'06 M6 @ drags with DR's

Well my drags strip visit last night was less then satisfactory. I got my DR's on and was really pumped to put down some good times. What did i get? a much less consist launch and slower times. My first one was a 14.8:mad: but the feel of the DR's are so much different so it took a few runs to get into the low 14's.

Once i did get into the low 14's i jusr could consistantly get a good 60'. My two best 60's were

60'- 2.171
660'- 9.313
E.T.- 14.323
MPH- 97.734

60' -2.175
660'-9.210
E.T. 14.272
MPH- 94.869

Both of theses were launched around 3,500-4000 rpm's, any lower and it bogged pretty bad, any higher it was all wheel spin.

Now i wasn' really pissed just about getting my slow times but that two weeks ago i got a 13.9

60'-2.217
660' 9.030
E.T.- 13.916
MPH- 100.384

And this was on the stock all season tires, WTF is wrong with me? Do you guys have any advice to get me some better times?

I talked to a cobra guy down there and he asked me my times and i told him what was going on and that i got a 13.9 on my stock tires and he said he had never seen a LS2 GTO get that good of a time at this track and he said he saw many take passes.


On a Good note i raced a guy in a STI, he said he was 18 so his parents had to of bought it for him, definitly not the working type. I beat him but then he decides to pass me after the end of the rack and get in front of me and throw rocks all over my car, f-ing SOB. So i passed him going back to the staging area and got a little into the dirt and full throttled it to give him a little taste.

Anyways that was my night.

Well those times and traps do seem very low. Fill us in a little bit first. Where are you racing, high altitudes and heat are going to kill your times and traps. Secondly, how many miles do you have on your 2006? I'm guessing the LS2 isn't broke in yet and you are still not getting all the power yet. My LS1 loosened up after 5000 miles and I have some G-Tech times to show it too. I've heard others saying the same for the LS2, that it takes it some time to "loosen" up to get your maximum performance.

Also, how are you shifting the manual? Powershifting or "grandma-ing" it?

Lastly, your 60 foots run around 2.2. Drop those with practice to 2 flat and you may see up to 0.4 drop in ET's. So theorhetically your 13.9 could have been a 13.5 with an "average" 2.0 60 ft.

I'm more concerned about your trap speeds. But again if you're racing at high elevations or in hot muggy air you could be way down on power. Don't despair, you've got a lot of room for improvement. :)

Opps didn't put the elevation in there, the track is around 5,500'. I have 3,500 miles on the car, and i wouldn't say i powershift but i do give it everything i can. I don't grama it at all at the track, i go there to do my best not to take it easy. Most other GTO's i see there are driven by older men who get mostly 15's. The track has the worst prep, they don't sweep or do much of anything. The D.A. is usually higher, the night i got the 13.9 it was around 7,500'. I'm not sure what it was last night.

I posted the same question on a local car forum and they all said that i need to do 18 psi, that 28 was way too high so i'll try this next time.

Well you can easily lower the tire PSI to get better traction, but for that elevation its not a bad time.

Whoa, you're up there. DA of 7500 ft. has got to be a B!tch!!!

I'd say with those conditions and from what you said about the Rustang guy saying a 13.9 was the best he's seen from a LS2 that you are close. Drop those 60 fts. and you'll see your ET go down nicely.

Remind me not to run at your track. ;)

When are you heading back? :)

Next friday it looks like, i'll drop the pressure and hopefully watch the times fly, we'll see.

So i revisited the track last night with great results, i'm really happy. I started off at 22 Psi and still wasn't getting the times i wanted so i dropped it to 20 psi still not what i wanted and then to 18 psi and that was definitly the sweet spot. I'm glad i went down in steps cause it helped me adjust to the new traction.

But anyways on 18 PSI and a good tire warmup i got a new PB and consistent 13's by the end of the nighthttp://www.gtoforum.com/images/smilies/party.gif

Best E.T.:

60'- 2.119
660'- 8.878
E.T.- 13.781
MPH- It shows 8 but i would guess it was 98

Best 60':

60'- 2.098
660'- 8.960
E.T.- 13.872
MPH- 98.962

This shows that there is room for improvement but i missed 4th on this one so i just cruised in and i was pissed when i saw my slip.

I'll be out there again soon to get some better times with more practice but i'm comfident that 13's will be consistent nowhttp://www.gtoforum.com/images/smilies/coolgleamA.gif

For all of you who don't know the Alb. track its at 5,500 feet and i don't know what the DA was but in the past its been around 6-7,000'

Improvement is the key. :)

Wait until your engine loosens up a bit too, then those mphs will start to creep up as well. You are fighting the good fight at those altitudes. Come down closer to sea level and I'd bet you'd be low 13's easy at 105 mph.

Think you may have a little more on the 60 foot? Drop that 2.098 to 2 flat and you'll see 13.5's I bet. Good luck. :)

I would love to see a 13.5 and i almost have to go to the track next friday, its just too adicting now. I bet next time i can get at least a 13.6X with knowing what i know now.

I would like some advice on what RPMs to shift at if any of you have some experience, i try and shoot for 6,250 going to second and third but in third i wind it all the way out to try and reach the end before i need forth, its usually right there or a little short.

