Moparts

60 FT TIMES

Posted By: bonefish

60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 04:57 PM

my car sits high in the back.its got caltrac monos and 9 way shocks.my 60,s are in the low 1.70,s to high sixties.i see cars with less motor doin 1.50,s.383MAN comes to mind.his car runs awsome with less motor.is my rear highth holding me back that much.

Attached picture 8086674-newwheels001.JPG
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 05:06 PM

It sure can... the front has to move farther to
get the weight to transfer to the rear... I cant say
how much the difference would be.. but most any car
will 60' better with a lower rear.. it comes to a point
that if its too low the front end will be up in the
air too long and may be reading the 60' with the rear tires
Posted By: Locomotion

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 05:27 PM

Are the tires actually slipping or spinning? If you are hooking, then most improvements would come through optimizing the converter, gear and carb tune-up. Accelerator pump circuit is critical, especially for a footbrake car. It's always a matched "package" that works together for best performance.

Posting more combo info as well as MPH can help determine what kind of HP you are making and what the '60 potential may be. Someone may have a similar combo.
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 05:52 PM

this combo is 520 ci.alum block.10.2 comp. indy 325 CNC heads prepped by PRH. comp cam [Email]263@50[/Email] in.,269@50 ex.GVL is649-654. 9 in. PTC vert that flashes at around 3800.410 dana,727 mvb.30x12.5 rear tires. 1050 dom.with TTI 2in. headers into 3 in ex. car weighs around 4000 w/me in it.with a 1.7147 60ft it went 99mph. 1/8 mi.i had people watch and they said the tires are not spinning.
Posted By: Sport440

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 06:36 PM

Well your combo looks good. your 1/8 mile 99 mph equates to a sub 10.70 potential.

Your right, your 60 ft is way off. Im going to guess its the tune/bog off the starting line or a vert issue. Most likly tune though.

Reminds me when I put one of my new combos together. It was a Pig off the line untill I got the tune right, and then it really woke up.

Tell us more about your carb and timing setup. Jets squirters pump cams etc.
Posted By: Cab_Burge

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 06:40 PM

Take some white shoe polish and put a 2 to 3 inch stripe on the tires, both of them, from the edge of the rims straight down to the outside edge of the tires and have someone video a run, do one for each side of the car . Look at those video in slow motion to see what the tires are really doing I can't tell if your rear tires are slicks, street tires, bias ply or radials What are they?
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 06:42 PM

Can you level out the rear or at least drop it several inches AND have tire clearance? Not only does that look and handle bad but there`s no way a nose heavy car(in my opinion)will leave w/that motors potential............
Posted By: RobX4406

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 07:01 PM

10 flat engine wrapped in a 13 second chassis. It's at least 2 tenths off in 60ft. Post the entire timeslip.

I agree with sport440, It's likely multiple issues. Is it getting full throttle?

Lower the rear, and maybe put a shorter tire on it.

Tune it up. The squirters/cams may be way off. An AF meter with logging comes in real handy here and for down track results.

The converter is pretty soft if it's a race oriented build. Have any dyno time on it. I bet it could use more converter.

There is a TON of time locked up in front suspensions!

IMO, that 520 should blow the tires off at will in a bad chassis.
Posted By: Mr.Yuck

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 07:14 PM

I just put my Cal-tracs on so I can't tell you how much better they are, but I'm in the same boat. Was cutting 1.65-1.75 sixty foot, my car was spinning, one guy told me the car was unloading. I went w/ the -1 monos and it still sits about 1/2" higher than the old XHD springs. I keep my front end low but I'm going to raise it 3/4" maybe more. You car seems to have a ton of rake to it. Can you bring the front up some? You might also want to consider 1" lowering blocks in the rear. Did you set the pre-load like the directions state? (bottom out and 1/4 turn) I noticed the butt end raises up as you crank the bars. FWIW my car runs around 11.40@120. I think my 1/8 is in the 7.30ish range. I'm shooting for 11.teens @ 120+.
Posted By: draginmopars

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 07:36 PM

Quote:

this combo is 520 ci.alum block.10.2 comp. indy 325 CNC heads prepped by PRH. comp cam [Email]263@50[/Email] in.,269@50 ex.GVL is649-654. 9 in. PTC vert that flashes at around 3800.410 dana,727 mvb.30x12.5 rear tires. 1050 dom.with TTI 2in. headers into 3 in ex. car weighs around 4000 w/me in it.with a 1.7147 60ft it went 99mph. 1/8 mi.i had people watch and they said the tires are not spinning.




your combo is close to our 68 Satellite
we were 1.631 @ 7.382

loosen up the front with 90/10 shocks

1.527 @ 7.353

540 /4500, 4.10 dana/31x14-15
super comp headers
also running a 1050 Dominator

no major tuning yet
only got 4 passes last year
on E-85

Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 07:52 PM

carb,50 cc pumps front and rear,35 squirters.jetted 89 square.no PV.tires are MT ET streets.the vert is a little soft but its a street mostly car.the launch doest feel as bad as it shows,i was shocked when i looked at the slip. ide really like to find a 30 in. tire about 9 inces wide and lower this thing down. PS.timming ,20 initial 38 all in by 1200
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 07:54 PM

Quote:

Quote:

this combo is 520 ci.alum block.10.2 comp. indy 325 CNC heads prepped by PRH. comp cam [Email]263@50[/Email] in.,269@50 ex.GVL is649-654. 9 in. PTC vert that flashes at around 3800.410 dana,727 mvb.30x12.5 rear tires. 1050 dom.with TTI 2in. headers into 3 in ex. car weighs around 4000 w/me in it.with a 1.7147 60ft it went 99mph. 1/8 mi.i had people watch and they said the tires are not spinning.




your combo is close to our 68 Satellite
we were 1.631 @ 7.382

loosen up the front with 90/10 shocks

1.527 @ 7.353

540 /4500, 4.10 dana/31x14-15
super comp headers
also running a 1050 Dominator

no major tuning yet
only got 4 passes last year
on E-85




got 90/10,s on the front.
Posted By: draginmopars

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 08:04 PM




got 90/10,s on the front.




Yes,but we don't drive it on the street

I mention the shocks, maybe you could loosen up the front.

we have 6 leafs on the rear

Tires are also ET. street

we only run this car in the "Street class" at the track

only rules are mufflers/street tires
registered with tags
antique tags
Posted By: draginmopars

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 08:31 PM

Bonefish- I notice your location s.w.fl

What track would that be

We enjoy going to Bradenton

plans are to take the Dart and Rampage
down there
when the car hauler is finished>paint
tracks still closed for winter here

Posted By: Sport440

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 08:49 PM

Dragin, whats your MPH in the 1/8th with that 7.35 Its not going to be near the 99 MPH like the OP is running. Your 1.52 60 ft. is great for that 7.35 et
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 08:50 PM

Quote:

Bonefish- I notice your location s.w.fl

What track would that be

We enjoy going to Bradenton

plans are to take the Dart and Rampage
down there
when the car hauler is finished>paint
tracks still closed for winter here




i love bradenton its a great trak but i usually go to immokalee its only about 30 minutes from my house.
Posted By: draginmopars

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 09:11 PM

Quote:

Dragin, whats your MPH in the 1/8th with that 7.35 Its not going to be near the 99 MPH like the OP is running. Your 1.52 60 ft. is great for that 7.35 et




here you go

not bad for a 4 door, out having "Fun"



these are a month apart last year ,oct/nov

changes
front shocks
rear tires (new, same size) and E-85
need to get a A/F meter to see what happened

better 60ft- lost top end > 4.41mph

7.35 --- 1.52 --- 89.79
7.38 --- 1.63 --- 93.20
Posted By: Mr.Yuck

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 09:35 PM

I put comp eng 90/10 front and 3-way out back and saw no improvement. My best slip so far is a 11.38 @ 119.22 (I have run faster mph but slower et) That run was a 1.607 60, 7.25 1/8 @ 95. And that was before the new slicks and shocks. hoping these things can get me into the 1.50's
you guys have MUCH more motor than I have so you might have a harder time hooking.
Posted By: dragram440

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:07 PM

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.
Posted By: GTX MATT

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:13 PM

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?
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:15 PM

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?
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:18 PM

