Badfish's first time at the track :)
#31
06-10-2006, 11:49 PM
Originally Posted by dannyb785
Jon, you dont even have LT's. I dont remember, do you have a tb/plenum? I honestly just dont remember, but I'm hopin r3dn3ck can chime in here and say that intake, exhaust, and gears can get you into the 12's. How was your traction? Are 60' times affected by elevation? It all just seems too good to be true. I mean, swervo ran low 13's on dr's and he's near 300 rwhp. I wonder how correct the sae thing is
#32
06-10-2006, 11:50 PM
Originally Posted by MattJ
Ive always said SAE is cheater setup. Anyone can throw out some low *** SAE numbers. Personally, I dont post any SAE things because your time is so reducted by it. Anything I post is real world numbers that im running, on whatever day/temp/track blah blah.
#33
06-11-2006, 12:11 AM
I really dont understanbd the whole SAE Corrected stuff.....I mean, how do you run a 12.8 when your time slip says 14.6?? I mean, not flaming or anything, but if hes running 12.8s then I guess im running 11's?
I just hope you dont go around telling people it runs 12.8s......I rode in a GT tonight with 4:10s and it was WAY faster than my car on motor! I mean it felt so much quicker from a dead stop. I need gears badly......
Glad your taking your time with the nitrous........Dont spray out of the hole.....:wallbash:
I just hope you dont go around telling people it runs 12.8s......I rode in a GT tonight with 4:10s and it was WAY faster than my car on motor! I mean it felt so much quicker from a dead stop. I need gears badly......Glad your taking your time with the nitrous........Dont spray out of the hole.....:wallbash:
#34
06-11-2006, 12:16 AM
well its like when dyno numbers are SAE corrected. it'll either add or take away horsepower depending on the atmosphereic conditions at the time. the question is.. how do you really know its accurate, because it's just taking the number you put down and the numbers from the atmosphere and calculating them to get some other number thats suppose to be your horsepower if we lived in perfect conditions? lol who knows.
when i go to the track i just compare it to what other cars are running to see ifim where i should be or not.
when i go to the track i just compare it to what other cars are running to see ifim where i should be or not.
#35
06-11-2006, 01:08 AM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 10,698
lol..."really dont understanbd the whole SAE Corrected stuff"
how does that make sense? are you being serious, do you really not get the concept of thinner air up here? you dont think it makes a difference? ..when you talk to local people n stuff...sure I'll tell them exactly what i got...14.6..
but If you didn't know who i was or where i lived and i said on the net: "here are my mods I ran a 14.6" ... people will be like, damn, talk about slow
sure r3dn3ck it's easy to disregard SAE when you live in a place where the biggest hill in the state is the garbage dump (true in FLA)
Bandimere Speedway is at five thousand eight hundred feet ...so I corrected it to give myself and others more of an idea of what i'd be running if it were an even playing feild...
I really don't care about "internet times"...like I said...just to give myself and others an idea...
how does that make sense? are you being serious, do you really not get the concept of thinner air up here? you dont think it makes a difference? ..when you talk to local people n stuff...sure I'll tell them exactly what i got...14.6..
but If you didn't know who i was or where i lived and i said on the net: "here are my mods I ran a 14.6" ... people will be like, damn, talk about slow
sure r3dn3ck it's easy to disregard SAE when you live in a place where the biggest hill in the state is the garbage dump (true in FLA)
Bandimere Speedway is at five thousand eight hundred feet ...so I corrected it to give myself and others more of an idea of what i'd be running if it were an even playing feild...
I really don't care about "internet times"...like I said...just to give myself and others an idea...
#37
06-11-2006, 01:42 AM
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jon i know you have a fast car and all, but im going to have to call a BS on it till i see a real time slip, you have a fast car but 12.7s without the nitrous with those mods??, I go to the track a lot and i see people with those same mods and more running mid 13s.
