took the 383 to the track
01-30-2004, 06:58 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: jacksonville, fl usa
Posts: 287
took the 383 to the track
a friend rented gainesville raceway yesterday, so i got a chance to take the TA to the "big road" for the first time with the 383. i got a tune in the new PCM just a few minutes before leaving the house. the program is the same one in my cousin's car that made 457 rwhp last week on the dyno. his cam is slightly larger than mine, but other than a couple of other minor differences our cars are pretty much the same. i've had issues with the clutch fork and throwout bearing (one or both are f!cked up), so i was hoping to make 2 or 3 good passes before something went wrong. turns out i got to make 2 passes.
first pass was 12.13 @ 119.38 with a 1.96 60 ft. i left at 2500 and shifted easy at 6300. it felt good, so i went back around to dog it good before it started acting up. the next pass was 11.94 @ 119.84 with a 1.92 60 ft. i launched at 4000, shifted at 6500 and tapped the limiter at the top of 3rd. if not for that i might have seen 120 mph, but i was happy as hell; i think that's pretty good for an all motor 383. i realize they aren't the greatest numbers in the world, but i wanted to post them to see what people think.
there were funny noises coming from the bellhousing on the way to the pits after the second pass, so we pushed it on the trailer and called it a day. ima try to fix it tomorrow at my buddy's shop.
first pass was 12.13 @ 119.38 with a 1.96 60 ft. i left at 2500 and shifted easy at 6300. it felt good, so i went back around to dog it good before it started acting up. the next pass was 11.94 @ 119.84 with a 1.92 60 ft. i launched at 4000, shifted at 6500 and tapped the limiter at the top of 3rd. if not for that i might have seen 120 mph, but i was happy as hell; i think that's pretty good for an all motor 383. i realize they aren't the greatest numbers in the world, but i wanted to post them to see what people think.
there were funny noises coming from the bellhousing on the way to the pits after the second pass, so we pushed it on the trailer and called it a day. ima try to fix it tomorrow at my buddy's shop.
Last edited by rumair; 01-30-2004 at 07:01 PM.
01-30-2004, 09:37 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: In The Engine Room
Posts: 948
Details on this 383 please???
I'll take the liberty of assuming the standard 4.030 " Bore and 3.750" Stroke. What compression ratio? Who's heads? Specs on the bumpstick ?
Of course anything else you care to divulge is perfectly acceptable
I'll take the liberty of assuming the standard 4.030 " Bore and 3.750" Stroke. What compression ratio? Who's heads? Specs on the bumpstick ?
Of course anything else you care to divulge is perfectly acceptable
01-31-2004, 10:00 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
Posts: 5,308
11's on your 2nd pass...................not bad 
.
Yeah, so.........what kind of car are you running??
Since the majority of members on here have LT1's, I'll assume you're running an LT1-based 383?
Regardless though, 11's on the motor is pretty good IMO
.
..................I need to start working on a 383 for myself!!!
.Yeah, so.........what kind of car are you running??
Since the majority of members on here have LT1's, I'll assume you're running an LT1-based 383? Regardless though, 11's on the motor is pretty good IMO...................I need to start working on a 383 for myself!!!
01-31-2004, 12:21 PM
#5
Moderator
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cinnaminson, NJ
Posts: 2,713
11's on your second test run isnt bad at all. They may not be "great" numbrs for ET, but your mph is awsome. The power is there, now you just have to get the 60' down and you will easily cruise to low 11's... for just motor I'd say that its pretty impressive. Care to elaborate on the set up?
... for just motor I'd say that its pretty impressive. Care to elaborate on the set up?
02-01-2004, 11:02 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Columbia, SC, USA
Posts: 746
Nice times! Give us some more details - cam, heads, race weight, etc. Also, if I remember right, didn't you used to have a CC305 with stock heads making around 350 rwhp? If so, what did the car run with that setup?
02-01-2004, 11:09 PM
#8
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: jacksonville, fl usa
Posts: 287
i know how some peeps are, but i'm not holding any state secrets here. i could include my sig but it has full info on both of my cars and would undoubtedly cause trouble with the moderators!!
my street car is a 97 Trans Am that we purchased new in November 1997. the car now has a little over 59,000 miles on the odometer. specs on the engine and drivetrain are as follows (the car is full weight, no roll cage):
that's about it for the LT1. my other car is a 74 firebird that ran 11.70's @ 116 last year with a stock bottom end 462 ci poncho engine at 3800 lbs. on a 9" slick. this year's combo will be a 474 ci long rod stroker (4.25" stroke, 6.8" rod). we're looking for low 11's or high 10's @ 120+ mph at about the same weight with the small tire.