Raising the ft. isn`t the answer...........get the rear lower by getting the c-vert -1 lower rears and a 2" lowering block the get the pinion in the 4-5 nose down range and THEN see what happens.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:25 PM

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
Posted By: Mr.Yuck

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:35 PM

"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"

looking at the pix in the sig line the front end looks like a decent height. back has to come down.
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:46 PM

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.
Posted By: dustergirl340

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 10:47 PM

Quote:

1.527 @ 7.353




Nice! I was pretty happy with my 1.71 @ 7.89 but you've got me beat big time.
Posted By: draginmopars

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:07 PM


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
Posted By: 67Satty

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:17 PM

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
Posted By: tex013

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:20 PM

Quote:

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.




I agree with this

Tex
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:31 PM

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.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:32 PM

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
Posted By: Quicktree

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:40 PM

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
Posted By: jnkgal

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:42 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Bonefish- I notice your location s.w.fl

What track would that be

We enjoy going to Bradenton

plans are to take the Dart and Rampage
down there
when the car hauler is finished>paint
tracks still closed for winter here




i love bradenton its a great trak but i usually go to immokalee its only about 30 minutes from my house.




Bradenton is well organized more than the other tracks we have been to.
Immokalee as I estimated maybe almost 2 hours from Bradenton? maybe another one we need to visit.

That is the area Id love to live. Maybe one day we can just move down there. awesome weather ( except hurricanes) Great weather, and the race season is longer.

Attached picture 8087102-7951638-MotorhomeStretched.gif
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:48 PM

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
Posted By: dvw

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/24/14 11:59 PM

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
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 12:34 AM

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.
Posted By: Sport440

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 12:51 AM

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.
Posted By: Locomotion

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 12:55 AM

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.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 12:59 AM

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
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:07 AM

Quote:

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



cam is installed at 106 as per the manufacturers recomendatiom.but it does rev kinda slow,it realy doesnt seem to come on till about 3000 or so.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:14 AM

cam is installed at 106 as per the manufacturers recomendatiom.but it does rev kinda slow,it realy doesnt seem to come on till about 3000 or so.




Are you SURE... did you put it in... all the actions
tend to say its retarted.... or even the cam is
made wrong to the specs... by chance did you check
each lobe
Posted By: 383man

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:15 AM

First I would like to say Thank you Bonefish for the kind words about my car. Here is a pic of how my car sits as I just adjusted the torsion bars after I put SS springs on to have it sit how I like it. I use SS springs and the MP longer rear shocks. And up front its stock with 90/10 shocks. I use a Luppo Dynamic 9.5 conveter thats basically a street/strip conveter as it flashes about 4200 and drives great on the street. I use 30 x 9 Hoosier radial slicks with 4.30's that work ok for me. My 1/4 times are 10.70's @ almost 125 and my 1/8 is 6.83 @ 100 mph and thats capped up on pump. My best 60 is a 1.50 as I usually hit from 1.50 to 1.53 sixty times on the average. I see some are telling him to get a better converter company but I thought PTC were pretty good converters which I believe is what he uses ? Course it needs more stall speed. I agree you need to lower the rear as it is up there kinda high and it will help to lower it in the back. Have you run the 1/4 with the car as I dont seem to have seen any 1/4 times for your car ? Ron

Posted By: 383man

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:19 AM

Here is one of my timeslips if you want to compare to your #'s. I am car 201. Ron

Posted By: jnkgal

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:26 AM

.
Posted By: ChrgrCuda

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:27 AM

Quote:

Here is one of my timeslips if you want to compare to your #'s. I am car 201. Ron





Bad Ass street car Ron
One of the few cars that runs as good as it looks
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:40 AM

Quote:

cam is installed at 106 as per the manufacturers recomendatiom.but it does rev kinda slow,it realy doesnt seem to come on till about 3000 or so.




Are you SURE... did you put it in... all the actions
tend to say its retarted.... or even the cam is
made wrong to the specs... by chance did you check
each lobe



yes i put it in and checked it several times but i will admitt im not real experienced.i did not check each lobe.but it is real lazy on the hit when i rev it.i installed a AF guage and its right about where it needs to be and gets a good shot from the carb.i tried slowin down the pump shot and it just made it worse.i never thought about the cam bein the prob but it kind feels like it could be.
Posted By: 383man

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 01:48 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Here is one of my timeslips if you want to compare to your #'s. I am car 201. Ron





Bad Ass street car Ron
One of the few cars that runs as good as it looks




Thank you. Looks like you have a pretty great running car yourself. Ron
Posted By: Barry70GTX

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 02:02 AM

It may have a nice AF ratio by the time you get to the 660 ,but I'd be willing to bet that it's pig rich for the first sixty.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 02:06 AM

Quote:

Quote:

cam is installed at 106 as per the manufacturers recomendatiom.but it does rev kinda slow,it realy doesnt seem to come on till about 3000 or so.




Are you SURE... did you put it in... all the actions
tend to say its retarted.... or even the cam is
made wrong to the specs... by chance did you check
each lobe



yes i put it in and checked it several times but i will admitt im not real experienced.i did not check each lobe.but it is real lazy on the hit when i rev it.i installed a AF guage and its right about where it needs to be and gets a good shot from the carb.i tried slowin down the pump shot and it just made it worse.i never thought about the cam bein the prob but it kind feels like it could be.




What carb cam color are you using and did you try
larger squirters
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 02:30 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

cam is installed at 106 as per the manufacturers recomendatiom.but it does rev kinda slow,it realy doesnt seem to come on till about 3000 or so.




Are you SURE... did you put it in... all the actions
tend to say its retarted.... or even the cam is
made wrong to the specs... by chance did you check
each lobe



yes i put it in and checked it several times but i will admitt im not real experienced.i did not check each lobe.but it is real lazy on the hit when i rev it.i installed a AF guage and its right about where it needs to be and gets a good shot from the carb.i tried slowin down the pump shot and it just made it worse.i never thought about the cam bein the prob but it kind feels like it could be.




What carb cam color are you using and did you try
larger squirters



havnt done that ill have to order some.its got the standard pump cam that doms come with,cant remember the color but i can look tomorrow.
Posted By: D-50

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 02:30 AM

PTC makes very good convertors and can loosen yours up if you think it is too tight. I went from a 9.5 in convertor to a 8 in when I had a 360/380 magnum crate motor in my D-50 and it picked up over 3 tenths in the 1/8.

Attached picture 8087406-CIMG0081.JPG
Posted By: dvw

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 02:33 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Here is one of my timeslips if you want to compare to your #'s. I am car 201. Ron





Bad Ass street car Ron
One of the few cars that runs as good as it looks




Thank you. Looks like you have a pretty great running car yourself. Ron




Ron's car runs very well ET wise vs MPH. Why don't you compare the incremental splits between his 60-330 and 330-660 with your slip? This will give you an idea if your problem is all in 60ft or if it continues losing ground down track. I did this with my 64 which I believe is about .2 slower than it should be. I found my major problem to be 60-330.
Doug
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 02:46 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

cam is installed at 106 as per the manufacturers recomendatiom.but it does rev kinda slow,it realy doesnt seem to come on till about 3000 or so.




Are you SURE... did you put it in... all the actions
tend to say its retarted.... or even the cam is
made wrong to the specs... by chance did you check
each lobe



yes i put it in and checked it several times but i will admitt im not real experienced.i did not check each lobe.but it is real lazy on the hit when i rev it.i installed a AF guage and its right about where it needs to be and gets a good shot from the carb.i tried slowin down the pump shot and it just made it worse.i never thought about the cam bein the prob but it kind feels like it could be.




What carb cam color are you using and did you try
larger squirters



havnt done that ill have to order some.its got the standard pump cam that doms come with,cant remember the color but i can look tomorrow.




I really dont think thats your issue.. the stock
squirters should be fine... myself.. I think its
a cam issue thats dont making power down low in the
RPM range... I assume that your compression is what
you said it is... whats your cranking pressure
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 04:06 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

cam is installed at 106 as per the manufacturers recomendatiom.but it does rev kinda slow,it realy doesnt seem to come on till about 3000 or so.




Are you SURE... did you put it in... all the actions
tend to say its retarted.... or even the cam is
made wrong to the specs... by chance did you check
each lobe



yes i put it in and checked it several times but i will admitt im not real experienced.i did not check each lobe.but it is real lazy on the hit when i rev it.i installed a AF guage and its right about where it needs to be and gets a good shot from the carb.i tried slowin down the pump shot and it just made it worse.i never thought about the cam bein the prob but it kind feels like it could be.




What carb cam color are you using and did you try
larger squirters



havnt done that ill have to order some.its got the standard pump cam that doms come with,cant remember the color but i can look tomorrow.




I really dont think thats your issue.. the stock
squirters should be fine... myself.. I think its
a cam issue thats dont making power down low in the
RPM range... I assume that your compression is what
you said it is... whats your cranking pressure



dont know but i can check.
Posted By: Sport440

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 06:15 AM

Quote:

.





Just so you know, your fast 1.52 60ft. is acknowledged for your ET and MPH.

Your one slip was 10 MPH slower then the OP,s but yet you still netted a 1.52 60 ft. Its a example that should be noted. No reason to shy away.
Posted By: deaks

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 12:37 PM

Dont know about the motor but i would fit 2" lowering blocks, make sure your front is not binding anywhere and if you're running big block torsion bars, swap them out for 318 ones.
Have you tried different tyre pressures. I changed my slicks fron M/T to hoosier and the car wouldn't 60 ft less than 1.48, from advice here, i upped the pressure to 13 and it dropped to 1.43 straight away.
Mick
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 03:29 PM

well, i checked my comp. with my guage.i could only do one cyl. on each side ,the headers make it almost impossible to get this hose on.with the throtle wide open i got 170 on each side.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 03:36 PM

Quote:

well, i checked my comp. with my guage.i could only do one cyl. on each side ,the headers make it almost impossible to get this hose on.with the throtle wide open i got 170 on each side.




That doesnt sound bad for 10.4(I think thats what
you said) but I would have guessed a bit more...
that is defiantly pump gas friendly... but you need
to check all of them when you can... you could have
some low ones
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 03:44 PM

Quote:

Quote:

well, i checked my comp. with my guage.i could only do one cyl. on each side ,the headers make it almost impossible to get this hose on.with the throtle wide open i got 170 on each side.




That doesnt sound bad for 10.4(I think thats what
you said) but I would have guessed a bit more...
that is defiantly pump gas friendly... but you need
to check all of them when you can... you could have
some low ones



when Dwayne speced out this piston and cam that was our goal,pump gas freindly.
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 03:46 PM

im just wonderin if mabey this single plain manifold could be hurtin my low end a little.it looks like i got a combination of things to address.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 03:46 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

well, i checked my comp. with my guage.i could only do one cyl. on each side ,the headers make it almost impossible to get this hose on.with the throtle wide open i got 170 on each side.




That doesnt sound bad for 10.4(I think thats what
you said) but I would have guessed a bit more...
that is defiantly pump gas friendly... but you need
to check all of them when you can... you could have
some low ones



when Dwayne speced out this piston and cam that was our goal,pump gas freindly.




Is that a fresh valve grind on the heads.. not just what
they came with
Posted By: bonefish

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 03:51 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

well, i checked my comp. with my guage.i could only do one cyl. on each side ,the headers make it almost impossible to get this hose on.with the throtle wide open i got 170 on each side.




That doesnt sound bad for 10.4(I think thats what
you said) but I would have guessed a bit more...
that is defiantly pump gas friendly... but you need
to check all of them when you can... you could have
some low ones



when Dwayne speced out this piston and cam that was our goal,pump gas freindly.




Is that a fresh valve grind on the heads.. not just what
they came with



Dwayne did the heads.i was runnin low 9, with these heads in another combo.i also checked them out real good when i resprung them for the street cam.
Posted By: 383man

Re: 60 FT TIMES - 03/25/14 06:12 PM

Quote:

im just wonderin if mabey this single plain manifold could be hurtin my low end a little.it looks like i got a combination of things to address.





I run the dual plane Indy intake as since my car is a street car I figured it would work good for me on the street and help the low end. Course I dont street race and I plan to try a single plane one day to see how it works compared to the dual plane. But I have no complaints with this dual plane as it works great for me on my combo. Ron
© 2024 Moparts Forums