Panoz RUNNING DOWN a ZO6

My Panoz with a 427ci ford with slicks running down a ZO6 with a 383ci LS with hoosiers with about 100hp more (I think).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kuXkr0bsic

Very nice, that vette driver looked like a menace he was all over the place, a serious case of the res mist when you caught him!

Fricken awesome Brian! :smile:

[quote=panozracing]My Panoz with a 427ci ford with slicks running down a ZO6 with a 383ci LS with hoosiers with about 100hp more (I think).


Awesome Brian, really enjoyed watching the vid. Particularly enjoyed the split passing of slower cars by yourself and the Vette. Assume you were running in 450 RWHP mode during this session? What RPM limit do you run in the car at the 450 RWHP setting? I see you are running 112 octane fuel, what sort of compression ratio are you running?

I have been playing around on the Dyno 2000 software looking at different Ford block / bore / stroke combo's and power outputs at varying rpm's. I had been pretty fixed on a 302 blocked 360 - 370 cube engine combo but it is tempting to go down a similar path re the 427 (particularly if you are getting similar fuel consumption (4 mpg) with the 427 on the 390 carb). Dont know if you have this software but I have found on my previous race engines that its predictions are pretty close to what you will see on a Dynojet Dyno.

Very Nice!! Thanks for sharing.

Assume you were running in 450 RWHP mode during this session? What RPM limit do you run in the car at the 450 RWHP setting? I see you are running 112 octane fuel, what sort of compression ratio are you running?

I have been playing around on the Dyno 2000 software looking at different Ford block / bore / stroke combo's and power outputs at varying rpm's. I had been pretty fixed on a 302 blocked 360 - 370 cube engine combo but it is tempting to go down a similar path re the 427 (particularly if you are getting similar fuel consumption (4 mpg) with the 427 on the 390 carb). Dont know if you have this software but I have found on my previous race engines that its predictions are pretty close to what you will see on a Dynojet Dyno.

Yes we are running with the 390 carb and its "SOMEWHERE" between 420-470 rwhp. Some might ask why the range. Welllll.....3 differant dynos have given us 3 diff. answers (420,450,470 and 2 of the dynos where the same model) so what is up with that????? All the dynos curves told us that with the 390 carb there was little point revving past 6k so I run a 6700 chip. I sometimes need the extra RPMS depending on traffic and gearing so I would run it up to 6500 With the 650 carb we should run up another few RPM's and we run the 7k chip (we have not run the 650 carb much). We built the motor to take much more than that but you have to feed it fuel and thats when you need the big carbs.

We run the 112 because our engine builder and others have all told us it may be more money buts its cheap insurance, better fuel, better octane....its more money butttt we are racing :screwy: !!!! I am not 100% sure but I think I remember 11:1 compression. We could run pump gas buttttttttttt again why risk anything with our race motors.

I have not messed with any engine building programs but I know our builder (Mike) at Total Engine Concepts (he builds all the MT900 Mosler engines and much more) did before ordering parts. The engines are AWESOME and I cannot say enough about the motor and TEC.

Brian,

Was that West Palm Beach?

Whose organization was it, as that looks like a fun group of cars to race with...good power and rear wings.

Patrick James

Brian,

Was that West Palm Beach?

Whose organization was it, as that looks like a fun group of cars to race with...good power and rear wings.

Patrick James

Yes...Blue Heron Blvd. TEC is an AWESOME engine builder and I will never go anywhere else. He goes over and above to make sure his engine works perfectly.

That race was the NASA Nationals this year.

thanks for showing what is possible---my next goal..

We could run pump gas buttttttttttt again why risk anything with our race motors.

Interesting on the fuel Brian. We are going through some changes on fuels able to be used in racing here in New Zealand. I have built my 'interim' 302 as a low compression engine to avoid any hassles (as well as to allow re-use of the heads with a bigger capacity short block :). It will run detonation free on our 95 octane. Not sure what octane this fuel would be rated at in the US but suspect it would be lower and around 90 or 92. I thought 340'ish RWHP was not a bad effort for that lower compression and octane.

