98 3.8 question
08-08-2005, 03:27 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
Re: 98 3.8 question
What I am saying is I know its not a hp game...
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO ABOUT HORSEPOWER!
see now will you quite saying all I am talking about is peak hp... I don't car about hp, if I did probably woudl have dynoed my car by now. I know you are trying to get into the whole thing that I don't understand peak hp means nothing blah blah blah... I understand the concept, its "the supra problem"(has 1200 hp but still runs 12s)
I probably understand it more then most, I run different exhaust setups for different racing(drag, vs. autocross, vs. roadrace)
I coudl give a rats *** what hp people have... I am interested in times.
everytime I talk about gains I talk about better times.
ITS A FACT v6s run better times with 3' catbacks, then 2.5. We are not talking about my car or anything to do with my car. We are talking about dozens fo v6s on the v6 boards.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO ABOUT HORSEPOWER!
see now will you quite saying all I am talking about is peak hp... I don't car about hp, if I did probably woudl have dynoed my car by now. I know you are trying to get into the whole thing that I don't understand peak hp means nothing blah blah blah... I understand the concept, its "the supra problem"(has 1200 hp but still runs 12s)
I probably understand it more then most, I run different exhaust setups for different racing(drag, vs. autocross, vs. roadrace)
I coudl give a rats *** what hp people have... I am interested in times.
everytime I talk about gains I talk about better times.
ITS A FACT v6s run better times with 3' catbacks, then 2.5. We are not talking about my car or anything to do with my car. We are talking about dozens fo v6s on the v6 boards.
Last edited by MustangEater82; 08-08-2005 at 03:30 PM.
08-08-2005, 03:36 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Statesville NC
Posts: 1,109
Re: 98 3.8 question
then the burdon of proof is on you. Like I said. Take a 2.5 inch cat back to teh track, run it and then swap out a 3 inch cat back of the same company, the same day, at the same track and see what happens. If by your logic it will work better, then how come your not telling all the V8 guys that they would run better with 4 inch exhaust? Surely you do not think that the 350/346 CI requires the same pipe diameter as the V6's?
so you say that it runs better, then prove it. I'm not talking stock exhaust VS 3 inch. I am talking aftermarket 2.5 inch cat back VS aftermarket 3 inch cat back on the same car. you up for it?
so you say that it runs better, then prove it. I'm not talking stock exhaust VS 3 inch. I am talking aftermarket 2.5 inch cat back VS aftermarket 3 inch cat back on the same car. you up for it?
08-08-2005, 03:44 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
Re: 98 3.8 question
Originally Posted by HBHRacing
then the burdon of proof is on you. Like I said. Take a 2.5 inch cat back to teh track, run it and then swap out a 3 inch cat back of the same company, the same day, at the same track and see what happens. If by your logic it will work better, then how come your not telling all the V8 guys that they would run better with 4 inch exhaust? Surely you do not think that the 350/346 CI requires the same pipe diameter as the V6's?
so you say that it runs better, then prove it. I'm not talking stock exhaust VS 3 inch. I am talking aftermarket 2.5 inch cat back VS aftermarket 3 inch cat back on the same car. you up for it?
so you say that it runs better, then prove it. I'm not talking stock exhaust VS 3 inch. I am talking aftermarket 2.5 inch cat back VS aftermarket 3 inch cat back on the same car. you up for it?
how about you get me times of cars with 2.5: catbacks, and I start getting what times people with 3 in catbacks have run.
That or you can buy me the exhaust systems I'll install them on my car, run them, log them with HPT, and compare them for ya
08-08-2005, 03:45 PM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
Re: 98 3.8 question
08-08-2005, 03:47 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Statesville NC
Posts: 1,109
Re: 98 3.8 question
Liek I said, the burdon of proof is on you. Your the guy with the V6, your the guy sticking up for the 3 inch system, your the guy that is going against scientific formula, engineers and year upon years of testing that says your wrong. It's up to you to prove yourself right, not me.
BTW, that thread will NOT get you the information that you need. posting that there is like going to paris and telling them that french food is not as good as american food.
There was already a VERY good post there that was totaly ignored by 99% of the members.
BTW, that thread will NOT get you the information that you need. posting that there is like going to paris and telling them that french food is not as good as american food.
There was already a VERY good post there that was totaly ignored by 99% of the members.
Last edited by HBHRacing; 08-08-2005 at 03:49 PM.
08-08-2005, 03:49 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
Re: 98 3.8 question
Originally Posted by HBHRacing
Liek I said, the burdon of proof is on you. Your the guy with the V6, your the guy sticking up for the 3 inch system, your the guy that is going against scientific formula, engineers and year upon years of testing that says your wrong. It's up to you to prove yourself right, not me.
And I say right back...
you do not race v6s you have not been around them so how the hell coudl you know what they can and cannot do? I'm not coming in and telling you about lt1s... because I don't have too much experience with them.
hell earlier in this thread you claimed you worked with a 5-speed with 3.08s, which is not possible and commonly known among v6ers, unless you guys swapped in something which woudl be retarted.
Never claimed to be an expert, just relaying what I have seen in the last 7 years of racing v6 f-bodies.
I think the problem is you focus on what "the experts" say... which I normally woudl agree... but unfortuneatley no experts waste their time with proper research on v6 f-bodies because their is no money in it. And I trust "real world data" over the research on a platform that has nothing to do with me.
Last edited by MustangEater82; 08-08-2005 at 03:52 PM.
