Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 107

Best 1/4 time

This is a discussion on Best 1/4 time within the Firebird / WS6 forums, part of the Vehicle Specific category; Originally Posted by Firebirdjones I agree, it's in need of a good converter and a gear. Would have to then ...

  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    3,260

    Arctic White, red/gray
    1997 Corvette, 92 Typhoon

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I agree, it's in need of a good converter and a gear. Would have to then see how that affects his trap speed, because 108 mph is low for the engine mods he has done.
    I was very suprised when he said 108mph trap speed. He has heads and a cam, bone stock f-body on a really good day have hit 107,108mph.

  2. #62
    imo an ls1 with headers,catback,and lid should trap in the 109-111 range. these cars usually hit 106-108 bone stock.

  3. #63
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike0202 View Post
    imo an ls1 with headers,catback,and lid should trap in the 109-111 range. these cars usually hit 106-108 bone stock.
    That would be rare, and conditions would have to be excellent. I rarely if ever even see a bone stock car go 106-108. Be hard to find a bone stocker nowadays.
    My buddies 98 WS6 6 speed he bought new, only had 2,000 miles on it, and it trapped 104. My 02 SS auto only trapped 102 mph when it was bone stock.
    I've seen others that had lids and other little crap that only trapped around 105 mph.
    On a rare occasion you might see a 6 speed car driven well, with great DA numbers trap as high as you mention. But it's definately far from the norm, and I wouldn't expect all LS1's to be doing it.
    That's the problem with the internet. Now with these cars 10 years old or more, it's hard telling what's been done. Easy to hide stuff on these cars.

  4. #64
    Member Camaro69Mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Agawam Mass
    Posts
    334

    Black
    69 Camaro, 99 Camaro SS

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike0202 View Post
    imo an ls1 with headers,catback,and lid should trap in the 109-111 range. these cars usually hit 106-108 bone stock.
    I had a 107 trap with very good weather i couldn't get much more out of it my mods are small buy with a tune this week maybe i can get 110 i would doubt it though

  5. #65
    Exalted Cyclops 67CamaroRSSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    5,824

    2002 Z28 A4 NBM
    Sadly now demodded :(

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    That would be rare, and conditions would have to be excellent. I rarely if ever even see a bone stock car go 106-108. Be hard to find a bone stocker nowadays.
    My buddies 98 WS6 6 speed he bought new, only had 2,000 miles on it, and it trapped 104. My 02 SS auto only trapped 102 mph when it was bone stock.
    I've seen others that had lids and other little crap that only trapped around 105 mph.
    On a rare occasion you might see a 6 speed car driven well, with great DA numbers trap as high as you mention. But it's definately far from the norm, and I wouldn't expect all LS1's to be doing it.
    That's the problem with the internet. Now with these cars 10 years old or more, it's hard telling what's been done. Easy to hide stuff on these cars.
    I'm with Larry on this one. My 02 did a best 13.6x @ 104 with 2.73 gears. This was my best stock baseline run. Average was more like 13.7x @ 102/3.

  6. #66
    Member AKA Speedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    375

    Spice Red Metallic
    2006 Pontiac GTO

    Quote Originally Posted by 67CamaroRSSS View Post
    Throw a stall (with accompanying tranny mods) in it. I did and it took .5 seconds off my ET.
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Ya I'd say. My auto (although with 3.23's) was stock other than long tube headers, and a tune that I had worked on and it was going 13.20's at 106 mph. In a vert at 3,820 lbs. no less.
    I stuck a converter in it and went 12.76 at 107 +. I still haven't opened the motor yet.

    Although I here a few complaints from performance out of Patriot heads,,,but still,,,,with that cam and all I would have expected more too.
    Do you have a converter?? A converter and some mild gears would help,,,,but I can't help but wonder why the mph is down. LS1's modded like that with mild cams usually dip into the low 12's at least going 112-114 mph.
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I agree, it's in need of a good converter and a gear. Would have to then see how that affects his trap speed, because 108 mph is low for the engine mods he has done.

    When I had it built I expected more. It ran 13.6-13.7 stock.

    I'm looking at a yank 3200 stall and 3.42 rear gears for the future. Right now I'm trying to get the kinks worked out of my brakes (warped rotors) and the Bushings holding my rear Sway bar need to be looked over, so here I come overhalled suspension.

  7. #67
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by 67CamaroRSSS View Post
    I'm with Larry on this one. My 02 did a best 13.6x @ 104 with 2.73 gears. This was my best stock baseline run. Average was more like 13.7x @ 102/3.
    Your car was nearly the same as mine,,,but I have 3.23 gears. So it sounds like yours was running pretty good considering the 2.73's.
    The best mine went when it was stock was 13.72 at 102 mph. It ran some 80's but the MPH just wouldn't budge though.
    Maybe if the DA was a bit better I might have squeaked another mph out of it.
    Since my buddies brand new WS6 with a manual and 3.42's only trapped 104.xx I figured mine was about on par with most.

