Same story for me. I'm 30, married, with two kids. I have gone 125+ a couple of times in cars. I am also lucky to be alive with some of the stupid things i've done in life. Be careful out there, guys.

 

Hmm 8 cars lengths in 60 feet? So is the Cobra or Audi 7 feet long? Does that kind of chop interfere with leg room? Couldn't resist man.

I agree ET wins races. And that's related to driver skills as much as money to add equipment.

 

Ahh, so much to deal with....where to begin.

First of all, I'm not flaming a particular person or what they choose to drive. Different strokes. I'm merely pointing out the huge discrepancy between what "xxx whp/xxx car weight" means as far as ETs, when comparing a turbo import to a V8. Completely different worlds, and if you try to use dyno and car weight numbers from one side to relate to the other side, it just doesn't work. I've been hearing, in person and online, about how this or that import has been modded up to 500HP, only weighs 3000 lbs, and it's gonna eat a domestic car alive. But the numbers just don't work that way. Pointing that out makes me a bad guy? Sorry.

My post was not about whether an import can beat a domestic, or even which one is "better". There is no single answer to that, it's just personal preference and the particular cars. My post was about how misleading dyno numbers can be as compared to actual perfomance at the track. People love to have one nice, neat HP or TQ number to toss around, but that really doesn't tell you squat about what the ET's going to be, especially comparing different configuration engines.

A couple of items I'd like to cover:

1. I'm pretty sure that the point in a drag race is to be in front at the finish line. The only thing that determines that is ET. Trap speed vs ET does provide indicators of how well a car is putting it's available power to the ground, among other things, but talking about your higher trap speed is a poor substitute for winning a race.

2. It's not even close to being just "about traction". That's only one piece of the puzzle, as someone else intelligently pointed out. Torque curve vs gearing is huge, completely independently from traction. You could have tires glued to the track and a ton of peak horsepower, but if your gearing doesn't properly mate up to your torque curve, or your torque curve is so peaky and narrow that you can't efficiently apply the power to even the world's stickiest tires, you still have a problem. You're going to lose.

As an overly simple example, let's say we run the 1/4 mile with identical cars, both with manual trannies that are stuck in 3rd gear from start to finish. Only one difference. Put a 2.73 rearend in one, and a 3.42 in the other.

Who's going to win? Doh! It's not about traction, it''s not about driving, it's not about more or less "rated" horsepower or torque, since the cars are otherwise identical. So which car do you want to be in? I'm thinking the 3.42. The only thing the 3.42 rear end did was to let the engine operate closer to it's optimum torque band for more of the race than the 2.73 did. Yeah, I know this is all obvious, but there is a point to it.

The (IMO) ridiculously narrow, high-RPM-only power band of these turbo'd 4 bangers is just not going to allow their impressive looking dyno numbers to translate to low ETs anywhere near the relatively broad, flat torque curve of a SBC, if both showed the same peak HP. The import car's relatively light weight is the saving grace. Factor that out by swapping the turbo 4 and the V8 between the cars, WITH BOTH ENGINES SHOWING 450 *PEAK* HP AND TQ ON THE SAME DYNO, and it's going to take about 10 seconds at the track to confirm that those peak HP numbers do not mean anywhere near the same thing on both engines. Anybody race an LT1 RX7 lately? 10's on DRs.

How about some math? The 499 HP Eclipse hits 300 ft/lb of torque at about 4700RPM and stays above 300 until it tops out at about 7200 RPM. So he's got about a 2500 RPM range of 300+ torque. OTOH, a somewhat typical modded LT1 with "only" 377 HP dynosheet, like the one HERE will show you 300 ft/lb of torque available from around 2300RPM straight through to the 6300 RPM redline. That's a 4000 RPM range with 300+ ft/lb of torque available.

It's obviously going to be a lot easier to put that amount of torque, similar in both cars, on the pavement when it's available over nearly double the RPM range. Period. The engine will be operating at/near it's optimum powerband more of the time, with less gearing changes (shifting) any way you slice it. Average out the total power available over a 12 second period and the V8 yields a similar amount of *useable* power during the 1/4 mile, though it supposedly has 122 less HP.

Now the ET numbers add up to make a lot more sense, since the Eclipse has about a 200-300 lb weight advantage. In fact, it looks to me like the Eclipse is hooking up at least as good as the Camaro, once you factor at all in. Like I said, it's a little more complicated than just "traction".

 

Ummm, I think maybe it does if you're racing.

No offense, but the mentality in your quote up there is pretty much exactly the issue I'm talking about. If ET doesn't count in a drag race, what does? Dyno sheets? Trap speeds? Flaming green speedometer overlays?

 

Originally posted by RawAzzLT1
I also wanted to add that this thread is pointless.

