Street Racing & Kill Stories - 600 whp Turbo 3v loses to 5th Gen camaro




DietCoke
03-24-2012, 03:55 AM
Background:
First kill on the new engine... lots of shit talking back and forth with this guy, we decided to finally run em. He finally got his shit together too, so it was a run what you brung kind of night.




Mustang:

Built 3v (some fancy saleen shit)
Cool intake
67mm snail pushing whatever pump gas allows (10-11psi?)
Manual
~620rwhp
http://img.tapatalk.com/a6fa048f-6649-1937.jpg

Camaro:
429, weight reduction (~3600),
Huge stall 4L80.
~590rwhp
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn163/GhostRL/DSC04730.jpg
Both cars had a 220lb passenger


The cars
http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/521610_410196595660513_100000105272951_1726515_818 520882_n.jpg

The video (not very exciting, dont like this new camera loc... obviously he never comes close to getting in front) Camaro puts ~3 cars on mustang to 140
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERMQ_6Vaz2Y

The aftermath, mustang ended up with a hurt cylinder a few minutes later on the way back. The camaro pushed the valve cover gasket out and sprayed some oil everywhere (needs better PCV).

We towed it home with my buddy's.... Chevy truck. Priceless.
http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/540950_410196665660506_100000105272951_1726516_111 0362584_n.jpg

Rematch to come sometime soon when he fixed his shit and I add some more pcv vent.


marc97taws6
03-24-2012, 04:07 AM
Typical results ;)

Good kill

why87
03-24-2012, 10:35 AM
Nice kill, you're car looks like it moves pretty good.


88blackiroc
03-25-2012, 12:11 AM
Just another mustang of the roads! :D.
good kill to.. i agree on the camera needs to find a much better position

Cjm1991
03-25-2012, 03:23 AM
Your car sounds very healthy, nice kill.

Sticks n Stones
03-25-2012, 04:48 AM
Nice kill 'coke, not that I was surprised though: Big cube N/A power stomps the hell out of similiar turbo power any day of the week.

3 pedal SS
03-25-2012, 04:48 AM
You car looks and runs great. Will watch for the rematch.

Heater
03-25-2012, 05:00 AM
Damn OP, your car sounds good and looks like it moves out pretty good.

gregsss
03-25-2012, 02:22 PM
nice, car moves out and sounds good OP

LS1rob00
03-25-2012, 03:14 PM
Your car runs good and sounds nice too. Nice kill

unit213
03-25-2012, 04:10 PM
Nice kill 'coke, not that I was surprised though: Big cube N/A power stomps the hell out of similiar turbo power any day of the week.

You might want to get to the track and test that theory of yours. I think you will find quite the opposite. Two properly setup cars...one n/a and one turbo...turbo wins.

Sticks n Stones
03-25-2012, 05:44 PM
You might want to get to the track and test that theory of yours. I think you will find quite the opposite. Two properly setup cars...one n/a and one turbo...turbo wins.

So you are saying that with same hp and weight, that a naturally aspirated car is gonna lose to a turbo car? Stop smoking the funny stuff man. We aint talking about 9,000 rpm hondas here: big cube big torque naturally aspirated is gonna win ever time with everything else equal.

why87
03-25-2012, 08:51 PM
turbo car will trap the hell out of n/a any day. I think similar power would be pretty close.

Sticks n Stones
03-25-2012, 09:04 PM
turbo=second half track car. They will trap the hell out of n/a any day. I think similar power would be pretty close.

again I'll say it: they will NOT outtrap a N/A that makes similiar power if they weights are the same. Period. Can't believe I have to even tell you guys why as any turbo guy intimately knows the drawbacks that I'm talking about...

Naturally aspirated has a billion times better throttle response, the kind of instant power that turbo guys can only enviously "try" to emulate. there is never EVER ANY power drop off because you changed gears or let up on the gas. Power is seamlessly tied into what your foot is doing and it's not a game of yo-yo with the driver of the turbo car trying desperately to match his delayed onput power output to his traction limits.

And do we even have to mention all the issues with heatsoak? Or the problems that require meth or racegas to overcome, and all the different tunes a turbo guy carries around for different occasions?

Turbo's and superchargers are the tools one uses when they can't get to the power level they want without using them.

Quite similar to the reasons Viagra is such a popular subscription.

why87
03-25-2012, 09:11 PM
Look at how many turbo cars trap higher than n/a cars when they run similar et's...they definitely move better on the back end. Not necessarily saying the turbo cars are better.

Sticks n Stones
03-25-2012, 09:20 PM
Look at how many turbo cars trap higher than n/a cars when they run similar et's...they definitely move better on the back end. Not necessarily saying the turbo cars are better.

