Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Take a look at your own passes of late for example. You have done about 5+ 13.4-13.5's and then a 13.0 and a 13.1

If consistency is the issue, I would challenge you to look at the two times alone that were run AFTER the nitrous/over-rich condition was fixed.

13.0 @ 115.15mph

13.1 @ 115.56mph

Within a tenth of each other and also within half of one mph.

The 3 runs before that were revving only to 6krpm as the car was over-fuelling and turning into a slug (as evidenced by the massive black smoke plumes the car expelled just before every gear change.)

The car felt GREAT on the last two passes of the day....A different car that freely revved to a peak of 7298 rpm with gear changes coming within 100 rpm of this each time. Boost was stable and even for the majority of the run and the car suffered none of it's previous bogging up top as the fuel prob was fixed with correct jetting.

Ther point is this. Every time I run the car, I am aiming to get the absolute most out of it for that run. I don't care if i have a bad launch cos something about the WHOLE run could tell me something I didnt know before. I'm gonna come out and say it that I beleive a low 12 is possible in my car with Radial tyres - RIGHT NOW. Tell me why I should aim for 12.7 when 100 years of drag racing maths and some common sense tells me otherwise?!?!? Tell me why I should be dissapointed with running 14.0 in a stuffed-up run on the way to getting there?!?!?!

As a point of interest, after 4 meets and about 15-20 different runs, I am YET to have a day or night at the track where the car runs more than 0.5sec +/- different for the session.

I'm sorry mate but it just doesn't make sense to me to aim for the mud when there's so much better there waiting.

Adrian

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I would really like conformation on this.

What is the quickest ET / MPH that an R32/R33/R34 GTS-T/GTT has run with the std turbo intact and untouched?

Will also start a new post in General Auto asking the same question.

Adrian

 

I just wouldn't be going to the track aiming to knock 0.5->0.9sec off "just like that" because the mph says its possible.  

Why? The whole idea about going to the track is to see how fast you can get the car moving. If its capable, try different techniques until you get there.

If it was that easy many more people would be doing it.

Think about it... you have 12-14sec to do what u gotta do. A minor 0.1-0.3sec stuff up anywhere along that 400m is gonna ruin a good time.

I just think consistency is the key to a 'quicker' time. With a 115mph TS a 12.1 flat would not be out of the question thats a whole 0.9sec faster than what has currently been done

I think this consistency thing you're on about refers to driver ability (ie practice makes perfect). The reason why most people run a super time around slightly slower times is for that 1 super run they got everything right. What they need to do is try and mimic these actions again and again until consistency is achieved. Achieving consistency for a slower time may provide good training for a faster pass but its really selling the car and yourself short.

Hope that makes sense...

13.0 @ 115.15mph

13.1 @ 115.56mph

I'm sorry mate but it just doesn't make sense to me to aim for the mud when there's so much better there waiting.

Adrian

i totally agree there is shit tins left in it going by the mph.

what are your 60ft times outta interest?

Both of those runs were with high 2.2's.

Have gone 2.0 on more than a couple of occassions when the tyres didnt suck.

Hoping for the same mph on 2.0's then 1.8 on some Drag Radials.

Adrian

note... slicks :D

Fair enough i aint got a stock turb, but i ran 12.9 @ 109mph... with 2.1 60ft.

On your average 225 street tyre. And my car weights in the same as yours, and you have a decent advantage with your IRS setup

You need rubber mr 2rismo i think!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...