12.01 bolt-on auto camaro(no power adder/headers)
12-13-2011, 08:52 PM
#41
Sorry guy's, but this is not adding up to me. The trap speed isn't right for the listed mods. I run a 12.05 at 112.8 mph w/a 1.65 60'. I also have 370rwhp,[NA] So, to the op, unless you have a lot of weight stripped out of your car, there are more performance mods then what you have listed.
My Formula ran 11.944 ET at 111.17 MPH's at 3,665 lbs., 100% stock internal 91K miles, LS1 intake, stock TB, stock injectors, lid, headers, full exhaust, TH400, stall and 3.70 gears. The car made 329 HP when it had the stock trans with stock convertor and 3.23 gears. I am sure when I added the TH400 and Stall plus the 9 inch rear with 3.70 gears the horsepower went down due to more drive train loss and of course more weight. I would have loved to have had 370 HP to the wheels at that time!!
I have no problem believing the ET or MPH! They said his car has 325 HP to 330 HP.
Congrats to the OP that started the thread on your new best.
N2
12-13-2011, 09:00 PM
#42
11 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NW IN
Posts: 1,730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please explain my 3600 lb. bolt-on only (again maybe 320ish RWHP) car running a 11.99 @ 111 in 500+ DA then. That formula is good for getting an estimate and that's it. And there are over a hundred cars on this site that are doing the same.
Now if you are talking about 372 flywheel HP, then the OP's car and mine are both probably over that mark, which is how they can hit those trap speeds.
Now if you are talking about 372 flywheel HP, then the OP's car and mine are both probably over that mark, which is how they can hit those trap speeds.
12-13-2011, 09:15 PM
#45
TECH Fanatic
I agree, there are far too many variables out there on the real track that can hinder that calculator's estimated times. That isn't a substitute for actually running the car down the track, it's just a rough estimate is all.
12-13-2011, 09:22 PM
#46
10 Second Club
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Glassboro
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
alright, its about time i chime in and just clarify some things. first off, thanks marc, greg, and ron for all your help and advice at the track. and thanks to all the guys on here that believe my times. i was just as surprised to see these times. the DA was approx 2000' below sea level. my 1/8 mile times were 7.631@89.56mph. there are 3 guys on here that were at atco with me on sunday and can vouch for my mods and 1/4 mile e.t.'s that day. my full list of mods are: slp lid. ported/polished tb. ls6 intake. underdrive pulleys. gibson cat-back. b&m shift kit. b&m transcooler. circle d 3400 stall converter. MT dr's. RPM tune. everything else on the car is STOCK except for eibach lowering springs. as far as weight reduction, i removed the spare tire/jack. rear interior plastics/speakers. door panels/front speakers. passenger seat. rear seats. seat belts. the car weighed 3660 with me in it before any weight reduction, so it was no lighter than 3460 on track day. Please remember that this is in december, at ATCO. my car put down 316whp 325wtq in the early fall. id guess and say it was probly making at least 325-330whp on this day. no offense but my car definately does NOT make 372whp
12-13-2011, 09:42 PM
#47
TECH Fanatic
I am not surprised. The hp# you used in your calculation was taken from a dyno, right? Some dyno's are very close, some, are not. In my case, it was almost dead on. N/A I had 373 rwhp. My trap N/A was 112mph. On a 75fwhp shot of nitrous, my dyno showed 423rwhp. Trap was 119mph, if I recall. In my case, the dyno was about dead on to the hp numbers that the formula said I was putting down. Trap speed is the most accurate way to determine hp.
12-14-2011, 12:03 AM
#51
11 Second Club
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO
Posts: 1,865
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dannyz, maybe you didn't realize they've acknowledged the fact that the car will only run that number at that track, at that time of year. -2000DA is rediculous. You need to use more then one calculator...mainly a DA calculator/converter. OP running that quick is completely believable giving the conditions of the track. If you would of been there the same day, you probably would of went .5 quicker too.
Great run OP, cars like that really hurt feelings.
Great run OP, cars like that really hurt feelings.
12-14-2011, 01:27 AM
#53
I trapped 113.62mph (on an 11.8 second pass) in my Z28 with only 335rwhp.
I just trapped 127.53mph in my C6 with only 393rwhp on the same day that Lucas and Ron ran.
Those numbers are SAE corrected on a Dynojet.
12-14-2011, 07:28 AM
#54
On The Tree
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dannyz cannot be wrong. The other 20 posters are wrong. Every track across the United States is malfunctioning. 2012 is near, sell your cars and build a bunker. 
Grats to OP, I enjoyed the thread, even with dannyz's antics.
Grats to OP, I enjoyed the thread, even with dannyz's antics.