OK, that's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. But the obvious question is, "Then why are you reading it and posting a 3 paragraph response?" Hey, I'm just messing with you a little. I'm really a pretty rice.........I mean, nice guy.

digging up information you know nothing about just to stir up trouble is counter productive. there is alot you dont understand about hondas.

I've owned 7 Hondas. 1 Civic, 3 Accords and 3 Preludes. 5 of them I bought new. I like Hondas and think their QA is incredible. I probably know at least a little about them. I'm not just ******* imports, my man. I'm ******* the trend, which seems to be popular among import drivers, to quote huge dyno numbers, then come up short at the track. I would feel the same way about domestic cars, if that was the same case. Find me an fbody that dynoed *522 HP* that can't beat 12.6 sec in the 1/4 mile. And I don't care what the thing weighs, or who was driving it. Heck, I may not even care if there was a blizzard going on during the run

That is my point. Talking smack, using inflated numbers that really don't mean too much in the realworld. That is just not cool. But that's what I'm getting from various peeps these days. Even teenage relatives at family parties, which just may be why it bugs me so much.

 

I'm right there with you, and keep trying to remember that when my foot starts twitching on the freeway. Oh, the stupdity-on-steroids stories I could tell.

 

And there you go again. What kind of HP and torque does my car produce? What kind of ET does my car turn? Which car that I'm talking about would "outright destroy" me? Where did you get your info?

I'm quoting hard numbers, directly from a public website and drawing some conclusions about what I think are disappointing gaps between HP ratings and Elapsed Times in the 1/4 mile. OTOH, you are assuming I would get "outright destroyed" without a lot of info.

You didn't ask, but I'm probably putting up somewhat similar HP and TQ numbers to the LS1 on that website, out of my new 383 at this point. Maybe a little lower than his, since I haven't been dynotuned yet, so I'm just estimating, to be honest. Custom grind cam, TEA heads, and the rest of the usual stuff in a forged 383. I put better than 5 car lengths on a new C5 the other day, and seriously hammered a stock 2001 Z28 a good bit worse than that, so I know she's running pretty strong. Dynotuning is coming soon.

Frankly, once I get dialed in over the next 2 or 3 weeks, I don't see too much to be nervous about on that website. FWIW, I had my file-to-fit rings installed just a tad loose so I wouldn't have any heat related seizing issues on the bottle. I'm built to take a 200-250 shot on top of my 425 rwhp N/A target.

I don't give my 10 bolt much chance of living to see Christmas. Maybe not even July 4th

 

MyZb383
first thing. Hondas are usually geared correctly for their powerband. (the peopel that actually know what they are doing) secondly there is a little thing called a 2 step. allowing you to launch in your powerband.. example
now that car runs 11.9@120 those numbers add up to me. and thats with 328whp

This does the 1/4 in 10.8@124 with a 1.5 60 foot those numbers look just like a v8 numbers dont they?

This runs 12.4@118 with 300 at the flywheel



so why do other people with 500hp run 12's? two reasons lots of money in the motor but none in suspension. second reason is gearing Lots of turbo honda guys opt for the LS transmission which is super long its comparable to a 2:73 rear end on a camaro that with a small displacement motor ... you can figure out the rest. the reason this is popular is because with high hp it makes highway pulls longer which is what alot of themcare about.

But as you can see you can have matching 1/4 et and mph with little hp

 

Ok, I'm going to sum this over-talked about, stupid argument up.

Dyno #s don't mean ****. Putting a car on a dyno simply shows you how much HP/TQ a cars engine is making, that's it. It doesn't mean that the car will run a certain ET or trap a certain MPH. There are too many real world variables that come into play. That takes care of the dyno thing...

As for the ET v.s. MPH debate: ASSUMING that your car is set up right (tuning, gearing, good broad HP/TQ band, etc), than it's fair to say that ET wins races at the track and MPH plays more of a role on the street, MOST of the time. What I mean by this is this- EX: You've got two cars. One runs 12.0 @ 115 w/ 1.60 60ft AT THE TRACK. The other runs 12.2 @ 125 w/ 2.4 60ft AT THE TRACK. Now take the cars to the street where they will BOTH more than likely have traction problems, and the outcome would be a little different than at the track. Now if that 12.0 @ 115 car has his car set up REALLY good, and he hooks on the street like he does at the track, then the race is in his favor again.

The main thing that matters on the street is traction and MPH. I've been streetracing too long to have some 30yo guys who DON'T streetrace try and tell me that ET matters on the street like it does at the track. I'm sorry if you don't buy into that, but I've only seen a handful of guys hook on the street like they do at the track- and I'm talking 9-10sec cars that have thousands in susp., some narrowed up, and even tire soaked in VHT. And they can yank tires 2-3ft in the air just like at the track. But those guys are few and far between.


Don't streetrace? Thats totally fine. I got absolutely nothing against you. But don't try and talk about something you don't know about. And the simple fact is- ON AVERAGE, ET IS WHAT WINS RACES AT THE STRIP; MPH PLAYS MORE OF A ROLE ON THE STREET.



