Track Kill Stories Race Track Victories, 1/4 Mile Times, Dyno Numbers - DRIVE RESPONSIBLY

A win, but should it have been this close??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 2, 2004 | 08:59 PM
  #1  
ChevyTuffD.A.'s Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,214
From: Fort Bragg, NC
A win, but should it have been this close??

I race a friend of mine that was in my Auto tech class from last year. He has a 92 Iroc Z with only 88,000 miles, nice car, runs good. It is a basically stock car besides exhuast. I raced my car with the mods in my signature and I was on street tires, keep in mind that I also have very crappy 2.73 gears. We raced from a stop and i had to keep getting on and off the gas to get some traction. By the time I had hooked and was moving he was a whole car ahead of me. Once i got traction i started realing him in and had a car length on him by the time I shut down at about 80 or so. Should it have been that close or what?? Am i going to need slicks and some gears to get full potential out of this car or do I have something wrong? The car feels good and doesnt run bad. Regardless I am happy I didnt lose to a 3rd gen.
Old Sep 2, 2004 | 09:06 PM
  #2  
BiGGinZ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 805
From: California
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

You just need traction. That is the reason most races with these cars are closer then they should be.
Old Sep 2, 2004 | 09:09 PM
  #3  
Ben383's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 187
From: Sac , Ca
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Is it a vert ? I had 273's in my vert, i installed headers, 373's gears and a shiftkit the car really woke up . I say even with 273's you should of beat him by a little more, but with traction issues you'll be surprise with what car's can hang with you .
Old Sep 2, 2004 | 09:29 PM
  #4  
nuke61's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 52
From: Vista, Ca
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Think of it this way... you picked up 3 car lenths in about 1/8th of a mile. Your car is much faster than his. Now you can improve your driving or get better tires (or both) so it's also much quicker.
Old Sep 2, 2004 | 10:43 PM
  #5  
CamaroGuy22's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,876
From: Maryland
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Well they didnt make IROC's in 92 for starters. But he probably has the L98 motor with great low end torque that will keep it up with you for the first 60 mph of the race, after that it falls on its face. But with your mods you should be slaughtering him...get some drag radials and run at the track, you probably have him by atleast 13 tenths. I didnt know pacesetter made shorties.
Old Sep 2, 2004 | 11:07 PM
  #6  
ChevyTuffD.A.'s Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,214
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

I didnt mean to put 92 on the year of the car, it was a 90 and i saw it after i had posted and didnt mess with changing it. I actually just found out tonight that my Pacesetter "shorty's" are in fact mid-lengths, I was just not sure so i just put shorty's. Traction was pretty bad at the start of the race, I had to get on and off the gas probably three times before i could get enough traction to leave it. I think I am going to need some tires to stick me to the ground and I am going to need to ditch the 2.73's becuase lets face it, they arent the best thing GM ever put in the camaro. Unless of course you want optimum gas mileage which in this case you shouldnt be buying a camaro. Thanks for the reply's. Dustin.
Old Sep 3, 2004 | 12:44 PM
  #7  
Antz97ZNJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 3,223
From: Browns Mills, New Jersey
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

If you had a perfect launch he would have been WAY back, those tpis run outta gas real quick
Old Sep 3, 2004 | 08:33 PM
  #8  
Sephiroth's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 28
From: the sea of cheese
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Originally Posted by ChevyTuffD.A.
I race a friend of mine that was in my Auto tech class from last year. He has a 92 Iroc Z with only 88,000 miles, nice car, runs good. It is a basically stock car besides exhuast. I raced my car with the mods in my signature and I was on street tires, keep in mind that I also have very crappy 2.73 gears. We raced from a stop and i had to keep getting on and off the gas to get some traction. By the time I had hooked and was moving he was a whole car ahead of me. Once i got traction i started realing him in and had a car length on him by the time I shut down at about 80 or so. Should it have been that close or what?? Am i going to need slicks and some gears to get full potential out of this car or do I have something wrong? The car feels good and doesnt run bad. Regardless I am happy I didnt lose to a 3rd gen.
LOL........and you guys say 99+GT's are slow.
I OWNED 2 guys at my work with old Iroc's............IN MY NEON.....98SPORT DOHC..........with some bolt ons......no nitrous.......my 03GT destroys them.....
I like the "traction" excuses............
Old Sep 5, 2004 | 06:59 PM
  #9  
Marc 85Z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,022
From: MD
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Any idea what engine was in the IROC? They came with several in 1990, ranging from a 210HP 305 to a 240HP 350 that will catch many LT1's offguard until 3rd gear Even with good traction it would have been only a car or two length difference to 60 if equipped with the 350 L98 engine. After that, well...

