HAL shocks = faster ETs?
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
From: PURDUE
HAL shocks = faster ETs? Something I don't understand here...
If my car is already hooking hard enough ( I don't need more traction ) then how would HAL adjustable shocks (up front) make me quicker? I understand they're for more weight transfer, but you only want more weight transfer for more traction... right or wrong?
If my car is already hooking hard enough ( I don't need more traction ) then how would HAL adjustable shocks (up front) make me quicker? I understand they're for more weight transfer, but you only want more weight transfer for more traction... right or wrong?
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? I just installed the front HALS on my car and I didn't notice any improvement on my 60 ft. Honestly, if I had it to do all over again I would have kept the stock shocks and spent the money elsewhere. I don't think they are worth the money considering the lack of performance gain, not to mention how much of a pain they are to install. <img src="gr_sad.gif" border="0">
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? How well is hooking hard enough? are you pulling low 1.5 60's? <img src="gr_stretch.gif" border="0">
Actaullt I never seen an actual gain in my 60 foot time but it made it WAY more consistant instead of my 60 foot time being all over the place.
Actaullt I never seen an actual gain in my 60 foot time but it made it WAY more consistant instead of my 60 foot time being all over the place.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 3
From: Troy, AL
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? If you don't have enough power to the tires to need more traction, Hals aren't going to help.
mmiller, what 60 fts are you pulling? What tires are you useing? Do you still have the front swaybar connected?
mmiller, what 60 fts are you pulling? What tires are you useing? Do you still have the front swaybar connected?
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? Colonel,
I am running 26" x 11.5" x 15" ET Streets on 15" x 10" Pro-Stars with an air bag, subframes, tubular LCA's, front sway bar removed, 1LE rear sway bar w/urethane end links and bushings, stock torque arm w/poly bushing, and stock pan hard bar. I have cut a best 60 ft. of 1.51. For me, the HALS showed no improvement in my 60 ft.
I am running 26" x 11.5" x 15" ET Streets on 15" x 10" Pro-Stars with an air bag, subframes, tubular LCA's, front sway bar removed, 1LE rear sway bar w/urethane end links and bushings, stock torque arm w/poly bushing, and stock pan hard bar. I have cut a best 60 ft. of 1.51. For me, the HALS showed no improvement in my 60 ft.
11 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
From: Houma,La.
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? Just a little food for thought. Perhaps with the front Hals and better weight transfer you could get by with more rear tire pressure which would help all the way down the track. I would say if your car is not spinning with stock shocks that if you add Hals and run the same tire pressure that there would be no improvement. Also with the Hals you can lower the front end a bit for wind resistance. Frank95z
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 3
From: Troy, AL
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? [quote]Originally posted by mmiller:
<strong>Colonel,
I am running 26" x 11.5" x 15" ET Streets on 15" x 10" Pro-Stars with an air bag, subframes, tubular LCA's, front sway bar removed, 1LE rear sway bar w/urethane end links and bushings, stock torque arm w/poly bushing, and stock pan hard bar. I have cut a best 60 ft. of 1.51. For me, the HALS showed no improvement in my 60 ft.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I also meant to ask if you're spinning the tires? I assumed that you were since you are surprised that your 60ft did not improve. Otherwise, no improvement makes sense. Also, what PSI are you running in the air bag?
<strong>Colonel,
I am running 26" x 11.5" x 15" ET Streets on 15" x 10" Pro-Stars with an air bag, subframes, tubular LCA's, front sway bar removed, 1LE rear sway bar w/urethane end links and bushings, stock torque arm w/poly bushing, and stock pan hard bar. I have cut a best 60 ft. of 1.51. For me, the HALS showed no improvement in my 60 ft.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I also meant to ask if you're spinning the tires? I assumed that you were since you are surprised that your 60ft did not improve. Otherwise, no improvement makes sense. Also, what PSI are you running in the air bag?
Trending Topics
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? It did not feel like I was spinning the tires, and I had several people watching and they did not think the tires were spinning. The air bag pressure was at 17 PSI and the tire pressure was at 20 PSI. The HALS were set at either 0 or 1. BTW, I have an ST-3500. I stall it up to around 3300 RPM and let it rip.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? My front HALs made my car launch MUCH more consistently. I still need to get a few more runs with the back HALs though I've only made one pass and got the boot, 1.619 isn't too bad for a bolt-on 6 speed though. <img src="gr_stretch.gif" border="0">
<img src="graemlins/camaro.gif" border="0" alt="[Chevrolet]" />
<img src="graemlins/camaro.gif" border="0" alt="[Chevrolet]" />
Re: HAL shocks = faster ETs? As stated above, the Hals also made my 60' times a LOT more consistent in my T/A. I had a 1.53 and three 1.54 60' times my 1st time out with the Hal setup.
mmiller - The Hals will help on the tracks that don't hook as well, but at HRP I definitely wouldn't have expected a gain with them considering the 60' times you were pulling w/ the stock shocks in place. Your suspension would have to be JACKED UP to unload at HRP! Sticky tracks are awesome, and you can get away with a lot more at a very well-prepped track and sticky tires. Just look at John's 1.38 60' time on 26" tires with STOCK suspension! <img src="gr_eek2.gif" border="0">
[ March 02, 2002: Message edited by: Trevor D ]</p>
mmiller - The Hals will help on the tracks that don't hook as well, but at HRP I definitely wouldn't have expected a gain with them considering the 60' times you were pulling w/ the stock shocks in place. Your suspension would have to be JACKED UP to unload at HRP! Sticky tracks are awesome, and you can get away with a lot more at a very well-prepped track and sticky tires. Just look at John's 1.38 60' time on 26" tires with STOCK suspension! <img src="gr_eek2.gif" border="0">
[ March 02, 2002: Message edited by: Trevor D ]</p>
__________________
