dont make fun of my rockers
|
|
09-09-2010
dont make fun of my rockers
09-09-2010
When I tried rockers, I touched the 100mph barrier a handful of times....when I put the cam in it was instant 101-105, when the methanol went on it was trapping as high as 108 with a 2.8 pulley.
If you want to trap consistent 103mph + "easier", then you'll most likely need a cam/header/tune/ported blower combo with as small of a pulley as you can run on the tune. High octane will help you a little more, but it's all in how well your car responds to the mods, and how good you can peddle a 60' time (this really affects the top end of the track).
The aggravating thing about Blue's car, is it constantly trapped 100mph+ but never dipped into the 12's.
09-09-2010
Sh1t....I've even got a 106 trap on one pass...but Brian ran into the 12's with a 105 trap. Stupid f*cking car. Just wait till it goes to the track this fall...its gonna run 14's at 190. Agreed though on the rockers...I had a 3.5", PEM's, 3" DP, and 1.84 Rollers and trapped 100-101 a couple times...but the cam made a HUGE difference.
09-09-2010
The easiest and cheapest way to run 105-110 traps is to get a used turbo hot side and a decent turbo. Bigger injectors with some e85 and you will be there. I ran 110 traps when I first installed my twin-charged setup with no turbo intercooler, stock cam, and running on the stock trans. I never broke the trans, but I did upgrade, and I would have expected it to break at any time. I also broke an axle at that time, so you have to expect anything might go.
09-09-2010
What about a basic turbo kit? I have only been to the track with mine once, but it ran a 13.4 @ 109.5 with a 2.4 60' on a Z3 kit on 13PSI and 1.84 rockers and couple other small mods.
09-09-2010
I stopped reading at this post.that's well into the 12s territory. youre gonna be hard pressed to do that on a budget for less than $5k.
To the OP: Assuming that your transmission is in good shape you can run a cam, ported blower, throttle body, and E85 and trap 106+ =).
09-09-2010
i said this under the assumption of needing a transmission and the need for more parts because the average person doesnt drive that well.Originally Posted by Tengis
09-09-2010
Only issue with that...not everyone has access to E85 or is it always the best thing to turn...if someone doesn't have a tuner...what's going to happen if they run out of gas and NEED to full up on some junk 91? Because I for one ain't the kind of person who is going to bring 20 little 1 gallon lawn mower jugs to fill up of corn fuel just to run it. Also...where's my damn cover. Lawlz
09-09-2010
those rockers are treating me well btw Nick...
and I hate to say it cuz im totally against it but theres always the NOS option...
09-10-2010
So...rockers/S2IC/3.1" vs. XP/3.2"...who won that one
09-10-2010
Maybe its just me but wouldnt a different gear ratio in the trans be much easier to reach 105-110 along with supporting mods? Also Gen5s are getting to be everywhere. Shooting for 110, I think around 5k would be fine. Gen5, cam, headers, IC, 42.5 injectors, a little head work tune and gear ratio change should come close wouldnt it? Gen5 trans headers and tune is where Im starting and half those parts are already in my garage. Either way I think the 3.29 or 3.69s would be much better than the 2.93s. Someone on CGP has a nitrous NA GP GT with 3.69s in the 12s dont remember trap speed tho.
09-10-2010
there was alot more "X" factors than that lolSo...rockers/S2IC/3.1" vs. XP/3.2"...who won that one
OH and what number engine was that with? 1?...2?...3?
09-11-2010
Ummm, the first one we put in it...so the 2nd motor if you will. What "x" factors though?there was alot more "X" factors than that lol
OH and what number engine was that with? 1?...2?...3?
09-11-2010
you had a tune jerkface
09-10-2010
You just didn't say NOS did you...oh boy.
09-10-2010
Did someone say naws?
09-10-2010
"Pill it till ya kill it!"
It had to be said.
09-10-2010
3.29's are plenty. If you have seen a 3.69 geared supercharged car its beyond overkill...maybe for a N/A car. You think you've got hook issues now...try 3.69's...your trap speed would suck because you'd be sitting there trying to get out past the 60 foot all day.
09-10-2010
Yeah I was suggesting the 3.29s over the 2.93s thats all 3.69s in a SC car would be massive traction issues. Either was still think for 5k this could easily be done. Hell 3k for a turbo kit and the rest for a trans would get the job done.
09-10-2010
Most of the time when someone upgrades a 4T65E-HD in a supercharged car they go from the 2.93's to 3.29's from a standard 4T65E...its very common. I run that setup in the trans as does Reptile...on our old track passes like stated he would hit upwards of 106+ and I'd be sitting consitantly around 102+. I haven't been back to the track since but 2nd to 3rd is much better since your getting well into 3rd by the traps if your hitting 110 with 3.29's.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Tags for this Thread |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
