I watched two two fbodies run almost identical E.T's, 14.1@98.1 2.2 sixty foot and 14.1@102.6 2.4 sixty foot?
How can I estimate how much horsepower each of these are making?

 

All of the online calculators that i know of need a vehicle weight.


------------------
Dirk
1997 TA A4
11.251@119.3 1.52 60',7.132@95.39 1/8
The RacinLT1
RacinLT1 pic's

 

The best calculation is from the MPH. ET depends on traction. Assuming you don't have a tailwind and your car is about 3500 pounds the 102.6 mph would calculate out to 295hp.

------------------
Stephen's racing page
or check out the race car

87 IROC SuperPro race car
461 big block
Best ET on a time slip: 11.589
Best MPH on a time slip: 116
Best corrected ET: 11.079

Altitude corrected rear wheel HP: 468
Best 60 foot: 1.646
Member of the Calgary Drag Racing Association

 

My friend had his 96 T/A M6 T-Tops weighed, came out to 3620 with him in it.

------------------
1993 Grabber Blue Mustang GT
Trick Flow Heads, Street Heat intake, 3/8in spacer, E303, TFS 1.7rr & 6.75 pushrods, Holley 190lph fuel pump, 24# injectors & sample tube, SVO timing chain, Aeromotive AFPR, 180* t-stat, 2 5/8 Auto Meter mech fuel pressure gauge, K&N, March Ram Air & Pullies, 73mm C&L MAF, Edelbrock 65mm TB & EGR, 1 5/8in Equal Length Super Competition Hooker Headers, 2 1/2in H-Pipe w/hi-flow cats & Flowmaster 2 1/2in Cat-Back Exhaust, FlowTech Cut-Outs, Nitto DR's, 3.73 gears, FMS Aluminum DriveShaft, Pro 5.0 Shifter, Pro-Shift Lite, 8.5mm MSD Super Cunductor Plug Wires, PowerSlot rotors, PowerMaster 140amp Alt., LX lights, Cobra R hood w/SVO scoop, Saleen spoiler, Cobra Bumper, 3in chrome tips.

13.007 @ 108.39 w/ 2.149 60'

 

By the way with those weights the 102.6 is 305hp and the 98.1 is 267 hp. These are not corrected for weather conditions though so it may be a bit higher.

 

The car with the higher mph had a race weight of 3750 lbs. I don't know exactly how much the other car weighed but I would think it was a bit less weight.

[This message has been edited by rpm4lalo (edited July 27, 2002).]

 

A 3750 pound vehicle running 102.6 mph is putting out 316.1 hp

 

How did he get the weight up to 3750? Does he have a full roll cage and stuff? My friends Formula weighs 3620 with all the options (except automatic) spare and everything and he weighs about 180 so that puts the car at 3450 or so.

------------------
1993 Grabber Blue Mustang GT
Trick Flow Heads, Street Heat intake, 3/8in spacer, E303, TFS 1.7rr & 6.75 pushrods, Holley 190lph fuel pump, 24# injectors & sample tube, SVO timing chain, Aeromotive AFPR, 180* t-stat, 2 5/8 Auto Meter mech fuel pressure gauge, K&N, March Ram Air & Pullies, 73mm C&L MAF, Edelbrock 65mm TB & EGR, 1 5/8in Equal Length Super Competition Hooker Headers, 2 1/2in H-Pipe w/hi-flow cats & Flowmaster 2 1/2in Cat-Back Exhaust, FlowTech Cut-Outs, Nitto DR's, 3.73 gears, FMS Aluminum DriveShaft, Pro 5.0 Shifter, Pro-Shift Lite, 8.5mm MSD Super Cunductor Plug Wires, PowerSlot rotors, PowerMaster 140amp Alt., LX lights, Cobra R hood w/SVO scoop, Saleen spoiler, Cobra Bumper, 3in chrome tips.

13.007 @ 108.39 w/ 2.149 60'

 

Using generic calculators you can get pretty high numbers. But take a look at people's dyno's and times, and you realize that those calcs are pretty far off. Those calcs have been around for years and do not take into the fact and f-bod's aerodynamics, which when those calcs were really starting to be used, an aerodynamic car was a Nova.

A f-bod weighing in at 3750 lbs and traps 102.6 MPH will be developing around 283 rwhp.

------------------
1996 Z28 Camaro
2001 best 1/4 BFG DR's NA - 11.865@113.57 w/1.634 60', 1/8 - 7.563@89.82mph Best 1/4 MPH 114.82 - Best 1/8 MPH 90.73 - 2002 Mid 11's NA, Mid 10's n2o

1989 GMC 1500 truck for work 18.1@73 305
8 cats to feed clean after 1999 V6 Mustang 5 speed
15.358@89.47 MPH w/ 2.227 60'
15.364@90.92 MPH w/ 2.383 60'

 

dyno numbers seem to be somewhat inflated now-a-days. Before a stock 5.0 would dyno 18x-19x stock but now I see 21x's and stuff but still run the same time/mph as they always have. And your argument about the calculators being old and outdated is true, for the most part, but that would mean the calcs are OPTIMISTIC since they are measured with more risistance (less aerodynamic). Meaning that 305 hp calculation for the 102.6 would be closer to 290 hp since the Fbod is more aerodynamic. And these numbers these calcs give are @ the flywheel, not rear wheels.

------------------
1993 Grabber Blue Mustang GT
"Bolt-On's" (no power adder(s)

13.007 @ 108.39 w/ 2.149 60'

 

Anymore ,I just dont really trust some of the dyno figures I see on message boards.I can see basically the exact same cars,run within a tenth of each other ET wise,almost identical MPH, ,but have 20-30 HP different on dyno figures.Unless you dyno on the same dyno ,same day comparing figues is not real accurate,then throw in different dyno operators.Kinda like comparings ETs from different tracks and states.Just my opinion

[This message has been edited by 86ZZ4 (edited July 31, 2002).]

 

Thats EXACTLY what I believe.

------------------
1993 Grabber Blue Mustang GT
"Bolt-On's" (no power adder(s)

13.007 @ 108.39 w/ 2.149 60'