Track Day - better results
MexSiR
02-22-2004, 12:18 AM
I have a 1999 Civic Si with the b16a2. Its completely stock and my city is at 5200 FT above sea level, so it greatly affects performance.
Well, today I went to the track once again. Remember my first time I manage to do a 17.345 as my best time. Then My fourth time or so I pulled off a 17.027. Well today with the best driving I could ever do, shifting as a crazy motherfucker at the sweet spots 8200 rpms on 1st and second, 8000 at third. And having a real good launch, semi feathering at 5700 rpms and dumping it shortly after.
I managed to pull of a....
http://www.whitecivic.com/eminemslip.jpg
16.719
I know the image is really blurry but if you try real hard, you can see the number. I was car number 19. My friend with his EX 2003 managed a 17.1 and he beat twice a 2002 Golf GTI 180 h.p . Those things when driven well are pulling numbers very similar to my car. 16.5, 16.7. So with good driving a can take em. Mustang Gts year 1998 are pulling 17.0, 16.8. My car is a tad faster than those 4.6 liter inefficient motherfuckers. The 1999+ mustangs are pulling 16.0 -16.2.
So there it goes...16.719 at 5200 ft above sea level. Getting better and better.
Well, today I went to the track once again. Remember my first time I manage to do a 17.345 as my best time. Then My fourth time or so I pulled off a 17.027. Well today with the best driving I could ever do, shifting as a crazy motherfucker at the sweet spots 8200 rpms on 1st and second, 8000 at third. And having a real good launch, semi feathering at 5700 rpms and dumping it shortly after.
I managed to pull of a....
http://www.whitecivic.com/eminemslip.jpg
16.719
I know the image is really blurry but if you try real hard, you can see the number. I was car number 19. My friend with his EX 2003 managed a 17.1 and he beat twice a 2002 Golf GTI 180 h.p . Those things when driven well are pulling numbers very similar to my car. 16.5, 16.7. So with good driving a can take em. Mustang Gts year 1998 are pulling 17.0, 16.8. My car is a tad faster than those 4.6 liter inefficient motherfuckers. The 1999+ mustangs are pulling 16.0 -16.2.
So there it goes...16.719 at 5200 ft above sea level. Getting better and better.
chuckhatch
02-22-2004, 12:37 AM
yo...those are tight times..
i cant believe that sea level elevation is that much of a bitch...that sucks..i live on the east coast of the us...and all those cars including yours runs lower quarter mile times..but were at sea level almost..i guess
i cant believe that sea level elevation is that much of a bitch...that sucks..i live on the east coast of the us...and all those cars including yours runs lower quarter mile times..but were at sea level almost..i guess
hot_red_z28
02-22-2004, 12:53 AM
yeah, damn, 16's and 17's for mustang GT's sucks... they should be at least down around 14's under normal conditions...
MexSiR
02-22-2004, 12:57 AM
Yes true. But I should be around 15.5 at sea level. Or perhaphs a little better. But Im proud I can beat 1998 GT 4.6 liter mustangs, feels so good. :)
18c5sol94
02-22-2004, 04:00 PM
Why Does Sealevel Affect The Cars Performance?
Spectre927
02-22-2004, 04:29 PM
Why Does Sealevel Affect The Cars Performance?
The air density. Colder air is denser and denser air has more oxygen. (or something like that...)
The air density. Colder air is denser and denser air has more oxygen. (or something like that...)
mattyoung33
02-22-2004, 05:02 PM
yeah my 115-hp vtec-e hx runs 16.5 haha
Doubletap
02-22-2004, 10:14 PM
The air density. Colder air is denser and denser air has more oxygen. (or something like that...)
Close but it is not dependant on temperature. (It is usually colder at higher elevatiopns anyway)
It is the fact that the lower you are there is more air pressure pushing down on you from the top of the atmosphere.
Example: at 6000 ft (here in Colorado Springs) the ambient air pressure is something like 0.89 atmospheres (atm)
If you are at sea level the air pressure is 1.00 atm. Basically more is better and if it wasn't so friggin hot in death valley that would be the best place to race cause it is even below Sea level so the pressure would be more like 1.1 or 1.2 atm.
There is the science lesson of the day
DoubleTap
Disclaimer: all measurements are estimates and should not be taken for fact as it could lead to horrible humiliation by your peers.
Close but it is not dependant on temperature. (It is usually colder at higher elevatiopns anyway)
It is the fact that the lower you are there is more air pressure pushing down on you from the top of the atmosphere.
Example: at 6000 ft (here in Colorado Springs) the ambient air pressure is something like 0.89 atmospheres (atm)
If you are at sea level the air pressure is 1.00 atm. Basically more is better and if it wasn't so friggin hot in death valley that would be the best place to race cause it is even below Sea level so the pressure would be more like 1.1 or 1.2 atm.
There is the science lesson of the day
DoubleTap
Disclaimer: all measurements are estimates and should not be taken for fact as it could lead to horrible humiliation by your peers.
Spectre927
02-22-2004, 10:48 PM
Its air density/air pressure like I said. Cold air is typically denser, so I was trying to show him an example of how it works like with a CAI. :p
MexSiR
02-22-2004, 11:48 PM
Yeah its the preassure. The lower you are it means more air is on top of your head, pushing on you harder. This is why you can breathe easily when your at the sea, but when your on very high places its harder to breathe. If a car has more air pushing down on the engine, it is easier for the cars engine to "breathe" just like a human being.
Spectre927
02-23-2004, 01:51 AM
Yeah its the preassure. The lower you are it means more air is on top of your head, pushing on you harder. This is why you can breathe easily when your at the sea, but when your on very high places its harder to breathe. If a car has more air pushing down on the engine, it is easier for the cars engine to "breathe" just like a human being.
lol. its ok man. Its only hard to breathe at high altitudes cause of the lack of oxygen, which is why they take those oxygen tanks with them when they go really high. Air pressure pushes on us in every possible direction, unlike gravity. There's typically a higher concentraion of O2 in denser air, which is why you might run rich in higher altitude places.
lol. its ok man. Its only hard to breathe at high altitudes cause of the lack of oxygen, which is why they take those oxygen tanks with them when they go really high. Air pressure pushes on us in every possible direction, unlike gravity. There's typically a higher concentraion of O2 in denser air, which is why you might run rich in higher altitude places.
Spectre927
02-23-2004, 01:54 AM
im not laughing at you man. just thought your explanation was cool. but you are right about cars being able to breathe easier like us. the reasons a little off, but you get the idea
MexSiR
02-23-2004, 11:56 PM
It was a down to earth simple explanation man!...lol.
Anyways high altitudes suck...period.
Anyways high altitudes suck...period.
18c5sol94
02-24-2004, 01:50 PM
that is a trip i never knew that. so basically the lower elevation the better car performance?
got v-tec?
02-24-2004, 02:03 PM
ya i live in utah(4425above sea)i called my track a few weeks ago to get that exact number. but i only run a 15.0 up here and ran a 14.4 in sacremento. high elavation sucks! it felt like i had a 55shot n20 in cal.
stock gsr's run high 15's the best ive seen is a 15.7 with a good launch and i/e. stock b16's run 16.5 and the 350z runs 15.3
stock gsr's run high 15's the best ive seen is a 15.7 with a good launch and i/e. stock b16's run 16.5 and the 350z runs 15.3
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025