#39
06-11-2006, 06:20 AM
Originally Posted by Badfish
w00t i beat an ls1. ****, i was .4 away from beating a modded c5. he never left one car ahead of me
how "modded" was he? And remember, people can tend to really suck if they dont have dr's or slicks.
take me for example :foot:
#40
06-11-2006, 06:37 AM
Corrected track times are fine for comparing your car's performance from day to day. In fact the corrections aren't very accurate at the higher numbers. Therefore it's very hard for folks like Badfish to compare their performance with someone at sea level. So.......do I think Badfish can run 12's at sea level? I have to say "no way" based on his 60' time alone. A 2.10 60' is a soft launch at any altitude and you just won't get a near stock GT in the 12's without a damn good launch. Sorry about that, but your times are very respectable for the altitude...plus you got bit by the track bug..
Jay
Jay
#42
06-11-2006, 09:33 AM
I'd have to agree with Jay, there is no way your car will be anywhere close to the 12's at sea level. The calculations are way off. You're probably only running, MAYBE a 13.7 at sea level, sorry badfish.
#43
06-11-2006, 01:58 PM
Guest
Posts: n/a
Damn, if i ever go to the track i aint posting **** after reading through this.
Jon got the times by entering the into he had in at MPH, which is a pretty respectable site. He wanted to find out roughly what he might run at sea level. Up here in colorado when you have a low 14 second car or high 13 thats pretty impressive.
of course there are tons of parameters that would need to be in mind, but it was to give a general idea.
as far as 13.7 at sea level being the best he could do with those mods? are you ****ing serious? from what i hear on all the sites is that a good driver can hit 13.8-13.9 with a stock mustang gt with good conditions.
Its amazing how many people scoff at the notion he could hit 12's. I diddnt hear anybody out there saying **** to TrueBlueGT when he said all that is required to hit 12's in a mustang is a good driver aand 250hp.
I agree 12.7 does seem a little bit fast, but christ, any of you have a better equation than what is on MPH? then bust it out or quite giving him such a hard time.
being this high up at 5,800 feet definatly puts a hamper on the performance. He used a calculator off a well respected site and got those numbers. dont give him **** about it. come one, what happened to the support?
anyways, i dont see why he couldnt be in the low 13's at sea level with those mods.
Jon got the times by entering the into he had in at MPH, which is a pretty respectable site. He wanted to find out roughly what he might run at sea level. Up here in colorado when you have a low 14 second car or high 13 thats pretty impressive.
of course there are tons of parameters that would need to be in mind, but it was to give a general idea.
as far as 13.7 at sea level being the best he could do with those mods? are you ****ing serious? from what i hear on all the sites is that a good driver can hit 13.8-13.9 with a stock mustang gt with good conditions.
Its amazing how many people scoff at the notion he could hit 12's. I diddnt hear anybody out there saying **** to TrueBlueGT when he said all that is required to hit 12's in a mustang is a good driver aand 250hp.
I agree 12.7 does seem a little bit fast, but christ, any of you have a better equation than what is on MPH? then bust it out or quite giving him such a hard time.
being this high up at 5,800 feet definatly puts a hamper on the performance. He used a calculator off a well respected site and got those numbers. dont give him **** about it. come one, what happened to the support?
anyways, i dont see why he couldnt be in the low 13's at sea level with those mods.
#44
06-11-2006, 02:30 PM
Reason why he cant hit low 13s or 12s is because of his 60ft.......:bash:
2.1 isnt gonna do any better than about 13.8-14.1.......but with those tires im sure with practice he can cut some 1.7s.....
2.1 isnt gonna do any better than about 13.8-14.1.......but with those tires im sure with practice he can cut some 1.7s.....
#45
06-11-2006, 04:24 PM
I have been to alot of races latley and my buddy ran 5 times yesterday in Tulsa with the same Mod's as Jon and was running 14.3 and 14.2.I have run him in town and pull on him pretty hard since the TB/PL that he has'nt done yet.The temp was almost 100 in Tulsa yesterday!!
I got to the track to late to run or I would be able to see how much a difference the other Mod's I have from his make's.
I did race a 96 Vette and a Hemi Charger last night from about a 15 mph roll for each and pulled away from the Vette pretty easy but the damn Hemi kept up till I hit 4th gear.That thing had huge *** 22's on it too and was pretty quick.He would'nt race me from a dig though
I got to the track to late to run or I would be able to see how much a difference the other Mod's I have from his make's.
