New best
Thread Starter
TQ > MPG
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,624
Likes: 8
From: Metro Detroit
New best
I know this isnt the 100% correct forum, but alot of people dont go in the sanstioned racing forum, and I post a full detail of the pass in there.
Basically I ran a couple 14.4's, a couple 14.5's, and a couple 14.2's. Best pass of the day was 14.08 @ 98.8 mph. I was hoping for something in the 99's as far as mph goes, but I'm sure if I had stock wheels in the back it would have gotten there.
It wasnt exactly the 13.99999X I was hoping for, but still not bad for 3 mods totaling $400.
Basically I ran a couple 14.4's, a couple 14.5's, and a couple 14.2's. Best pass of the day was 14.08 @ 98.8 mph. I was hoping for something in the 99's as far as mph goes, but I'm sure if I had stock wheels in the back it would have gotten there.
It wasnt exactly the 13.99999X I was hoping for, but still not bad for 3 mods totaling $400.
Thread Starter
TQ > MPG
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,624
Likes: 8
From: Metro Detroit
Originally Posted by Joe5.0
I know this isnt the 100% correct forum, but alot of people dont go in the sanstioned racing forum, and I post a full detail of the pass in there.
Basically I ran a couple 14.4's, a couple 14.5's, and a couple 14.2's. Best pass of the day was 14.08 @ 98.8 mph. I was hoping for something in the 99's as far as mph goes, but I'm sure if I had stock wheels in the back it would have gotten there.
It wasnt exactly the 13.99999X I was hoping for, but still not bad for 3 mods totaling $400.
Basically I ran a couple 14.4's, a couple 14.5's, and a couple 14.2's. Best pass of the day was 14.08 @ 98.8 mph. I was hoping for something in the 99's as far as mph goes, but I'm sure if I had stock wheels in the back it would have gotten there.
It wasnt exactly the 13.99999X I was hoping for, but still not bad for 3 mods totaling $400.
Didnt edit quick enough, thats the full details of the pas.
And yeah icebox, light 17's, and dr's are the only mods.
Thread Starter
TQ > MPG
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,624
Likes: 8
From: Metro Detroit
I would, if headers were alot cheaper. I'm trying to save for an S-trim for my mustang, and headers are almost HALF of what a freakin SC costs for my mustang. 
Unless someone is selling them used in great condition for under $600 I'll probaby not do anymore hp mods to it.
Unless someone is selling them used in great condition for under $600 I'll probaby not do anymore hp mods to it.
Trending Topics
V-tak Yoo
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: Olathe KS
Originally Posted by Joe5.0
I would, if headers were alot cheaper. I'm trying to save for an S-trim for my mustang, and headers are almost HALF of what a freakin SC costs for my mustang.
Unless someone is selling them used in great condition for under $600 I'll probaby not do anymore hp mods to it.
Unless someone is selling them used in great condition for under $600 I'll probaby not do anymore hp mods to it.
save your money. buy a t-trim. or go turbo. stang's love turbos
Thread Starter
TQ > MPG
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,624
Likes: 8
From: Metro Detroit
Well the track I went to is very back woods. Gravel pits, no way for fwd water burnouts, and one of the lanes is impossible to launch in a manual because you roll forward. However, their timing system is brand new last yr, andsit seems more consistent than the other local track I go to.
I def am not going to buy slicks (noone makes a skinny 17" slick anyways), and yes I know 2.2 60's suck with dr's. My car is bone stock suspension wise, so there is tons of weight transfer and I get a very decent amount of wheelhop.
And I dont think too many 6 speed people are sub 2.2, maybe all-motor with his slicks, but I dunno. The 6 speed is MUCH harder to launch than the auto, its def not a drag racing clutch.
I def am not going to buy slicks (noone makes a skinny 17" slick anyways), and yes I know 2.2 60's suck with dr's. My car is bone stock suspension wise, so there is tons of weight transfer and I get a very decent amount of wheelhop.
And I dont think too many 6 speed people are sub 2.2, maybe all-motor with his slicks, but I dunno. The 6 speed is MUCH harder to launch than the auto, its def not a drag racing clutch.
Racer
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
From: glendale, CA
Originally Posted by Joe5.0
Well the track I went to is very back woods. Gravel pits, no way for fwd water burnouts, and one of the lanes is impossible to launch in a manual because you roll forward. However, their timing system is brand new last yr, andsit seems more consistent than the other local track I go to.
I def am not going to buy slicks (noone makes a skinny 17" slick anyways), and yes I know 2.2 60's suck with dr's. My car is bone stock suspension wise, so there is tons of weight transfer and I get a very decent amount of wheelhop.
And I dont think too many 6 speed people are sub 2.2, maybe all-motor with his slicks, but I dunno. The 6 speed is MUCH harder to launch than the auto, its def not a drag racing clutch.
I def am not going to buy slicks (noone makes a skinny 17" slick anyways), and yes I know 2.2 60's suck with dr's. My car is bone stock suspension wise, so there is tons of weight transfer and I get a very decent amount of wheelhop.
And I dont think too many 6 speed people are sub 2.2, maybe all-motor with his slicks, but I dunno. The 6 speed is MUCH harder to launch than the auto, its def not a drag racing clutch.
Racer
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
From: glendale, CA
Originally Posted by allmotor_2000
Nice My best with with a K&N drop-in filter was 14.1. The header helped me hit 13's but I concur that the 6-speed is very difficult to launch.
My best with with a K&N drop-in filter was 14.1. The header helped me hit 13's but I concur that the 6-speed is very difficult to launch.May I ask what track this was? And at what mph? I noticed you are in So Cal...
