New Track times with the Ford.

BullDog71ss · #1 03-17-2007, 01:11 PM

Made it out lastnight to Firebird Raceway lastnight. Got there Early enough to be one of the first 20 or so to tech and there was a nice small line in the staging areas when I lined up. Only problem was I sat out there for 45 minutes untill they opened up the track...

Had 3/4 of 89 oct. in the tank and it was about 85 out or so lastnight...much hotter than I wanted it to be. I was cooking in my car all night. Other than that track conditions were good.

So here are the runs in order.

Me / Other lane
Maverick
R/T- .098.... .066
60'- 2.244.... 2.343
1/4- 14.493.... 15.895
MPH- 98.46.... 85.44

Turbo'd 5.0 stang <--- Took him till 1/8th mile to catch me.
R/T- .502.... .370
60'- 2.186.... 2.409
1/4- 14.402.... 13.096
MPH- 97.94.... 122.79

LT1 Firebird
R/T- .412.... .630
60'- 2.299.... 2.328
1/4- 14.594.... 15.066
MPH- 97.17.... 93.69

S/C Lighting <--- I beat him to the lights at the end.
R/T- .391.... .651
60'- 2.162.... 2.135
1/4- 14.341.... 14.245
MPH- 98.66.... 96.90

2500 Duramax Chevy
R/T- .537.... .329
60'- 2.192.... 2.304
1/4- 14.322.... 15.776
MPH- 98.50.... 86.51

Was happy and dissapointed with lastnight. Happy that I'm consistant with the car and I can get it out of the hole in a hurry, but dissapointed that it wouldn't pick up the pace later on down the track. There were a couple things hurting me lastnight though. First was really bad heatsoak, the car never had a proper cool down on any of these runs. Second was a very warm sping evening. I'm sure the car woulda been much happier running in the 60-65 degree zone that I ran the Cobalt in to get it's good times. Third is the fact that I've got 18's and my car is optioned out. I'm betting mine wieghs over 100 pounds more than the base model GT. I also forgot to take out the spare as well...that was kind of stupid.

I had hopes of cracking into the 13's with the stang lastnight, and I'm sure on a cooler night, with 1/4 tank of fuel and some slight weight reduction I could get it there. But it doesnt look like I'll have that chance again for a long time. It's just going to get hotter very fast here. But overall, I'm happy with lastnights' base line runs.

TheStang00 · #2 03-17-2007, 01:16 PM

not to bad, you are consistent. i was hoping for 13's too but maybe next time. did better than i would of probably, ive never been to the track

jeepgclwj · #3 03-17-2007, 03:26 PM

Maybe I do stand a chance with a new GT on the streets after all.....j/k I cant wait to hit the track....

VR43000GT · #4 03-17-2007, 03:56 PM

Not too bad for the first time out. Seems like there were others that could have done much better too lol (LT1 and the lightning).

Next time get us some vids too.

BullDog71ss · #5 03-17-2007, 10:43 PM

What are lightnings supposed to hit stock? Cause this guys got a better '60 than me which means he was out of the hole in a hurry. And it's not like you can say it's his driving down the track because his auto did the rest for him after the hole shot. Maybe there was something going on with the track/weather conditions that were really hurting everyone's et's and traps.

Musashi3000GT · #6 03-18-2007, 01:10 AM

Shit, you did alot better then my first time out!

Good job on the conssistency too bro.

GForce957 · #7 03-18-2007, 05:48 AM

When I saw your post I was pretty much expecting high 13's, and especially so when I saw that you had a lightning go against you. Maybe it was a crappy prepped track or heatsoack or something, but that doesnt sound like stock conditions for anything.

lt1 getting a 15 1/4 is slow, same thing with a s/c lightning, that's high mid 13 second car in good conditions, i dunno man, at least you were consistent...

