Also, "getting used to" a car with only an upgraded cam and headers isnt going to be that tough. Only talking 50hp or so, and although you can feel the difference, its not like going from a bone stock motor to a blown stroker.

He was cutting 2.0s before, and is cutting 2.0s now....that is the hardest part of "getting used to" the cars new power (launching). That is basically an unchanged variable for him at this point, so the rest of the run (WOT and shifting) pretty easily falls into place in comparison to the launch.

Just doesnt add up......but I guarentee that NYI is not the problem. Either dyno numbers or mechanical issue.

Jason

 

I'm kind of wondering if I'm getting a little timing retard from false knock. I should really get a Scanmaster. I do have worn shoulders on at least one of my self aligning rockers. I wonder if it's a little sloppy and maybe making a little bit more noise than it should. I also thought I would have higher trap speeds. I know that my 60' could use some work 'cause I'm about .15 slower than when I was racing more frequently.

Andy

 

FWIW,

I think everyone has valid point. First I agree with Bret it takes time for someone to get used to driving and getting the most out of there car. Andy picked up almost 2 mph with same sixty foot time over the other night. Lets give him a chance to max out his combo before we decide the car is broken. Secondly with 2.2 sixty Andy is blowing away fist gear. This leads me to many questions but the most important ones on my mind:

Is the launch now a bog? or

Are you getting in and out of it in first gear?

Both of these situations will result in both bad et's and poor mph numbers at the end of the track. There are only so many rev's of tire in relation to gear and rpm potential in 1320ft. Secondly the only way to compare two cars are on the same track and the same day. The variables between two different cars on two seperate days with two different drivers are to numerious to mention. With a sub 2.0 sixty foot I believe the car will go 110+ mph in the quarter. The harder he is comfortable launching the more mph a car pull. That's just how it is...(unless it has no power at all) Andy made 340 rwhp on an honest dyno. It is checked almost weekly against both an engine dyno and race car ET's.

Now Jason is right in that something is wrong. It is one of the obvious variables. Time will tell which one it is. Driver? traction? bad tune? knock retard? But lets give things a chance before the lynching party goes out to lay blame. Al little time and work and it will come around. That I am sure of. Good luck Andy. and hook that damn car up so you can stay in it through first gear.


Vince

 

Andy - Get some logs on the car..that is very important. However, I missed the part about the dyno. 340rwhp and that trap speed is not adding up. For example:

My friend has a bolt on LS1 A4. It dynoed 329rwhp (Corrected). 2 weeks later at HRP it ran 13.0X @ 107.5ish (85-90*). His car weighs 3650. 10 more hp and less weight = more mph.

I hate to ask this, but does the car *feel* any different from when it was dynoed and when you ran it at the track? If it doesn't, I'd say the dyno numbers are inaccurate and the car likely needs tuning. If yes, then obviously its a mechanical problem.

I've probably flashed my pcm 5x a week for the past 2 months and haven't had much success besides better drivability. It might be a while before I start my mail order tuning program . Tuning is huge and a heck of a lot harder/time consuming than everyone makes out a simple cam swap to be.

Brett: I was hoping to hit 114 during the winter. With my low speeds I'm pretty pessimistic that I'll reach that 114 trapspeed. However, stay tuned for a dynotune before December!

Ryan

 

HRP is at or bleow sea level and the Texas guys always run very fast there. Seems when the come up north they slow right down. I was at Memphis back in 1998 and all the fast Texas cars seemed to non existant in the hot Memphis air so in my opinion the numbers out of Houston don't add up either. I bet my car would go 165mph down there and that just isn't realistic. Its like George Baxters magic 9.04 @ 155mph run. 50 degrees outside at island dragway below sea level at 63% humidity. Now I run 9.08 @ 160mph on a slick track at 1200ft elevation at 92 degrees with 98% humidity. Who really is faster? I give it to George because the arguing takes up to much energy. Nobody wants to believe the reality....same day same track and race. Thats it. Nothing else counts. Bench racing is wrong and pathetic. So lets give this car and this driver a chance

Vince

 

I can agree that maximizing the ET and mph takes more than a couple trips to the track. No bench racing here, but corrected (I forget the actual conversion temp, hum, etc) numbers can give a loose idea of what to expect.