I did race a 96 Vette and a Hemi Charger last night from about a 15 mph roll for each and pulled away from the Vette pretty easy but the damn Hemi kept up till I hit 4th gear.That thing had huge *** 22's on it too and was pretty quick.He would'nt race me from a dig though
#46
06-11-2006, 04:43 PM
Originally Posted by jeredan2003
Reason why he cant hit low 13s or 12s is because of his 60ft.......:bash:
2.1 isnt gonna do any better than about 13.8-14.1.......but with those tires im sure with practice he can cut some 1.7s.....
2.1 isnt gonna do any better than about 13.8-14.1.......but with those tires im sure with practice he can cut some 1.7s.....
Exactly.....unless you're making mad horsepower you're gonna need a sub-1.8 60' in most cases. My car has ran 12's prolly 20 times , but never with a crappy 60'. Also I've had "corrected" times of 12.40's, but I can't claim to run 12.40's because my best timeslip says 12.89
And I'm not scoffing Badfish....he did a great job his first time out:clap: Jay
#48
06-11-2006, 06:51 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 10,698
I was talking to some guys who race up here alot, and the altitude DOES affect 60 foot times....2.1 is actually good for drag radials up here., it's like a 1.8 at sealevel...so at sealevel I COULD be running high 12's..low 13's... 1.6 60 foots up here are barley acheived by guys running slicks
#49
06-11-2006, 07:00 PM
No, its not gonna work that way.......I think your car should be really fast.......but to tell you the truth.....what you ran at Bandimere is prolly within 2 tenths of what you would run at any other track......You just need some practice, its not the car or the altitude. 14.6 with your mods means you need practice nomatter what altitude.
#50
06-11-2006, 07:06 PM
Originally Posted by Badfish
I was talking to some guys who race up here alot, and the altitude DOES affect 60 foot times....2.1 is actually good for drag radials up here., it's like a 1.8 at sealevel...so at sealevel I COULD be running high 12's..low 13's... 1.6 60 foots up here are barley acheived by guys running slicks
Now with nitrous yes and below.
#52
06-11-2006, 07:12 PM
So did the other 50 guy's I saw run this weekend with the same or more mod's.
#53
06-11-2006, 07:31 PM
Guest
Posts: n/a
so the general consensus is that altitude does nothing for the 1/4 mile run?
lol.....
uhh, that is pretty common knowledge......
lol.....
uhh, that is pretty common knowledge......
#54
06-11-2006, 07:31 PM
Originally Posted by Lances03GT
So did the other 50 guy's I saw run this weekend with the same or more mod's.
I couldn't begin to count the PM's I've gotten from folks wanting to run 12's, and I've been honest with every one of them. But you know, very few will make the sacrifices necessary to do so
Jay
#57
06-11-2006, 07:55 PM
Even at the WFC I saw modded 05/06's and ALOT of 99/04 GT's run high 14's and even low 15's.And that is guy's that have been doing it for along time.
I'm not trying to put you down Jon but it's not that easy to run mid 13's and high 12's without the proper mod's,alot of traction,and a great reaction time.I don't see it around here and places like Topeka and other NHRA sites in this area run very well there.I know guy's that run every weekend in the summer that would have a hard time getting high 12's or low 13's with your mod's.
I'm not trying to put you down Jon but it's not that easy to run mid 13's and high 12's without the proper mod's,alot of traction,and a great reaction time.I don't see it around here and places like Topeka and other NHRA sites in this area run very well there.I know guy's that run every weekend in the summer that would have a hard time getting high 12's or low 13's with your mod's.
#58
06-11-2006, 08:00 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 10,698
me running 12's is arguable...but mid 13's? no way man. why is it so hard for you to grasp the concept of elevation? i am running at 600 feet above a MILE HIGH....almost 6000 feet! there is only a FRACTION of the oxygen up here. and I'm running mid 14's UP HERE with a little better 60 foot...at sealevel thats low 13's, high 12's i dont care what the guys with GTs are running there..these are MY times
#60
06-11-2006, 08:22 PM
And yes I know about elevation!!!
I'm just saying there is no way you would run 12's with your Mod's right now!!!
I'm just saying there is no way you would run 12's with your Mod's right now!!!