Not what i had hoped
Re: Not what i had hoped
Originally Posted by Zachz28
Those times were at byron, and the 2500 stall came in the car when i got it.
Since it was in there when you got the car, does your car have a tranny cooler? I heard someone say "heat" the first thing I think of affecting a car on a hot day is one, a slick track and second the tranny fluid getting hot causing it to slip.
Re: Not what i had hoped
yea my old camaro ran pretty consistently the one time i had it at GLD. it had CAI and a dumped exhaust, 6 speed and i did a 14.1 at 99MPH with a 2.2 60 ft, so a little more hookup and i woulda been right doing well. but actually my T/A did a 14.4 at 101 with a 2.4 60'. obvious reason for worse ET but GLD is a decent track for how old it is, and Byron is pretty nice as well.
id look into some gears and maybe get it dynoed or scanned to see if anything else is going on that you might not know about.
id look into some gears and maybe get it dynoed or scanned to see if anything else is going on that you might not know about.
Re: Not what i had hoped
Im goin to say against someones else's opinion, that the 2:73's are a big part of your problem. I would also suspect something else isnt right, but Id think 3:73's would net you about .4. with as few mods as your car has, NO WAY are you goin to get 1.6's out of it with a 2500 stall and no slicks. thats just my opinion though. every engine is diff, so you cant always run what other people are running with the same mods. my car when it was mostly stock, with a 6 speed, would only turn 14.5's. in cool weather, it will also make your car drop about .2 - .3 alone. some drag radials will probably be needed once you put in the 3:73's though cause it will be harder to hook.
Re: Not what i had hoped
my 2.73 experiance comes from my LS1 motor (stock bolt on) it's a different motor but upgrading to the 3.73 only got me a couple tenths. Still I was running mid 12's with 2.73s, so if it is different with the LT1's then my bad.
I also had a LT1 with 3.42s and then upgraded to 3.73s, still no huge improvment.
I also had a LT1 with 3.42s and then upgraded to 3.73s, still no huge improvment.
Re: Not what i had hoped
On the MPH side...something is definitely wrong. I would look at tune up items like fuel pump/filter, plugs, wires,opti cap & rotor
My car, when bone stock, was good for 14.1@99. Thats pretty much standard.
My car, when bone stock, was good for 14.1@99. Thats pretty much standard.
Re: Not what i had hoped
Originally Posted by Zachz28
Just got back from the track and i was no were near what i had hoped to run. With the mods in the sig. i got a best of 14.1 w/a 2.1 60FT and i made 4 runs as i was shooting to get a 12. The car runs great and feels strong but on the track it is no were near what i hoped. It is an A4 with 2.73s (how much could the 2.73s be costing me?) other then that i dont know were i am losing time.
Secondly, that car isnt geared or stalled correctly for the cam you have. i have a 2800 stall, and knowing what i know now, i should have gone with 3200-3400 at least. also, my car was a dog with the stock 3.23 gears..3.73 woke it up with the cam. also, put a cut-out on it for the track...and for a little extra a high flow cat
i would think running that cam with those gears and stall would be like starting the 1/4 at the bottom of third gear.
Last edited by vin1382; Jul 10, 2006 at 10:59 AM.
Re: Not what i had hoped
Originally Posted by Zachz28
Are the flowmasters that bad?
mod, with the 3.73 being a good choice. It also sounds like you have
some general combination tweaking and optimization to do.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Formula Steve
LT1 Based Engine Tech
45
Sep 19, 2023 08:31 AM
tommalcolm
Computer Diagnostics and Tuning
2
Sep 11, 2015 03:39 PM



