:WOOT WOOT: back from the track
09-18-2004, 02:51 PM
#1
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
:WOOT WOOT: back from the track
Track conditions were beee-a-yoootiful 
Mid 60's with no wind & low humidity, nice & sunny to keep the track warm.
For those who dont know I have a bone stock 6 speed, when I say bone stock I mean still has the stock air filter. Back last year with like 3,500 miles on the car with stock tires I ran a couple 14.5's @ 96.5mph. The only change I did today was a set of 02 CL-S 17" wheels and 225/45/17 BFG G-Force drag radials.
1st pass : 22psi fronts, 45psi rears. I just wanted to get a run in to get the tires clean(the pits are gravel
). Pulled a 14.400 @ 98.45mph, with a worse 60' than my previous best 14.5. 
2nd pass was the best of the day, and I have no idea how. I thought the launch sucked cuz I got a decent amount of wheelhop, but no spin. Still got about 2 hops on the 1-2shift but again, no wheelsspin. Here's the slip:
RT........... .603
60'.......... 2.287
1/8 ET..... 9.377
1/8 MPH... 80.55
1/4 ET...... 14.293
1/4 MPH.... 98.78
So, I gained 2mph & lost 2.5 tenths from some more break-in miles, cooler temps, and a SLIGHTLY better 60'.
I was hoping for a little better 60's, but I think I need some suspension work for that. I think that the ET was also helped by not having major wheelspin on the 1-2 shift.
I'll probably try again once more this year when its yet a little cooler and see if I can get my 60' in the low 2.2's. If I can do that it should run 14.1.
Also the rest of the runs were all between 14.295-14.316, so its not like I ran a string of 14.5's and the 14.2 was a fluke. MPH average from all the runs (5 total) was 98.466 and average ET was 14.303.
Mid 60's with no wind & low humidity, nice & sunny to keep the track warm. For those who dont know I have a bone stock 6 speed, when I say bone stock I mean still has the stock air filter. Back last year with like 3,500 miles on the car with stock tires I ran a couple 14.5's @ 96.5mph. The only change I did today was a set of 02 CL-S 17" wheels and 225/45/17 BFG G-Force drag radials.
1st pass : 22psi fronts, 45psi rears. I just wanted to get a run in to get the tires clean(the pits are gravel
). Pulled a 14.400 @ 98.45mph, with a worse 60' than my previous best 14.5. 2nd pass was the best of the day, and I have no idea how. I thought the launch sucked cuz I got a decent amount of wheelhop, but no spin. Still got about 2 hops on the 1-2shift but again, no wheelsspin. Here's the slip:
RT........... .603
60'.......... 2.287
1/8 ET..... 9.377
1/8 MPH... 80.55
1/4 ET...... 14.293
1/4 MPH.... 98.78
So, I gained 2mph & lost 2.5 tenths from some more break-in miles, cooler temps, and a SLIGHTLY better 60'.
I was hoping for a little better 60's, but I think I need some suspension work for that. I think that the ET was also helped by not having major wheelspin on the 1-2 shift.
I'll probably try again once more this year when its yet a little cooler and see if I can get my 60' in the low 2.2's. If I can do that it should run 14.1.
Also the rest of the runs were all between 14.295-14.316, so its not like I ran a string of 14.5's and the 14.2 was a fluke. MPH average from all the runs (5 total) was 98.466 and average ET was 14.303.
09-18-2004, 03:01 PM
#4
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
Supposedly some guy drove his wife's to a 14.2 bone stock, and Allmotor ran like a 14.2 stock also. I'm just happy with the mph, cuz with some better driving/launching I hould be able to cut off a tenth or two.
09-18-2004, 03:17 PM
#6
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
Didnt really watch the tach, concentrating more on the lights. Probably around 2k rpm or so and try to slip the clutch enough as to not shock the tires while still being an aggressive launch.
Trending Topics
09-19-2004, 07:08 AM
#19
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by typeR
80.55 is good for an 8.9 1/8th and on your way to a 13. xx 1/4
I know and I was cautiously dreaming about somewhere close to that, but I dont know why I only gained 18.3mph in the 2nd 1/8th mile. Isnt the rule of thumb 20mph?
09-19-2004, 07:19 AM
#20
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Pure Adrenaline
Factory freak??
Awesome times, man. I'm jealous. I have mods and I'm running 14.5.
5AT
Awesome times, man. I'm jealous. I have mods and I'm running 14.5.
5ATI'd almost like to re-dyno it because it put down the normal 220whp (or so). This isnt the 1st time I've been accused of having a factory freak. My mustang is probably 3 tenths faster than average for its mods done. Maybe I'm just a decent driver.
09-20-2004, 03:43 AM
#22
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
Well it aint hard to shift, the launching is the tricky part. Looking at the slips in more detail compared to my older times I definitely want to try again. I really want to get a low 2.2 60' and aim for something in the 14.1's. The 1/8 & 1/4 MPH is freakin awesome, so I know if I can get a little better launch it will help tremendously.
BTW I think the shorter tires helped also because it felt like the gears revved quicker and I was shifting into 4th sooner, which may be helping my mph also.
BTW I think the shorter tires helped also because it felt like the gears revved quicker and I was shifting into 4th sooner, which may be helping my mph also.
09-20-2004, 10:36 AM
#25
Red/Ebony CLS 6-Spd
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fuzzy02CLS
Nice times. But to be fair it's not a stock CLS 6. You have 225-45-17 tires which are smaller then stock size diameter. So you really changed your gearing by doing that.
Mathematically, if the impact of having the smaller tire size for the 1/4 mile run were linear and all other things being equal (which it probably isn't), there is the implication that having the stock 819-revolutions-per-mile tire mounted (instead of the 825-revolutions-per-mile tire) would add another .10471 seconds to the ET--changing the ET to 14.39771 seconds.
09-20-2004, 11:00 AM
#26
Audi S4 driver
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Forked River NJ
Age: 39
Posts: 2,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by resedaruss
would add another .10471 seconds to the ET--changing the ET to 14.39771 seconds.
09-20-2004, 12:38 PM
#27
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
Ummmm, i never said bone stock tires. I plan on doing some measurements of actual tire heights installed to see the difference. I'm sure it made a difference, but who can say how much? So should I claim 14.39 so that its closer to stock tire size? How lame is that?
09-20-2004, 01:37 PM
#28
///M POWER
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West Bloomfield, MI
Age: 39
Posts: 15,299
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
saying that is just like saying running light weight wheels shouldnt be counted when ya run, i also run a 225/45/17 and i cant even tell a differnce in the gearing, shit in the winter i was on 215/45/17 and still didnt notice
09-20-2004, 02:45 PM
#29
Red/Ebony CLS 6-Spd
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my post above, I qualified my comments with the observation that the amount of ET increase were based on a conclusion linearly extrapolated from wheel revelolutions per mile. Yet, given other dynamics in the tires besides revolutions per mile (weight, balance, construction, material, etc.) we would be hard pressed to declare a "computed" ET as "THE ET." There are too many variables.
In the end, you are left with no recourse except to report the time you actually got without being able to account for every last qualifier.
The only reason I did my computation was my curiosity as to just how much a very small difference in gearing might impact a quater-mile run. I originally thought that such a small change in gearing couldn't amount to much--but it turns out that it can have a significant impact (if one can indeed feel a .10471 second difference in their pants).
I think it would be very appropriate to declare the car bone stock with the exception of 235X45X17 "racing" tires. No one would argue with that and it would still be very, very impressive.
By the way, I think jtkz13's driving ability is outstanding. I would be ecstatic with an ET anywhere near his.
In the end, you are left with no recourse except to report the time you actually got without being able to account for every last qualifier.
The only reason I did my computation was my curiosity as to just how much a very small difference in gearing might impact a quater-mile run. I originally thought that such a small change in gearing couldn't amount to much--but it turns out that it can have a significant impact (if one can indeed feel a .10471 second difference in their pants).
I think it would be very appropriate to declare the car bone stock with the exception of 235X45X17 "racing" tires. No one would argue with that and it would still be very, very impressive.
By the way, I think jtkz13's driving ability is outstanding. I would be ecstatic with an ET anywhere near his.
09-20-2004, 02:59 PM
#30
///M POWER
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West Bloomfield, MI
Age: 39
Posts: 15,299
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
well u get and extra 6 revs per mile, thats only 1.5 revs in the 1/4.... i cant imagine helping out by a full tenth
u can go the other way and say with a 235/45 he woulda nailed a 2.1 60' instead of a 2.2.......
u can go the other way and say with a 235/45 he woulda nailed a 2.1 60' instead of a 2.2.......
09-20-2004, 04:22 PM
#31
Red/Ebony CLS 6-Spd
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One revolution of a tire that revolves 825 times in a mile covers 6.4 feet in one revolution (6.4 * 825 = 5280). A revolution and a half = 9.6 feet. It sounds reasonable to me that a car that is ahead by 9.6 feet might be a tenth of a second faster.
09-20-2004, 07:38 PM
#32
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
You could also aruge that if it was a 225/50/17 the extra sidewall would give me a better 60' and thus a better ET. Thats all just guesswork tho. I got the slip and thats all that matters. And why cant I claim bone stock with drag radials, its right there in my sig. I literally have zero mods, save for some door sill plates & a XM reciever. 
09-20-2004, 07:41 PM
#33
///M POWER
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West Bloomfield, MI
Age: 39
Posts: 15,299
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by jtkz13
You could also aruge that if it was a 225/50/17 the extra sidewall would give me a better 60' and thus a better ET. Thats all just guesswork tho. I got the slip and thats all that matters. And why cant I claim bone stock with drag radials, its right there in my sig. I literally have zero mods, save for some door sill plates & a XM reciever.
09-21-2004, 04:18 AM
#36
TQ > MPG
Thread Starter
I may get a CAI in the future, but definitely not headers or SC. Its just my semi-fast daily driver that I want to be reliable & efficient. It being fast is just a bonus. I think that the power level is more than adequate, I'm going to work on suspension & looks more than powertrain. I just wanted to see what it would run if I didnt have to worry about wheelspin.
I just wanted to see what it would run if I didnt have to worry about wheelspin.
09-21-2004, 03:48 PM
#40
Audi S4 driver
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Forked River NJ
Age: 39
Posts: 2,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Headers are certainly reliable and efficient .. and make the ride twice as fun. you wouldn't regret them as long as you did them .. just go Comptech
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mugen TSX
Eastern Canada
0
09-01-2015 11:11 PM
Mugen TSX
Eastern Canada
0
09-01-2015 11:05 PM
