|
hey capt bill....it sure looks like your m2 turbos are working nicely. Mine will be coming in any day now...I cant wait.
Ill post the times as soon as the motor is broken in. j |
Warmed up a bit
Last time I tested it was near 30 F, and had just barely warmed up, i.e. the engine compartment was still relatively cold. This time I had been running for an hour or so, and the ambient temp was closer to 50F.
4.507s was the average this time. Here's the detailed results: Code:
Start Speed 40.0mph |
My primary turbo has a bad bearing in it so I don't get full boost until about 4K with non-sequentials (weak - getting new turbos) I did a 50-70 test tonight right before my exit since I was thinking of this 40-70 thing. It took less than 2 seconds - pretty cool with only one turbo working :D I'll do some runs tomorrow - pretty sure it'll be around 5 secs since I have no power in my primary - we'll see. Can't wait to get both turbos on board. I am running 12 psi with about 1/4 tank for this basically worthless test.
|
Sank: Which performance tool are you using?
|
The AP-22 from http://www.Race-Technology.com
It's the only one I'm aware of that logs data. I really like it. This comparison page shows some of its features: http://www.cb-racing.com/rt-comparison.htm I got mine for 240. |
I think the APEX unit logs data. Looks very cool, but it's more like $350 with the g sensor: http://www.APEXi-usa.com/meters_revspeedmeter.asp
GTech is also coming out with a newer/better performance meter next winter. |
Well guys, I finally did some runs today.
60 degrees (nice) 1/4 tank gas 1st run: surface (flat) 40-70 in 4.01 secs - I think I hit the timer at like 37-38 mph 2nd run: surface (slight downhill) 40-70 in 3.53 secs 3rd run surface (slight uphill) 40-70 in 3.53 secs (consistent) My 40-50 seemed like about 2 secs - I had terrible lag and was scared to look at the time (my primary turbo is barely working) but from 50-70 literally took about 1.0 to 1.3 secs. I was running 12 psi on the PFC. I'm pretty happy with my times considering I'm down about 60 hp. Let's see some more times here! |
The APEX version is meant to interface with the ECU. The others are stand-alone. Mine fits in the palm of my hand, and doesn't connect to anything. Just strap it to the dash, and it's amazingly accurate, AFAICT. You give it rolling resistance, Cof of drag, body roll...so it can get very specific to your car. They have a new one coming out as well, with GPS functionality, so it should have even higher accuracy, since it can compare it's calculated speed with the speed calculated by GPS.
But back to topic, where is the times for that Camaro SS? That, I want to see! |
Originally posted by Sank But back to topic, where is the times for that Camaro SS? That, I want to see! |
I'm going do mine on my lunch break
|
back in the day I used to keep it at 40mph start the watch and floor it in 3rd gear and stop the watch at 70mph.
no wonder these times are faster :doh: |
Originally posted by MaxRX7 back in the day I used to keep it at 40mph start the watch and floor it in 3rd gear and stop the watch at 70mph. no wonder these times are faster :doh: |
Got my new rear tires installed the other day. AVS Sport 275-40-17
They are a bit taller than the last set. AVS Sport 245-45-17 I will try some new runs to see if they affect my times any. While the speedo may be off a bit, 40-70 in third gear is still a 30 mph change in the midrange even if the true speed is off + or - a couple of mph or so. |
SS times finally in!
My friend finally got around to running the test once in either direction with his stock 98 Camaro SS. Temp was around 68 degrees and he had a quarter tank of gas. His car has less that 30K miles and appears to be in good working order.
Average between the two runs: 4.71 seconds I have to admit, I was expecting faster. However, gearing and what not is likely a big factor. Again, not apples to apples, but interesting.:p: |
Actually with the amount of torque the LS1s have I'm really surprised of those times for the SS. I figured it would be low 4s for the SS - interesting.
|
It's apples to apples as far as what's faster. :-)
|
Originally posted by capt. bill1 It's apples to apples as far as what's faster. :-) |
What? You mean you don't?
Thats why you down shift when someone wants to run you. And it's still a good indication of a street cars midrange power. And there for it's potencial. |
Originally posted by capt. bill1 What? You mean you don't? Thats why you down shift when someone wants to run you. And it's still a good indication of a street cars midrange power. And there for it's potencial. The SS and 7 achieve similar amounts of power (relative to their weight) in strictly different ways. For the purposes of this test, comparing the two cars in the same gear has no real meaning. |
With a downpipe and about 65 out. I did 5.1, however this was the "old" method of cruise at 40 then punch it. When my car is back up and running id beinterested to see what it will do with the 35mph roll on method. And what the cold air intake added..if anything...
|
How do I do it for an automatic?? The ratios are different. The auto is 3.90 and the standards are 4.1. Does anyone know what the time for an auto would be?
|
Two runs, average 4.81 and its an automatic. I'll post new times later this week after the 4.30 rear is installed.
|
Tested last night, one run, cruised @ 40 mph then stabbed it, 67 degrees F, approximately 10.5 psig:
4.5 sec |
Originally posted by jasonsr1 Tested last night, one run, cruised @ 40 mph then stabbed it, 67 degrees F, approximately 10.5 psig: 4.5 sec 1. Cruise at 35mph - 'stab it' 2. Time from 40-70 3. Time both directions on the same stretch of road - then average them. |
True. Do it again and see how the times differ though. I'm just curious.
I did post specific instructions at the start of this thread.;) |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:44 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands