for the sake of argument
for the sake of argument All things being equal, if a 6 speed and an auto with exactly the same flywheel hp cut exactly the same 60', would the 6 speed still hang with it or even maybe eek out ahead a bit? Just trying to wonder if the autos advantage goes past the 60' mark, and if so by how much.
Re: for the sake of argument If both cars cut the same 60' times, I would definitely give the edge to the M6 car w/driver that knows how to shift. The mid-range and top seemed to be just a little stronger on my '99 M6 SS than my '02 A4 SS when both were bone stock. '02 car is now way quicker w/similar mods, though. WJ. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Re: for the sake of argument If the 6-speed driver is good and can bang those gears, I'd say the 6-speed (with proper gearing) will run a bit quicker. Closer gearing ratios in the tranny, and more power to the ground.
Tony
Tony
Re: for the sake of argument So really, the autos only advantage is that it usually cuts a better 60' time? (of course consistency too). What I'm getting at is with my mods, an auto would easily be in the 11's. If I can get my 60's down to a 1.7 or so, then I should be able to also?
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 3
From: Troy, AL
Re: for the sake of argument ...but then again, if you were using the RIGHT converter then you wouldn't have tied to the 60ft mark against the M6! <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />
Re: for the sake of argument Cool, I'm not trying to bash autos, far from it. I'm just trying to make us M6 guys feel better, knowing an auto doesn't ALWAYS hold an advantage off the line.
That is, can an M6 run just as fast ET as a mirror image auto set up perfectly? Granted it may take a 12 bolt and clutch.... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
<small>[ March 13, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Greg Fell ]</small>
That is, can an M6 run just as fast ET as a mirror image auto set up perfectly? Granted it may take a 12 bolt and clutch.... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
<small>[ March 13, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Greg Fell ]</small>
Trending Topics
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 3
From: Troy, AL
Re: for the sake of argument It would be interesting to see a test of two identical bolt-on only cars. One with an M6 and one with an A4.
Give 'em both a 12-bolt.
Give 'em both 4.10 gears (I KNOW you M6 owners don't want to stay with the 3.42s and it's not fair to leave the A4 with 3.23s now is it?)
Give the M6 a damn fine clutch.
Give the A4 a TP4400 converter.
Give 'em both a set of 26" slicks.
The A4 will be locking the converter at the top of 3rd gear so that he can make it across the line. The M6 is already at a true 1:1 ratio across the line so this is only fair. Otherwise the A4 has to use a 3.73 gear which gives the M6 an unfair advantage.
Run 'em at the track. The M6 gets a A+ driver of course.
Results? The A4 absolutely SMOKES the M6. Sorry, that's just the reality of it. <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />
Ok, same senerio but the A4 somehow looses traction resulting in a disapointing but exact 60 ft of the M6 car. Results? I don't know but I'd like to. My money is still on the A4 but just barely.
Give 'em both a 12-bolt.
Give 'em both 4.10 gears (I KNOW you M6 owners don't want to stay with the 3.42s and it's not fair to leave the A4 with 3.23s now is it?)
Give the M6 a damn fine clutch.
Give the A4 a TP4400 converter.
Give 'em both a set of 26" slicks.
The A4 will be locking the converter at the top of 3rd gear so that he can make it across the line. The M6 is already at a true 1:1 ratio across the line so this is only fair. Otherwise the A4 has to use a 3.73 gear which gives the M6 an unfair advantage.
Run 'em at the track. The M6 gets a A+ driver of course.
Results? The A4 absolutely SMOKES the M6. Sorry, that's just the reality of it. <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />
Ok, same senerio but the A4 somehow looses traction resulting in a disapointing but exact 60 ft of the M6 car. Results? I don't know but I'd like to. My money is still on the A4 but just barely.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
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
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Re: for the sake of argument Manual is definily quicker and faster with a ideal setup. Look at prostock, they dont run converters but they also can shift without using the clutch. The problem with the M6s is the gearing is wrong for drag racing. If you want to beat an auto youre gonna need something like clutchless Jericho trans with right ratios. Still it would probably only be about a 10th quicker than an auto.
The autos are tough to beat. The shift extension from the converter makes up for the wide ratio differences and they are not that inefficent. They are much cheaper than the M6's to dragrace. Its amazing what these new converters can do.
The autos are tough to beat. The shift extension from the converter makes up for the wide ratio differences and they are not that inefficent. They are much cheaper than the M6's to dragrace. Its amazing what these new converters can do.
Re: for the sake of argument Colonel, are you saying that the auto would smoke it because of it could still 60 better?
I've seen some 6 speed cut 1.5 or high 1.4. I dont know how much better an auto could get than that?
Lets say they both run 1.5 60's, which I know is probably pushing it with an M6. Then the auto wouldn't smoke it, right?
I've seen some 6 speed cut 1.5 or high 1.4. I dont know how much better an auto could get than that?
Lets say they both run 1.5 60's, which I know is probably pushing it with an M6. Then the auto wouldn't smoke it, right?
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 3
From: Troy, AL
Re: for the sake of argument "Colonel, are you saying that the auto would smoke it because of it could still 60 better?"
Yes. Both with the same power, both with the same weight, both with the same gearing, both with the same traction...the A4 with the TP4400 is going to 60ft better than the M6. I don't care if you're launching the M6 off the rev limiter.
I went on to say that if for some reason (traction) the A4 happened to 60ft the same on a run, it would be a very close race but I might still put my money on the A4.
"I've seen some 6 speed cut 1.5 or high 1.4. I dont know how much better an auto could get than that?"
1.2s. I saw that from an auto at the Thunder Shootout. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />
Raughammer pulled 1.38 with a stock CI heads/cam car running NA. I haven't seen any M6 cars approach that kind of launch...even those with 400 CIs.
Yes. Both with the same power, both with the same weight, both with the same gearing, both with the same traction...the A4 with the TP4400 is going to 60ft better than the M6. I don't care if you're launching the M6 off the rev limiter.
I went on to say that if for some reason (traction) the A4 happened to 60ft the same on a run, it would be a very close race but I might still put my money on the A4.
"I've seen some 6 speed cut 1.5 or high 1.4. I dont know how much better an auto could get than that?"
1.2s. I saw that from an auto at the Thunder Shootout. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />
Raughammer pulled 1.38 with a stock CI heads/cam car running NA. I haven't seen any M6 cars approach that kind of launch...even those with 400 CIs.
Re: for the sake of argument Yes well i'll concede that! i'd say so holy hell.
real world wise (in other words, the cars i'll run into on street) have smaller convertors, like 3500 down. i just want to whoop up on these cheaters! (jk auto guys he he i'm just jealous)
real world wise (in other words, the cars i'll run into on street) have smaller convertors, like 3500 down. i just want to whoop up on these cheaters! (jk auto guys he he i'm just jealous)
Re: for the sake of argument All things being equal,the A4 will KILL
the M6 to 60'and ET.
Let's put it this way,I think the fastest
internally stock A4 is 11.27? being heavier
than me.
Same day,Same mods,Same weight....A4,hands down.
the M6 to 60'and ET.
Let's put it this way,I think the fastest
internally stock A4 is 11.27? being heavier
than me.
Same day,Same mods,Same weight....A4,hands down.
Re: for the sake of argument Well, FWIW, not to disrespect my idol, the Colonel, my goal is to get within half a tenth of Mr. Hoffpauir's 1.45 60' with my cam-only setup. That would be pretty respectable. If I can get that 60' with the same raceweight and DA that Mr. Hoffpauir did, I think it's pretty safe to say that the 6-speed will come out on top, since my MPH would likely be in the 125+ range. Wouldn't you think? My point is that if the 6-speed can get CLOSE to the A4's 60's, the difference in horsepower lost through the drivetrain ought to put the 6-speed even with (or maybe even quicker than) the A4. But, then again, I don't really know what I'm talking about. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Embarrassed]" src="gr_emb.gif" /> Just my $.02.
What are your thoughts on that, Stephen?
Also, I wanted you to know that I recently dynoed 336 (not 360, much closer to your 318 or whatever it was) in the same trim I ran 11.59 @ 118 @ +700-ish feet worth of DA and 3425 lbs. of raceweight. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
What are your thoughts on that, Stephen?
Also, I wanted you to know that I recently dynoed 336 (not 360, much closer to your 318 or whatever it was) in the same trim I ran 11.59 @ 118 @ +700-ish feet worth of DA and 3425 lbs. of raceweight. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
Re: for the sake of argument That is my point. I'm not arguing that an auto can launch better. I'm just saying, IF a 6 speed could 60 really well, enough that would make an auto proud (1.6 etc), then the 6 speed should run a wicked ET also.
I'm not talking about huge converter'd drag cars, just street cars with modest converters.
I'm not talking about huge converter'd drag cars, just street cars with modest converters.
Re: for the sake of argument Greg, the only advantages of an A4 setup are:
1. Cheaper to make 60' well
2. No driver skill required
If both cars cut identical 60' times, have the same crank HP, the M6 will win.
There aren't too many 3600 lb all-motor A4 cars cutting 1.4s like my lowly 6-speed either. Most of the awesome 60' time A4 cars are gutted 3000-3200 lb cars with huge converters that I'd never consider daily-drivable.
Find me an A4 car that ran 10.6 or better, all-motor, with the stock (unmodified 4L60E), a converter with less than 3500 stall, and over 3625 lbs. What were their 60' times?
Tony
1. Cheaper to make 60' well
2. No driver skill required
If both cars cut identical 60' times, have the same crank HP, the M6 will win.
There aren't too many 3600 lb all-motor A4 cars cutting 1.4s like my lowly 6-speed either. Most of the awesome 60' time A4 cars are gutted 3000-3200 lb cars with huge converters that I'd never consider daily-drivable.
Find me an A4 car that ran 10.6 or better, all-motor, with the stock (unmodified 4L60E), a converter with less than 3500 stall, and over 3625 lbs. What were their 60' times?
Tony
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,396
Likes: 1
From: Hot Rainy Humid +2000 DA South Florida
Re: for the sake of argument Drag racing is all about the 60'.
My friend and I both have SS and at one point we both had the exact same mods, from heads & cam to the air filter and stock clutches. Our cars were practially twins.
We both ran consistantly 12.3xx's @ 116-117 mph with high 1.8 60's.
I took the bold leap and swapped my M6 for a TH400 reverse manual with only a 3400 stall. Before we both had 4.10s. I dropped down to 3.73 when I put the 3 speed in for streetability.
We both raced again, my friend ran a nice 12.3 again. I ran a easy 11.89 @ 110 with a 1.6 60'
The beautyful thing was with the auto, I had the same launch everytime (transbrake), I only had to shift 2 times, 1-2, 2-3. There is now way in hell I could ever miss a gear. but even with a wussy 3400 stall I cut a 1.6 60's and we both had the same nitto's.
My friend can hammer a 6 speed down the track as good as anyone I know, but all I did was switch to an automatic and he had no chance of beating me in ET.
Kinda funny because I am able to cut better 60's I always get the finish before him, and when I let off he comes screaming past me. I'm only trapping at like 110 and he's approaching like 120 when I let off.
My 60' = 1.6's = 11.8's ET
His 60' = 1.8's = 12.3's ET
It's all about getting off the line. Our LS'1 have awesome pulling power.
Lee
My friend and I both have SS and at one point we both had the exact same mods, from heads & cam to the air filter and stock clutches. Our cars were practially twins.
We both ran consistantly 12.3xx's @ 116-117 mph with high 1.8 60's.
I took the bold leap and swapped my M6 for a TH400 reverse manual with only a 3400 stall. Before we both had 4.10s. I dropped down to 3.73 when I put the 3 speed in for streetability.
We both raced again, my friend ran a nice 12.3 again. I ran a easy 11.89 @ 110 with a 1.6 60'
The beautyful thing was with the auto, I had the same launch everytime (transbrake), I only had to shift 2 times, 1-2, 2-3. There is now way in hell I could ever miss a gear. but even with a wussy 3400 stall I cut a 1.6 60's and we both had the same nitto's.
My friend can hammer a 6 speed down the track as good as anyone I know, but all I did was switch to an automatic and he had no chance of beating me in ET.
Kinda funny because I am able to cut better 60's I always get the finish before him, and when I let off he comes screaming past me. I'm only trapping at like 110 and he's approaching like 120 when I let off.
My 60' = 1.6's = 11.8's ET
His 60' = 1.8's = 12.3's ET
It's all about getting off the line. Our LS'1 have awesome pulling power.
Lee
Re: for the sake of argument Yes I hear you, thats what I'm trying to get better.
Anyone want to guess what kind of 60's i can get with a 100 shot on top of my 388 rwhp, with a 12 bolt 3.73, spec stage 3, and nittos?
Anyone want to guess what kind of 60's i can get with a 100 shot on top of my 388 rwhp, with a 12 bolt 3.73, spec stage 3, and nittos?
Re: for the sake of argument We know that ET is mostly 60'. He asked who would be most likely to ET better if the 60' times were identical, and the crank HP was identical.
We could argue 60' times all day long, thats another subject. To say that an M6 can't 60' as well as an A4 is incorrect, it just costs more and takes more skill to set up correctly with an M6.
Tony
We could argue 60' times all day long, thats another subject. To say that an M6 can't 60' as well as an A4 is incorrect, it just costs more and takes more skill to set up correctly with an M6.
Tony