Will somebody else chime in here?

For the purpose of this conversation regarding fast street cars: trap speed is based upon your horsepower to weight ratio. If one car traps higher then the other car and they both have the same elapsed time, then the higher trapping car is less efficient at using it's available power. Your argument actually proves my point!

Turbo guys have tons of tricks and mods that they use to try and minimize there deficiencies. They KNOW they are at a disadvantage and try to work around it.

why87
03-25-2012, 09:28 PM
Will somebody else chime in here?

For the purpose of this conversation regarding fast street cars: trap speed is based upon your horsepower to weight ratio. If one car traps higher then the other car and they both have the same elapsed time, then the higher trapping car is less efficient at using it's available power. Your argument actually proves my point!

Turbo guys have tons of tricks and mods that they use to try and minimize there deficiencies. They KNOW they are at a disadvantage and try to work around it.

I think we might be arguing two different points here.......I'm saying turbo cars roll hard on the back end and that's their advantage over an n/a car. They may get pulled out of the hole but roll right back around on the 2nd half of the track. Big broad powerband with an auto

Nick V.
03-25-2012, 09:29 PM
wouldnt a well set up turbo or supercharger, have no lagg? at least on a auto?

88blackiroc
03-25-2012, 10:04 PM
I think we might be arguing two different points here.......I'm saying turbo cars roll hard on the back end and that's their advantage over an n/a car. They may get pulled out of the hole but roll right back around on the 2nd half of the track. I think that's what Unit was alluding to.

Im going with sticks and stones on this one. Think about it..
as n/a gets out of the whole better and also keeps up that power as they go down the track. They have no power drop off until they shift or let off.
turbo cars dont have the same throttle response as n/a as the turbo has to spool up and by that time, the n/a car is gone. There is no reason why a turbo car with the same power and weight would catch up as it is making the SAME power. It would keep up if they were side by side doing a roll under perfect conditions with the same drivers as they make the same power in that point in time, but in a 1/4 race its n/a all the way.

Zac_Speed
03-25-2012, 10:09 PM
You might want to get to the track and test that theory of yours. I think you will find quite the opposite. Two properly setup cars...one n/a and one turbo...turbo wins.

There's a cetain N/A HOSS Camaro that runs faster times than most of the Turbo / Nitrous guys in the LSX series..

why87
03-25-2012, 10:16 PM
Im going with sticks and stones on this one. Think about it..
as n/a gets out of the whole better and also keeps up that power as they go down the track. They have no power drop off until they shift or let off.
turbo cars dont have the same throttle response as n/a as the turbo has to spool up and by that time, the n/a car is gone. There is no reason why a turbo car with the same power and weight would catch up as it is making the SAME power. It would keep up if they were side by side doing a roll under perfect conditions with the same drivers as they make the same power in that point in time, but in a 1/4 race its n/a all the way.

Agreed. But two properly setup cars (autos) the lag in between shifts doesn't exist. Look at how some of the guys with turbo cars can launch as soft as a 12 second car and run right around the n/a car on the back end. I've watched some turbo pro mods launch that look like they're rolling into the trottle compared to the big cube nitrous cars and pull like a freight train on the 2nd half. Boost control is an awesome thing. Turbo'd auto has a nice power curve compared to n/a.

itsslow98
03-25-2012, 10:17 PM
You guys are high if you seriously think an all N/A car will be faster then a turbo car at the same power.

Leave with a turbo/auto car off boost and it will never drop out of boost the entire run, and it will own that N/A cars torque the entire way down the track. You obviously have seen some really shity turbo combos to assume what your thinking.

why87
03-25-2012, 10:45 PM
There's a cetain N/A HOSS Camaro that runs faster times than most of the Turbo / Nitrous guys in the LSX series..

the SAM Camaro? :drool: :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnq7qja7As8

GotHemi?
03-25-2012, 10:56 PM
Cant believe this is even a debate. Give me a car. Ask me which one would i take out of a 600rwhp turbo set up vs a 600rwhp NA set up and you better believe im going with NA. And I promise you @ the track with all things being equal that NA car will make that turbo car look silly...

Let be honest here. Can a turbo 60 foot well?? Yea a PERFECTLY set up one. In reality tho how often do we see it outside of the pros??? It isnt that turbo cars trap so high for their power output. A 600rwhp turbo car should trap around the same as a 600rwhp anything if all things are equal. Its that turbo cars usually trap so high for their ET.

Example: 11.50@127mph

That tells you right there the car is making good power but isnt getting out of the hole worth a damn. Why? Because its a pain in the ass to get a turbo to leave.

Now you take a NA car making the same power and that bitch will probably run a 10.50@127.

We see turbo cars get beat in this section by cars that are waaay underpowered. Whats one of the first things ppl scream?? Did he brake boost and all this other bs. Ill pass.

Back to the race tho. I think this is a perfect example. We have a turbo car thats making more power than the NA car and both cars should weigh about the same. What happened? The NA car walked the dog on his ass.

BTW. 590rwhp outta the 5th gen??! Thats a hell of a set up. Can we get any details on the engine?

88blackiroc
03-25-2012, 11:10 PM
You guys are high if you seriously think an all N/A car will be faster then a turbo car at the same power.

Leave with a turbo/auto car off boost and it will never drop out of boost the entire run, and it will own that N/A cars torque the entire way down the track. You obviously have seen some really shity turbo combos to assume what your thinking.

Even if a turbo car got off the line without lag and hit boost and had perfect conditions then they are the same 'power' level then theres no reason the turbo would pull away unless you can explain a car having the same power at full boost is able to pull away and beat a n/a car?
Cant believe this is even a debate. Give me a car. Ask me which one would i take out of a 600rwhp turbo set up vs a 600rwhp NA set up and you better believe im going with NA. And I promise you @ the track with all things being equal that NA car will make that turbo car look silly...

Thank you!

GotHemi?
03-25-2012, 11:19 PM
the SAM Camaro? :drool: :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnq7qja7As8

That graph was fuckin with me at first!! Until I noticed it didnt start till 7K :eek2:

Not much of a tq curve either! lol

itsslow98
03-25-2012, 11:47 PM
If this, if that, but this............hilarious. Pointless argument IMO. You could also say your N/A motor is maxed out, and with the hit of a button or turn of a knob a turbo car can add 200rwhp if they want. But that would be a pointless argument. You guys assume that every n/a setup is perfect, and no turbo car has ever been set up properly.

why87
03-25-2012, 11:56 PM
That graph was fuckin with me at first!! Until I noticed it didnt start till 7K :eek2:

Not much of a tq curve either! lol

I'd bet it's safe to say it doesn't spend much time under 8k either :D

And the tq line looks like a table top :lol:

DarkJuggalo
03-25-2012, 11:58 PM
If this, if that, but this............hilarious. Pointless argument IMO. You could also say your N/A motor is maxed out, and with the hit of a button or turn of a knob a turbo car can add 200rwhp if they want. But that would be a pointless argument. You guys assume that every n/a setup is perfect, and no turbo car has ever been set up properly.

An N/A car can do that too with nitrous :secret2:

GotHemi?
03-26-2012, 12:21 AM
If this, if that, but this............hilarious. Pointless argument IMO. You could also say your N/A motor is maxed out, and with the hit of a button or turn of a knob a turbo car can add 200rwhp if they want. But that would be a pointless argument. You guys assume that every n/a setup is perfect, and no turbo car has ever been set up properly.

lol but that would go against what the entire debate is about...

GotHemi?
03-26-2012, 12:23 AM
I'd bet it's safe to say it doesn't spend much time under 8k either :D

And the tq line looks like a table top :lol:

Its safe to say no matter WTF that graph says or how that engine operate that its working well with a time of 8.1@170!!! Bad ass!!

gregrob
03-26-2012, 12:31 AM
Funny you mention the PCV system. Mine was setup just like that and would suck oil on a hard run. It's currently being replumbed to be more effective.

why87
03-26-2012, 12:40 AM
Its safe to say no matter WTF that graph says or how that engine operate that its working well with a time of 8.1@170!!! Bad ass!!

Could you imagine banging gears with that motor :hump:

Sticks n Stones
03-26-2012, 01:10 AM
You guys are high if you seriously think an all N/A car will be faster then a turbo car at the same power.

Leave with a turbo/auto car off boost and it will never drop out of boost the entire run, and it will own that N/A cars torque the entire way down the track. You obviously have seen some really shity turbo combos to assume what your thinking.

So you are saying that, say, a Evo or Supra at 600whp is making more torque then OP's 427ci LSx over the useable rpm band? I haven't done direct comparisons but have seen quite a bit of dyno graphs of both types and I don't see that happening. High revving engines with big turbos spool late in the rpm band, subaru or grand national type torquer engines make amazing low/mid range torque but there smaller turbo's die off up top. You're just not gonna see 600+whp turbo setups that have the proper, broad, user friendly torque curve of a big cube N/A motor.

.... now a big cube, "small" turbo LSx would be the ideal street warrior setup!

GXPPOWER
03-26-2012, 10:56 AM
FORD=Found on road Dead.

sweetC5
03-26-2012, 01:47 PM
Good kill, that car sounds unreal man!

88blackiroc
03-26-2012, 02:01 PM
So you are saying that, say, a Evo or Supra at 600whp is making more torque then OP's 427ci LSx over the useable rpm band? I haven't done direct comparisons but have seen quite a bit of dyno graphs of both types and I don't see that happening. High revving engines with big turbos spool late in the rpm band, subaru or grand national type torquer engines make amazing low/mid range torque but there smaller turbo's die off up top. You're just not gonna see 600+whp turbo setups that have the proper, broad, user friendly torque curve of a big cube N/A motor.

.... now a big cube, "small" turbo LSx would be the ideal street warrior setup!

Yes it would! :drool:
and no im not saying that. Im for n/a being quicker which is the point i was trying to get at but not sure if i really 'hit'.

Also for the sam camaro, id love to give that thing a go at the track! Id be so confused trying to shift at 7k or so and i still have that much rpm left!

DietCoke
03-26-2012, 09:27 PM
Funny you mention the PCV system. Mine was setup just like that and would suck oil on a hard run. It's currently being replumbed to be more effective.

:) I ended up with 3 breathers AND a catch can and it doesnt push oil anymore. Thank god for that.

BOBS99SS
03-26-2012, 09:55 PM
Only on tech someone would say a na car is better than a turbo car lol

automach1
03-26-2012, 10:05 PM
Only on tech someone would say a na car is better than a turbo car lol

Nobody said it was better

Sticks n Stones
03-26-2012, 10:29 PM
:) I ended up with 3 breathers AND a catch can and it doesnt push oil anymore. Thank god for that.

I haven't had any oil pushing issues with my shotrod yet. Everyone else seems to though so I guess it's just time ---- or I haven't had it WOT long enough.

So we still on for our run Diet? N/A to N/A then how about me with a small 100 shot? If you got your nitrous setup by then, we can go my 200 to your 400 and see who can catch traction first. lol

why87
03-26-2012, 10:41 PM
So we still on for our run Diet? N/A to N/A then how about me with a small 100 shot? If you got your nitrous setup by then, we can go my 200 to your 400 and see who can catch traction first. lol

Ahhhh shit. Here we go :corn: Time to deliver on the callout thread

DietCoke
03-27-2012, 12:17 AM
I"m not putting a kit on it anytime soon. Show up to seattle. Lots of cars will be there.

got-a-ls1
03-27-2012, 07:53 AM
lol all you guys just want to talk horsepower. nevermind the huge mid range torque a turbo makes.. usually a big cam n/a motor makes a lot more horsepower then torque and at high rpm. A turbo car usually makes more torque then horsepower. So even though it may have a bit of lag it also pulls way harder when it spools. Its too bad apparently some of you havnt been in a nice turbo car from the sounds of it. I love big inch engines as much as anyone, but the cost to build one is very high and the driveability of such an engine is not nearly as good as a turbo for a street car. the reason i went turbo is because i wanted the stock driveability coupled with awesome power. I have a crappy 6 speed turbo which loses huge amounts of boost betweens shifts. I mean completely letting off the throttle and not even power shifting it takes a whopppppping .3-.4 tenths of a second to come back into full boost, and a i shift into about 3 lbs from the start. Some people are just misinformed. oh and i doubt that mustang is making 600 rwhp on 10-11 lbs

sidewayz28
03-27-2012, 01:48 PM
nitrous > all

GXPPOWER
03-28-2012, 10:42 AM
Leaf blower mounted to intake> nitrous!

jbhotrod
03-28-2012, 11:19 AM
Every scenario is different. You cant give absolutes to either setup when just talking generally. A properly setup and sized turbo engine will make major mid range and pull like a train all the way to redline. The powerband of a N/A pushrod engine really depends on the cam, as said, without VVT/VCT.

Specifically about this race though, I would have to say that Camaro is definitely making more power under the curve. Its easy to tell this Camaro is not a max power setup and has an easier powerband than, say, a N/A 1100hp SB2.2, though I do think the SB2.2s are sick and would love to have an all black 69 Z/28 pro-touring or SCCA Trans-Am style setup with a big power SB2.2 but thats for a different thread. With 429ci at 590hp vs 283ci at 620hp, imo its a given which has more average power. And as can be seen in certain badly tuned/setup Supras making 1000hp yet still running mid-high 11s, average power matters esp in a drag race. And in this case, with the modular, maybe Im wrong, but Ill stick by my gut and say the mod is making less average than the LSx 429.

LittleMT
03-28-2012, 01:00 PM
I prefer boost at my altitude, it's damn hard to make power NA when you are more then a mile high...

got-a-ls1
03-28-2012, 07:39 PM
nitrous > all

lol i had nitrous... its hardly > all. its awesome but tastes even better with forced induction... ;)

1_MEANZ28
03-28-2012, 11:54 PM
nice kill ur car sounds great