12-14-2011, 10:02 AM
#55
My car same mods before the stall...
+2265 da 13.197
+2062 da 13.087
-249 da 12.740
-1245 da 12.638 Best with stock stall
My car same mods with ss3600
+503 da 12.062
-187 da 11.918
It appears the "drop of 1000 da is good for .1" dosent apply to my car? lol
12-14-2011, 11:13 AM
#56
11 Second Club
iTrader: (36)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: South Jerzy
Posts: 1,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A drop in da seems to effect my car alot more than what the calculators say and what is being said here in the thread.
My car same mods before the stall...
+2265 da 13.197
+2062 da 13.087
-249 da 12.740
-1245 da 12.638 Best with stock stall
My car same mods with ss3600
+503 da 12.062
-187 da 11.918
It appears the "drop of 1000 da is good for .1" dosent apply to my car? lol
My car same mods before the stall...
+2265 da 13.197
+2062 da 13.087
-249 da 12.740
-1245 da 12.638 Best with stock stall
My car same mods with ss3600
+503 da 12.062
-187 da 11.918
It appears the "drop of 1000 da is good for .1" dosent apply to my car? lol
nice times btw
12-14-2011, 05:56 PM
#57
alright, its about time i chime in and just clarify some things. DA was approx 2000' below sea level. Full list of mods are: slp lid. ported/polished tb. ls6 intake. underdrive pulleys. gibson cat-back. b&m shift kit. b&m transcooler. circle d 3400 stall converter. MT dr's. RPM tune. Weight reduction, i removed the spare tire/jack. rear interior plastics/speakers. door panels/front speakers. passenger seat. rear seats. seat belts. 325-330whp on this day.
You are just a bad man! If you had that 370 HP the OP has that tin can would have ran 11.70's
Just kidding
N2
12-14-2011, 11:26 PM
#58
haha well I wouldnt claim what I said to be the gospel. I should've been a lil more specific lol. Bascially, what I did was take the difference between a summertime pass and a wintertime pass, where the DA was on 2 extremes (-2000 and +2000') that comes out to a total of 4000', divided it by the amount of time i dropped and came up with a rough idea of how much altitude change it takes to = .1 second. There could be other factors that have an effect on times, like your 60'. If the car 60's stronger as a result of the DA change, then that's going to drop some time, as well as pulling in that better air all the way down the track nice times btw
nice times btw
12-15-2011, 12:14 AM
#59
We never actually figured it out entirely but aerodynamics and possibly even weight distribution played a part in it.
As far as 98tadriver's car and yours, probably almost half of the ET difference can be traced back to sixty foot alone, very possibly as much as .35 of his ET advantage is attributable to his much better sixty foots (1.49s) over yours. The rest is a combination of a really well matched set up, great air, good track prep, better aerodynamics and maybe his car was a little less than 3400 pounds on that particular day.
12-15-2011, 07:31 AM
#60
This also brings up a little 'sub debate' that a good friend of mine had ventured into a few years back. He has a heads & cam Camaro Z28 automatic making roughly 450rwhp and running high 10s to low 11s depending on the weather and couldn't figure out how in the hell a Corvette C5 of similar power and and even somewhat close in overall weight was still notably quicker/faster than his car, and this applied to quite a few C5s, not just one.
We never actually figured it out entirely but aerodynamics and possibly even weight distribution played a part in it.
As far as 98tadriver's car and yours, probably almost half of the ET difference can be traced back to sixty foot alone, very possibly as much as .35 of his ET advantage is attributable to his much better sixty foots (1.49s) over yours. The rest is a combination of a really well matched set up, great air, good track prep, better aerodynamics and maybe his car was a little less than 3400 pounds on that particular day.
We never actually figured it out entirely but aerodynamics and possibly even weight distribution played a part in it.
As far as 98tadriver's car and yours, probably almost half of the ET difference can be traced back to sixty foot alone, very possibly as much as .35 of his ET advantage is attributable to his much better sixty foots (1.49s) over yours. The rest is a combination of a really well matched set up, great air, good track prep, better aerodynamics and maybe his car was a little less than 3400 pounds on that particular day.
Thats a good explaination and I could think of those off the top of my head but no way would I think all that would equal about .9 difference.
You did forget one thing though and thats suspension but still a .9 difference? Do you happen to know the da of his 11.0 run? I didnt get the da I wanted this year. Im usually able to get a -1200 da run in. I only got -187. The way my car responsds to a drop in da I have no doubt my time would be 11.7 or so. But still thats a .7 difference! Also FWIW my swaybar was off the car and I dead hooked. If you watch my left front tire you can actually see it pulled off the ground an inch or two. It didnt appear to have any weight transfer issues.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsG2UrUS7sw