I doubt there is anything wrong with your car, just lack of traction. You just ran into a well running 3rd gen, a rare site indeed, but they are out there! We're not all slow In fact, I can trash 98 DOHC Neons with 2 plug wires pulled, a few passengers, and without even opening the secondaries I can do the same for 03 GTs, but they require the entire use of the carb...

Last edited by Marc 85Z28; Sep 5, 2004 at 07:06 PM.
Old Sep 5, 2004 | 09:46 PM
  #10  
Steve Y's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 97
From: Reno, NV
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Originally Posted by Marc 85Z28
Any idea what engine was in the IROC? They came with several in 1990, ranging from a 210HP 305 to a 240HP 350 that will catch many LT1's offguard until 3rd gear Even with good traction it would have been only a car or two length difference to 60 if equipped with the 350 L98 engine. After that, well...

I doubt there is anything wrong with your car, just lack of traction. You just ran into a well running 3rd gen, a rare site indeed, but they are out there! We're not all slow In fact, I can trash 98 DOHC Neons with 2 plug wires pulled, a few passengers, and without even opening the secondaries I can do the same for 03 GTs, but they require the entire use of the carb...
What heads do you have on that motor? What do you run in the 1/4 mile?
Old Sep 6, 2004 | 09:39 AM
  #11  
Marc 85Z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,022
From: MD
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Its got World Products Torquer heads on it. Fastest time several years ago before the cam, larger exhaust, gears and drag radials was a 13.8@100 It's much quicker now. Judging by results from street races and the butt dyno, I'm guessing very low 13s at around 105-107. Maybe quicker, I don't seem to have any problems with near stock LS1s from a roll. I plan on taking it to the track for a baseline run before the AFR 195s and Comp XE284 go on in the next few months.
Old Sep 6, 2004 | 10:36 AM
  #12  
Steve Y's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 97
From: Reno, NV
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Originally Posted by Marc 85Z28
Its got World Products Torquer heads on it. Fastest time several years ago before the cam, larger exhaust, gears and drag radials was a 13.8@100 It's much quicker now. Judging by results from street races and the butt dyno, I'm guessing very low 13s at around 105-107. Maybe quicker, I don't seem to have any problems with near stock LS1s from a roll. I plan on taking it to the track for a baseline run before the AFR 195s and Comp XE284 go on in the next few months.
It's nice to see some good running 3rd gens!
Old Sep 6, 2004 | 11:56 AM
  #13  
ChevyTuffD.A.'s Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,214
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Yes it was the 240 hp 5.7. If you want to bring your mustang out here to Kokomo Indiana I would love to hand you your ***, as a matter of fact i am going to order slicks today. Then we will see who's car really can beat mini vans.
Old Sep 6, 2004 | 03:49 PM
  #14  
'88Saleen's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 167
From: Harrisville,RI,USA
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Originally Posted by ChevyTuffD.A.
Yes it was the 240 hp 5.7. If you want to bring your mustang out here to Kokomo Indiana I would love to hand you your ***, as a matter of fact i am going to order slicks today. Then we will see who's car really can beat mini vans.
To bad I live so far from Indiana.

_________________
'88 Saleen- 310cid Novi 2000 twisted wedge heads C4
best et- 9.68
best mph- 146.18
'00 T/A- Hurst,MTI lid,Borla catback,eradispeed rotors,Hothchkis LCA's,KB DD SFC's,spec st.3 clutch, nitto DR's
my site- www.renegadesaleen.com
Old Sep 6, 2004 | 04:35 PM
  #15  
ChevyTuffD.A.'s Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,214
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Re: A win, but should it have been this close??

Sephiroth, you probably dont have to worry about traction issues, you drive a Mustang, you probably dont even have enough power to turn the wheels.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:34 PM.