Landracing Forum Home
November 21, 2017, 06:53:09 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 ... 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 [125] 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Getting ready for Bonneville(rebuild)  (Read 606443 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
dieselgeek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 44
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 269




Ignore
« Reply #1860 on: December 03, 2012, 10:40:26 AM »


 Yeah ...maybe we can go 300 mph with 1100 hp at the end of 5 miles [Bville pro says 1700] but we were going 318 at the end of the three with 2 more miles to go and accelerating from 6500 to 7000 rpm in 4.2 sec.

  Our fastest time has been 280 + in the 21/4 and 294 in 1st timed mile
 How fast was the #97 going at 987hp and were on the course was it.
 Seems I read Lee was never able to give it full throttle.

  How long does the #97 car take to accelerate 500 rpm in high gear.

  You think Lindsleys and Leggitt 291 and 308 records were only putting out 1100 hp huh They had a top time
avg of 333 mph, and Less told me they were tacking over 340 and this was in the 4th mile shocked

  You actually wonder if 2300 hp is needed in a land speed car?

  Dieselgeek ...if the ring lands get tight orslammed shut and the rings can't seal, the piston will be torched. A melted piston is not always from a lean condition. Lack of ring seal is what happened in both of our piston melts.

  I'll try and get a video of our data log [ Troys job smiley] and post it. but on our 294 run at full throttle in high gear
the AF ration varied from 11 at start 10.5 a tenth of a second later with a high of 11.38 and a low of 10.25 correcting constantly every tenth of a second.

  Dyno was a DynoDynamic and uses a magnetic train brake for loading [ made in Australia I believe]. It has 2 rollers and we were able, with our wide tires, and a few tricks of the trade, able to make a 2300+ hp pull without spinning the tires. I recall tire spin with the # 97 car at around 800 hp.

  2000 + HP is not unusual with these ProChargers. In the sidebar of the ProCharger video above Steve Morris
makes 2000+ hp on pump GAS and a blow thru single 4 barrel carb shocked

              JL222

   

 


I guess I wasn't clear, I'm saying I can tell you the exact power you are putting down at any time by knowing your injector sizes, number of injectors, and pulsewidth (or duty cycle) at any point on the course.  This data wil be far more accurate than engine dyno, or calculator, or simulation figures because your EFI is carefully metering fuel consumption, and providing AFR data (so you know what percent you are rich of stoich).

Ours showed between 945 and 985 flywheel HP uncorrected for altitude, the entire time in 4th and 5th gears.  It's more related to boost than RPM for us.  Since you guys have a linear boost curve, I'm not sure what the data looks like but if you can take a look at your logs where you are on the throttle the most or longest, I can give you an idea what you're actually putting down.

I'm pretty sure it's not 2300hp only because that would mean your car is 2.5 times harder to push through the air than a 69 Charger Daytona, which doesn't seem right to me, LOL.   

Do you guys run staged (16) injectors?   I need to go back in your pics and make a closer look. 
Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1861 on: December 03, 2012, 03:02:21 PM »


  Paul and Diesel Geek

  FAST EFI only allows us to log 6 or 7 things before we run out of collection time.So no pulse width,but I heard you can get an add on for more time.

  Diesel Geek this was a PITA grin not really though, and I learned that as the engine comes up on boost the car accelerated faster from 6500-7000 [4.2 sec] as it did from 6250-6500 [4.7 sec] shocked

 High gear at 54.3 sec  5550 rpm  AF 10.5  boost 15.63 lbs

                   60.1 sec   6250 rpm  AF 10.88 boost 20.57 lbs

                   64.8 sec   6500 rpm  AF  10.63  boost 22.6 lbs

                   69    sec    7000 RPM  AF  10.38 boost 25.65 lbs. 7000 rpm =318 mph with 1 in tire growth figured.

                    DG...there are some low 11s in between but the FAST knocks them down as soon as they show up.

  19 sec needs to be subtracted from times above for actual run time, as  data logger is turned on before start.

  Diesel when comparing hp, #97 to #222, you have to consider where on the course the speed was obtained.

  A dragster that reaches a 1/8 mile speed of 280 mph is making a bunch more hp than one with the same
speed at the 1/4.

  Hope this helps. Hey, I found out that as the boost comes up the power is really coming up, and the data logger
shows it. This also shows that the boost does not come on all at once.


