Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 567
P
Veteran CEG\'er
Offline
Veteran CEG\'er
P
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 567
Originally posted by nick10:
I wonder how much mph would phat svt gain if he had a better hook up of the line,lets say a 2.0 or 2.2 60 foot with stock rims?




Just think those wheels I was on that day were the TSW Imolas. One wheel weighs 6 lbs more than the stock one.


Sam 1998 SVT Contour- SOLD 2002 Mustang GT - 406 RWHP/391 RWTQ 12.1 @ 115 MPH
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,020
F
Hard-core CEG\'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
F
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,020
MPH would probably stay about the same. It is not effected much by a good or bad launch. That is why it is a good indicator of how much power a car is making.


Simon new- '04 Dodge Dakota 4x4. V8, 5spd FOR SALE Black 98 SVT EO (#2119 of 6535)- SOLD! New project-'88 Ranger 302 swap.
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
D
Hard-core CEG'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG'er
D
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Originally posted by fst4dr:
MPH would probably stay about the same. It is not effected much by a good or bad launch. That is why it is a good indicator of how much power a car is making.



Actually have 25lbs less unsprung & rotational mass would increase both ET & trap speed.

Also a quicker 60' can translate into a slightly better trap speed as less acceleration time is wasted spinning the tires.

We are talking about dropping over 1/2 second off the 60' time.

I'd definitely agree with you if the 60' time change was just a tenth or 2.


2000 SVT #674 13.47 @ 102 - All Motor! It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  mbb41_dup1 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5