2000LS1Z28 · #8 03-18-2007, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BullDog71ss

What are lightnings supposed to hit stock? Cause this guys got a better '60 than me which means he was out of the hole in a hurry. And it's not like you can say it's his driving down the track because his auto did the rest for him after the hole shot. Maybe there was something going on with the track/weather conditions that were really hurting everyone's et's and traps.

Ehh, stock Lightnings range from a 14.2 sec. 1/4 mile to a 13.8 sec. 1/4 mile, depeding on the year of the Lightning (I believe the 2001's had 380hp, and the 99's had 360hp).

Anyways, i'm surprised that you didn't run in the 13's. Your 60' time is pretty dang good. I mean, a 2.1 sec. 60' isn't bad on street tires. I'm sure you could get a 2.0 sec. 60' with even more practice, which is just insane for a stock car (Heard and seen those new stangs getting out of the hole, and they are vicious). The top end just seems really lacking to me though. Thought those cars were LS1 killers. Seems like they run out of gas past the 1/8th mile from what i've seen at the track (Seen a few, which I think might have had exhaust, that ran a 13.8 sec. 1/4 mile at 100mph).

Track conditions always play a factor. Last time I went to the track I only ran a 13.2 sec. 1/4 mile at 108mph, cause I ran into a 30mph headwind. My previous best, with less mods, was a 13.1 sec. at 109mph. I'm sure that if you were in 60 degree temperatures, without a headwind to run into, and with decent track prep, that the car would run high 13's. The mph just seems low to me though. What do Mach1's run at that track?

Anyways, nice driving out of the hole.

-Jayson- · #9 03-18-2007, 12:54 PM

not bad times, with some weight reduction and get that 60ft down to a 2.0 flat you could do high 13's.

VR43000GT · #10 03-18-2007, 10:59 PM

Lightnings are capable of running mid to low 13's stock and can hit 12's with DR's. A very good LT1 driver in a F-body can hit upper 13's. Generally, Lt1 times tend to be around 14.0-14.3 give or take.

BullDog71ss · #11 03-18-2007, 11:38 PM

I did a bit more investigating and it was about 90 even out at Firebird when I was running and considering the miserable trap speed of the Lightning and Firebird I ran against I think the track conditions were killing a lot of top end down the track. I also forgot to mention that the Lightning ran 2.135 60' compared to my 2.162. He even had a better launch than me, but because his r/t was twice that of mine I still beat him to the traps. I still can't believe that he only hit 96 mph, it's not like his driving could kill it down the track. It is after all an auto.

Firebird sits at about 1300 feet above sea level and it was 90 out that night. Can anyone convert my time to sea level and a temp of 60 or so?

Chiquae07 · #12 03-19-2007, 12:27 AM

well from here i get this

http://www.greatlakesdragaway.com/co...onfactors.html

alt-1300 time-.9861 mph-1.0143

12.89 @ 99.9MPH

BullDog71ss · #13 03-19-2007, 12:37 AM

That seems a bit...off. Doesn't it?

BullDog71ss · #14 03-19-2007, 12:39 AM

I got 14.122 @ 99.90

Hmm...factor in a nice drop from 90 to 60 degrees an I might be in business...

2000LS1Z28 · #15 03-19-2007, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SL3000gt

Lightnings are capable of running mid to low 13's stock and can hit 12's with DR's. A very good LT1 driver in a F-body can hit upper 13's. Generally, Lt1 times tend to be around 14.0-14.3 give or take.

12's on DR's, LOL. I highly doubt that. The rags run them to a high 13 sec. 1/4 mile. I suppose a few might eek into the mid 13's, but 12's with DR's sounds like a big stretch. That a 4000+ lb. pickup truck with the aerodynamics of a brick being pushed into the wind. DR's aren't gonna take off 7 tenths of a sec.

Anyways, Bulldog you may wanna adjust your times for density altitude, and not just altitude. Your track was more then likely above 2000+ ft. density altitude. Most likely you ran a high 13 sec. pass with all the variables taken into consideration.

Still surprised by the LT1 F Body running a 15 sec. flat 1/4 mile though. That's just weak.

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD