dands99tl

Wondering who here has run a '99 TL at the strip and what your times are. My best time running in auto mode is a 16.8 @ 83mph. This was 5800' above sea level. Hp and torque numbers are in my sig, I will have the dyno chart up later today or tomorrow. Also if you could list your mods. Thanks!

My mods right now include:
Stone Racing Headers
AEM CAI
Power Steering overdrive pulley
Car Sound High-flow Cat

When car was last run/dyno'd it had:
OBX headers
AEM CAI
Car Sound High-flow cat

1fasttl

What did you do with your obx headers?

dands99tl

They are sitting in my garage...

Got_3.2?

iTrader: (2)

is 16.8 good?

dands99tl

Not from what I know, but then again it was in Auto mode vs Sport Shift, and with the altitude, it really doesn't help

ou sig

ummm not at all...but maybe auto and the altitude cut off at least 1 second??!?!

dands99tl

errr, make that an UNDERdrive pulley... why can I not edit my post?

Pure Adrenaline

iTrader: (2)

With those mods, you should be running a little bit quicker than 16.8.

bacardi151

That seems way off man.. I don't know if it's because of the altitude or your 4 gears... A 00 TL-P is capable of running 15.3 without any mods. A 02 TL-S can easily run 14.7 stock.

patrick

Perhaps. But I do believe that the higher altitude may be a major factor in his lower quarter mile time. It is interesting to note that dands99tl has very similar HP/TQ gains to me:

dans99tl
188 WHP
186 TQ


My TL:
188.8 WHP
185.9 TQ

And we have similar mods (we both have Stone Racing Headers).

dands99tl

I believe the dyno shows "corrected" numbers which accounts for barametric pressure etc. So it is not totally accurate of what my car really makes at altitude.

Patrick, ever run your car?

REDLINEN

If the OBX headers are forsale and in good shape pm me.

patrick

Nope I haven't. But you make a good point. My dyno is "corrected" but at sea level. So I can assume that your TL will make a few ponies more at sea level with the mods that you have.

@cUr@-TL

the altitude adds at least a second and a half to the real 1/4 mile time his car should do...

dands99tl

What I meant was the corrected #'s are what my car would make at sea level. It makes less than that at altitude.

PenguinQX

iTrader: (1)

Any reason you swapped them out for the Stone headers? I have new OBX headers that I'm waiting to install.. i'm starting to have doubts about them.

dands99tl

I got the Stone headers for free.... and the obx ones were dinged on the bottom from the previous owner, so I said what the hell. Really pretty much the same if you look at them side by side. The stone headers are ported on the inside, so they probably flow a little better, the O2 bung is in a slightly different spot, but other than than, they look exactly the same.

Ianbiz3

since when did the 99TL have 188hp??

Tunaboy

whp jackass 225 from the crank I pity the foo

dands99tl

so does anyone want to cough up their times in a '99? Lots of talk, no numbers though, everyone always says your car SHOULD run ..... but I don't see anyone elses track times...

patrick

Sorry, my misunderstanding! In that case, our TLs are quite comparable then in terms of WHP and TQ.

luxurycarson20s

i have an 01 tl with magnaflow straight pipe exhaust, and aem short ram intake. i ran a 15.3

ChucksCL-S

I have a '00 TL with I/H/E/P and ran just a hair under 15.0 at 93 mph.

dands99tl

Man I was hoping that there are some more '99 TL people out there that have raced their cars...
chuckstl, what altitude do run at?

patrick

I may take my TL to the track next spring or summer, after I do a few more mods. I'll let you know how I do then.

bacardi151

Damn 15.3 is low for I/H/E/P on a 00-01 TL... They should do 15.2 stock according to car-stats :
http://www.car-stats.com/stats/shows...tsgivenid.aspx


The TL-S is running 14.8 1/4 and 6.2 0-60 which is definetly right. Check out the TL-S here :
http://www.car-stats.com/stats/shows...tsgivenid.aspx


I recommend gate shifting even though it's bad for your tranny if you do it too much.. You'll definetly feel the difference and see lower times.

moahdriven

he was nicely tryin to say...188 wheel horsepower, thats horsepower that actually gets to the wheels...225 is the horsepower at the crankshaft, it decreases as it travels to the wheels though.

unlemming

According to Comptech '99TL stock makes 164.8HP/162.4TQ, and with H/E it makes 175.9HP/165.1TQ, so the your intakes must be synergistic with the H/E . Or they use a different dyno method, shrug.

http://www.comptechusa.com/images/dyno/1999TLplot.pdf

dands99tl

Nice find, I think they must use something other than a Dynojet type dyno to test their vehicles, I don't see my generic headers and AEM giving me that much more than the Comptech parts. If they do use a Dynojet, then damn, the stock TL-P doesn't make too much power.

