AI Cam Only Track Time...Finally
04-14-2009, 01:05 PM
#43
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really.
http://www.lowesmotorspeedway.com/schedules/dragway/
04-14-2009, 01:23 PM
#45
[QUOTE=buzz12586;11428936] ET is most important in drag racing. QUOTE]
No way, really! Holy **** we have a rocket scientist on tech!Lawlz
Its pretty obvious by what the op's car is trapping that it has alot left in it. Also it was his first runs on the new setup, so you cant expect the car to perform at it's full potential. Also maybe et is not his main focus. Maybe he went to the track to get an idea what kind of power its makin.
No way, really! Holy **** we have a rocket scientist on tech!Lawlz
Its pretty obvious by what the op's car is trapping that it has alot left in it. Also it was his first runs on the new setup, so you cant expect the car to perform at it's full potential. Also maybe et is not his main focus. Maybe he went to the track to get an idea what kind of power its makin.
04-14-2009, 01:32 PM
#47
TECH Resident
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lantana, TX
Posts: 956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You would think so, lol. It's funny how they write off dyno numbers and say they don't mean anything and when they go to the track they write off ET saying it doesn't mean anything either, but MPH is where it's at. What's the difference between racing your dyno sheets and racing your MPH? What's the point of going to the track if you aren't concerned with your ET? Wow, you ran a 12.8 at 114, and then you do some calc to say that 114mph means you have approx 375 rwhp, sounds like dyno sheet racing to me.
04-14-2009, 01:58 PM
#49
Some look at mph/60ft to see what is possibly left in a setup. Which is what my point was from the get go. Also his 12.8 was on a 2.1 60ft, which we all know that these cars will 60ft better than that. Show me a bolt on only lt1 that runs 12.8 on a 2.1 60ft. Point is, the op car is running on par and it frustrates me when people jump on here runnin there mouth sayin thats slow or they are not impressed when they don't look at all the variables.
04-14-2009, 02:04 PM
#50
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never said it was slow and I agree there is a lot left in it. You are the one getting all excited about a car that makes 360whp trapping 114 like it should. Just curious, what does your car run?
04-14-2009, 11:30 PM
#54
Again i agree, E/T is nothing to be impressed by, but i've set the car up for other things. But just a comparison between our times
12.859@113.48 - 2.172 60' - 1200' DA
13.15@102.6 - 1.82 60' - 1700' DA
Again, in bench racing mode if i could match your 60' im looking at 12.30's, this is meant really to show the power from the cam alone (aside from supporting mods). The entire car though SUCKS for the drag strip, that i wont deny. I guess its also nice to show that the dyno numbers i have aren't happy numbers haha.
12.859@113.48 - 2.172 60' - 1200' DA
13.15@102.6 - 1.82 60' - 1700' DA
Again, in bench racing mode if i could match your 60' im looking at 12.30's, this is meant really to show the power from the cam alone (aside from supporting mods). The entire car though SUCKS for the drag strip, that i wont deny. I guess its also nice to show that the dyno numbers i have aren't happy numbers haha.
You ran a 12.8@113. You're making good power, but you still have a 12.8 second car in the end. Don't tell me your car can 60' what mine can. Without A LOT more in mods it won't. So, until you can actually launch like a stalled auto, don't tell me you would run better with my 60' times. CAUSE YOU CAN'T LAUNCH LIKE I CAN. Clearly.
Oh and I've seen plenty of cam only cars trap higher... and run faster.
I AM NOT IMPRESSED.
You have only half a drag setup.
04-15-2009, 01:04 AM
#56
What if we went light to light?
What if I could launch my car like my R6?
What if he could?
What if he launched better than me?
What if he had more suspension?
What if he had a stalled auto?
What if it was a road race?
What if I had a jet engine?
What if your grandma had *****? She'd be your grandpa.
And yes. I understand the concept of not everybody wants a drag car.
But if that's the case Then why is this thread about his "CAM ONLY TRACK TIME???"
Should it not be about mph and dyno #s???
And before you get all bent out of shape about that, I am going off of the thread title.
You are all on his nuts about a 113mph trap when other cam only cars are outtrapping him. I don't get it.
It's a respecable mph, but I'm NOT impressed.
116 would be impressive as I've already seen a few 115mph cam onlys.
If he posted the same thread with a non big name cam, you'd all chastise him. But because it's AI, it's somehow an awesome trap?
04-15-2009, 09:46 AM
#57
Village Troll 
iTrader: (2)
Your line of argument is a bit hypocritical when you tag your ET's w/ your altitude. It screams out "If only I were at a sea level track..."
Can you give any examples as to these cam only LT1 f-bodys that are running the mph you claim? Reason being is the OP's mph is fairly comparable to a few heads/cam combos running around on the internet. I'd love to see anything you can provide. Not saying you are lying. It's just that I haven't seen anything like that.
Whatever the argument may be it really doesn't matter since the OP is not claiming this to be any sort of record breaking achievement. He's happy with what he's done. He explained very clearly as to why the car did not ET the way it should. The car has potential and he's sharing the joy. Nothing wrong with that.
Can you give any examples as to these cam only LT1 f-bodys that are running the mph you claim? Reason being is the OP's mph is fairly comparable to a few heads/cam combos running around on the internet. I'd love to see anything you can provide. Not saying you are lying. It's just that I haven't seen anything like that.
Whatever the argument may be it really doesn't matter since the OP is not claiming this to be any sort of record breaking achievement. He's happy with what he's done. He explained very clearly as to why the car did not ET the way it should. The car has potential and he's sharing the joy. Nothing wrong with that.
04-15-2009, 09:55 AM
#58
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 3,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We can play the what if game all night guys.
What if we went light to light?
What if I could launch my car like my R6?
What if he could?
What if he launched better than me?
What if he had more suspension?
What if he had a stalled auto?
What if it was a road race?
What if I had a jet engine?
What if your grandma had *****? She'd be your grandpa.
And yes. I understand the concept of not everybody wants a drag car.
But if that's the case Then why is this thread about his "CAM ONLY TRACK TIME???"
Should it not be about mph and dyno #s???
And before you get all bent out of shape about that, I am going off of the thread title.
You are all on his nuts about a 113mph trap when other cam only cars are outtrapping him. I don't get it.
It's a respecable mph, but I'm NOT impressed.
116 would be impressive as I've already seen a few 115mph cam onlys.
If he posted the same thread with a non big name cam, you'd all chastise him. But because it's AI, it's somehow an awesome trap?
What if we went light to light?
What if I could launch my car like my R6?
What if he could?
What if he launched better than me?
What if he had more suspension?
What if he had a stalled auto?
What if it was a road race?
What if I had a jet engine?
What if your grandma had *****? She'd be your grandpa.
And yes. I understand the concept of not everybody wants a drag car.
But if that's the case Then why is this thread about his "CAM ONLY TRACK TIME???"
Should it not be about mph and dyno #s???
And before you get all bent out of shape about that, I am going off of the thread title.
You are all on his nuts about a 113mph trap when other cam only cars are outtrapping him. I don't get it.
It's a respecable mph, but I'm NOT impressed.
116 would be impressive as I've already seen a few 115mph cam onlys.
If he posted the same thread with a non big name cam, you'd all chastise him. But because it's AI, it's somehow an awesome trap?
And I don't think anyone cares if your a jerk with a bolt on slushbox is impressed with his car.
04-15-2009, 11:28 AM
#59
Your line of argument is a bit hypocritical when you tag your ET's w/ your altitude. It screams out "If only I were at a sea level track..."
Can you give any examples as to these cam only LT1 f-bodys that are running the mph you claim? Reason being is the OP's mph is fairly comparable to a few heads/cam combos running around on the internet. I'd love to see anything you can provide. Not saying you are lying. It's just that I haven't seen anything like that.
Whatever the argument may be it really doesn't matter since the OP is not claiming this to be any sort of record breaking achievement. He's happy with what he's done. He explained very clearly as to why the car did not ET the way it should. The car has potential and he's sharing the joy. Nothing wrong with that.
Can you give any examples as to these cam only LT1 f-bodys that are running the mph you claim? Reason being is the OP's mph is fairly comparable to a few heads/cam combos running around on the internet. I'd love to see anything you can provide. Not saying you are lying. It's just that I haven't seen anything like that.
Whatever the argument may be it really doesn't matter since the OP is not claiming this to be any sort of record breaking achievement. He's happy with what he's done. He explained very clearly as to why the car did not ET the way it should. The car has potential and he's sharing the joy. Nothing wrong with that.
John P. (1SlowFormula)-11.561@118.00, 95 Formula A4, Bolt-ons/NA/2835 lbs "Bolt on Record holder Sep/08 - Oct/08, short lived victory"
tomcowle-11.481@118.98 1.502 60', 95 Camaro Bolt-ons/Auto/Fuel Injected "Bolt on Record"
There's a few more from the list trapping 115+ but they don't say if they are running stock heads or not. There's a bunch of 113-114 cam only cars though.
The OP's car runs good. A better 60' time and he'd be in some good company ET-wise.
04-15-2009, 11:29 AM
#60
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a few:
John P. (1SlowFormula)-11.561@118.00, 95 Formula A4, Bolt-ons/NA/2835 lbs "Bolt on Record holder Sep/08 - Oct/08, short lived victory"
tomcowle-11.481@118.98 1.502 60', 95 Camaro Bolt-ons/Auto/Fuel Injected "Bolt on Record"
There's a few more from the list trapping 115+ but they don't say if they are running stock heads or not. There's a bunch of 113-114 cam only cars though.
The OP's car runs good. A better 60' time and he'd be in some good company ET-wise.
John P. (1SlowFormula)-11.561@118.00, 95 Formula A4, Bolt-ons/NA/2835 lbs "Bolt on Record holder Sep/08 - Oct/08, short lived victory"
tomcowle-11.481@118.98 1.502 60', 95 Camaro Bolt-ons/Auto/Fuel Injected "Bolt on Record"
There's a few more from the list trapping 115+ but they don't say if they are running stock heads or not. There's a bunch of 113-114 cam only cars though.
The OP's car runs good. A better 60' time and he'd be in some good company ET-wise.
What you aren't taking into account there is the weight of the car. A lot of those bolt on record cars are probably about at 3000lb race weight. OPs car weighs in the 3500-3600lb range.