When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I agree completely.....you've misled yourself based on the light weight of the vehicle and a mid 6 second 1/8 mile reflects a very decent time and MPH of 105 for a motor with your power numbers. The aero is killing this truck as evidenced by the 22MPH back end difference in MPH between 1/8 mile and 1/4 mile. It's also possible that your cowl air intake system isn't functioning the way it needs to at high speed either.....did you data log/record any of the track runs?
No I do not data log my runs. I do not have a way to do so. Usually the tuner comes to the track, and does that. This is a street driven truck mostly. But I do run, at some nostalgia events. So I really have no need, to change the tune. Once the tuner does his thing, at the track, on the street & on his dyno. I do not mess with the tune. But I have always thought it should run better times. So I started chasing some more ET. As you said maybe I am wrong. but a speed & et calculator says, I should be around 134mph in the 1/4. So I am 7mph off. That is not a big deal. Like you said the aero is not all that great. But I still think the 1/8 mile Ets should be better.
Last edited by bada; 11-28-2014 at 01:43 PM.
Reason: .
Maybe this will post. I broke a shock on this run. So I backed out on down track. The pass would probably, have been another 10.00. So this will give you guys and idea, on how the truck runs. This is the stock cam.
That thing hooks, pulls the tires, needs a wheelie bar and runs low 10s with a cammed LS7? You're doing fine. It runs strong. Your intake is the only bottle-neck I see aside from any tuning issues we're unaware of...and if there are, you're not missing much.
bada, this will put your mind to ease once and for all to show you how much the Aero is killing you....take a look at the simulation below....I took my 1988 Monte Carlo SS and backfitted the actual track MPH into Quarter Mile Jr to reflect the MPH demonstrated at the track when the motor was all stock with headers and it was only down about 27 RWHP from what it did on the chassis dyno (~460RWHP demonstrated vs 487RWHP on the chassis dyno). My car had 4.10's and a T56. I used this same data and swapped your transmission/convertor, gears, weight and aero date (the aero was just a guess using a van as the aero value) and you can see that your MPH is likely where it needs to be compared to my car....my Monte ran an 11.52 @ 121.66 MPH and what's important here is the MPH, not the ET.
The simulator results are very surprising, even shocking.
Bada, stick that drive line in a second gen RX7 and I bet you'll trap over 130mph. Those little cars are ubber slippery. Mine had a race weight of 3150, 400rwhp, and it trapped between 124-126mph (11.20s et) depending on weather.
bada, this will put your mind to ease once and for all to show you how much the Aero is killing you....take a look at the simulation below....I took my 1988 Monte Carlo SS and backfitted the actual track MPH into Quarter Mile Jr to reflect the MPH demonstrated at the track when the motor was all stock with headers and it was only down about 27 RWHP from what it did on the chassis dyno (~460RWHP demonstrated vs 487RWHP on the chassis dyno). My car had 4.10's and a T56. I used this same data and swapped your transmission/convertor, gears, weight and aero date (the aero was just a guess using a van as the aero value) and you can see that your MPH is likely where it needs to be compared to my car....my Monte ran an 11.52 @ 121.66 MPH and what's important here is the MPH, not the ET.
11-28-2014, 01:36 PM
