|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,708
Moderator
|
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,708 |
Does what ever program you are using figure in physics of a FWD vehicle?
-Mark
You can do something for Love...
You can do something for Money...
But there is nothing quite so satisfying as doing something out of Spite.
GTExtreme1@aol.com
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 592
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 592 |
So not counting David Zs 3.0L The best documented SC SVT times are 14.1s??? WEll can B.S. All day about what ifs...whats be run???? low 14s......Correct me if i'm wrong.
Ryan
98.5 Silver Frost Tour SVT 5979/6535
Born: May 15, 1998
Some Mods, still not fast enough..
90 Black SHO
SVT Performance.Com
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,682
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,682 |
Originally posted by T-RedSVT:
My best MPH was 99.76 and that was a 14.12 run. 100 mph is like a 13.8-13.9 time... a higher trap speed DOES NOT EQUAL a lower et.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,682
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,682 |
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
So not counting David Zs 3.0L The best documented SC SVT times are 14.1s??? WEll can B.S. All day about what ifs...whats be run???? low 14s......Correct me if i'm wrong. i'll agree to that. and add, if you want to hit LOW 13s you DAMN well better get some more torque (low/mid/high), cause without the tq, you will be lucky to get high 13s, and i don't care whose tranny you have.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329 |
Originally posted by bret:
i'll agree to that. and add, if you want to hit LOW 13s you DAMN well better get some more torque (low/mid/high), cause without the tq, you will be lucky to get high 13s, and i don't care whose tranny you have. Again you are wrong! :rolleyes: IT's TRACTION!!! Spinning through 3rd gear is no way to make good ET's. (heavy 17" rocks don't help either - but woulda coulda shoulda) I beat PhatSVT to 330' by a couple tenths. By the 1/8th had 2 tenths on me. (he ran almost 2.7 60' to my 2.2 - Imagine a 2.2 - that's ~13.6 @ 103!!!) TRACTION!!! Either that or I make over 200lb/ft at the wheels...  Your call... Get off the torque wagon silly... It's done run over your head... :p
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 392
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 392 |
Originally posted by WorldTour:
Does what ever program you are using figure in physics of a FWD vehicle?
-Mark Yes it does. Ill show you what I have for inputs and you can tell me what needs to be changed. In bold are the ones that are probably specific to YOUR SVT. The parameters are: displacement: 2544 cc location: front engined type: supercharged
hp: 358 @ 7100
tq: 225 @ 6000
compression: 10.2
redline: 7300
start rpm: 1500
with clutch: dumpTransmission: 5 spd manual Ratios: 3.42, 2.14, 1.45, 1.03, 0.77 final drive: 4.06 drive wheels: front car test weight: 3100
% of weight on front wheels: 63%
wheelbase: 106.5
tire section width: 215
wheel diameter: 16 in
tire profile: 50%coefficient of drag: 0.32 overall height: 54.5 overal width: 69.1 ground clearance : 6.0 inches
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329 |
CR is 10:1
Redline is 7500
Test weight ~3250-3300 (driver & S/C)
Try 3k clutch slip (though you probably did optimum launch method)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,319
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,319 |
Originally posted by bret:
a higher trap speed DOES NOT EQUAL a lower et. Did you read what I was talking about? In the previous post RyeLou said: Originally posted by RyeLou:
Corbett has had a s/c SVT for a while. It's not anymore, but he broke the 100mph barrier last week with it. I'm not sure if he got into the 12's, but I know he has been really close. So, basically I was telling him that 100 mph would not equal a 12 sec time in a S/C SVT. If he ran 100mph with the 60' times that have been discussed, it would equal about a 13.8 - 13.9. Originally posted by bret:
I'll agree to that. and add, if you want to hit LOW 13s you DAMN well better get some more torque (low/mid/high), cause without the tq, you will be lucky to get high 13s, and i don't care whose tranny you have. You better learn CPR if you want to discuss this, beacause that horse has been beat to death numerous times......
1991 GVR4
Lots of mods done.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 392
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 392 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
CR is 10:1
Redline is 7500
Test weight ~3250-3300 (driver & S/C)
Try 3k clutch slip (though you probably did optimum launch method) On your car? Stock 99 and up Cr is 10.25:1 I believe? Redline at 6750. Is mark running to 7500? Test weight...looks about right?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,708
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,708 |
I have an early 98, so the C/R is 10:1 IIRC, stock rev limiter on my car was 7,000rpms.
Currently it is 7,500rpms, but I will be using my MSD DIS-4 to lower it down to 6,800 for daily use once installed.
-Mark
You can do something for Love...
You can do something for Money...
But there is nothing quite so satisfying as doing something out of Spite.
GTExtreme1@aol.com
|
|
|
|
|