brain- you posted while i was making that long-a** list. yes, i used to have the cc305 cam before going to my current heads and cam on the stock bottom end in Oct. 2002. with the 305 cam the car made 348 rwhp and went 12.79 @ 110 with stock heads, bolt-ons and bbk shorties. there was more in it but i did the heads/cam swap before i got the most out of that setup. i went 13.01 @ 112.8 in my cousin's car with that cam, stock heads, bolt-ons and long tube headers. after the heads/cam swap in Oct. '02 the car made a best ET of 12.13 (that was on ET streets with a 1.74 60') and a best mph of 114.8 (not on the same pass) before it spun 7 bearings. i've picked up 5 mph (and should get more with some tuning) going to the stroker with no other changes to the valvetrain or drivetrain.
my street car is a 97 Trans Am that we purchased new in November 1997. the car now has a little over 59,000 miles on the odometer. specs on the engine and drivetrain are as follows (the car is full weight, no roll cage):
- 1996 LT1 4-bolt block bored .030" over
- scat 9000 crank
- scat 6" h-beam rods
- SRP forged .030" over pistons
- ported stock heads by Heads-Up Performance
- comp cams custom hydraulic roller...230/236 duration @ .050, .602/.608 lift, 112 lsa
- 36# injectors
- meziere electric water pump
- elgin double roller timing chain
- march underdrive pullies
- hooker long tube headers
- custom 2 1/2" exhaust with x-pipe, dynomax bullet mufflers
- stock T56 transmission
- spec stage 3 clutch with 4-puck disc
- B&M ripper shifter
- mac sub-frame connectors
- slp panhard bar and lca's
- summit rear spring air bags
- motive 4.10 gears, TA girdle
- nitto 275/40/17 drag radials
- OBD 1 conversion, tuning by Tony Bishop (local guy)
that's about it for the LT1. my other car is a 74 firebird that ran 11.70's @ 116 last year with a stock bottom end 462 ci poncho engine at 3800 lbs. on a 9" slick. this year's combo will be a 474 ci long rod stroker (4.25" stroke, 6.8" rod). we're looking for low 11's or high 10's @ 120+ mph at about the same weight with the small tire.
brain- you posted while i was making that long-a** list. yes, i used to have the cc305 cam before going to my current heads and cam on the stock bottom end in Oct. 2002. with the 305 cam the car made 348 rwhp and went 12.79 @ 110 with stock heads, bolt-ons and bbk shorties. there was more in it but i did the heads/cam swap before i got the most out of that setup. i went 13.01 @ 112.8 in my cousin's car with that cam, stock heads, bolt-ons and long tube headers. after the heads/cam swap in Oct. '02 the car made a best ET of 12.13 (that was on ET streets with a 1.74 60') and a best mph of 114.8 (not on the same pass) before it spun 7 bearings. i've picked up 5 mph (and should get more with some tuning) going to the stroker with no other changes to the valvetrain or drivetrain.
Last edited by rumair; 02-01-2004 at 11:18 PM.
02-02-2004, 12:30 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 51°N 114°W, 3500' elevation
Posts: 2,037
That sounds like my old 383's passes. Old specs are still on my web page (old technology 383). The engine ran fine for 2 years before it finally threw a rod and destroyed the engine.
The MPH should be good for a mid 11 second pass. Those 17" tires are very short. Less than 26". Some 28" tall tires could really help. It would give you a bigger contact patch on the ground from front to rear of the tread. There's no reason you shouldn't have at 1.7x 60' time with that kind of power and some traction.
The MPH should be good for a mid 11 second pass. Those 17" tires are very short. Less than 26". Some 28" tall tires could really help. It would give you a bigger contact patch on the ground from front to rear of the tread. There's no reason you shouldn't have at 1.7x 60' time with that kind of power and some traction.
02-02-2004, 08:28 AM
#10
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: jacksonville, fl usa
Posts: 287
yeah...i could probably squeeze a 28X10.5" ET street under there on some stock 16" wheels, but then i'd need a new rear end. the car 60'd 1.74 on the stock bottom end with 26x10.5x16 ET streets back in 2002.
02-02-2004, 10:09 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Oklahoma where trees are made of wood.
Posts: 2,725
Man you guys are making my mouth water, I cant wait til the track opens so I can get some numbers.
Good runs rumair, with that mph you should be able to wittle the time down quite a bit with some tweaking.
Good runs rumair, with that mph you should be able to wittle the time down quite a bit with some tweaking.