Fair enough.

Ryan

 

Yeah good points. That's a big point in the MPH

Different cars, different drivers etc. 340rwhp or 300rwhp we don't race dynos. I'm the last guy to ever say if a dyno is high or low, but they are all different. Even the same dyno at a different place both dialed in perfectly can be off 15%

I got thinking about this, what does his dyno chart look like? One thing i've seen with the Combo cams, especially the XE cams is that they die at over 6K, that right there will really effect the average HP and in turn hurt the mph too.

If his car goes 107 or 114 encouragement and not automatically calling his car broke is what I was after.

Bret

 

Yeah the tracks and DA play in there, but you gotta run the number to get the top spot. A head to head race would really determine it though. It would be a good race but I would think that Vince has something on Baxter there.

Bret

 

I agree with most everything that has been said, but I dont agree that it is an "NYI track" problem.

Andy also said he cut a 2.0 the second time, so the 2.2 60ft is no longer valid. I can almost guarentee that a 2.0 is not a bog with that setup.

Fix the mechanical problem and then see what happens. I am not sure how Andy is at driving or shifting (shift points), but the problem is most likely something like that (mechanical, shifting, etc...).

Jason

 

I have to agree with Bret...

I dont know if its me or the track but Ive never been able to pull crazy MPH at NYI either. 107 last year with 325ish rwhp in a 3650 car on only 115 this year on a1.7X 60. My ET has always been fairly decent though.

There was a Head Cam LS1 at NYI trapping 114ish with slicks, skinnies, Hals, etc Then take for example Chris from ARE, he was trapping 122+??? How can that be?

Maybe it could be bunk tuning like Jason said since the same guy tuned the car both times...

The DA the day Andy was just at the track was 2200. Nowhere near sealevel. Barometric pressure often gets lost in consideration since everyone always focuses on the temp and humidity. With the rain coming in on friday night the pressure was falling the whole night.

From what I have seen all the fast nationally posted times come from the east coast, louisianna, texas, etc where they at or below sealevel all the time.

If Andy was running at sealevel he would have gone 12.86 at 110.69 which sounds more realistic based on what everyone else was expecting...

Here is the calc...http://www.gnttype.org/techarea/misc/altitude.html

 

Actually Jason I haven't run a 2.0 60' yet with this set up. I ran a best of 2.19. If I can get in the 2.0's I should be in the 12's. My corrected time and mph look good. Too bad those aren't the actual times I ran. We'll see what happens for the rest of the year. I'm going to try to be there every Wednesday and Friday until they shut down for the winter.

Andy

 

I would agree with Jason the NYI isn't the problem. I have actually ran much better times at NYI that I have at Englishtown.

 

Andy, I misread what you wrote.....in that case, you have 2mph more with a 1.9 60ft.

Matt, your mph "appears" to be low because in reality Kennedy's dyno number a high. Take a look at every car that comes out of there....just doesnt match up.

So, its driving and mechanical in Andys case. Gotta get off those GSCs and a little extra gear will help you out with that cam. You will be able to utilize more of 4th gear. One of the best ways to get a little extra mph out of your car (everytime I have done it) is running out 3rd gear as long as you can.

Jason

 

I have been taking 3rd all the way through the traps. I tried shifting to 4th once and lost about 1 mph. You're right about those GSC's. I hate 'em. I loved my BFG Comp T/A's that I had before these. I will probably pick up a pair of drag radials in the spring. I should get gears too, but I'm probably gonna wait until i can get a 12 bolt.

Andy

 

You need gears 4.10s for that combo would be best IMO.
Jason