LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

Just got my first runs in at the track!

Old Mar 23, 2003 | 05:43 PM
  #31  
atljar's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 3,068
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
Originally posted by AlexBarabas
Sounds like ricer excuses to me.


I'm sure the fact that our track which has a density altitude of 2800 some feet has nothing to do with it. I hate dumb people.

You do realize that there are mathmatical equations which figure the gains in ETs and traps which take into account humidity, temperature, and elevation. I didnt come up with the numbers outta my ***.

Last edited by atljar; Mar 23, 2003 at 05:45 PM.
Old Mar 23, 2003 | 05:48 PM
  #32  
atljar's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 3,068
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
On a side note, lightnings are DOGS on high speed runs.

I must run a XX.XX, because i beat XX car. Now thats ricer.
Old Mar 23, 2003 | 05:53 PM
  #33  
KCFormula's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 557
From: KU
Originally posted by atljar
On a side note, lightnings are DOGS on high speed runs.

I must run a XX.XX, because i beat XX car. Now thats ricer.
Thats not ricer! Its bench-racing.
Old Mar 23, 2003 | 05:53 PM
  #34  
Grease's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 870
From: Cuyahoga Falls, OHIO
Originally posted by AlexBarabas
I'll post something when I bring my car to the track -- hopefully soon. However, I will not try to estimate adjustments or anything like that... I'll run what I'll run and if it's bad, it'll either be because I'm a ****-poor driver and/or because my car is a slow piece of crap. Only consistent benchmark I've had so far is that...from 0 to about 100, I beat a near-stock 2001 Lightning by a carlength.
Opps, my bad. I was under the impression that you've actually been to a drag strip.
Old Mar 23, 2003 | 09:16 PM
  #35  
atljar's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 3,068
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
Originally posted by KCFormula
Thats not ricer! Its bench-racing.
lol.


Any one looks at dudes mod list? I bet money he doesnt break mid 14s
Old Mar 23, 2003 | 09:38 PM
  #36  
scott95ta's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 98
From: Birmingham, Al
Originally posted by mkent
I have yet to see an M6 or an A4 run a sub-14second time yet with just cat-back and cai. I seen 14.7's from one kid the day i was in columbus, but that was an A4. another guy with a stock car was running 14.6's with an m6. i ran a best of 14.38 at 98mph on a 2.12 60'....granted, i'm not the quickets shifter around but still...
i seen brand new LS1 camaro SS's running 13.9's at 103mph stock in cool air.
i'm not calling you all liars, i suppose you guys running 13's with stock cars might be at better tracks or on Nittos but i refuse to believe the "average" m6 LT1 should be running a 13.9 at 102mph until i see it happen. from what i've seen 14.2-14.4 seems to be the average for stock lt1's on street radials and factory weight.
...although i do believe my 97 A4 with crappy 2.73's will run a 14.10 at 99mph... but we'll see when i finally get to take it to the track in april.
Mine ran 13.7 @101 with Moroso CAI Flowmaster catback and the freebies. Original plugs and wires at 62k miles.
Old Mar 23, 2003 | 09:48 PM
  #37  
MyGreenBabyZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 203
From: Roseville, MI, USA
Alot of you guys ran faster than I in stock form. so Be happy!

Granted my 60' times arent the greatest (2.0) but i should be faster than a 13.91 with the things ive done.

Be happy with what you got and since you trap speeds do look a little on the low side why dont you change the plugs, wires, and coil. they can do worlds on our cars.

good luck.
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 07:29 PM
  #38  
cndctrdj's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 998
From: abington MA
im going to the strip this year. i am planning on 15's so i should be happy with anything under that. o ya im gonna stall out too
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 07:48 PM
  #39  
AlexBarabas's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 218
From: Melbourne, FL, USA
Originally posted by atljar


I'm sure the fact that our track which has a density altitude of 2800 some feet has nothing to do with it. I hate dumb people.

You do realize that there are mathmatical equations which figure the gains in ETs and traps which take into account humidity, temperature, and elevation. I didnt come up with the numbers outta my ***.
Did I say that altitude doesn't matter? The dude claims .4 sec faster from "humidity, etc" adjustments. Learn to express your situation clearly in writing.
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 09:04 PM
  #40  
atljar's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 3,068
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
I didnt feel it necessary to post all the details. I was just stating the air quality has a bunch to do with the time slips. I never said i dont believe a CAI/cat back car can go mid 13s. I said around here it doesnt happen because of the air.

Ever notice how some states have abnormally fast cars? Its because of the awesome air.

Low elevation, high pressure, and no humidity are ideal. Mix that with a cool night and you have awesome drag weather.

Move that same car up here with 60% humidity, low 29.XX barameter, heat, and a 900 foot track you get poor results.


Combining temperature, humidity, pressure, and elevation you can come up with "density altitude". Even though our track is only 900 feet up, on that paticular day it acted as a 2800 foot track with the conditions.

Using density altitude you can come up with corrrected numbers, which is what i gave.

Maybe before you make smart *** remarks you think before typing.
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 09:24 PM
  #41  
Brent94Z's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: May 1999
Posts: 4,060
From: Inverness, FL
Guys, if we can't debate each other in an adult like manner, this one will be closed. Thanks
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 09:28 PM
  #42  
AlexBarabas's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 218
From: Melbourne, FL, USA
I looked up at some of the posts and noticed words such as "barameter" and what-not. Here's a tip... go to school.
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 09:31 PM
  #43  
stevil's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 295
From: Columbus, Ohio
Originally posted by mkent
I have yet to see an M6 or an A4 run a sub-14second time yet with just cat-back and cai. I seen 14.7's from one kid the day i was in columbus, but that was an A4. another guy with a stock car was running 14.6's with an m6. i ran a best of 14.38 at 98mph on a 2.12 60'....granted, i'm not the quickets shifter around but still...
i seen brand new LS1 camaro SS's running 13.9's at 103mph stock in cool air.
i'm not calling you all liars, i suppose you guys running 13's with stock cars might be at better tracks or on Nittos but i refuse to believe the "average" m6 LT1 should be running a 13.9 at 102mph until i see it happen. from what i've seen 14.2-14.4 seems to be the average for stock lt1's on street radials and factory weight.
Damn, what track were you at? Stock I was running 14.1-14.2 @ 97 mph. And that was at National Trails in the summer, which is a crappy track IMO. I don't think I've seen any LT1 cars in the mid-14's.

His traps do seem low for a M6, odd.
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 09:39 PM
  #44  
muraoka's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 125
From: spokane, wa.
your times sound fine. maybe he lifted before the third line. anyways looks like the post got off subject. i feel if your happy with your car thats all that matters, if not mod up!
Old Mar 24, 2003 | 09:45 PM
  #45  
Brent94Z's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: May 1999
Posts: 4,060
From: Inverness, FL
Originally posted by AlexBarabas
I looked up at some of the posts and noticed words such as "barameter" and what-not. Here's a tip... go to school.
Take a look at the post right above your reply.. chill out! Thanks

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:36 AM.