           JL222

 








Logged
dieselgeek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 44
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 269




Ignore
« Reply #1862 on: December 03, 2012, 03:06:59 PM »

 Diesel when comparing hp, #97 to #222, you have to consider where on the course the speed was obtained.

I'm selling a FAST touchscreen dash logger I'd make you guys a smoking deal on, then you'll know how much power you're actually putting down.


For example, the #97 car is built to make 3500hp.   Will we ever need that?  no chance in hell.   I'm telling you that the actual application of power for us was right under 1000hp at the flywheel, uncorrected for sea level, and I know for sure that your numbers are close to that.  If you were putting down 2300whp at any point on the salt (and able to, with traction), your accelleration rate would be nearly double what you're currently showing.  It's not a horsepower contest, I'm just trying to help you understand how much power you're actually using.   It's not 2300 and probably not half that.


Also you used the 911 roadster as an example.   That engine is built for 4000+hp, but they're only using a fraction of that to get their results (which are impressive).   That car's engine builder is on my Engine Masters Challenge team, I'm familiar with the program and have seen the datalogs, they also can tell you how much power they're using as they monitor fuel flow.  They seldom hit WOT.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 03:08:55 PM by dieselgeek » Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1863 on: December 03, 2012, 03:52:47 PM »

 Diesel when comparing hp, #97 to #222, you have to consider where on the course the speed was obtained.

I'm selling a FAST touchscreen dash logger I'd make you guys a smoking deal on, then you'll know how much power you're actually putting down.


For example, the #97 car is built to make 3500hp.   Will we ever need that?  no chance in hell.   I'm telling you that the actual application of power for us was right under 1000hp at the flywheel, uncorrected for sea level, and I know for sure that your numbers are close to that.  If you were putting down 2300whp at any point on the salt (and able to, with traction), your accelleration rate would be nearly double what you're currently showing.  It's not a horsepower contest, I'm just trying to help you understand how much power you're actually using.   It's not 2300 and probably not half that.


Also you used the 911 roadster as an example.   That engine is built for 4000+hp, but they're only using a fraction of that to get their results (which are impressive).   That car's engine builder is on my Engine Masters Challenge team, I'm familiar with the program and have seen the datalogs, they also can tell you how much power they're using as they monitor fuel flow.  They seldom hit WOT.

   We know we can't apply full throttle in the lower gears and we know were not using 2300 hp in those gears
but as the data logger shows 4.2 sec from 6500-7000 that's a good indication that the boost and power is coming up and its hooked up. What i'm trying to get you to understand is you need that power after it gets hooked up to get that high speed.

  If our power levels were the same as the #97 why didn't it have a 280 mph 21/4 and 294 1st mile speed.
and a top speed of 318mph? You still compare our power to the #97 even though we went faster in the 21/4
than the #97 at the 5 mile? 4.2 sec 6500 to 7000 rpm in high gear and same power as the #97 [give us a comparison on that]

  The difference in the 911 and the 222 is that they shred there tires after a run, our new tires this year still has the tits on them.
  If the 911 ever gets traction watch out shocked

  JL222

   
Logged
dieselgeek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 44
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 269




Ignore
« Reply #1864 on: December 03, 2012, 05:00:02 PM »

but as the data logger shows 4.2 sec from 6500-7000 that's a good indication that the boost and power is coming up and its hooked up. What i'm trying to get you to understand is you need that power after it gets hooked up to get that high speed.

I understand that it takes power and traction to accelerate.

 If our power levels were the same as the #97


I'm not saying that either.  

why didn't it have a 280 mph 21/4 and 294 1st mile speed.  and a top speed of 318mph? You still compare our power to the #97 even though we went faster in the 21/4

Sure, if you went 20 mph faster than us in the quarter, then you're putting down more than 985whp.   But not 2300whp more.  That's the point I am making, knowing how much power it is putting down instantly versus guessing or using chassis dyno numbers (which are far less accurate).  In my experience, this is helpful information to know.  Why make more power than you need, generating more heat and working parts harder than necessary?  these are expensive engines we're trying to make live for two passes.  My approach is "use as little as possible to put two reliable passes together" - I'm sure you are facing the same dilemna.


