I'm wondering how many LS1 F-Bodies are running 9.99 or faster on the motor? How many cubic inches does it take and what is the most common way of getting there? Stroker motor? All bore? Stroke and bore?

Also, what about the drivetrain and the suspension and the camshaft? Has anyone done this with a hydraulic cam? What about a stock style suspension?

I've been undecided about what I want to ultimately do with my car. Lately I'm leaning towards going for 9's N/A with a hydraulic cam shaft if it is possible. My money situation is tight right now so I'm going to have some time to think about it.

 

Why are you set on a hydraulic roller? You should be able to do 9's n/a on stock cubes without a problem. More cubes should lessen the burden. I think the most common way on here is to throw as much money as you can at it and cross your fingers.

 

stock style suspension is easy to get into the 9's. chassis prep is the biggest issue to a et, so choose your parts carefully and make sure they are set up right.
the cam choice will have to be made to match the heads and intake system, that si when teh hydraulic or not decision will have to be made.
if money is tight the cheapest way to start pickin up et is to drop weight.

later
tim

 

Amen Brother!

Coach

 

if your money situation is tight, it's probably not even a good idea to attempt going fast takes a LOT of money.

and 9's NA on stock cubes no problem?? are you serious?? I don't actually think anyone has done that yet.... think 10.1X's are the fastest on stock cubes NA

 

No one? Or no one on this board? Surely there is a difference. And that still doesn't explain why it's difficult. I mean there are a bunch of 9 sec n/a lt1 cars and that's with 23 deg. heads. Sure they aren't stock cubes, but they aren't much above it either (383, 370, etc). It's just money spent in the right places and on the right builders/motors, that's all.

 

Going fast & "money's tight" don't mix. I'd first make a firm decision what to do w/ the car & define my goal before comitting time, money, and effort to the endeavour cuz speed cost. Just keep in mind a dyno queen won't get ya there.

 

Al Corda went 9.97 on a stock elim car. that is as close to stock as you can get. It might be .030 over though, not sure.

 

To be honest, I think it would be very difficult to go 9's NA down here. The weather just doesn't get good enough except around late November-December and by then there are no tracks open here

 

Colonel, 422, hyd. cam
Mikey, 436(?), solid cam
SAM, 418(?), solid cam
GeorgeC, 382, solid cam

And I think some Cartek car went 9's recently...Vette? Cant recall.

 

What I meant by my current money situation is tight is there are currently other expenses I'd like to get out of the way first. I also have to wait for a few of my stocks to recover from some recent down turns. Finally, I know for a fact my wife would be less than thrilled to know I’m going to spend 20 grand on a motor and upgrades.

I’ve got more than enough money saved up or invested to buy two or three motors. But unless you’re a multi millionaire, chances are that money is intended for other things besides just going fast in your hot rod.

So forget about that comment, let’s get back to the point. Who has gone 9’s NA? I know George C has and I’m pretty sure the Colonel was well into the 9’s NA a few years ago, right? I think George C’s car went 9.98 and it was a 383ci ARE built motor. Colonel’s was an MTI motor, right?

I don’t want a solid roller because I want as little maintenance as possible. I’d like to try to do it with a big hydraulic cam, a TH400 with a 4400 or larger stall, transbrake, 12-bolt with 4.30 gears, and somewhere around 383 to 408 cubic inches. If possible, I’d like to be able to run 93 octane. I’ll probably go with the AFR 225 heads or an AFR casting with a TEA stage 2.5 or stage 3 program. My raceweight is about 3300 pounds and my suspension is up for the task.

I like to set goals that are very difficult to reach, if not impossible. If I can only muster low 10’s then so be it but that will still be bad *** in my book. I’m confident that if I get close I can be creative enough to find a way to drop another tenth or two.

 

Thanks Ryan! So it sounds like George C is one of the only ones to run 9’s with less than 400ci. One thing I’m curious about. Did those guys eventually break those motors or did they just decide they want something bigger and better? I’m just wondering how long you can expect those motors to hold up.

 

Colonel sold his to build a C5R based NA motor (still not done). Mikey still has his I think. The SAM car has been through a few ittereation and rebuilds during its time (not that its a bad build...but they actually competitivly race that car nation-wide), they have been running 9's for a few years I believe. Currently they are rebuilding due to a broken rod. I can't remember what happened to George's car, but he is moving on to a BBC I belive.

The expensive part of any build up is parts breakage and rebuilds. Like the SAM car probably gets a thorough look-see once a season...same with Mikey I would assume. Colonel's motor actually only had a few hundred miles on it when he sold it I thought. Again, its not like the motors are unreliable POS's or anything...its just what you do with race motors.

I'd get an aluminum 427 (TEA's new AFR or raised runner heads) with a good sized hyd. cam and concentrate on the rest of the car. Its all in the combo.

 

Suspension is going to be your main focus area to get into the 9's. A big motor isn't going to do you any good if you can't get it to the ground. The car's going to have to 60ft ATLEAST in the high 1.3's

Good luck with ur goal

 

I understand and agree completely. That's why I focused primarily on my suspension and drivetrain just to get where I am right now. I'm not by any means running times that standout like some others on here but I do think my car runs very well and very consistent for the horsepower mods it has.

I have a C1 cam only setup and consistently run 11.4's and 11.5's at 117 to 118 mph in 1200 to 1800 DA, pulling mid 1.5 sixty foots, often with both front wheels off the ground. I know that drivetrain, tire selection and suspension are crucial to low ET's. But what tells me my car is currently setup well is the fact that out of nearly 100 passes, I have only spun my rear tires three or four times. All of the other passes were near dead hooks.

Obviously going from a cam only setup to a big cube motor with ported heads setup is a big jump in power. The fuel system will need to be upgraded and I'll need a TH400 and a 12 bolt as well as revisit my suspension. All of that adds up very fast and before you know it a lot of money has been spent just to get that rush of adrenaline.

 

0.070"

 

0.070" resleeved is legal for Stock Eliminator

 

SAM went 9.43 or something to that tune at 143 mph setting the new NA record... or i think it was a 9.5 at 144

 

Yes, Stealth's (Mike R.) '99 C5 hardtop went 9.98 NA with a CARTEK built hydraulic cammed 441 and a 4L60E.

 

The SAM car went 9s a few years ago with a 375cid engine. Earlier today I was reading an article that told about the history of that car.

It went 9.50@143.7 a few weeks ago when it broke the rod and took out the block. It looks like we'll assemble the next engine next week or soon after. The new pistons, rods, and cam are here. The block is probably honed by now or will be very soon (I saw it in the machine earlier today.) It will be a few CID larger and will have even more compression with a slightly bigger cam. I wouldn't be surprised if it puts 700hp to the wheels next time around.