List of cars I've beaten doesn't match Dyno numbers
08-18-2016, 06:06 AM
#21
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
Last edited by badformulaLS1; 08-18-2016 at 06:15 AM.
08-18-2016, 07:05 AM
#23
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
08-18-2016, 07:16 AM
#24
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am just trying to figure out a couple things. I want to know if there is anything wrong with my car (just got a new motor), if I just got lucky on all these races, and why the numbers would differ so much if no to the first two.
08-18-2016, 07:17 AM
#25
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
Last edited by nwilson44; 08-18-2016 at 07:25 AM.
08-18-2016, 10:36 AM
#27
Yes.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
And honestly you shouldn't have beaten any of those cars except maybe the exhaust only '15 Mustang... and maybe the CTS-V too. Were these roll races are dig races? Under what conditions did your car trap 123mph? Even the most stout cam only set ups typically trap no more than 120 in full weight, stock drivetrain (no lightweight components) cars and thats rare as **** and happens in perfect conditions on a perfect track. And based on what you've told us your mods are just the typical few bolt ons and cam which usually gets people 114-117mph traps. So you're either BSing for attention or you aren't telling the full story. With a lightweight cluth, drag pack, and weight reduction maybe your claims would make some sense.
08-18-2016, 12:11 PM
#29
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hard to not be humble in the world of racing! The rule is that there is always someone faster than you!
My point is simply low dyno numbers. I simply used some cars that have better dyno numbers to provide a context for my claim of low numbers.
My underlying question is why my numbers suck lol
08-18-2016, 05:04 PM
#30
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I completely missed that cause I'm a fucktard. My mistake. It all still sounds a little far fetched though. Untouched 243s won't gain anything crazy over 241s.
I also don't think your dyno numbers are low to the point that there should be cause for concern. Maybe just a tad below the norm. If your heads were worked that would be a different story.
I also don't think your dyno numbers are low to the point that there should be cause for concern. Maybe just a tad below the norm. If your heads were worked that would be a different story.
08-18-2016, 05:59 PM
#31
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Howell & Fenton MI
Posts: 11,145
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
To be honest I'm actually glad I don't know my current dyno numbers, because I just know that I would not be happy lol. It runs like it should so that's all that matters. I know exactly how you feel OP. When people ask just tell them you don't know the dyno numbers, but estimate maybe 440 or so, since it performs as such lol
08-18-2016, 08:40 PM
#32
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest I'm actually glad I don't know my current dyno numbers, because I just know that I would not be happy lol. It runs like it should so that's all that matters. I know exactly how you feel OP. When people ask just tell them you don't know the dyno numbers, but estimate maybe 440 or so, since it performs as such lol
08-18-2016, 09:11 PM
#33
TECH Enthusiast
So all of these were roll races sorry for not clarifying. My motive behind it was not a brag, but rather to just reconcile discrepancies. Trap speed was corrected from 119.4 to 122.5. Don't remember DA, but it was early this summer in the 100's and high 90% humidity. I do have full suspension but it's geared for road racing. I also have a 3.90 gear. I just deleted rear seats. I feel like the dyno is really conservative or I just won those races on luck. The exhaust only GT I put 4-5 cars on.
What do you mean "corrected"? Like using the dragtimes DA calculator?
Do you have a slip with 122.5 on it? If so, thats one of the strongest cam only LS6s I have ever seen... Even at a real 119 mph trap, you can beat a lot of the cars on your kill list.
Who gives a **** about dyno numbers?... ET wins races...and money...
Either way, it sounds like your car runs pretty well..
08-18-2016, 09:38 PM
#34
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do you mean "corrected"? Like using the dragtimes DA calculator?
Do you have a slip with 122.5 on it? If so, thats one of the strongest cam only LS6s I have ever seen... Even at a real 119 mph trap, you can beat a lot of the cars on your kill list.
Who gives a **** about dyno numbers?... ET wins races...and money...
Either way, it sounds like your car runs pretty well..
Do you have a slip with 122.5 on it? If so, thats one of the strongest cam only LS6s I have ever seen... Even at a real 119 mph trap, you can beat a lot of the cars on your kill list.
Who gives a **** about dyno numbers?... ET wins races...and money...
Either way, it sounds like your car runs pretty well..
Your right they don't matter but if I'm honest I was disappointed
08-19-2016, 07:13 AM
#37
7 Second Club
08-19-2016, 07:49 AM
#39
TECH Apprentice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends on if I am running my bama tune or not, but generally anywhere between 135.7 and 143.6
Man I can't do one of GM's auto's. They are just so sloppy and dimwitted. Don't get me wrong they are perfect for consistent drag racing but my car spends most of its time on the street or track (road race). I've been to the strip twice and I'm honestly terrible at launching on street tires! Although I found out that my stock torque arm was a serious hindrance to the problem...
Man I can't do one of GM's auto's. They are just so sloppy and dimwitted. Don't get me wrong they are perfect for consistent drag racing but my car spends most of its time on the street or track (road race). I've been to the strip twice and I'm honestly terrible at launching on street tires! Although I found out that my stock torque arm was a serious hindrance to the problem...