4.2 sec 6500 to 7000 rpm in high gear and same power as the #97 [give us a comparison on that]

Looking through my data logs, I don't have any data in 5th gear (1:1) that spans 6500-7000rpm.   I have that data in 4th gear however, on our third run where we qualified for the A record.  Driver hit the rev limiter in 4th in the middle of the 5th mile, but averaged 267.747mph in that mile with an exit of 241.759.  It took us 13.3 seconds and the car went from 242.0mph to 260.6mph in that timeframe.  I don't have our transmission gear ratios handy at the moment.  I'm logging wheel speed with front and rear pickups ($40 per wheel), I was showing between 2 and 4% slip at this rate.


« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 05:02:23 PM by dieselgeek » Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1865 on: December 03, 2012, 06:09:29 PM »

  
 DG  I love my BvillePro for stuff like this it computes speeds and times at different rpms and time, if a cetain speed is needed for instance ''240 mph'' I can adjust the hp info till that rpm and speed shows up.
 Anyhow by knowing the rpm at 240 mph I can go to the data log and see that rpm and time, same as the 260
time.

     260 mph data log time 56.50
     240 mph                     50.8
#222 time from 240-260   =  5.7 sec   #97 13.3 sec  

   This is shifting from 3rd to high gear

           JL222

P.S.  We have NEVER tried to make an easy pass just to set a record or get in the 2 club, its always as fast as the course will allow.

       
« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 06:29:22 PM by jl222 » Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1866 on: December 05, 2012, 12:07:42 AM »

 Diesel when comparing hp, #97 to #222, you have to consider where on the course the speed was obtained.

I'm selling a FAST touchscreen dash logger I'd make you guys a smoking deal on, then you'll know how much power you're actually putting down.


For example, the #97 car is built to make 3500hp.   Will we ever need that?  no chance in hell.   I'm telling you that the actual application of power for us was right under 1000hp at the flywheel, uncorrected for sea level, and I know for sure that your numbers are close to that.  If you were putting down 2300whp at any point on the salt (and able to, with traction), your accelleration rate would be nearly double what you're currently showing.  It's not a horsepower contest, I'm just trying to help you understand how much power you're actually using.   It's not 2300 and probably not half that.


Also you used the 911 roadster as an example.   That engine is built for 4000+hp, but they're only using a fraction of that to get their results (which are impressive).   That car's engine builder is on my Engine Masters Challenge team, I'm familiar with the program and have seen the datalogs, they also can tell you how much power they're using as they monitor fuel flow.  They seldom hit WOT.

  Dieselgeek ...in the above post were you state that your application of power was close to 1000 hp,and
'' I know for sure that your numbers are close to that'' and if we were putting down 2300hp our acceleration rate
would be double what were showing.

 Time from 240-260 mph   #97 13.3 sec
                                      #222  5.7 sec

   13.3 divided by 5.7=2.33 times quicker shocked  Its more than twice as quick as the #97  and  at part throttle in 3rd gear.

  Funny how this works out But  2.33 times #97s 1000HP=2300hp grin

  Time from 295 mph to 318 -4.2 sec. and 2 more miles to go.

  Still sure #222 has the same application of power as #97

  Forum readers...I don't think we have ever bragged about the hp we make. We just post the results of testing.
  AND from the above posts I hope I've made the case for ''WHY WE NEED ALL THAT HP''

  There's more to it than just hp, in our case, its getting it hooked up +HP.

             JL222 cheers


             

               

 

   

 
Logged
dieselgeek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 44
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 269




Ignore
« Reply #1867 on: December 05, 2012, 12:10:40 AM »

 Diesel when comparing hp, #97 to #222, you have to consider where on the course the speed was obtained.

I'm selling a FAST touchscreen dash logger I'd make you guys a smoking deal on, then you'll know how much power you're actually putting down.


For example, the #97 car is built to make 3500hp.   Will we ever need that?  no chance in hell.   I'm telling you that the actual application of power for us was right under 1000hp at the flywheel, uncorrected for sea level, and I know for sure that your numbers are close to that.  If you were putting down 2300whp at any point on the salt (and able to, with traction), your accelleration rate would be nearly double what you're currently showing.  It's not a horsepower contest, I'm just trying to help you understand how much power you're actually using.   It's not 2300 and probably not half that.


Also you used the 911 roadster as an example.   That engine is built for 4000+hp, but they're only using a fraction of that to get their results (which are impressive).   That car's engine builder is on my Engine Masters Challenge team, I'm familiar with the program and have seen the datalogs, they also can tell you how much power they're using as they monitor fuel flow.  They seldom hit WOT.

  Dieselgeek ...in the above post were you state that your application of power was close to 1000 hp,and
'' I know for sure that your numbers are close to that'' and if we were putting down 2300hp our acceleration rate
would be double what were showing.

 Time from 240-260 mph   #97 13.3 sec
                                      #222  5.7 sec

   13.3 divided by 5.7=2.33 times quicker shocked  Its more than twice as quick as the #97  and  at part throttle in 3rd gear.

  Funny how this works out But  2.33 times #97s 1000HP=2300hp grin

  Time from 295 mph to 318 -4.2 sec. and 2 more miles to go.

  Still sure #222 has the same application of power as #97

  Forum readers...I don't think we have ever bragged about the hp we make. We just post the results of testing.
  AND from the above posts I hope I've made the case for ''WHY WE NEED ALL THAT HP''

  There's more to it than just hp, in our case, its getting it hooked up +HP.

             JL222 cheers


Where does your speed input come from?  Wheel speed sensor?  GPS?
Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1868 on: December 05, 2012, 12:44:26 AM »

 
 Like I said in another post BvillePro computes the speed at a lot of rpms I enter 29'' for our 28'' tires. In the past
 we had an exit speed of 275 mph and found that we had 11/2 in. Tire growth. After over 10 yrs of use I bought
new ones because I was worried about age, but the wear holes were still there. Wish I would have measured the depth but not close to being gone.

  We havn't had an exit speed with the new tires but there's a pic of them here with the tits still on them after
reaching 280 in the 1ST mile loosing a rod and getting a time of 260+

  Intering 29.5'' tires, BvillePro computes 323mph at 7020 rpm.

            JL222
Logged
dieselgeek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 44
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 269




Ignore
« Reply #1869 on: December 05, 2012, 12:59:49 AM »

Sounds like there is the problem. 

You are using rear wheel speed believing that the car is accelerating that fast.  This would work if you had zero wheelspin...   

Using wheelspeed to determine acceleration without knowing % slip is just telling you that you can spin the tires really quickly.  There's no data that shows you accelerated the entire car that fast then?   GPS data, or front wheel speed is needed before you know if the whole car changed speed that quick.

For example, if we're comparing similar data, I look at my first gear rear wheel speed that went from 114mph to 138mph in .67 seconds.   Sure, that'd be awesome (top fueler) acceleration but I know that this data is bogus because my FRONT wheel speed only goes up 114mph to 117mph during the same timeframe.  I can't assume the car went from 114mph to 138mph in a half second just because I can spin the tires that fast.
Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1870 on: December 05, 2012, 01:31:47 AM »

Sounds like there is the problem. 

You are using rear wheel speed believing that the car is accelerating that fast.  This would work if you had zero wheelspin...   

Using wheelspeed to determine acceleration without knowing % slip is just telling you that you can spin the tires really quickly.  There's no data that shows you accelerated the entire car that fast then?   GPS data, or front wheel speed is needed before you know if the whole car changed speed that quick.

For example, if we're comparing similar data, I look at my first gear rear wheel speed that went from 114mph to 138mph in .67 seconds.   Sure, that'd be awesome (top fueler) acceleration but I know that this data is bogus because my FRONT wheel speed only goes up 114mph to 117mph during the same timeframe.  I can't assume the car went from 114mph to 138mph in a half second just because I can spin the tires that fast.

  Dieselgeek...give it up, quit trying to discredit us, we weren't spinning the tires on that 294 ist mile run and the tires and the data logger shows it.

  Look at our 280 mph 21/4 and 294 mph 1st mile time. Look and weep. Thats the same speed in the 2/14 as the
#97 in the 5 mile, thats 1/2 the distance. acceleration is double. and less than 50% throttle in 1st thru 3rd.
  You do believe BNI times  shocked
  Maybe you should be learning something. Go back to the drawing board.

  I have had enough of your BS.

              JL222

   
Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1871 on: December 05, 2012, 01:37:52 AM »

So today was the day that we finally cleaned the racer!  Surprisingly there wasn that much salt under the car. cheers  We got the car on jacks took the tires off and noticed on both rear tires that the nipples were still on them.



We did spin the tires just a bit, but were suprized to see them still there.

Now that the car is up high enough to get under it I decided to have a looksee into the holes in the block.  I could see both rod caps on the suspected rods that had exited the block.  WTF?...  Ofcourse since it's only a few nuts, we tried to take the pan off. evil  well we had to use a disc grinder to cut two studs off so the blown up pan would release itself.  We found that even though the caps were still attached, #5 upper rod did leave the building... By itself.  The good news is that the #5 journal doesn't seem to be scuffed or scratched at all. grin. That's all we know as of today, We don't know how bad the rest of the engine or crank is, I will keep anyone who is interested updated.  A picture of our carnage in a pan. tongue



  Pic of tires after reaching 280 mph this Aug. No wheelspin.

 JL222
Logged
dieselgeek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 44
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 269




Ignore
« Reply #1872 on: December 05, 2012, 02:17:53 AM »

Sounds like there is the problem. 

You are using rear wheel speed believing that the car is accelerating that fast.  This would work if you had zero wheelspin...   

Using wheelspeed to determine acceleration without knowing % slip is just telling you that you can spin the tires really quickly.  There's no data that shows you accelerated the entire car that fast then?   GPS data, or front wheel speed is needed before you know if the whole car changed speed that quick.

For example, if we're comparing similar data, I look at my first gear rear wheel speed that went from 114mph to 138mph in .67 seconds.   Sure, that'd be awesome (top fueler) acceleration but I know that this data is bogus because my FRONT wheel speed only goes up 114mph to 117mph during the same timeframe.  I can't assume the car went from 114mph to 138mph in a half second just because I can spin the tires that fast.

  Dieselgeek...give it up, quit trying to discredit us, we weren't spinning the tires on that 294 ist mile run and the tires and the data logger shows it.

  Look at our 280 mph 21/4 and 294 mph 1st mile time. Look and weep. Thats the same speed in the 2/14 as the
#97 in the 5 mile, thats 1/2 the distance. acceleration is double. and less than 50% throttle in 1st thru 3rd.
  You do believe BNI times  shocked
  Maybe you should be learning something. Go back to the drawing board.

  I have had enough of your BS.

              JL222

   

What I'm saying isn't BS.  It may be what you don't want to hear but you know as well as I do that you're using wheel speed as if it's the same as acceleration, and it's not - nobody is out there in a production body car running zero wheelspin at 300mph.

I'm not weeping, or learning anything here, just trying to help you out.  Originally I took you for someone who listened to practical and realistic advice.   No need to try to put me down, my approach seems to be working, although we're going for records - not wheelspin contests.
Logged
jl222
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Clovis calif.
Posts: 2535




Ignore
« Reply #1873 on: December 05, 2012, 12:47:06 PM »

Slick, glad you could here it.  We got a nice visit from Freud and Brett in impound.  The good news is we went 280 in the 2 1/4 and cheers 294 in the first mile. grin. The bad news is that we won't be able to back it up. sad. We hurt piston 1 and 6, and we don't have spare parts to replace it.  Like slick had said early, there is a lot left in this car/motor.  JL222 said he wasn't into the gas that hard until high gear.  We will wait and see if a door slammer can beat that 1/4 or mile time this year.  We did see a few new contenders and some vets here that could do it.  We will have to wait and see. afro We are pretty happy with the speeds but bummed that we couldn't back it up.

  YOU help ME out, how is that huh Were the ones going  280 mph in 21/4 miles and 294 avg in 1st verses #97 280mph in 5 miles. #97 takes twice as long to get to 280 and you call it a
 Wheel spin contest?

  And your trying to help me out huh  I feel sorry for the #97 team but am glad they have you.

 Wake up and face the facts.

  Not only BS, also delusional  ''one that persist psychotically''

                        JL222

 
« Last Edit: December 05, 2012, 01:04:18 PM by jl222 » Logged
Glen
Global Moderator
Hero Member
***
Offline Offline

Age: 82
Location: South West Utah
Posts: 6927

SCTA/BNI timer 1983 to 2004, Retired,. Crew on Tur



« Reply #1874 on: December 05, 2012, 02:01:30 PM »

I think you guys need to knock it off before the name calling starts.  Pissing contests are ok but you guys are getting mad at this point.
Logged

Glen
Crew on Turbinator II

South West, Utah
Pages: 1 ... 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 [125] 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156   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 20, 2017, 07:34:43 PM