    Of course I'm talking when these cars were new. We used to see dozens of them at the tracks, some still with temp tags back then,,,,lol.
    Now you see people claim bone stock on cars that are 10+ years old, so you have to be a little skeptical.
    Last edited by Firebirdjones; 07-22-2010 at 11:47 AM.

  8. #68
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH.WS6 View Post
    When I had it built I expected more. It ran 13.6-13.7 stock.

    I'm looking at a yank 3200 stall and 3.42 rear gears for the future. Right now I'm trying to get the kinks worked out of my brakes (warped rotors) and the Bushings holding my rear Sway bar need to be looked over, so here I come overhalled suspension.
    13.6-13.7 stock is about right. That stall and gears will help tremendously.

  9. #69
    Member AKA Speedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    375

    Spice Red Metallic
    2006 Pontiac GTO

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    13.6-13.7 stock is about right. That stall and gears will help tremendously.
    yeah I thought my times were right on par stock.

    I dropped 0.7 with the H/C/E upgrades, which I was content with, but my goal when I did everything was to get down into the 12's... I mean mid 12's, maybe low 12's. I picked up some 80rwhp from the upgrades.

    I did the H/C/E upgrades trying to get to the point where I could run with a stock C6 corvette.

    I haven't raced one, but I am anticipating a 13.065 @108 isn't going to give me that honor.

  10. #70
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH.WS6 View Post
    yeah I thought my times were right on par stock.

    I dropped 0.7 with the H/C/E upgrades, which I was content with, but my goal when I did everything was to get down into the 12's... I mean mid 12's, maybe low 12's. I picked up some 80rwhp from the upgrades.

    I did the H/C/E upgrades trying to get to the point where I could run with a stock C6 corvette.

    I haven't raced one, but I am anticipating a 13.065 @108 isn't going to give me that honor.
    I would think your car should be running quicker than that. With those ported heads, a 224 camshaft etc....I don't see why that car wouldn't trap higher than 108. But I'm not there and I know there are just too many variables. I didn't pay attention to where you are located, maybe high elevation??

  11. #71
    Member AKA Speedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    375

    Spice Red Metallic
    2006 Pontiac GTO

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I would think your car should be running quicker than that. With those ported heads, a 224 camshaft etc....I don't see why that car wouldn't trap higher than 108. But I'm not there and I know there are just too many variables. I didn't pay attention to where you are located, maybe high elevation??
    Well I ran that time at Beech Bend, KY. my first few passes I kept lighting the tires up stalling at 1500rpms and not getting any traction, so I got to where I could baby it enough to get out of the hole with the stock 17x9's

    My 60 was a 2.01 (the same as before the H/C/Exhaust swap.)

    Now I have 17x11's in the rear bearing 315/35/R17's, but if you go by my beech bend (1/4mile) time slips 1/8th mile split vs post 315's at Ohio Valley (1/8th mile closer to my house) I lost 0.2 in the 1/8th (before=8.5 vs after=8.7)

  12. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    3,260

    Arctic White, red/gray
    1997 Corvette, 92 Typhoon

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH.WS6 View Post
    Well I ran that time at Beech Bend, KY. my first few passes I kept lighting the tires up stalling at 1500rpms and not getting any traction, so I got to where I could baby it enough to get out of the hole with the stock 17x9's

    My 60 was a 2.01 (the same as before the H/C/Exhaust swap.)

    Now I have 17x11's in the rear bearing 315/35/R17's, but if you go by my beech bend (1/4mile) time slips 1/8th mile split vs post 315's at Ohio Valley (1/8th mile closer to my house) I lost 0.2 in the 1/8th (before=8.5 vs after=8.7)
    2.01 isnt good but it isnt horrible.

  13. #73
    Member Camaro69Mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Agawam Mass
    Posts
    334

    Black
    69 Camaro, 99 Camaro SS

    Quote Originally Posted by Zinergy View Post
    2.01 isnt good but it isnt horrible.
    2.01 isnt good for street tires? Seems ok, for a m6 thats not bad. Auto seems like should be better

  14. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    3,260

    Arctic White, red/gray
    1997 Corvette, 92 Typhoon

    Quote Originally Posted by Camaro69Mac View Post
    2.01 isnt good for street tires? Seems ok, for a m6 thats not bad. Auto seems like should be better
    People have hit 1.6s on street tires as firebird jones pointed out earlier. Its decent for a car with street tires, stock stall and stock suspension, but you could still get better. But yes thats what im saying, the 2.01 and a car with ported heads, cam and supporting mods should run better than a 13.065 @ 108mph. But its the low trap speed that really gets me because et is alot about launch and this car is obviously not hooking up and launching like it could. But 108mph is slow for a car with those mods and that power.
    Last edited by Zinergy; 07-22-2010 at 02:45 PM.

