Landracing Forum
Bonneville Salt Flats Discussion => Build Diaries => Topic started by: overdue on February 19, 2014, 05:39:48 PM
-
I've just posted in the introductions thread, so now time to post a few pics of the car.
I bought it to be a daily beater when I had no job at all, but now I'm earning solidly, and have a clean, reliable, late-model full-size pickup.
So here goes.
-
Yes, it is a T-top, sadly. Undecided what I'll do about that. Any suggestions?
I'm leaning toward cutting the roof skin from a junkyard hardtop and going from there.
Please don't suggest getting another car.
-
Welcome.
I hope you enjoy the stay and wish you success with the car.
Get a roof from the junkyard.
You'll have an easier time installing the roll cage without having a roof to contend with.
Mike. :cheers:
-
Yes get a donor top. With the top removed the roll cage is ALOT easier to install. Hope the new job pays well. It's takes a lot to go land speed racing. Good Luck.
-
Thanks, both of you!
-
Howdy, check out out build diary. Might help. Have fun.
http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,12743.0.html
-
I lucked out by building a comp coupe. I was chopping my car anyway. It sure makes welding all those tube junctions a lot easier!
What class are you building for?
Lot's of great guys, and even more information can be found here. Good Luck! :cheers:
-
Overdue:
Plenty of roofs around for that model Camaro. Just have the replacement roof before you cut the old roof so you make sure you have both to measure. The build is a journey and though its hard work its rather fun. Lots of advice and opinions here and most of it is very helpful. These guys have saved me a lot of frustration by recording their builds on this forum and I believe my car is a lot safer based on things I learned here. Now that it is safe we are working to make it fast too.
What's you plan for the car? Class and motor?
BR
-
No plans for class, just whatever safety equipment is required to run the number.
Turbo 4.8L LSx / 4L80E / 2.75:1 9" Ford axle / 28" rear tires.
May swap to a Trans Am nose, as per the SE Racecraft car that ran 298 back in '89.
First desire is 255 MPH, ultimate hope is 301.
I've already found a hardtop roof, at a salvage yard 35-ish miles away.
Just gotta go show them where I want it cut.
Actually, first hope is 186 MPH on real tires, if that's permitted.
Top Gear did it, but they may have bribed the B'ville people to allow it after everyone else was finished?
Freiburger should have done it for some traction.
-
Just ordered a rulebook, already had plans for both inner and outer SFCs, already planned a 12-point cage, the cage and the outer SFCs from Competition Engineering for compatibility.
-
Got an e-mail from the guy with the gears, he also has a set of 2.50:1, but he has no PayPal account, so no sale.
-
Just e-mailed M/T about availability of, and wheel widths for, their 26.5x9.0-18 and 30.0x9.0-18 LSR tires.
Thinking it best to get 4 of each, just in case.
-
You're from Utah and you only got the fever NOW???
I'm a gazillion miles away and I'm terminal. :wink:
Tell them to cut it around the bottom of the shield. Get as much as you can.
-
Mike, you know how it is, I live at the beach (3mi. away) and I never go. :roll:
-
Still waiting for my new 2014 rulebook, been progressing with the oilpan mods and oil tube. Finally got my truck pan not hanging below the car's crossmember. Tube still needs work. Having a spare engine on a stand is a big help, the spare engine was 3/4 the price of a new Holley oilpan that's known to fit perfectly, but I saved enough using the Trans-Dapt S-10 mounts rather than the Spohn mounts. Engine's sitting maybe 1/2" higher than the Spohns, but I'm trying to pioneer a far-lower-cost swap than anything found on thirdgen.org
Anyway, no pics of my progress.
-
Since you have no class ideas (run whatever) the Trans Am nose on a Camaro puts you in Altered at least. Not a problem though the engine swap makes you GC anyway. By the way, the nose on Gary Eakers car in '89 was not a stock piece but a special (maybe one off- I don't know) from GM that had a deeper air dam. Lowering the car of course in needed. There is/was an aftermarket supplier of an air dam looked factory but 2" or so more air dam worth looking at though of course you can make your own similar to what Keith Turk (Freiburger) did on their earlier model Camaro and of course many others as well. I am not sure if lowering spindles for that year are still available. Is what I used and a fellow in Ohio I have talked to building similar had asked about. I have not recently researched that. He may have. Let me know if you are interested in site for the air dam.
-
I've been wondering about that. I always believed the air dams were like gospel, and I know Roadkill has to be taken with a grain of salt, no pun intended, but after that '79-'81 Firebird killed Freiburger's run with no air dam, running around 230-something MPH, maybe some re-thinking is called for. I've never liked how the factory ground effects are higher off the ground at the very front than at the wheel wells, though I do understand why. Also, factory ground effects don't actually do anything to create a tunnel under the car, they're really no lower than the metal bodywork under the doors.
Back in late '92 Pacific-something made a sweet air dam for the '91-'92 nose, which made that my favorite look, and yet I'd rather copy SE Racecraft just because theirs is known stable at speed, no such evidence that I can find for the '91-'92 nose, though it seems the sleekest.
I'm thinking run an '85-up Camaro nose for road use, and fit the common '85-'90 T/A nose for speed runs, extending the air dam with braced aluminum. If I ran a 'bird nose with a 'maro rear on the road, I'd have endless hassles with every cop everywhere. Just as not worth it as getting a 'bird. I may yet end up with a hardtop 'bird for a dedicated speed car, but I'd rather one car that can do everything, like the Veyron, but for a million dollars less than the Veyron.
-
....Turbo 4.8L LSx / 4L80E / 2.75:1 9" Ford axle / 28" rear tires....
Welcome to having a build underway. I like the engine choice. What are you going to do for a crank when you start making the power needed to run over 250? The head choices for that engine are good and I'll be interested in seeing how it works out for you. Might be something I look at later also.
I'm wonder why the 4L80E? You would be stuck with one set of gears basically and not really the best ratios for what you are wanting to do. Maybe consider something like the G-Force 101A where you can change gear ratios cheaply down the road to match what you are doing at the time. Not a whole lot more than a built 4L80E and the controller for it.
You might also take a look at this thread starting on page 7 where the discussion turned to a Ford rear-end combination where you end up with 2.26 gears ....
http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,13504.90.html (http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,13504.90.html)
Hooley runs the 2.47 Ford 9 inch in his Stude but to get to 300 that presents some problems gear wise unless you are going to really turn the 4.8 and you don't really need to do that with the turbo.
Just a couple things to think about and good luck on the build,
Sum
-
Granted I'm new to LSR myself, but I feel like you are going to have a really hard time trying run a "230mph race car" on the street. It's one thing to build a street car to race at the track, but it's another to run a race car on the street. The problems I see trying to do this are: 1 - Every cop in the entire state is going to be pulling you over. 2 - Running the same gears to hit 230mph are going to be borderline useless in a street application. 3 - Emissions? (Not sure if you need to pass emissions where you live).
This is just MHO, as I've considered trying to make my '59 Indian street legal, and I just don't think it's worth it. The headache trying to make it happen and the fact that you will just get yourself into trouble. As far as being a cheaper version of the Veyron, maybe you should look into getting a NRE motor if you want to run the track and the street.
http://www.nelsonracingengines.com/
At any rate, good luck with your build!
Scottie J
-
A street/LSR car is a compromise that will result in one that is mediocre in both applications-- like the continually re- invented airplane/car.
Choose one or the other.
Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ
-
....Turbo 4.8L LSx / 4L80E / 2.75:1 9" Ford axle / 28" rear tires....
Welcome to having a build underway. I like the engine choice. What are you going to do for a crank when you start making the power needed to run over 250? The head choices for that engine are good and I'll be interested in seeing how it works out for you. Might be something I look at later also.
I'm wonder why the 4L80E? You would be stuck with one set of gears basically and not really the best ratios for what you are wanting to do. Maybe consider something like the G-Force 101A where you can change gear ratios cheaply down the road to match what you are doing at the time. Not a whole lot more than a built 4L80E and the controller for it.
You might also take a look at this thread starting on page 7 where the discussion turned to a Ford rear-end combination where you end up with 2.26 gears ....
http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,13504.90.html (http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,13504.90.html)
Hooley runs the 2.47 Ford 9 inch in his Stude but to get to 300 that presents some problems gear wise unless you are going to really turn the 4.8 and you don't really need to do that with the turbo.
Just a couple things to think about and good luck on the build,
Sum
I can afford to do it safe, but I'm not trying to order the best of everything, bolt it all together, and call it done. The 4.8L is not only because Holdener did 1203 HP in HotRod magazine, though the aftermath, or follow-up that never got published, was that his 4.8 continued to survive a great many more pulls over 1200 HP, still on a stock short-block assembly. I don't foresee ever getting many chances to open it up that much, mostly drive on an 800-horse tune, more likely.
I'm convinced the Ford 9.75" rear axle assembly, with 3.08:1 gears, that I intend to use for everything else but the salt, isn't necessary when there's no real traction. The 9" is easier to install, and stronger, than a Ford 8.8" or a GM 8.5", both of which offer close-enough 2.73:1, but the 8.8 is by far the most common in the salvage yards.
There are guys who've run stock 4.8s to 7500 RPM for years, even without ARP rod bolts and Comp Pro Magnum HR lifters, so the RPM can easily go 7500 with those upgrades installed. I'm mostly concerned about valvesprings, as the springs used by the 7500-RPM non-turbo guys are the same ones used for 1203 HP @ 6500 RPM. Titanium retainers will help, but I'm not doing Ti valves. The best normal exhaust valves are available for $ 250 / set.
I surely don't need to touch the heads to run 255, but probably to run 301.
I had to pass on a set of 2.50:1 9" gears because the old man refused to get himself a PayPal account. There's no other way to guarantee that nobody gets cheated unless it's live, face-to-face, in person. He couldn't understand that. On the Ford460 forum they claim that 2.50:1 was for the 460, and 2.47:1 was for the 351M, and the 400M in station wagons, or some such.
2.73:1 in the rear, 0.75:1 in the trans, and 28.6" (Y)-rated road tires puts my RPM at 7249 to go 301 MPH. which brings me to the 4L80E
I can rebuild one myself, I can get one in the salvage yard for $ 125, and they can be built to hold 1400 HP. The alternative is to spend 16 times as much for a Tranzilla from Rockland Standard Gear, and that is still 0.75:1 in sixth, not 0.68:1 like last year's ZR1, which they take first through third gears from anyway. Controlling the 4L80E is no cost at all. I already got the #411 PCM and harness with the 4.8L, and the 4.8L was offered with the 4L80E in the Express vans. I e-mailed my tune guy, Ryan Gick at GMTuners.com, and unlocking the anti-theft, calibrating the speedometer, and replacing the 4L60E map with the 4L80E map all adds up to $ 85, not bad at all. He always gets it right on the first try.
I hope I've answered your questions, and thanks for being friendly!
-
Granted I'm new to LSR myself, but I feel like you are going to have a really hard time trying run a "230mph race car" on the street. It's one thing to build a street car to race at the track, but it's another to run a race car on the street. The problems I see trying to do this are: 1 - Every cop in the entire state is going to be pulling you over. 2 - Running the same gears to hit 230mph are going to be borderline useless in a street application. 3 - Emissions? (Not sure if you need to pass emissions where you live).
This is just MHO, as I've considered trying to make my '59 Indian street legal, and I just don't think it's worth it. The headache trying to make it happen and the fact that you will just get yourself into trouble. As far as being a cheaper version of the Veyron, maybe you should look into getting a NRE motor if you want to run the track and the street.
http://www.nelsonracingengines.com/
At any rate, good luck with your build!
Scottie J
First, what would the cops pull me over for? Seriously.
Second, I had a 145-horse 305 in a '78 Camaro with a TH350 and a 2.41:1 axle, it drove surprisingly well, and this proposal has more aggressive gearing.
Third, as long as the turbos are after the Cali-legal stainless-steel-core cats, which don't heat-melt, and as long as my cam has no overlap at 0.050" tappet movement, then there's nothing stopping me from having my 1200 horses with emissions-legality. This is no different, emissions-wise, from an LS1 swap, which is even legal in Cali, and the Squires rear-turbo LS1 kit is legal there also.
And turbos quiet the exhaust, past the point where mufflers aren't needed. so think of them as the world's most powerful mufflers :-D
-
A street/LSR car is a compromise that will result in one that is mediocre in both applications-- like the continually re- invented airplane/car.
Choose one or the other.
Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ
Neil,
I may end up with both, but being in my late 30s, I'm still young enough to suffer the compromise. The glory isn't calling, but a guy has to make a name for himself to draw customers for car-building, and these days it takes extreme accomplishments to make a name.
-
Thought I'd share a photo-chop I did of a friend's car, showing why I chose a Camaro over a Firebird. I snuck about 3.5" out of the front overhang, as GM should have, as proven by the FD-chassis Mazda RX7, which has far less overhang than this.
-
........ 2.73:1 in the rear, 0.75:1 in the trans, and 28.6" (Y)-rated road tires puts my RPM at 7249 to go 301 MPH. which brings me to the 4L80E....
Just a couple more things to think about. Hooley's Stude weighs between 5000 and 6000 and with a 1.90 first gear and the 2.47's and with the old motor, probably between 800-850 HP, 40-50% throttle is about max without blowing the tires off. The 80LE with the 2.48 1st and the 2.73 rear will make 1st about useless.
Our second was a 1.30 and he still wasn't able to run WOT in 2nd ever. Not until the 1:1 3rd and the 7% overdrive was he running WOT. I think you will probably find that you will be running 3rd and overdrive and 1st and 2nd will be pretty useless. We went with the 101 to stay away from a huge rpm drop between 3rd and 4th. A high HP turbo motor might make that drop ok, but we are still tying to keep it at a 15% max even with the new turbo motor.
5 miles is also a lot longer than most dyno pulls and Subaru happens :-).
You are also going to need to buy landspeed tires and the goodyears at $600 a piece and they are a tad under 28 inches so just a bit smaller than the dia. your quoted. I get the same speed at rpm you do just wonder about that big jump going into 4th. You are going to have to make sure your power band is wide enough for it.
Figure probably $5000 for the required safety equipment to run over 200 with a blown front-engine car.
Keep studying and keep planning and try to avoid some of the screw-ups some of us have done :cry:. We are just trying to help in that direction,
Sum
-
First, what would the cops pull me over for? Seriously........
I've driven enough Hot Rods and Pro Streets to know that any cop that sees a roll cage and a parachute knows it's just a matter of time before you hit the throttle. That's all.
Scottie J
-
More or less streetability of a Bonneville car has been a topic here before and the consensus has been that with all the requirements for cage, seat, fire systems etc etc, not to mention mounting the dry sump tank in the passenger area, replacing all glass with lexan, and the list goes on and on, that it is not a viable deal. You can work up on it certainly but ingress and exit with the cage and helmet support requirements makes it tough. If I can get it to work will post a photo of my 'Bird. Front springs cut one turn, dropped spindles and the deeper front dam. At rest, I could just get two fingers under the nose in the center. At speed, it lifts. I ran the stock spoiler on back at first but took it off and ran faster but I was not traction limited, which you will be.
McDonald and Pitts/Mike LeFever (dynoroom here) IIRC (don't want to misrepresent here but I think this is right) ran the 91-2 vintage which has the new nose but old back I think and were over 300 (??313?). You might ask them about stability. Mike told me the stock spoiler worked well when you need downforce on the rear. Weight gets to be a big topic when traction becomes an issue. People load the back. This is not good for aero stability as soon as you spin the tires and the back gets out a bit as it wants to keep going. Delicate balance between going straight and going Acura first.
-
(http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=13648.0;attach=45434;image)
Great looking car!
........ Weight gets to be a big topic when traction becomes an issue. People load the back. This is not good for aero stability as soon as you spin the tires and the back gets out a bit as it wants to keep going. Delicate balance between going straight and going Acura first.
Good points. The Studebaker was about 3100 lbs. before we started adding weight. None is behind the axle. Some ahead on both sides for traction and then more further forward under the transmission and more in the nose to help balance the car and now...
(http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/wing--87.jpg)
http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20construction%20menu.html (http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20construction%20menu.html)
....the big vertical stabilizers allowed in comp coupe that help even more,
Sum
-
That Baker is sweet!!! Love it!!!
-
Jack has most of the facts correct. We ran a 300.787 mph average with a 307 terminal speed back in 1999.
Here are a few of the cars that have set records in the classes you'll be able to run in. A couple are over 300 mph.
I know you "just want to see how fast I can go" but in the end you will have so much money tied up in tires (~$750 ea. rear), safety gear ($1000 fire suit used), windows (glass is no longer allowed) etc. you might as well forget the street car aspect IMO.
You are doing one thing right, the '82-'92 "F" bodies have much better aero than the 4th gen cars. However you can no longer mix and match features from different model years in Gas Coupe any longer, i.e. '92 nose with the '88 rear spoiler.
Good Luck & remember to have fun.
-
New rulebook arrived. Made more progress on my engine / oilpan / oil tube problems. Got pics posted on TGO's forum.
-
(http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=13648.0;attach=45434;image)
Great looking car!
........ Weight gets to be a big topic when traction becomes an issue. People load the back. This is not good for aero stability as soon as you spin the tires and the back gets out a bit as it wants to keep going. Delicate balance between going straight and going Acura first.
Good points. The Studebaker was about 3100 lbs. before we started adding weight. None is behind the axle. Some ahead on both sides for traction and then more further forward under the transmission and more in the nose to help balance the car and now...
(http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/wing--87.jpg)
http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20construction%20menu.html (http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/Hooley%202013/13%20-%20construction%20menu.html)
....the big vertical stabilizers allowed in comp coupe that help even more,
Sum
Thanks Sum- I liked to joke that the SCTA made a big mistake using a car from a heretic East Coaster as an example of a GC class car in the rule book. :)
-
Since you have no class ideas (run whatever) the Trans Am nose on a Camaro puts you in Altered at least. Not a problem though the engine swap makes you GC anyway. By the way, the nose on Gary Eakers car in '89 was not a stock piece but a special (maybe one off- I don't know) from GM that had a deeper air dam. Lowering the car of course in needed. There is/was an aftermarket supplier of an air dam looked factory but 2" or so more air dam worth looking at though of course you can make your own similar to what Keith Turk (Freiburger) did on their earlier model Camaro and of course many others as well. I am not sure if lowering spindles for that year are still available. Is what I used and a fellow in Ohio I have talked to building similar had asked about. I have not recently researched that. He may have. Let me know if you are interested in site for the air dam.
Better check if SCTA allows Pontiac nose on Camaro. I hope so because then we could put a Trans Am wing on the Camaro :-D
JL222
-
Not a rules expert but I think a Pontiac nose on a Camaro would put you in Alt at best, more likely CC. The spoiler, as you know, must either be factory stock or built to the rule book specs. Now if you fixed the tail lights so the Camaro looked like a 'Bird, likely no one would notice..... :cheers:
-
Frank Hartman (Captthunder) built (or bought?) some nice headlights covers for his Camaro, which would put you in
/ALT but running a turbo LSx will probably put you in a Modified class anyways. We made ours with flexible poly from
Allstar Performance and braced the cover with 1/4" solid rod. We used the same material for our chin spoiler; it was
easy to cut, drill into and bend around a support structure.
As for street legality, I drove the Camaro to and from meets at Maxton before we switched fuel systems (and went to
a 3 gallon cell)... The 2.50 rear made stop and go ridiculous, but that was with a T56 and later a Jerico. A 4L80 would
be much less of a pain.
Good luck, and feel free to PM me with any questions or pointers. We built a 200mph car on a slim budget; with the more
widely available/cheaper turbo stuff out there now, you can do better with less $ I'm sure.
