guys have pretty fast lancers....
I only did low 17s on the strip... but enuogh to get myself some trophies...(see mine at the registry)
Lancers rule!
I only did low 17s on the strip... but enuogh to get myself some trophies...(see mine at the registry)
Lancers rule!
May 7, 2002, 01:55 PM
#41
Evolved Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: nj
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well i told you guys a wile back my car ran like a 14.9 but now i added a new garret t 28 bb turbo and a new intercooler also i droped a venom nos kit at about 100 shot of nos and i ran like a 11.6 not to shabby i didnt think lol but seriusy i also had a 200 shot of h.a.d. (more hopes and dreams)
god i wish my lancer wasnt so slow someone sell me ther turbo or ill give you my oz for your evo sounds liek a fair trade ill throw in one of kidneys for nothing.....
god i wish my lancer wasnt so slow someone sell me ther turbo or ill give you my oz for your evo sounds liek a fair trade ill throw in one of kidneys for nothing.....