With the proper information available, I'll bet we could come up with a correlation that would allow one to estimate a vheicles 1/4-mile performance at sea level. This would allow us to put everyone's ETs on an equal basis, making it easier to compare the mountain goats with those that graze at sea level.

-K

Using the DA calculator provided by Orbit Orange the DA was between 7,500 and 8,000' Last night at 11pm when i ran my best times, where can we find a time correction calculator?

Using the DA calculator provided by Orbit Orange the DA was between 7,500 and 8,000' Last night at 11pm when i ran my best times, where can we find a time correction calculator?
Would you mind providing me the numbers you used to calculate your DA? I think that I might have a handle on how to make the conversion. Obviously anything we calculate will be theoretical. There are too many variables that can be neither counted on nor reproduced.

Also, what would you estimate you and your car to weigh?

-K

Time
EDT (UTC) Temperature
F (C) Dew Point
F (C) Pressure
Inches (hPa) Wind
MPH Weather Latest

Midnight (4) Jun 24 77 (25) 46 (8) 30.25 (1024) E 25 blowing widespread dust

11 PM (3) Jun 23 87.1 (30.6) 37.0 (2.8) 30.17 (1021) SSW 7

10 PM (2) Jun 23 89.1 (31.7) 35.1 (1.7) 30.15 (1020) WSW 3

9 PM (1) Jun 23 90.0 (32.2) 36.0 (2.2) 30.15 (1020) Variable 3

8 PM (0) Jun 23 90.0 (32.2) 36.0 (2.2) 30.15 (1020) Variable 5

Time
^EDT (UTC) Temperature
^F(C) Dew Point
^F(C) Pressure
^Inches(hPa) Wind


I used the 11Pm and 12PM data

Check this site out for timeslip correction factor

http://www.hardtail.com/techtips/altitude.html

Notice it only runs up to 6000 feet density altitude. I will try to find one that goes higher for you. Wait until you punch in your ET with the 6000 foot DA you are going to be VERY pleased. I see 12.7 or so at 105.X mph corrected to sea level, and that's not even correct because your DA was 7500 or so. Good job! :)

Well recalculating for a lower altitude is a nice idea but Its really not accurate . As we all know because hes running at that altitude hes losing power and because hes losing power hes better able to get a clean and consistant launch. His times are good for that altitude however I doubt hed see 12.7s without drag bags and nos/supercharger or turbo at sea level. If he had a supercharger or turbo then i guess altitude wouldnt make too much difference anyways.

I would think 12.7X's unlikely myself but not entirely out of the realm of possibility. (We are talking 0 feet density altitude). Intake and exhaust is giving him a few HP over stock and DR's are giving him a stickier launch. I have seen several claims of low 13's and even a few 12.9X's stock from 05's. I'm not saying that's the norm. So although unlikely as you say, and as I believe too, I wouldn't put a perfect 12.79 run out of the running (everything being perfect, as we know it seldom is). But I'm in your camp too on he would probably need a little more HP to get those numbers. Could a 12.9X at sea level be reasonable???

And correction factors are just that, corrections. Doesn't replace an actual timeslip. It's just a guesstimate to compare performance when there is an obvious disadvantage at high DA's. We need to find someone with similar mods down closer to sea level and see what times they have. :)

Opps didn't put the elevation in there, the track is around 5,500'. I have 3,500 miles on the car, and i wouldn't say i powershift but i do give it everything i can. I don't grama it at all at the track, i go there to do my best not to take it easy. Most other GTO's i see there are driven by older men who get mostly 15's. The track has the worst prep, they don't sweep or do much of anything. The D.A. is usually higher, the night i got the 13.9 it was around 7,500'. I'm not sure what it was last night.
whoa son. those are fighting words :). this old man can kick most kid's butts on the track. i have a much lower DA but i got 13.3x when my '04 LS1 was pretty stock on stock tires with a 1.987 60'.

Well recalculating for a lower altitude is a nice idea but Its really not accurate . As we all know because hes running at that altitude hes losing power and because hes losing power hes better able to get a clean and consistant launch. His times are good for that altitude however I doubt hed see 12.7s without drag bags and nos/supercharger or turbo at sea level. If he had a supercharger or turbo then i guess altitude wouldnt make too much difference anyways.

I would agree, and have come up with the disclaimer for the spreadsheet I am putting together:

The following methodology is used as a rough estimate to convert ¼-mile elapsed times at higher elevations and less than optimal environmental conditions to those conditions associated with sea level. There are plenty of variables that are not able to be accounted for in this theoretical approach, such as driver ability, track preparation, etc. The basic assumption is that these variables remain constant.
It is just a fun thing that is based on theory rather than empirical data and should not be used as supporting evidence of one car being faster than another. :)

-K

I have completed the spreadsheet on which I have been working to revise the basis for a 1/4-mile run in an effort to estimate a new elapsed time for optimal environmental conditions at sea level. If anyone is interested in getting a copy of the spreadsheet, PM me with your email address and I will forward you a copy. I have not spent an inordinate amount of time validating the calculations, but I have checked them against a set of specific conditions. Also, the work was completed using OpenOffice.org Calc, but I have a saved version in MS Excel format.

-K