Author Topic: '86 Camaro for B'ville  (Read 41265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bob Drury

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2599
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #60 on: March 29, 2014, 05:18:20 PM »
  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
Bob Drury

Offline salt27

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1734
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #61 on: March 29, 2014, 05:19:36 PM »
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


Offline Sumner

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4078
  • Blanding, Ut..a small dot in the middle of nowhere
    • http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/sumnerindex.html
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #62 on: March 29, 2014, 06:57:51 PM »
.... 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

Offline jacksoni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #63 on: March 29, 2014, 10:54:56 PM »
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.
Jack Iliff
 G/BGS-250.235 1987
 G/GC- 193.550 2021
  G/FAlt- 193.934 2021 (196.033 best)
 G/GMS-182.144 2019

Offline Stan Back

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #64 on: March 30, 2014, 01:03:10 PM »
I don't think they've made 500 Veyrons yet.
Past (Only) Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters -- "California's Most-Exclusive Roadster Club" -- 19 Years of Bonneville and/or El Mirage Street Roadster Records

Offline overdue

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #65 on: March 30, 2014, 05:20:07 PM »
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.

Offline jacksoni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #66 on: March 30, 2014, 08:32:50 PM »
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.
Jack Iliff
 G/BGS-250.235 1987
 G/GC- 193.550 2021
  G/FAlt- 193.934 2021 (196.033 best)
 G/GMS-182.144 2019

Offline overdue

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #67 on: March 30, 2014, 08:37:34 PM »
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?

Offline overdue

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #68 on: March 30, 2014, 08:44:14 PM »
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.

Offline jacksoni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #69 on: March 30, 2014, 08:47:21 PM »
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.
Jack Iliff
 G/BGS-250.235 1987
 G/GC- 193.550 2021
  G/FAlt- 193.934 2021 (196.033 best)
 G/GMS-182.144 2019

Offline 4-barrel Mike

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3173
  • Any fool can drive a V8
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #70 on: March 30, 2014, 09:06:25 PM »
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
Mike Kelly - PROUD owner of the V4F that powered the #1931 VGC to a 82.803 mph record in 2008!

Offline overdue

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #71 on: March 30, 2014, 10:16:10 PM »
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.

Offline SPARKY

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6908
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #72 on: March 30, 2014, 11:34:18 PM »
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
Miss LIBERTY,  changing T.K.I.  to noise, dust, rust, BLUE HATS & hopefully not scrap!!

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."   Helen Keller

We are going to explore the racing N words NITROUS & NITRO!

Offline Freud

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5419
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #73 on: March 31, 2014, 12:55:41 AM »
Page 1  Post 1  doesn't look like a Veyron to me.

FREUD
Since '63

Offline redhotracing

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 279
Re: '86 Camaro for B'ville
« Reply #74 on: March 31, 2014, 09:35:35 AM »
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!
Luke- Winston Salem, NC
Loring 2 Club- 201.252 (2010)
Ohio 2 Club- 203.712 (2013)