-
John,
Go back to the original post. He does not care about records. He will have a hard enough time meeting safety before running legal.
DW
-
John,
Go back to the original post. He does not care about records. He will have a hard enough time meeting safety before running legal.
DW
Well dang. I thought you would chime in with a yes or no :-D
But I don't think a Trans Am nose on a Camaro would be legal for altered and only legal for completion coupe unless stretched the minimum 12 inches.
JL222
-
John,
Contact your committee chair person in Section 16 of the rule book.
DW
-
John,
Go back to the original post. He does not care about records. He will have a hard enough time meeting safety before running legal.
DW
Well dang. I thought you would chime in with a yes or no :-D
But I don't think a Trans Am nose on a Camaro would be legal for altered and only legal for completion coupe unless stretched the minimum 12 inches.
JL222
You only have to do ONE of the qualifiers to be CC (Chop, stretch, belly pan, set back) but only CC allows "streamlining" of the front of the car (not counting covering headlights/grille = Alt) I suppose as DW suggests, talk to committee person- Might not be legal at all making it a time only car. Sorta like 1 piece front ends.
-
John,
Go back to the original post. He does not care about records. He will have a hard enough time meeting safety before running legal.
DW
Well dang. I thought you would chime in with a yes or no :-D
But I don't think a Trans Am nose on a Camaro would be legal for altered and only legal for completion coupe unless stretched the minimum 12 inches.
JL222
You only have to do ONE of the qualifiers to be CC (Chop, stretch, belly pan, set back) but only CC allows "streamlining" of the front of the car (not counting covering headlights/grille = Alt) I suppose as DW suggests, talk to committee person- Might not be legal at all making it a time only car. Sorta like 1 piece front ends.
So your saying one piece front ends puts you in time only category?
-
John,
Go back to the original post. He does not care about records. He will have a hard enough time meeting safety before running legal.
DW
Well dang. I thought you would chime in with a yes or no :-D
But I don't think a Trans Am nose on a Camaro would be legal for altered and only legal for completion coupe unless stretched the minimum 12 inches.
JL222
You only have to do ONE of the qualifiers to be CC (Chop, stretch, belly pan, set back) but only CC allows "streamlining" of the front of the car (not counting covering headlights/grille = Alt) I suppose as DW suggests, talk to committee person- Might not be legal at all making it a time only car. Sorta like 1 piece front ends.
So your saying one piece front ends puts you in time only category?
Ut OH- Sorry- As I generally run GC at Bonneville my brain has focused in on that class more than others and a one piece front end is specifically not allowed in that class and would not be, of course, in production. Alt and CC of course different. I did not mean to imply, though my statement seemed to do so, that a one piece front end would make it a time only car, but that it would be illegal. Having rechecked the rule book, it applies to GC only as best I can find. Sorry for the confusion/miss-statement
-
John,
Go back to the original post. He does not care about records. He will have a hard enough time meeting safety before running legal.
DW
Well dang. I thought you would chime in with a yes or no :-D
But I don't think a Trans Am nose on a Camaro would be legal for altered and only legal for completion coupe unless stretched the minimum 12 inches.
JL222
You only have to do ONE of the qualifiers to be CC (Chop, stretch, belly pan, set back) but only CC allows "streamlining" of the front of the car (not counting covering headlights/grille = Alt) I suppose as DW suggests, talk to committee person- Might not be legal at all making it a time only car. Sorta like 1 piece front ends.
So your saying one piece front ends puts you in time only category?
Ut OH- Sorry- As I generally run GC at Bonneville my brain has focused in on that class more than others and a one piece front end is specifically not allowed in that class and would not be, of course, in production. Alt and CC of course different. I did not mean to imply, though my statement seemed to do so, that a one piece front end would make it a time only car, but that it would be illegal. Having rechecked the rule book, it applies to GC only as best I can find and the first class the OP would be in would be GC with the engine swap. Sorry for the confusion/miss-statement
-
........ 2.73:1 in the rear, 0.75:1 in the trans, and 28.6" (Y)-rated road tires puts my RPM at 7249 to go 301 MPH. which brings me to the 4L80E....
Just a couple more things to think about. Hooley's Stude weighs between 5000 and 6000 and with a 1.90 first gear and the 2.47's and with the old motor, probably between 800-850 HP, 40-50% throttle is about max without blowing the tires off. The 80LE with the 2.48 1st and the 2.73 rear will make 1st about useless.
Our second was a 1.30 and he still wasn't able to run WOT in 2nd ever. Not until the 1:1 3rd and the 7% overdrive was he running WOT. I think you will probably find that you will be running 3rd and overdrive and 1st and 2nd will be pretty useless. We went with the 101 to stay away from a huge rpm drop between 3rd and 4th. A high HP turbo motor might make that drop ok, but we are still tying to keep it at a 15% max even with the new turbo motor.
5 miles is also a lot longer than most dyno pulls and Subaru happens :-).
You are also going to need to buy landspeed tires and the goodyears at $600 a piece and they are a tad under 28 inches so just a bit smaller than the dia. your quoted. I get the same speed at rpm you do just wonder about that big jump going into 4th. You are going to have to make sure your power band is wide enough for it.
Figure probably $5000 for the required safety equipment to run over 200 with a blown front-engine car.
Keep studying and keep planning and try to avoid some of the screw-ups some of us have done :cry:. We are just trying to help in that direction,
Sum
I accept I still have a lot to learn, whether or not my wishes are compatible with this rulebook. I'm still only 20 pages in, it is a lot to absorb, even for a guy who knows drag racing V8 ponycars intimately.
The RPM drop into OD can be offset with torque converter stall.
With a remote adjuster for the wastegates, I figure I can do 0-7 psi in first, 7-14 psi in second, 14-21 psi in drive, max boost in OD.
I know this has been done before, I just have to figure out how to make it comply with the rulebook. anyway, the only real strain on the engine will be in OD, not the whole 5 miles.
The 4L80E gearing can't be helped, without wasting a grand on an aftermarket 2.20:1 first-gear gearset.
I'm attaching Holdener's dyno results.
-
First, what would the cops pull me over for? Seriously........
I've driven enough Hot Rods and Pro Streets to know that any cop that sees a roll cage and a parachute knows it's just a matter of time before you hit the throttle. That's all.
Scottie J
Admittedly I haven't mastered the rulebook yet, but since my 'maro now has a class 3 hitch through the rear bumper, why wouldn't I just grade-8-bolt my 'chute to that when I get to the salt? After all, on the streets I'll have 14" 6-piston brakes.
