Streetsweeper 228/232 on a 111 LSA Idle Clip
08-21-2009, 11:59 AM
#22
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Denver International Airport, Colorado USA
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Ed:
I should have inserted a 'smiley face' after my comment. The OP's car sounds really good.
I was just giving credit to Predator-Z who suggested that car ~3 years ago. Virtually no one at that time would ever suggest an LSA less than 112, let alone 110.
Obviously, even today shops and sponsors stay away from marketing lower LSA's, even though it is a ingenious way to get an optimum balance of valve events and the added benefit of overlap (depending on your combo!).
Sorry if I suggested otherwise. It was meant to be in good humor, but I was just acknowledging the success of Predator-Z's suggestion. I wanted great mid-range TQ that would carry me to ~6200 Rpms. He was right.
To the OP let us know how that car runs at the track. Again Ed, I apologize if I offended you.
..WeathermanShawn..
I should have inserted a 'smiley face'
after my comment. The OP's car sounds really good.I was just giving credit to Predator-Z who suggested that car ~3 years ago. Virtually no one at that time would ever suggest an LSA less than 112, let alone 110.
Obviously, even today shops and sponsors stay away from marketing lower LSA's, even though it is a ingenious way to get an optimum balance of valve events and the added benefit of overlap (depending on your combo!).
Sorry if I suggested otherwise. It was meant to be in good humor, but I was just acknowledging the success of Predator-Z's suggestion. I wanted great mid-range TQ that would carry me to ~6200 Rpms. He was right.
To the OP let us know how that car runs at the track. Again Ed, I apologize if I offended you.
..WeathermanShawn..
08-21-2009, 01:40 PM
#23
TECH Resident
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Working in the shop 24/7
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hi Ed:
I should have inserted a 'smiley face' after my comment. The OP's car sounds really good.
I was just giving credit to Predator-Z who suggested that car ~3 years ago. Virtually no one at that time would ever suggest an LSA less than 112, let alone 110.
Obviously, even today shops and sponsors stay away from marketing lower LSA's, even though it is a ingenious way to get an optimum balance of valve events and the added benefit of overlap (depending on your combo!).
Sorry if I suggested otherwise. It was meant to be in good humor, but I was just acknowledging the success of Predator-Z's suggestion. I wanted great mid-range TQ that would carry me to ~6200 Rpms. He was right.
To the OP let us know how that car runs at the track. Again Ed, I apologize if I offended you.
..WeathermanShawn..
I should have inserted a 'smiley face'
after my comment. The OP's car sounds really good.I was just giving credit to Predator-Z who suggested that car ~3 years ago. Virtually no one at that time would ever suggest an LSA less than 112, let alone 110.
Obviously, even today shops and sponsors stay away from marketing lower LSA's, even though it is a ingenious way to get an optimum balance of valve events and the added benefit of overlap (depending on your combo!).
Sorry if I suggested otherwise. It was meant to be in good humor, but I was just acknowledging the success of Predator-Z's suggestion. I wanted great mid-range TQ that would carry me to ~6200 Rpms. He was right.
To the OP let us know how that car runs at the track. Again Ed, I apologize if I offended you.
..WeathermanShawn..
If you go to that "old" Cam Thread that J-rod started, you'll see I stated the timing events we had been seeing a lot of success with, resulted in tighter LSAs than what was popular on here. It was not met with too much kindness back then (or even now sometimes) but after drilling it into their heads, people are finally learning about timing events and not dwelling on LSAs.
As for PredZ... Mark and I jab at each other on hardcorels1.com all the time so this is a little joking "payback" to him on his home turf.
08-28-2009, 12:42 PM
#29
Here's a video of my first time out to the track with it. I am getting 4.30's and a spool installed because I'm shifting into 4th about 100' before the traps and it's killing my MPH, not to mention my launches suck because the posi isn't really working as well as it should. After a little sorting out, it should be solidly in the 11's:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Rf_Q3BX_Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Rf_Q3BX_Q
08-28-2009, 02:43 PM
#30
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Denver International Airport, Colorado USA
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, the good ole days of running at sea level..and fighting traction.
Car sounds awesome. Curious what rpm are you shifting at?
..WeathermanShawn..
Car sounds awesome. Curious what rpm are you shifting at?
..WeathermanShawn..
09-03-2009, 07:51 PM
#31
Actually, that track is about 850 feet above sea level. I'm shifting at 6700 RPM, which is about what the cam peaks at. I have my 4.30's and spool in now, going to the track tomorrow to see how much I improve. The weather should be way better too, hopefully I can click off an 11 sec pass.
09-04-2009, 04:21 AM
#32
TECH Senior Member
That cam peaks less than 6700 From your intake and valve events I would say 63/6400
Nice runs, but I think you are going a bit overoard with a 430 ratio. Unless you run a lot of 1/8th miles
From your intake and valve events I would say 63/6400Nice runs, but I think you are going a bit overoard with a 430 ratio. Unless you run a lot of 1/8th miles
09-04-2009, 12:34 PM
#36
The track prep usually isn't great but it's better than most places. It's not like 5-6 years ago when you could hook on street tires. With a proper drag tire you shouldn't have issues.
13.99 and faster you need a helmet period - it's not a big deal, everyone knows that.
They are pretty laid back about most stuff - the owners are cool, and it's not normally busy.