  15. #75
    Member Camaro69Mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Agawam Mass
    Posts
    334

    Black
    69 Camaro, 99 Camaro SS

    Quote Originally Posted by Zinergy View Post
    People have hit 1.6s on street tires as firebird jones pointed out earlier. Its decent for a car with street tires, stock stall and stock suspension, but you could still get better. But yes thats what im saying, the 2.01 and a car with ported heads, cam and supporting mods should run better than a 13.065 @ 108mph. But its the low trap speed that really gets me because et is alot about launch and this car is obviously not hooking up and launching like it could. But 108mph is slow for a car with those mods and that power.
    I agree with you there. I'm doing 13.14 @107mph and i have only headers and other small mods. But with an auto i would think around where you were at 1.6 60ft's. I have a tough time getting 2.0's with the street tires and this junk stock clutch it just dies once i beat on it. Either it stays on the floor or i gotta pump it back up it sucks!

  16. #76
    Well even motor trend traped 107 with a stock m6 car..

  17. #77
    Member AKA Speedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    375

    Spice Red Metallic
    2006 Pontiac GTO

    Quote Originally Posted by Zinergy View Post
    People have hit 1.6s on street tires as firebird jones pointed out earlier. Its decent for a car with street tires, stock stall and stock suspension, but you could still get better. But yes thats what im saying, the 2.01 and a car with ported heads, cam and supporting mods should run better than a 13.065 @ 108mph. But its the low trap speed that really gets me because et is alot about launch and this car is obviously not hooking up and launching like it could. But 108mph is slow for a car with those mods and that power.
    I'm putting 370 down at the wheels... not gonna lie with the 275's it seemed like the car was a little wirly in the A$$ end. I haven't been on the same track since I got the 315's on, but I have been to that 1/8th mile, but again according to the ET's I've slowed down putting the wider tires on.

    Now would new tires hurt me? the Nitto street tires I'm running have maybe a few 100 miles on them. lighting them up did not seem to help though. I'll have to get back out there and try it out once I get back from my training.


    Quote Originally Posted by Camaro69Mac View Post
    I agree with you there. I'm doing 13.14 @107mph and i have only headers and other small mods. But with an auto i would think around where you were at 1.6 60ft's. I have a tough time getting 2.0's with the street tires and this junk stock clutch it just dies once i beat on it. Either it stays on the floor or i gotta pump it back up it sucks!
    You're right behind me...

    Something else someone suggested was sub frame connectors. They seemed to think that would help get the power to the ground. He seemed to think my chassis was absorbing a lot of the power when it flexed.

  18. #78
    Moderator 35th-ANV-SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wherever life takes me
    Posts
    12,466

    Red
    02 35th LE Camaro SS

    My car (02 SS, M6) with just a lid ran a 13.7 at 105MPH on stock tires.

    After my suspension, rear/gear, LTs, exhaust, and Nitto's I ran a 13.19 at 107MPH. I'm pretty sure I can get that into the high 12's with practice though.

    If you want better traction...a) SFC's b) LCA's with relocation brackets c) Torque Arm and d) Tires.

  19. #79
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike0202 View Post
    Well even motor trend traped 107 with a stock m6 car..
    Well that's not something we can base off of. In all honesty, these magazine tests can go many different ways.
    Some tests don't even visit a drag strip, they just strap a wheel on the car to measure distance and use a stop watch, the more advanced method now is to just stick a G-tech on the dash

    The mags that do actually hit the strip,,,99% of the time they go to places like Atco where they are at sea level, and even then it's usually 50 degrees outside where they have at or below sea level DA numbers. Usually during the winter months when the track is closed to the general public.
    To top that off, who is to say these mags don't get a test car that has been tweaked in some way, shape or form???

    Either way none of it is really relevant to real world conditions we all see. So you just have to take it for what it's worth. Base it off your own times with stock cars, if there is such a thing anymore.
    I can tell you I've had 4 of these cars, some of which I bought new. Either way they were all bone stock at the time of purchase, and I never had one of them trap even close to 107 mph, both autos and sticks. That's not to say they wouldn't have. Maybe the 5th one will?? Good luck finding a real bone stocker now,,,,but 1 out of 5 isn't a very good percentage anyway.

  20. #80
    Senior Member Too Fast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,170

    Black
    2000 WS6 6spd Hooker LT

    ^^^before I put my Hookers/ORY, Too Fast was trapping high 105s/13.5s. So almost 107s.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 1967 Chevrolet Camaro - Time After Time
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-09-2012, 04:20 PM
  2. Long time listener, first (or second) time posting
    By Norrie in forum New Member Introductions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-04-2008, 09:10 AM
  3. Long time reader first time poster
    By bigmarky in forum New Member Introductions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-27-2008, 06:47 PM
  4. Long Time Listener 1st Time Caller
    By NSSTG8TR98 in forum New Member Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-21-2007, 07:33 PM
  5. Replies: 55
    Last Post: 11-16-2006, 09:39 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •