Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: dragram440]
#1597747
03/24/14 06:15 PM
03/24/14 06:15 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,274 s.w.fl
bonefish
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,274
s.w.fl
|
Quote:
That just seems horrible for that combo. One good thing is there is definately room for improvement! That is a really tall tire for that gear and e.t. I have cheapo shocks and stock leafs and I run 1.48 to 1.49 60'. My guess is a lot of its your converter. I run a coan 8" and it is suprisingly tight on the street and flashes aroud 5000-5200.
how is your in gear idle for street use?
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: GTX MATT]
#1597749
03/24/14 06:25 PM
03/24/14 06:25 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
Quote:
It sure can... the front has to move farther to get the weight to transfer to the rear...
Mr P, not being a wise azz, but what if his front were higher/the car was more level, assuming he still had good front suspension travel?
You dont want to raise the front you want to lower the rear... by raising the front you just lessen the amount of travel... you would like around 5" of travel
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: draginmopars]
#1597752
03/24/14 06:47 PM
03/24/14 06:47 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 22,873 Chicken coop
dustergirl340
Chicken Little
|
Chicken Little
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 22,873
Chicken coop
|
Quote:
1.527 @ 7.353
Nice! I was pretty happy with my 1.71 @ 7.89 but you've got me beat big time.
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: dustergirl340]
#1597753
03/24/14 07:07 PM
03/24/14 07:07 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,490 smyrna,tn
draginmopars
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,490
smyrna,tn
|
dustergirl340-thanks we're trying and learning bonefish says he wants to go to a narrower tire to lower the rear dragram440 - says That is a really tall tire for that gear and e.t. we run the same ET street tire as bonefish at the time it was a 4.56 until this, then went to the 4.10 cause the gear is what we had what would be a better size tire to run ? 1/8 mile only
Ha-Ha Racin Havin Fun 101
Howard
68 "Cummins" Satellite 70 W-2 449 "More Door" Dart 70 340 Dart Swinger, 4spd 71 360 Dart Swinger 72 540/ 518 Dart Swinger 73 airwolf 446/a-500 Cuda 73 "Cummins" Crew cab-car hauler 84 446 Dodge Rampage (tube chassis) 92 CTD 11' flat bed 92 CTD club cab 07 Dodge Caliber
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: draginmopars]
#1597754
03/24/14 07:17 PM
03/24/14 07:17 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,271 Vista, California
67Satty
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,271
Vista, California
|
The MP Chassis book says to measure from the back of your rocker to the ground, then measure from the front of the rocker to the ground and that the front of the rocker should be one inch shorter. I don't know if this applies to cars with Cal Tracs too. I'm at a 1.68 60 foot and 7.86 1/8. I think that's a pretty good 60 foot for what my car is and the times it runs
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: Quicktree]
#1597756
03/24/14 07:31 PM
03/24/14 07:31 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,274 s.w.fl
bonefish
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,274
s.w.fl
|
Quote:
didn't read all the post but the first thing I see is the wrong converter if you are looking for 60' put a real converter in that thing and if you can make it hook you will see the 60' improve a ton.
thats what im thinkin.the vert company i delt with talked me into tradin my 8 inch 5000 stall vert for a 9 inch 3500.they told me i would have the best of both worlds,good trak performance and good street manners.changing the wheels tires and springs aint gunna happen at this time(but will eventually).im gunna go to the trak this sunday mabey i can get somone to take some vidio.i know the rear needs some work but its hard the beleive it has this much efect.
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: 67Satty]
#1597757
03/24/14 07:32 PM
03/24/14 07:32 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
The MP Chassis book says to measure from the back of your rocker to the ground, then measure from the front of the rocker to the ground and that the front of the rocker should be one inch shorter.
I don't know if this applies to cars with Cal Tracs too.