I also noticed in the video Brian that you have installed a support diaphragm inside the base of the windscreen. Did you do that or is that a factory fit for GTS's. Reason I ask is that my laminated screen caved in at speed at my last test session. Just before it caved in I noticed that it was flexing inwards along the base. I have now gone to lexan screen with chrome moly centre support and have filled the cavity at the base of the screen with expanding foam (the type that goes hard within an hour or two).

Interested to hear if you did fit the diaphragm Brian and if it was for similar reasons. There are a number of guys powering up their cars now and this is an area that is worth modifying for safety reasons at the higher speeds their cars will be capable of.

That's Popp's car... but was that Danny driving? If it was that's mighty sloppy for him... shit tires?

I also noticed in the video Brian that you have installed a support diaphragm inside the base of the windscreen. Did you do that or is that a factory fit for GTS's. Reason I ask is that my laminated screen caved in at speed at my last test session. Just before it caved in I noticed that it was flexing inwards along the base. I have now gone to lexan screen with chrome moly centre support and have filled the cavity at the base of the screen with expanding foam (the type that goes hard within an hour or two).

Interested to hear if you did fit the diaphragm Brian and if it was for similar reasons. There are a number of guys powering up their cars now and this is an area that is worth modifying for safety reasons at the higher speeds their cars will be capable of.

Actually, we bought both cars used and one has it and one doesnt. I am not sure if that is factory or the previous owner did it. It deffinately helps and I would highly recommend it. We had major issues with the car without the brace when we ran at Daytona and the entire front of the cowling has tons of cracks in it. The cracks are in the plastic and that is the entire roof which is not cheap. I think we need to have Panoz make this brace and we can all get one from them. Everyone email Brandon!!!!!

On another note. I have been uploading videos all day to youtube. I will make a post on here tonight with the details. Since everyone liked this video I went thru the library and picked some winners. I have Sebring and Daytona coming online and for the guy that didnt think we can run with a radical....stay tuned!!!!!!!

Devin and I's GTWC's have 3 stand off supports at the base of the windsheild I assume to prevent that. does your car have those at least?

Devin and I's GTWC's have 3 stand off supports at the base of the windsheild I assume to prevent that. does your car have those at least?

No...I dont think the cars come with anything std. at least the GTS that is. In the video you can see the continuous support that someone made and I think its a perfect design. I need to make one for the other car. As soon as the upload is done you will be able to see the other cars brace. Post a pic of yours for us to see!!!!

I don't have any good pics of them, but if you watch the VIR video I posted you can see them. they are connected to the bottom of the windshield straps and then mount to the sheet metal dash.

Here is the video , you can see the silver "rods" in the lower left corner of the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Kv3ePaMd_g

Historical question: My car still has glass in front without any need for the braces. Did your glass fail which prompted a switch to Lexan or did you just change for weight/safety reasons?

Historical question: My car still has glass in front without any need for the braces. Did your glass fail which prompted a switch to Lexan or did you just change for weight/safety reasons?


Was that for me or Brian? I still have stock glass but will be switching over to lexan when its time to replace this windshield for the weight savings

Eric, I assumed you only needed the bracing for Lexan. Does it do anything for glass-does it lessen the chance of cracking? I have read some treads in the past where guys have mentioned their glass cracked.

Eric, I assumed you only needed the bracing for Lexan. Does it do anything for glass-does it lessen the chance of cracking? I have read some treads in the past where guys have mentioned their glass cracked.

It's a safety thing, in the event of a crash the safety bands help keep the windshield on the outside of the car as opposed to sitting on my lap.

The GTWC's came with the bracing(mine and devins did anyway) I assume it was an ALMS safety rule.

Got it-thanks!