I have my dyno graph, but can't seem to open the file for some reason, I will keep working on it and get it up as soon as I get the problem figured out.

dands99tl

This is what I am trying to avoid.... I know that the cars "should" run, but I want to know what they run in real life, by the poeple that own them. There are a lot of factors to consider when running your car:

Altitude, barometric pressure, humidity, temp, etc.

These can all have very large impacts on how the car runs.

patrick

You are correct, the stock TL-P does not make much power at all. HP loss at the crank is high, estimated to be anywhere from 25 - 30%. We both had our TLs dynoed with a Dynojet, so we know that our performance figures are accurate, as our WHP and TQ are comparable, even though we both have similar, yet different mods.

Comptech's dyno with H/E is a good baseline for us (for comparison), as we can see what kind of gains we have over Comptech's when we do our mods.

patrick

There are so many factors in why a specific TL-P doesn't do a certain time in the quarter mile. The condition of the car, driver's skill and reaction time, weather, etc, etc all play a factor. It is definitely possible that dands99tl could run better given a better driver, better conditions, etc. (dands99tl: I'm not saying you are a bad driver, just saying that a driver who has more skill, say Mario Andretti driving your car, would most likely post better times).

dands99tl

Ok, finally got my dyno chart in the correct format. It will be posted tomorrow unless someone wants to host it for me. I stand corrected, my car makes 188hp, and 184 tq, not 186 like I remember for some reason...

Patrick, I am plenty a seasoned racer, I have been racing avidly for about 5 years and probably have over 500 passes in my CRX. The TL on the other hand was simply at the track as Sub car for the class I race in while the CRX was down. All runs thus far have been run only in Auto mode since I am a bracket racer and consistency is key. I'm fairly certain that the car is capable of running at least a couple tenths quicker with the sport shift, but again bracket racing is about consistency, not quickness.

Your reaction time has NO effect on your E.T. Your E.T. does not start until you have broken the beams, so you could in theory have a 15 second reaction time, and still run a 15 second E.T.

mrsteve

iTrader: (1)

An ET of 16.8 @ 5800' = a 15.5 at sea level.

For 5,800' multiply your ET by .9276

16.8 *.9276 = 15.58

A Trap Speed of 83 MPH @ 58'' = 89.22 @ sea level.

For 5,800' multiply your MPH by 1.075

83 * 1.075 = 89.22.


What was your 60' time? A trap speed of 89 MPH seems about right for 188 whp.

patrick

Thx for the info. I learn something new. BTW, I was not implying anything about your driving skills. As I have never done any races at the track, I assumed (incorrectly) that reaction time was essential.

dands99tl

Well, it depends on what type of run you are talking about. The reaction time has no effect on your E.T., but when you are running bracket racing and are in eliminations, your reaction time can make all the difference between winning and losing a round.

Here is my dyno graph for those who want to see it.

dands99tl

60' times varied, but 2.5 is the best the car has done. This is horrible, and I'm not really sure why it's as high as it is. Normally the car pulls a 2.6 60'.

BTW how/where did you come up with the calculation to convert the E.T. and mph?

etxxz

this might help...i have 99 also...

i didnt go to the track but i did run with some Beltronics thing my friend has...with all my mods, if i remember correctly it was either 14.6 or 16.4 (prob 14.6s.). I ran at like +-2ft above sea leve (FL) in mid 70s*F (60%+humidity). From a Complete stop => power break + SS no AC, radio, Nav off, lights, etc (all off) like 3/4tank and i didnt have mufflers (took off y-pipe and mufflers)

It should be getting cold again here i'll run again and show times.

When ^^ in Engine mods:
Obx SS headers
Injen CAI
UR crank
Iridium plugs
Vafc
no muffler
Me driving (20hp)

Hope this sheds some light.

*yep, it was loud.

mrsteve

iTrader: (1)

Your 60's are horrible and that is the main thing hurting your time. I have a CL-S and my best is a 2.0. I regularly run 2.1s now. You should be able to manage a 2.2 no problem. All else equal, by droping .1 from a 60' you should drop .2 of your ET. So by going from a 2.6 to a 2.2 you'd pick up .8 on your ET. Thus, you'd run a 14.7 at sea level. Not bad for a TL-P.

The formula is the standard from NHRA.

dands99tl

Yeah I know the 60's suck big hairy ba.... What do you do to get such a good 60'?

On a good day I get 2.1 or occasionally a 2.0 out of my CRX, but it has WAY more power and drag radials.

With the TL, the only thing I do is step on the gas to load up the torque converter as much as it will, then release the brake when the last yellow lights up.

Any pointers will be much appreciated as I normally race a manual, so launching the auto is totally foriegn to me.