I'm at a 1.68 60 foot and 7.86 1/8. I think that's a pretty good 60 foot for what my car is and the times it runs
What was that measurement for... a old pro stock.. forget that measurement.. a lot if the info is good in that book but some is OLD and out dated... it is easier to transfer weight if it if closer to the CG height... thats why a engine is raised in some cars
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: bonefish]
#1597758
03/24/14 07:40 PM
03/24/14 07:40 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
Quicktree
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
|
Quote:
Quote:
didn't read all the post but the first thing I see is the wrong converter if you are looking for 60' put a real converter in that thing and if you can make it hook you will see the 60' improve a ton.
thats what im thinkin.the vert company i delt with talked me into tradin my 8 inch 5000 stall vert for a 9 inch 3500.they told me i would have the best of both worlds,good trak performance and good street manners.changing the wheels tires and springs aint gunna happen at this time(but will eventually).im gunna go to the trak this sunday mabey i can get somone to take some vidio.i know the rear needs some work but its hard the beleive it has this much efect.
it' makes a huge difference, find a new company. I would have a 8" 5600 street or not
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: bonefish]
#1597760
03/24/14 07:48 PM
03/24/14 07:48 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
Quote:
didn't read all the post but the first thing I see is the wrong converter if you are looking for 60' put a real converter in that thing and if you can make it hook you will see the 60' improve a ton.
thats what im thinkin.the vert company i delt with talked me into tradin my 8 inch 5000 stall vert for a 9 inch 3500.they told me i would have the best of both worlds,good trak performance and good street manners.changing the wheels tires and springs aint gunna happen at this time(but will eventually).im gunna go to the trak this sunday mabey i can get somone to take some vidio.i know the rear needs some work but its hard the beleive it has this much efect.
Then why ask about the back end of the car... I dont like telling people where to spend money... thats why I try to answer the questions that are asked with a explanation of why or what will change
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: jnkgal]
#1597761
03/24/14 07:59 PM
03/24/14 07:59 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,871 MI, usa
dvw
master
|
master
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,871
MI, usa
|
If it's not spinning the tires all the chassis work in the world isn't going to do much. I would concentrate on why it's down on power. Does it bog? 4.10 with 30" tire isn't helping. If the gear is what you have, try to borrow a shorter set of tires. What intake? What size PTC is it, 9"? 3800 flash seems pretty low with that many cubes. Where is the timing? I don't agree that 99 mph is 10.70, That's optimal. My street car runs 7.0@100 with low 1.50 60 ft. Most bracket cars I see might go 6.90 at that speed. The basic parts are all there.Right now it looks like it's making about 600HP. That combo should be good for more HP. Doug
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: MR_P_BODY]
#1597762
03/24/14 08:34 PM
03/24/14 08:34 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,274 s.w.fl
bonefish
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,274
s.w.fl
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
didn't read all the post but the first thing I see is the wrong converter if you are looking for 60' put a real converter in that thing and if you can make it hook you will see the 60' improve a ton.
thats what im thinkin.the vert company i delt with talked me into tradin my 8 inch 5000 stall vert for a 9 inch 3500.they told me i would have the best of both worlds,good trak performance and good street manners.changing the wheels tires and springs aint gunna happen at this time(but will eventually).im gunna go to the trak this sunday mabey i can get somone to take some vidio.i know the rear needs some work but its hard the beleive it has this much efect.
Then why ask about the back end of the car... I dont like telling people where to spend money... thats why I try to answer the questions that are asked with a explanation of why or what will change
i appriciate your input and you answered my question but other responsese also made me aware that i have other problems not JUST my rear susp.i have another vert i do not have another rear suspention so although you have made me aware that it IS a problem i will have to address other areas first and live with the wheels for now.
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: dvw]
#1597763
03/24/14 08:51 PM
03/24/14 08:51 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,591 Canton, Ohio
Sport440
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,591
Canton, Ohio
|
Quote:
If it's not spinning the tires all the chassis work in the world isn't going to do much. I would concentrate on why it's down on power. Does it bog? 4.10 with 30" tire isn't helping. If the gear is what you have, try to borrow a shorter set of tires. What intake? What size PTC is it, 9"? 3800 flash seems pretty low with that many cubes. Where is the timing? I don't agree that 99 mph is 10.70, That's optimal. My street car runs [Email]7.0@100[/Email] with low 1.50 60 ft. Most bracket cars I see might go 6.90 at that speed. The basic parts are all there.Right now it looks like it's making about 600HP. That combo should be good for more HP. Doug
I agree, if its not spinning the tires all the chassis work in the world wont work.
Also the 99 mph 1/8th would be a optimal setup for a 10.70 in the 1/4.
If you take into account the slow 60 ft and it still was able to hit 99 mph 1/8th, whats it going to run when it does 60 ft./ not bog off the line. Typically a car running around 100 mph 1/8th will pick up around 24 mph or so on the back half. Thats around a 10.75 optimal, add in the bad 60 ft. aspects and this car is a sub 10.70 car potential in the 1/4 when it gets online.
That vert is flashing to low for that 520 combo. This car has some kind of tune issue coming off the line IMO. But you cant rule out a vert problem either.
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: dvw]
#1597764
03/24/14 08:55 PM
03/24/14 08:55 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,895 Florida
Locomotion
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,895
Florida
|
I don't have any specific answers or even specific suggestions, but one concern is the 520 cubic inches! A motor that big shouldn't need a lot of gear or converter. But that also looks like a lot of weight for that engine to move. Considering the narrow tires, it may be difficult to hook up IF you can figure out why it appears to be down on power. In other words, it may just blow through the tires if he engine is tuned to potential anyway. Big block (440, Hemi, 427, etc.) Stock Eliminator cars run low 10's and even high 9's on 9" tires and Cal-Tracs. But they have limited engine size, cam, heads, compression, etc. and a lot of time is spent on shocks, suspension adjustments and weight distribution. Track prep also has a lot to do with it. The more power you make, the more critical it is for everything to be "just right". Gears will be easier to narrow down. If it hooks, you'll need a Dana 60. But converters can be tricky. I run converters advertised around 4,400. But they actually flash to 5,100-5,400 rpm on my 360! (Autometer playback tach. ) Converter manufacturer need to have an idea of around where the torque peak is. Even then, similar advertised converters can vary a lot.
|
|
|
Re: 60 FT TIMES
[Re: Sport440]
#1597765
03/24/14 08:59 PM
03/24/14 08:59 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
Quote:
If it's not spinning the tires all the chassis work in the world isn't going to do much. I would concentrate on why it's down on power. Does it bog? 4.10 with 30" tire isn't helping. If the gear is what you have, try to borrow a shorter set of tires. What intake? What size PTC is it, 9"? 3800 flash seems pretty low with that many cubes. Where is the timing? I don't agree that 99 mph is 10.70, That's optimal. My street car runs [Email]7.0@100[/Email] with low 1.50 60 ft. Most bracket cars I see might go 6.90 at that speed. The basic parts are all there.Right now it looks like it's making about 600HP. That combo should be good for more HP. Doug
I agree, if its not spinning the tires all the chassis work in the world wont work.
Also the 99 mph 1/8th would be a optimal setup for a 10.70 in the 1/4.
If you take into account the slow 60 ft and it still was able to hit 99 mph 1/8th, whats it going to run when it does 60 ft./ not bog off the line. Typically a car running around 100 mph 1/8th will pick up around 24 mph or so on the back half. Thats around a 10.75 optimal, add in the bad 60 ft. aspects and this car is a sub 10.70 car potential in the 1/4 when it gets online.
That vert is flashing to low for that 520 combo. This car has some kind of tune issue coming off the line IMO. But you cant rule out a vert problem either.
I would think that its way down on power on the low end to cause a low stall(well below the torque)... I would/will ask if the cam was degreed in and what is it at... the conv might be just a real low stall for the engine... but before I trashed it I would sure want to know more about the cam.... and with a tall tire it only makes things worse if the cam is retarted... it would take too much time to spin up
|
|
|
|
|