-
More or less streetability of a Bonneville car has been a topic here before and the consensus has been that with all the requirements for cage, seat, fire systems etc etc, not to mention mounting the dry sump tank in the passenger area, replacing all glass with lexan, and the list goes on and on, that it is not a viable deal. You can work up on it certainly but ingress and exit with the cage and helmet support requirements makes it tough. If I can get it to work will post a photo of my 'Bird. Front springs cut one turn, dropped spindles and the deeper front dam. At rest, I could just get two fingers under the nose in the center. At speed, it lifts. I ran the stock spoiler on back at first but took it off and ran faster but I was not traction limited, which you will be.
McDonald and Pitts/Mike LeFever (dynoroom here) IIRC (don't want to misrepresent here but I think this is right) ran the 91-2 vintage which has the new nose but old back I think and were over 300 (??313?). You might ask them about stability. Mike told me the stock spoiler worked well when you need downforce on the rear. Weight gets to be a big topic when traction becomes an issue. People load the back. This is not good for aero stability as soon as you spin the tires and the back gets out a bit as it wants to keep going. Delicate balance between going straight and going Acura first.
Great info here, thank you! And especially the pic. I've run out of free time for today, but I may have a question or 2 after I think this through.
-
First, what would the cops pull me over for? Seriously........
I've driven enough Hot Rods and Pro Streets to know that any cop that sees a roll cage and a parachute knows it's just a matter of time before you hit the throttle. That's all.
Scottie J
Admittedly I haven't mastered the rulebook yet, but since my 'maro now has a class 3 hitch through the rear bumper, why wouldn't I just grade-8-bolt my 'chute to that when I get to the salt? After all, on the streets I'll have 14" 6-piston brakes.
Check with your chute company about the mounting height of the tether line, most want it about the center of gravity height which is usually around camshaft height on a cam in block V8. You don't want to be to high and jerk the front wheels up or to low for the same at the rear.
Good luck jl222
-
I cant find the old post....if I remember about right, Jim Diest told me to pull a line from the actual CG point of the car (he said weigh front and back, find fore/aft CG and then put end of that line about cam height of a Chevy at that fore/aft CG beside the car.) Pull 35 feet of line from that point, to a point 7 feet above the ground behind the car.
Where the line exits the body line is your pull point height.
If you have scales and a tall jack, there is a formula on the internet to find vertical CG, as well as longitudinal CG. The chute is pulling against the total mass of the car, which is the reason for finding true CG.
If I dont remember right, somebody please speak up.
-
Admittedly I haven't mastered the rulebook yet, but since my 'maro now has a class 3 hitch through the rear bumper, why wouldn't I just grade-8-bolt my 'chute to that when I get to the salt? After all, on the streets I'll have 14" 6-piston brakes.
Wolfe Racecraft sells a similar style chute mount, which is what we've used for 5 years. Build a chute mount
off of the receiver, level the tether point off CG and the chute at your desired angle and height. Voila.
-
Admittedly I haven't mastered the rulebook yet, but since my 'maro now has a class 3 hitch through the rear bumper, why wouldn't I just grade-8-bolt my 'chute to that when I get to the salt? After all, on the streets I'll have 14" 6-piston brakes.
Wolfe Racecraft sells a similar style chute mount, which is what we've used for 5 years. Build a chute mount
off of the receiver, level the tether point off CG and the chute at your desired angle and height. Voila.
Wouldn't the chute pull be transferred back down to the lower mounting point?
JL222
-
He could add another mount higher to raise the "pull point"... Not saying it's the most ideal, but I know that
it works in a < 1 mile shutdown from 200+. Our chute pulls have always been clean and without incident. I
will go ahead and knock on wood now :-D
-
Camshaft high works great on my 53 Stude (5200#, 238 mph). I use two Stroud ribbon chutes released one at a time. I can't remember if they are 12' or 14' but they both have 30' tag lines. I only use the second chute if I make it to the five under power.
You are better off a little high than too low. I used to have it mounted 8" lower (below the bumper) and it would try to dump me on my nose and get squirrely real fast!
Bob
-
Wouldn't the chute pull be transferred back down to the lower mounting point?
The line of action for a parachute tether acts through its point of attachment to the vehicle, regardless of the configuration of the structure that connects the attachment point to the vehicle. The loads are carried by the structure but the external load applied by the tether acts at the attachment point.
Rather like a C-clamp.
-
On the roadster, I was warned that air flows down over the back of the car. I mounted the pack below the attachment point, so the chute could tumble out of the bag without wrapping behind anything. My pack mount was made by using a flat plate for the back of the pack, with vertical small diameter tubes on each side of the plate. The body had two flat straps, bent out 90 degrees top and bottom to form tabs. The tabs had holes, and the pack was held on by long 1/4" rods dropped through the tubes. I used long springs to connect the top loop of the rods to the long end of the rod sticking out the bottom tab (to prevent the rods from walking out). This method allowed the pack to be easily pulled off the car while repacking the chute.
The attachment point was a roller, about 2 1/2" diameter, that had a large pivot bolt in double shear. I actually made this as a two piece roller, where the tether loop could move each side of the roller differently if it was snapping up at an angle. When the chute fills, it is usually coming off the ground, and the tether could be damaged if it isnt on a roller for the loop...it can really snap hard. You simply pull the roller pivot bolt to get the chute unhooked from the car.
The beauty of these two methods, is that it is much easier to take the chute to your hotel rooms...for whoevers turn it is to shower with the chute, that night. You will find its much easier to repack when its not crusted full of wet salt.
Probably a bunch of stuff you've already heard....us old guys ramble and mumble a lot.
JimL
-
Looking forward to seeing this build. I am a huge third gen fan. Glad to see a lot of participation from the NW group here.
-
.... I mounted the pack below the attachment point, so the chute could tumble out of the bag without wrapping behind anything. ....JimL
This past year Hooley switch from a lower horizontal deployment where the chute would travel along the ground before filling to an angled higher one where the chute is now launched up into the air stream for faster deployment. This all came from Stroud.
(http://1fatgmc.com/car/13-Hooley/13-%20chute-4.jpg)
In the picture above you can see the chute in the air just after being launched. This was done during tech inspection when they asked to see the chute deploy. Tony did a good job of catching the deployment with the chute in the air.
(http://1fatgmc.com/car/13-Hooley/13-%20chute-3.jpg)
Above you can see that it launched it quite a ways from the car just with the spring pressure. So far we are very happy with the new system.
(http://1fatgmc.com/car/13-Hooley/13-%20chute-1.jpg)
The chute pack's top is flush with the deck lid and...