08-08-2005, 04:07 PM
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Statesville NC
Posts: 1,109
Re: 98 3.8 question
I have been working with V6's for going on 3 years. If not for the fact that our project car was sold we would have it in the 13's by now with hardly anything at all done to it. I have for a long time been working on things for the 3.8's, you have to approach it a little bit different then the V8's. The power difference requires you to change your thinking just a little. There is more to be gained in areas that are not as popular on the V8's.
Once I get my shop up and running, one of my first project cars is going to be another 3.8 project car. I have a lot of luck with then and want to rival the fastest NA 3.8. I have been inside and around 3.8's several times. I have changed 3 V6 fbody motors. How many have you changed? I have developed one very nice performance part for the 3.8's that netted us a .33 ET gain. I am also working on several other ideas as mentioned before in this thread. All of this is on top of my 5+ years as an auto tech where I work daily on many cars including a lot of GM's. I have a certificate for completing a seminar for "GM engine performance II" which covers engine systems for GM. So yes, I think I have this pretty well covered. As I said, Pay attention in the years to follow and you will see what I mean.
BTW, if you want to kill about an hour and educate yourself.. feel free. http://www.camarov6.com/ubb/ultimate...=006136#000006
All the answers are all collected in that thread. It was many months ago. It will either change your mind like I have been trying to or you will just be like teh rest of the missinformed. We had 2 of the oldest members on that site convinced. Do you want to be one of them?
Once I get my shop up and running, one of my first project cars is going to be another 3.8 project car. I have a lot of luck with then and want to rival the fastest NA 3.8. I have been inside and around 3.8's several times. I have changed 3 V6 fbody motors. How many have you changed? I have developed one very nice performance part for the 3.8's that netted us a .33 ET gain. I am also working on several other ideas as mentioned before in this thread. All of this is on top of my 5+ years as an auto tech where I work daily on many cars including a lot of GM's. I have a certificate for completing a seminar for "GM engine performance II" which covers engine systems for GM. So yes, I think I have this pretty well covered. As I said, Pay attention in the years to follow and you will see what I mean.
BTW, if you want to kill about an hour and educate yourself.. feel free. http://www.camarov6.com/ubb/ultimate...=006136#000006
All the answers are all collected in that thread. It was many months ago. It will either change your mind like I have been trying to or you will just be like teh rest of the missinformed. We had 2 of the oldest members on that site convinced. Do you want to be one of them?
Last edited by HBHRacing; 08-08-2005 at 04:42 PM.
08-08-2005, 10:30 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Statesville NC
Posts: 1,109
Re: 98 3.8 question
I never said that it was.. I said that it would have been by now. Actualy we had it at 14.6 but the clutch was toast. With the spec 2 that we were going to install and a set of DR's along with the 3.73's we should have been right at the 13 mark. But thats besides the point since the car was sold before it could be done. Over 100 track passes and over 60K miles on the stock clutch was just way way too much. On the 14.8 run the clutch wasn't really healthy either. It was just masked by cool weather. In the summer it would slip forever. ..
08-09-2005, 09:07 AM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
Re: 98 3.8 question
well thats nice but like I said interested in real world numbers not theorys...
With your claim I can make the same claim... then I am going to have the fastest internatlly stock v6 n/a...
I mean little G's time is only 8/10ths away...
all I need is a better clutch, gears, and drag radials...
btw... notice how the population of v6s is all saying they had better results with 3" catbacks?
With your claim I can make the same claim... then I am going to have the fastest internatlly stock v6 n/a...
I mean little G's time is only 8/10ths away...
all I need is a better clutch, gears, and drag radials...
btw... notice how the population of v6s is all saying they had better results with 3" catbacks?
08-09-2005, 06:25 PM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Statesville NC
Posts: 1,109
Re: 98 3.8 question
No, they are saying that they went from flwmaster to a real cat back and showed improvment. Like I said on FBV6 i'm not suprised. Your not going to prove a thing from your post. Again. Same car, same company, same track, same day running the 2 cat backs is the only way that anyone will ever know.
08-10-2005, 01:19 AM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: rochester ny
Posts: 31
Re: 98 3.8 question
I read that long thread, HBHRacing, it was quite the read. Lots of info, Im inclined to beleive it all to. I would like to see that comparison though. but good info, I might have to follow it when I get a new exhaust.
08-10-2005, 08:05 AM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Statesville NC
Posts: 1,109
Re: 98 3.8 question
Originally Posted by bl4z3d
I read that long thread, HBHRacing, it was quite the read. Lots of info, Im inclined to beleive it all to. I would like to see that comparison though. but good info, I might have to follow it when I get a new exhaust.
Thank you. This is the exact responce I am looking for. Interesting, thought provoking and something that might be used later on. Like I said. I don't care what people do, I just want them to have the information and to deside for themselves what to do with it. Even if they deside to go with 3 inch if they still understand why the 2.5 will work better I will be fine with that. but honestly, 95% of you guys are clueless. your just following blindly because it's the "popular" thing to do. While gong with 3 inch might make you popular and not have people call you names. That doesn't mean that it's the best thing.
08-10-2005, 08:33 AM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
Re: 98 3.8 question
I just give up... 
how about this fact.
14.4 is faster then 14.8
$100s less was invested on the car that rant he 14.4( then the car that ran the 14.8. and weight reduction other hten the Jack/spare was not a factor.
how about this fact.
14.4 is faster then 14.8
$100s less was invested on the car that rant he 14.4( then the car that ran the 14.8. and weight reduction other hten the Jack/spare was not a factor.
Last edited by MustangEater82; 08-10-2005 at 08:36 AM.