Jon

 

This is a ridiculous stereotype. My SRT-4 makes more low-end torque than it can use, and most of the fun is over at 6,000rpm. It's a very torquey car, if I've ever driven one.

 

What exactly is there to know about street racing?

1). It's illegal

2). It's dangerous

3). Traction is worse then at a track because no one is prepping the street and not many people are running on ET Streets to go to the mall.

4). Many races occur on the highway negating traction issues and making the race trap vs trap and driver vs driver.

5). Anything can happen. Good or bad.

6). It's illegal.

7). It's dangerous.

ET wins at the track. Trap wins on the highway where you shouldn't be racing anyway. The overall best cars IMO are the ones who have a good combonation of the two. Can hit 1.7 60' times or lower and trap 115+ or whatever you think is a respectable trap speed.

And I agree that dyno numbers are not going to determine what you run. In fact I only see dyno graphs as a tool to measure your mods and help determine things like what gears or stall would fit best. Other then that I just wanna know what my ET is and what I trapped.

 

I mostly agree with you. In fact, it seems like you are making the same point I am. Namely, concentrate on hauling maximum butt down the track, not on your dyno sheets. The site I pointed out has more dyno #s than ETs on the front page. Gigantic dyno numbers of doom.

As you and I both pointed out, gearing is huge. But you still need to make power in as wide a band as possible, regardless of gearing. So think about this one.

Let's compare 2 go-really-fast-using-more-or-less-typical-mods type cars running upper 11's. For the V8, how about this one HERE. For the turbo 4 banger, we'll use your 1st example from HERE

Now let's look at the power to weight ratios for the cars.

V8 = 3500 lbs / 384 rwhp = approx 9.1 lbs per HP for 11.65 ET/119mph

Turbo 4 = 2550 lbs / 328 whp = approx 7.8 lbs per HP for 11.9 ET/120mph

It's pretty plain. The turbo 4 needs a better power/weight ratio to get it done. The Integra is one of the better performing examples from the Honda site. But the V8 turns a better ET with a 17% worse power/weight ratio. Why? Broader power band, for the most part. You can spend all day looking up track times and dyno sheets, then doing the math, and the results will be consistent. The forced induction 4 cylinders generally need from 20-30% better power to weight ratio to make the same thing happen as a V8. There will be the inevitable exceptions, but the vast majority will fall around that baseline. And please keep in mind that your import examples you are using here absolutely kick the crap out of the numbers on the site I first brought up. I think it's a pretty valid point I'm making.

So to summarize what I said in the first post of the thread:

Relative to the dyno vs realworld track performance of an LT1 or LS1, dyno sheets on a turbo ricemobile need to be adjusted downward by about 25%. That was and still is my point in this thread. Something to keep in mind when reading stats or talking down at the local nightspot.

 

That would be totally subjective, wouldn't it? "It's a very torquey car, if I've ever driven one." Depends on what you or I have driven, I suppose. I wouldn't call it torquey. I wouldn't even call my 383 Z28 torquey, relative to my driving experience. But I don't drive an SRT-4, and if you love driving it, I'm totally happy for you.

You probably don't care, but what I would call a torquey car (and remember this is just subjective based on where you've been) would be the '68 Shelby I owned with a 427 sidebolt main Ford LeMans in it. Totally modded and tweaked back, in the days of 105 Octane leaded gas at the pump. Well over 500HP and 500 ft/lbs of torque and a ton of it under foot across a big RPM range. Put the tranny in 4th from a dead stop (3.90 rearend) let the clutch out and floor it. By 30MPH you were accelerating strong, by 60 you were pinned to the seat. Out playing around on the freeway, a hard shift 3rd to 4th would yank the back tires loose doing over 100mph.

That's what I would call a torquey car, but again, it's all subjective.

 

No, it's completely objective. Take a look at the power (not my dyno, but that's how my sheet looked) it makes, and when it makes it.

The engine makes >90% of it's peak torque at 2500 rpm, inside of the normal driving range. I don't care who you ask or who's definition you use, but comparitively speaking that's considered torquey. If you disagree, you are likely on an illegal substance.

When I stomp the gas, it goes NOW. There is no waiting. There is no high-rpm only power like you speak of.

 

LOL. I'm over 30. In fact, I had probably already beaten that best time in your sig before you were even even thinking about getting born. Depends on exactly how old you are. I was taking street money from some pretty fast cars, likely before you were putting complete sentences together.

I always thought there might be something to learn from people who had been doing something longer than I had. But that's just me.

Anyway, wanna race? I'm an old fart, you should be able to waste me. I probably can't drive for crap, being all old and decrepit . I'm in Nashville. Maybe the forum would get a kick out of you teaching "the old fart" about street racing. I'm all up for learning. Don' forget the video cam.