Landracing Forum Home
November 21, 2017, 08:53:39 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
BACK TO LANDRACING.COM HOMEPAGE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  


(Note: Donations are not tax deductible)







Live Audio Streaming and Archives of Past Events
Next Live Event: TBD
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Hot Rod Lincoln :2012 Bonneville ..................  (Read 31483 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
fastman614
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 62
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 721





Ignore
« Reply #15 on: May 27, 2012, 12:59:40 PM »

h/r lincoln-

I said.....with an F class engine, though, it may be more academic than real. 

With an F Class engine, your speeds are not going to be in the higher 200 mph range - like 250 mph or so - the production record is, what, under 200 mph... as are the unblown "stock body" coupe classes - being, I think, mid 160s to high 180s mph-wise..... blown though is another story, so to speak - the records are from just over 200mph to well over 250 mph.

The aerodynamics are something that get factored in with exponential ratios as the speeds increase... and please don't ask me to expound on that as it is not my field of expertise.

I did not have accurate Cd numbers on the late 80s Mustangs - only the 79 to (probably) 87 'stangs... and the anecdotal info was from a site to which I had been directed that stated the same .4+ Cd for 'stangs up to and including '93... The reason I was looking into this was to compare frontal areas and Cd numbers of several comparable smaller North American car bodies with the numbers for our Vega...

Okay - the higher Cd number on the 'stang in combination with a smaller front area, when compared to the Lincoln with a lower Cd and a larger frontal area, will at some point do one of several things - effectively give the Lincoln an overall edge, give the Mustang an overall edge or be a "wash"...  the Lincoln body is not so much bigger than the older 'stang that, with its lower Cd, I think that you will have an overall "slipperier" car with the Lincoln....
Logged

No s*** sticks to the man wearing a teflon suit.
Hot Rod Lincoln
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 54
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 113





Ignore
« Reply #16 on: May 27, 2012, 01:31:34 PM »



Quote
The aerodynamics are something that get factored in with exponential ratios as the speeds increase

Certainly so, but I'm thinking cd has an effect on anything over 100mph. All else being equal I'm thinking the Lincoln will have an advantage over a Fox body stang with any engine running over 150 mph.

I wish I still had the magazine from years back ( 25yrs ago +/-) Motor Trend did an article on a factory GM test-bed Corvette nick named "Thumper". If I recall correctly the car ran 190 mph with something like 580 hp ( ? I forget the actual number) For the Vet to run 200 mph they would either have to increase the hp by 87 or reduce the drag from .34 to .28 ( the numbers are somewhere in that range, I read it 25 years ago, so I'm going off memory)   that's a .06 difference. Best info I have available the Lincoln has a .07 advantage over the the Fox body Mustang and with it's longer wheelbase it should handle a hell of a lot better. I'm thinking that .07 advantage will be of benefit over 150 mph.  We sure better be able to run over 150 with the NA engine......


Jon


Logged
RichFox
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: San Mateo, Ca
Posts: 2431





Ignore
« Reply #17 on: May 27, 2012, 01:37:29 PM »

The answer is just outside of Wendover
Logged
Hot Rod Lincoln
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 54
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 113





Ignore
« Reply #18 on: May 27, 2012, 01:51:15 PM »

The answer is just outside of Wendover

Lol....

yes it is.

Jon  grin
Logged
fastman614
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 62
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 721





Ignore
« Reply #19 on: May 27, 2012, 02:06:51 PM »



Quote
The aerodynamics are something that get factored in with exponential ratios as the speeds increase

Certainly so, but I'm thinking cd has an effect on anything over 100mph. All else being equal I'm thinking the Lincoln will have an advantage over a Fox body stang with any engine running over 150 mph.

I wish I still had the magazine from years back ( 25yrs ago +/-) Motor Trend did an article on a factory GM test-bed Corvette nick named "Thumper". If I recall correctly the car ran 190 mph with something like 580 hp ( ? I forget the actual number) For the Vet to run 200 mph they would either have to increase the hp by 87 or reduce the drag from .34 to .28 ( the numbers are somewhere in that range, I read it 25 years ago, so I'm going off memory)   that's a .06 difference. Best info I have available the Lincoln has a .07 advantage over the the Fox body Mustang and with it's longer wheelbase it should handle a hell of a lot better. I'm thinking that .07 advantage will be of benefit over 150 mph.  We sure better be able to run over 150 with the NA engine......