(http://1fatgmc.com/car/13-Hooley/13-%20chute-2.jpg)
One can also see that our attach point is below the common 'cam shaft' height location but has always worked very well with no effect on the handling of the car. One thing to keep in mind is that we don't need chutes the size you would need running over 200 on the drag strip or even at one of the mile venues. Our chute does not hit hard and there is no real need with our stopping distances we have. It has done its job and straightened the car out when it has been sideways before.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU59SUocJoA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU59SUocJoA)
The large spring is wound back down into the pack with a socket on a speed handle type tool. The tether detaches similar to what Jim described but we wash the chute in a 5 gallon bucket out on the salt and hang it in the pits unless we are getting back in line to run again,
Sum
-
Work's been killing me. Anyway, I'm one who feels every sincere question deserves a reply, I just lack time, and for that I apologize. Please forgive me that.
I am feeling a bit disgruntled toward these rules. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that even if I were to show up with a new, showroom-stock Bugatti Veyron SS on a trailer, on new, x-rayed, Veyron-specific tires, and a driver already licensed to go 300 at B'ville, these rules would prohibit this combo from running the 268 MPH that the car is known for, right?
Now, if this be the case, then that confirms that these rules are more about selling speed parts than safety. In which case I need an '85-'90 Trans Am hardtop as my salt car. My 'maro will have to see 255 somewhere else.
But if the SS would be permitted to run 268, then there's real hope for running my 'maro on the salt.
The temporary, stock, LSx V8 is final-installed and waiting for me to bolt up a 4L80E.
To the yellow T/A, it looks like you have the skinny front tires front and rear, right? It looks like Goodyear makes wider LSR tires for the rear, so is traction really that much less important than drag? Or are you just that lacking of any real horsepower? No insult intended, but I really don't get it, that's how it seems to me. I do thank you for the pic, I've saved it.
I'll be back when I have more time.
-
Work's been killing me. Anyway, I'm one who feels every sincere question deserves a reply, I just lack time, and for that I apologize. Please forgive me that.
I am feeling a bit disgruntled toward these rules. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that even if I were to show up with a new, showroom-stock Bugatti Veyron SS on a trailer, on new, x-rayed, Veyron-specific tires, and a driver already licensed to go 300 at B'ville, these rules would prohibit this combo from running the 268 MPH that the car is known for, right?
Correct. But don't be "disgruntled", if you did have an accident you would be glad you had all the safety gear required.
Almost every safety rule in the book is there because of some incident. It has been said the rules are written in blood, we don't want it to be yours.
Now, if this be the case, then that confirms that these rules are more about selling speed parts than safety. In which case I need an '85-'90 Trans Am hardtop as my salt car. My 'maro will have to see 255 somewhere else.
You could check out the 130 or 150 mph club with the USFRA
But if the SS would be permitted to run 268, then there's real hope for running my 'maro on the salt.
The temporary, stock, LSx V8 is final-installed and waiting for me to bolt up a 4L80E.
There is no chance you could run at Speed Week without the required safety gear.
To the yellow T/A, it looks like you have the skinny front tires front and rear, right? It looks like Goodyear makes wider LSR tires for the rear, so is traction really that much less important than drag? Or are you just that lacking of any real horsepower? No insult intended, but I really don't get it, that's how it seems to me. I do thank you for the pic, I've saved it.
I'll be back when I have more time.
You will see some on wide rear tires but most on narrow, best of luck with whatever you choose.
-
Please post a foto of your car.
We would enjoy seeing it.
FREUD
-
Please post a foto of your car.
We would enjoy seeing it.
FREUD
1st post 1st page...
-
Boy! If I hada Bugatti Veyron SS, I'd just take it to Daytona and kick their stock car as-ses for 500 miles!
-
Mine would be in my living room............ Before Marlo lost his Lambo to a Airplane propeller (true story) He told be he had only driven it a couple of times because everyone else was looking at his car rather than where they were aiming their cars. Bob
-
Boy! If I hada Bugatti Veyron SS, I'd just take it to Daytona and kick their stock car as-ses for 500 miles!
Sorry Stan, but it has a targa top so it's not really a roadster which means you would not morally be able to compete in it.
And besides you would need a different hat ornament.
Oh, disregard the previous statements, I forgot you have no morals. :-D
-
.... He told be he had only driven it a couple of times because everyone else was looking at his car rather than where they were aiming their cars. Bob
Even street rods can cause accidents. Once down in Phoenix a guy coming the other way on a surface street was looking at my truck and ran into the back of the car in front of him when it slowed.
Another time at a state park in Oregon I was camping in the teardrop and a guy went by in his pickup looking at the truck and the road had a bend in it. He drove straight into a tree caving his front bumper and grill back into the radiator and busting it. He had to get towed away.
Luckily no one was hurt in either incident,
Sum
-
With respect to the narrow tires on the Yellow 3522 'bird. Yes, they are narrow. Generally narrow tires are better for aero particularly on various open wheel cars- lakesters, roadsters etc. Some think they give better traction on the salt. Others feel, when aero, as in a full bodied car, is less an issue that wide tires work fine and give adequate traction and selection may be better in some situations. If you do a search here you will find many threads and an article on the USFRA website as well arguing the merits or demerits of each (wide vs narrow tires) and they can get heated. Your results may vary as always. Anyway, with respect to my car, recall or note that I was running G/GC. Traction was not an issue. I chose narrow in this setting for availability and whatever aero advantage they might allow. I had no trouble and the car went straight without tendency to spin etc. Top speed just over 170. The issue becomes availability and cost of speed rated tires whether narrow or wide, what fits your car, and getting the power to the ground. Weight properly placed and aero (reducing lift/adding downforce) without too big a drag penalty (either lift or downforce is a drag penalty) is where it's at. Many/most of the faster cars have power in excess of traction so balancing those things to keep it straight and between the "stripes" is needed. If you want to cut up your multi-million Veyron you can make it legal but it will need "special tires for racing as designated by the mfg". But you can "cherry pick" that open A/PS record. :cheers: (sorry, couldn't resist after that long thread about the bike records).
You have a good starting point for a landspeed car. It takes a lot of work to make them legal and generally they cannot be a street car too, at least not if you are running Bonneville and at/near record speeds. There are just too many compromises. Don't get discouraged. Plug away. Many folks spend years building a car. It doesn't happen overnight. Good luck.
-
I don't think they've made 500 Veyrons yet.
-
Frank Hartman (Captthunder) built (or bought?) some nice headlights covers for his Camaro, which would put you in
/ALT but running a turbo LSx will probably put you in a Modified class anyways. We made ours with flexible poly from
Allstar Performance and braced the cover with 1/4" solid rod. We used the same material for our chin spoiler; it was
easy to cut, drill into and bend around a support structure.
As for street legality, I drove the Camaro to and from meets at Maxton before we switched fuel systems (and went to
a 3 gallon cell)... The 2.50 rear made stop and go ridiculous, but that was with a T56 and later a Jerico. A 4L80 would
be much less of a pain.
Good luck, and feel free to PM me with any questions or pointers. We built a 200mph car on a slim budget; with the more
widely available/cheaper turbo stuff out there now, you can do better with less $ I'm sure.
Thanks, I may yet.
I looked at the thread of JL222, makes my Camaro, or a dedicated TransAm, seem silly after that, except I doubt I could rent a run.
BTW, the Veyron was hypothetical, I'm not making that much money.
I'm thinking about trying for a record 305-cubic-inch with a 3.736" bore, I doubt any 305 ever saw 200, but I have 2 4.8L LSx engines now, and I'm more likely to get a V6 'bird, then get the T/A aero / GFX bits from salvage yards.
I saw the rule about different years of parts, but I'm guessing that since an '85 T/A is no different than a '90, that isn't what was meant. So if one yard has an 86 nose, and another had an 87 rear bumper, I could still be legal even if the shell is an '85. Just not trying a '91 nose on an '82-'90 or some such.
I'm hoping to bring a decent car and make some 124-MPH runs this August, and meet all my new friends here.
-
I suspected as much re the Veyron and my comments, though I think accurate, were meant tongue in cheek.
I am not an inspector but I believe your comments re bumpers and nose parts etc are accurate and would pass- I doubt without some sort of serial number anyone could tell the difference.
I understand 305's are a common circle track motor but the small bore limits valve sizes and heads and there are a lot of potent D motors out there- take a look at the two Desotoman is selling in the for sale section here. You would be better off with your small LS motors but as before, they constitute and engine swap so a class change where the 305 could run production.
As before, there is a difference in driving a car to Maxton and prepping a legal one for Bonneville. All E and higher records are over 200, some well over, so the prep needs to meet that standard. Again, go for it.
-
Still not clear if an '85-'90 Trans Am, having no grille and hidden headlamps from the assembly line, constitutes Altered or not?
My Camaro would be a D/GC today, and this combo won't go 222, so why bother? Studying the book for the low-hanging fruit, I'm seeing the D/BMMP at 189 looking easier than easy, with second choice being D/BGT at 228. I see one snag with that one. Maybe I don't need the T/A, but I am still curious, if anyone knows the answer?
-
No question my 4.8L LSx is the most-potential D-class engine ever, and even a Ford 302 has more potential than Chevy's lame 305, though Chevy's old DZ302 has potential, but if I build anything aero enough for 200, then I'd want the 305 record just because. If you feel like it, google:"Hate Me 305", it's a cheap and easy 372 horsepower anyone could copy, so 400 HP wouldn't be out of the question even with no boost nor nitrous. I've seen a cast-crank production-block SBChev 383 do over 800 HP on boost, so a 305 block should take enough nitrous or boost to run 200.
-
Still not clear if an '85-'90 Trans Am, having no grille and hidden headlamps from the assembly line, constitutes Altered or not?
My Camaro would be a D/GC today, and this combo won't go 222, so why bother? Studying the book for the low-hanging fruit, I'm seeing the D/BMMP at 189 looking easier than easy, with second choice being D/BGT at 228. I see one snag with that one. Maybe I don't need the T/A, but I am still curious, if anyone knows the answer?
From the Factory, the TA is Production ( NOT altered- however, there are some dips and divots in the front, which if you filled in ( I have done by making little plates I taped on) which would be similar to putting the plastic or other plates over the headlights on the Camaro, would put it in Alt. Fold down headlights are pretty common on other cars. Nice thing is the lack of grille as you point out, with radiator air being pulled from underneath. One of the reasons this car is so good aerodynamically.
-
Still not clear if an '85-'90 Trans Am, having no grille and hidden headlamps from the assembly line, constitutes Altered or not?...D/BMMP at 189...
I'd like to see a D/BMMP with a Trans Am nose. :mrgreen:
Probably would be altered tho. :cheers:
Mike
-
Still not clear if an '85-'90 Trans Am, having no grille and hidden headlamps from the assembly line, constitutes Altered or not?...D/BMMP at 189...
I'd like to see a D/BMMP with a Trans Am nose. :mrgreen:
Probably would be altered tho. :cheers:
Mike
The nose is wider than the S-10 it would have to go on.
-
you may to find a good trans guy to get the OD unit to handle much boost better plan a HUGE trans oil cooler to handle the heat if you are going to run a converter at all
-
Page 1 Post 1 doesn't look like a Veyron to me.
FREUD
-
No question my 4.8L LSx is the most-potential D-class engine ever, and even a Ford 302 has more potential than Chevy's lame 305, though Chevy's old DZ302 has potential, but if I build anything aero enough for 200, then I'd want the 305 record just because. If you feel like it, google:"Hate Me 305", it's a cheap and easy 372 horsepower anyone could copy, so 400 HP wouldn't be out of the question even with no boost nor nitrous. I've seen a cast-crank production-block SBChev 383 do over 800 HP on boost, so a 305 block should take enough nitrous or boost to run 200.
We're running a .040 over 6.0 LS motor, puts us right under the C class engine limit. From everything we've been told by GM engineers and LSx experts, that's the perfect overbore for these motors. That would keep you in D class, then add a couple turbos and make some big power. We used the stock 317 heads for a few years before going to LSA (caddy CTS-v) heads, an Edelbrock Vic Jr. EFI intake and a VSP blower cam. It made 880whp on a Mustang, corrected to 1023 on a Dynojet on 15psi. Good luck!
-
you may to find a good trans guy to get the OD unit to handle much boost better plan a HUGE trans oil cooler to handle the heat if you are going to run a converter at all
I have a used stock LR4 in the 'maro, awaiting a used stock 4L80E, while I'm building my 1200-HP LR4 which will get a Jake's Performance 4L80E stage 5. I used a stock 700R-4 from an '88 'maro for stock transmission location, to adjust the LSx mounting. The 700R-4 is out and gone.
I considered a Tranzilla T56 from Rockland Standard Gear, but their best one is a lame 2.29:1 first with a stout 0.76:1 sixth, so the ratios are far too close. Besides, it's only rated to 1200 HP and 1000 TQ, which leaves nothing for improving the engine, while Jake's stage 5 is good past 1400.
I'm sure it will take a couple of tries to get a custom torque converter matched to this application just right, but I accepted that as part of the price of big power. In the world of GM V8s, transmissions have always been the biggest expense, even if starting with a TH400.
There used to be 2.14 gears for the GM passenger-car-use 12-bolt 8.875" axle, and if I could get a set then I'd just use a SM465 and modify the floorpan tunnel to match. Or if I could score a GearVendors and a proper 9" Ford, but even with Quick Performance offering the bolt-in housing with 35-spline shafts for under a grand, it's still less unnecessary spending to invest in swapping a salvage yard axle.
For dragstrip use the obvious winner is a F150 / sterling 9.75" since there are millions of them for under $ 200, and they have 3.08:1, 34-spline, and disc brakes. Just gotta do custom wheels or redrill the axles and rotors, then address the mounting brackets. It's not noticeably wider than the '93-'02 7.625" axle. And if I could score a GearVendors, I would never even consider any other rear for a multi-purpose 1200-horse car.
You guys indicate a Ford 8.8" would be adequate on salt, so I've researched which vehicles were closest in housing width. I can have it 2.73:1 and 31-spline and disc brakes and Traction-Lock for under $ 200, by being clever at the salvage yard.
So I'm still wanting a hardtop '85 TransAm, more than a record run. The D/MMP is so tempting, I may end up with more than 1 vehicle for the salt. Each starting point can be had for under $ 1000, and use the one engine for several vehicles.
-
Page 1 Post 1 doesn't look like a Veyron to me.
FREUD
Really? :-o
You must be a slow reader. :wink:
Just wait until you get to page 5. :-D
-
We're running a .040 over 6.0 LS motor, puts us right under the C class engine limit. From everything we've been told by GM engineers and LSx experts, that's the perfect overbore for these motors. That would keep you in D class, then add a couple turbos and make some big power. We used the stock 317 heads for a few years before going to LSA (caddy CTS-v) heads, an Edelbrock Vic Jr. EFI intake and a VSP blower cam. It made 880whp on a Mustang, corrected to 1023 on a Dynojet on 15psi. Good luck!
Thanks! I'm of the opinion that cylinder wall thickness is worth more to my plans than 4.4% more displacement.
-
We didn't necessarily go with the .040" for 6 extra cubes, but
because it "unshrouds the valves" with rectangular port heads.
Not my words, but someone who makes 1,300hp on a boosted
.040" over 5.3. I'll take his word for it.
-
S-10 with a TransAm nose and nitrous. I'd get 43-spline axles for it in case it ever hooked up. Easy to classify -- T.O.
-
S-10 with a TransAm nose and nitrous. I'd get 43-spline axles for it in case it ever hooked up. Easy to classify -- T.O.
You and 4-barrel-Mike team up and build it, once you find those 43-spliners.
-
We didn't necessarily go with the .040" for 6 extra cubes, but
because it "unshrouds the valves" with rectangular port heads.
Not my words, but someone who makes 1,300hp on a boosted
.040" over 5.3. I'll take his word for it.
No doubt, since those rect.-ports have chambers sized for 4.065" bores.
The salt should love how those heads kill off-idle torque compared to cathedral-ports.
I'd bet money that the overbore didn't gain him a single horsepower unless he either changed heads or went larger than 2.00" intake valves.
Still, used blocks still showing the factory crosshatch at standard bore are still so easy to find. The EFI is so good now that, combined with the better iron of precision mixing and the lower-tension rings, that ring ridges are ancient history.
This 'maro bay be a good way to try ideas for the T/A I haven't yet found, but I have so little build time available to spend in my garage that I'm entertaining ideas of a fun daily driver by having a trusted mechanic add a pair of turbos to a new K2500HD RCLB 6.0L 4x4, which should be an easy 720 HP with no garage time out of my schedule. The pickup I'm driving is reliable and low mileage, but slow and looks embarassing.
Problem is, that would take funds I might invest in earning my red cap.
-
T.O. = no records no red hat at least in BNI and SCTA :-D
-
Od,
I thought you mentioned you were not interested in records. Just wanted to run 255, or am I confusing your thread with another?
Club membership comes with a record from BNI, SCTA, USFRA or FIA/FIM only.
Good luck,
Dan Warner
President
Bonneville 200 MPH Club
-
Od,
I thought you mentioned you were not interested in records. Just wanted to run 255, or am I confusing your thread with another?
Club membership comes with a record from BNI, SCTA, USFRA or FIA/FIM only.
Good luck,
Dan Warner
President
Bonneville 200 MPH Club
No, you're not confused. I'd already started copying HotRod magazine's 1203-horse build when I realized it was too much for the street, I could only use that much in a dedicated drag car, or I could go to the salt. 255's always been a magical MPH target to me, since GM's old TPI ECMs couldn't accomodate more than that. Then 254 was the Callaway Sledgehammer's speed, then the Veyron's. Now I've read something about a red cap for an official 200 MPH.
This thread was to join in a new crowd, make a record of my LSx progress, and research before investing in anything beyond what I already had my heart set on. I've mastered drag racing well enough to suit me, in the 21 years I've had a driver's license, and I'm loving learning about the salt.
I've been reading other people's threads more and more, seldom commenting, and I'm enjoying it all. My thanks to everyone reading this. So I just finished a big project at work, gives me more time to be in here reading and posting.
When you see me post a pic of a Firebird, an S-10, a Fiero, or a Corvette, then you can know what I'll bring to SpeedWeek 2015. Until then, running 124 in this 'maro would be awesome!
And on that note, I just found a used '86 Z28 nose with the ground effect barely damaged. I want it!
-
To put a bit of rain on your parade - without malice, please, you need to know that a red hat doesn't get awarded to you for "merely" exceeding 200 on an official timed run at Bonneville. You're required to set a record (in your chosen class) over the existing record -- or over 200 if there is no record ("open record").
A record is a pair of sequential runs (qualifying one day and backing up the record the next) whose average speed is at least .001 mph above the existing record/200 mph mark.
Not quite as easy to do - but very satisfying once you've done it. And when you do qualify for the Club you'll find dang near everyone knows it and will congratulate you. I think the most exciting recognition is when your crew arrives to get the car and they're all gone crazy and yelling and flashing their hands showing TWO!
Best wishes, and we'll see you on the salt - right?
-
SSS,
You neglected to mention minimums. :roll:
-
. . . meaning you can set a record over 200 and over an existing record and still be 30 MPH short because of the 200 Club minimums. Check their website for minimums at Bonneville.
-
Thanks kindly you three.
I just got handed a new project at work, so I'll be away for a while.
I'll see y'all on the salt, in person, as a friend, whether I run anything or not.
-
Well, well -- I did indeed not include minimums. I erred in looking in the Rulebook and not the 200 MPH Club book of records. Per the rulebook the minimums are at El Mirage -- so I took out a line mentioning them. Thanks for setting me straight. I was wrong.
The only time I've ever been wrong was the time I thought I was mistaken. :cheers:
-
Jon,
When I mentioned minimums, I thought of Nancy. :-(
Still a little miffed, Don
-
OD there is 2.28 gears available in a GM 10/12 axle with 8 7/8" there is almost the same gear in the Ford version of this axle the 8.8 pick up 4+% at the rear wheels over the 9"