Jon

Jon,
All in all, I think you have it pretty much figured out .... that link that you provided to the markviii dot org sort of says it all.... less than 300 hp on a Ford dyno .... and they achieved over 180 mph.... Also, the fuel economy stats on the car itself (in stock form) are telling....

Suffice it to say, I was not in any way inferring that the car does not have good overall aerodynamics... I am pretty sure that it DOES!.....
Logged

No s*** sticks to the man wearing a teflon suit.
Hot Rod Lincoln
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 54
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 113





Ignore
« Reply #20 on: May 27, 2012, 02:49:23 PM »


We just have to see how she runs......  it does look promising on paper.......

To be honest I was a little bummed when I saw the F/GC record got bumped from 114mph to 162 in the 2011 event. That bar got set a bit higher than I'd like....but it gives us something to shoot for. The record is now held by a 240sx Nissan with 1/2 a 351C powering it.

Here's a shot of a Lincoln I saw on the freeway the other day at 80mph:


we always have next year to run a BB Ford......:    cool



but one thing at a time....one thing at a time.....

Jon
Logged
Tman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Black Hills, South Dakota
Posts: 3605




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: May 27, 2012, 04:22:22 PM »

That is always a good read about Lincoln. Too bad the brass never really GET IT!?!?!
Logged

www.compulsionrodandcustom.com
Hotrod, racing and performance parts
Hot Rod Lincoln
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 54
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 113





Ignore
« Reply #22 on: May 27, 2012, 04:28:05 PM »

After running on the salt last year with my dad and brother in the '88 Mustang GT ( 342" Ford, car ran 179.79 on the 5 mile course) we've decided to step it up a bit for 2012:

2011 car:



Jon





On a different note, we pulled the 342" out of the Stang for a check-over ( it boiled over three times last year), ran it on the dyno to see what she was making as it came out of the car. Then made a Carb change and header swap. Did a hot leak down test and was showing 5 cylinders leaking 3%, 2 were leaking 4% and 1 at 5%. Needed to pull the heads to replace a head gasket because of a water leak, so had the heads cleaned, springs checked etc.   We dropped the pan and it was in need of some bearings. Engine will be back on the dyno next week and I plan on just playing with a couple of intake spacers and then it will get dropped back in the Stang.

Dyno results ( cut and paste) oil psi was never below 62 psi:




The Stang ran 179.79 at 6,300 with a 29" tire and 3.08 gearing. Art Car C-4 trans. Hoping to get it to pull 6,600- 6,800 this year.

Jon
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 04:34:33 PM by Hot Rod Lincoln » Logged
fastman614
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 62
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 721





Ignore
« Reply #23 on: May 27, 2012, 05:24:14 PM »

Gonna make a suggestion.... go to a manual transmission with a really close 3rd to 4th gear.... (or a 4th to 5th gear) where top gear is direct drive....

I do not know what you C4 trans has for a 2nd gear ratio but I would guess it is between 1.4 and 1.5 to 1....

There is a BW Super T10 available that has a 1.19 to 1 3rd gear and, if I am not mistaken, a 2nd gear at around 1.6 to 1.... Richmond Gear does not show the 1.19 to 1 3rd gear as a choice on their website  in the T10 (although it IS shown in the 5 speed - as are some pretty interestingly close 1st, 2nd and 3rd gear ratios)

That way, you'll keep your RPMs up a lot closer to peak horsepower.... You will be wanting to rev the engine out to about 7400 RPMs for your shift from 3rd to 4th (if achieving that RPM is possible) and I will extrapolate to be "only" past your peak hp by about 3%...

You will, on a clean and quick shift, be at about 6200 RPM in top gear, which is "only" about 7% below your peak hp - on your way back up, so to speak.

With my use of a hypothetical 1.45 to 1 second gear ratio in your C4 trans, I calculate that, from a 7400 RPM shift point, you will be dropping to about 5100 RPMs, which is about 23% below your peak hp.... and A LONG WAY TO GO on your way back up.

Your shift points in the lower gears are not as critical but higher RPMs may be more advantageous.... It is something to think on...
Logged

No s*** sticks to the man wearing a teflon suit.
fastman614
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 62
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 721





Ignore
« Reply #24 on: May 27, 2012, 05:31:14 PM »

One more thing.... the 'stang has aero numbers similar to our Vega.... and 500hp was enough to make the Vega go an easy 205 mph.... with a 29" tall set of rear tires and a 2.75 -1 rear end ratio (and I am talking 25 years ago) - to actually set the record, we went to 3.00 to 1 rear end gears the next year....
Logged

No s*** sticks to the man wearing a teflon suit.
Hot Rod Lincoln
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 54
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 113





Ignore
« Reply #25 on: May 27, 2012, 06:00:06 PM »

Nice 205 in a vega.........   cool
what was it reving ?

we (me and Danny Crower) figure the Stang would be at least 10 mph faster with a 4 speed. But the way that thing handled at 180 mph it doesn't need to go much faster. We are working on the handling this year.

Jon
Logged
fastman614
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 62
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 721





Ignore
« Reply #26 on: May 27, 2012, 07:34:50 PM »

Nice 205 in a vega.........   cool
what was it reving ?

we (me and Danny Crower) figure the Stang would be at least 10 mph faster with a 4 speed. But the way that thing handled at 180 mph it doesn't need to go much faster. We are working on the handling this year.

Jon

If I recall, we were shooting for 7700 rpm (ideally, 8000 for a real fast - for back then, anyway - record).... I know that tire slippage was a problem for us and on the return run for the C/Fuel record, I had the engine up to about 8400 rpm at speed.... it should have been going about 235mph - and I was about 20mph slower than that....

We set the record in C/GAlt in 1988 @ 215.015mph ... and in C/FAlt in 1991 @ 216.695mph... That was before the implementation of the Classic Category... We have gone on to repower the Vega with a 432 C.I.D big block (pro stock style of the late 1990s with like 12 degree heads and all).... we set the B/CGAlt record in 2003 at 237.938 mph, reset it in 2006 at 245.324mph and set the B/CFAlt record in 2008 at 254.153 mph

I hope the attachment works.... This is the Vega


* The Vega in 2006.JPG (41.82 KB, 765x493 - viewed 241 times.)
Logged

No s*** sticks to the man wearing a teflon suit.
saltracer1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 66
Location: Lafayette, La.
Posts: 147





Ignore
« Reply #27 on: May 28, 2012, 08:27:17 AM »



Love the orange Mustang. This is ours in the building stages with supercharged Ford flathead. Might I ask what you guys are going to do to improve the handling on your Mustang? thanks Phil
Logged
Hot Rod Lincoln
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 54
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 113





Ignore
« Reply #28 on: May 28, 2012, 06:01:36 PM »



If I recall, we were shooting for 7700 rpm (ideally, 8000 for a real fast - for back then, anyway - record).... I know that tire slippage was a problem for us and on the return run for the C/Fuel record, I had the engine up to about 8400 rpm at speed.... it should have been going about 235mph - and I was about 20mph slower than that....

We set the record in C/GAlt in 1988 @ 215.015mph ... and in C/FAlt in 1991 @ 216.695mph... That was before the implementation of the Classic Category... We have gone on to repower the Vega with a 432 C.I.D big block (pro stock style of the late 1990s with like 12 degree heads and all).... we set the B/CGAlt record in 2003 at 237.938 mph, reset it in 2006 at 245.324mph and set the B/CFAlt record in 2008 at 254.153 mph

I hope the attachment works.... This is the Vega
[/quote]

Great info on the Vega...thanks. What did it weigh?

My brother and I would both like to build something to run over 250,,,,,, maybe next year.
Logged
Hot Rod Lincoln
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 54
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 113





Ignore
« Reply #29 on: May 28, 2012, 06:09:41 PM »



Love the orange Mustang. This is ours in the building stages with supercharged Ford flathead. Might I ask what you guys are going to do to improve the handling on your Mustang? thanks Phil

What class are you running?

Last year my dad purchased the car from a guy who used it for both drag racing and El Mirage. After tech on the salt last year my brother ended up talking to  the "kid" who dove it at El Mirage. He told my brother " Hey that car still had the 90/10 drag shocks on it when I drove it. If you haven't changed them up might want to"  He ended making some limiter straps for the front-end.  This years will have new shocks...........

We need to work within the rules to try to keep the air from under the car...either a chin spoiler or something of the sort and maybe some type of belly pan.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page November 10, 2017, 07:19:11 AM