bad times at the track

[shady milkman]

hello everybody i'm new here .................





anyways ..i went to the track yesterday to run

to say the least i was really disappointed.

i ran

60' 2.004
330 5.680
1/8 8.629
mph 84.61
1000 11.17
1/4 13.331
mph 104.71

this was pretty consistent through my 4-5 runs. all my times were 13.3xx
that would be a nice time if i was stock...however i am not . my mods are in my sig.

D/a
Density Altitude: 1970 feet
Relative Density: 94.36 %

corrected it comes out to 13.0 but still

so my question to you is...do you think those times are normal?

[Knight]

Are you m6? Spin off the line? Gear ratio?

[67CamaroRSSS]

I forgot but aren't you an M6?

To start: You're leaving a lot at the starting line. 2.004 60' is killing you. Get that down to 1.8X-1.9X and I imagine you'll be closer to 13.0x-13.1x (before correction factor). I'd up the gear ratio (if stock) for a better launch and get stickier tires as I imagine they are up in smoke with any concerted effort. And the 98's truck cam doesn't really have much of a top end pull even with an LS6 intake.

You'd also benefit from a cutout in the I-pipe.

There is more to add but this will get you started.

[Firebirdjones]

I see an intake, headers and a tune for mods that would have any effect on ET or MPH.
The DA isn't horrible either, at just under 2000 ft. it's better than most. It's lower than what I normally find in the summer time.

With that said I wouldn't say your times are horrible, and about on par with an automatic equipped 4th gen with a couple of bolt ons.

I'm assuming that is an auto,,,,,and race weight plays a huge factor as well.

[Spaz]

that mph is right for the time... what rpms are your shifts at???

[shady milkman]

to add some more detail. I was getting a low voltage input MAF SES about a week or so ago..this was after i cleaned it, it was also intermittent..well that code just magically went away one day ..however i am curious if my maf could be just barely above the threshold and far from operating efficiently causing bad times.

I also wonder if my stock torque arm is holding back my DRs from getting into the 1.9s or lower

[Knight]

to add some more detail. I was getting a low voltage input MAF SES about a week or so ago..this was after i cleaned it, it was also intermittent..well that code just magically went away one day ..however i am curious if my maf could be just barely above the threshold and far from operating efficiently causing bad times.

I also wonder if my stock torque arm is holding back my DRs from getting into the 1.9s or lower

Sounds possible to each.

[Firebirdjones]

I also wonder if my stock torque arm is holding back my DRs from getting into the 1.9s or lower

I doubt it,,,I've seen stock torque arm setups cut 1.6 60 foot times and pick the front tires up.

You had drag radials and ran 2.00 60 foot times??? I'm guessing an automatic then without a converter???

[Spaz]

to add some more detail. I was getting a low voltage input MAF SES about a week or so ago..this was after i cleaned it, it was also intermittent..well that code just magically went away one day ..however i am curious if my maf could be just barely above the threshold and far from operating efficiently causing bad times.

I also wonder if my stock torque arm is holding back my DRs from getting into the 1.9s or lower

i'm not sure about the maf... but the stock TQ arm is an absolute piece of shit... i cracked mine in half... they flex and then they snap eventually...

[Spaz]

I doubt it,,,I've seen stock torque arm setups cut 1.6 60 foot times and pick the front tires up.

You had drag radials and ran 2.00 60 foot times??? I'm guessing an automatic then without a converter???

i've yet to see a stock tq arm fbod lift the wheels...

[Firebirdjones]

i've yet to see a stock tq arm fbod lift the wheels...

Are you kidding me?? I've seen several

[Firebirdjones]

i'm not sure about the maf... but the stock TQ arm is an absolute piece of shit... i cracked mine in half... they flex and then they snap eventually...

I've been around these things for a long time,,,,and that is the first case of that I've ever heard of. Probably had something else going on,,,,or a defect of some sort.

[Spaz]

I've been around these things for a long time,,,,and that is the first case of that I've ever heard of. Probably had something else going on,,,,or a defect of some sort.

when i posted about it years ago there were several others who had the same thing happen... it's very common for the stocker to break... usually they break (like mine) where they bolt up to the rear...

[Firebirdjones]

when i posted about it years ago there were several others who had the same thing happen... it's very common for the stocker to break... usually they break (like mine) where they bolt up to the rear...

Here ya go,,,,stock torque arm, stock lower control arms, stock panhard bar.....you don't need all that suspension crap to go fast with these cars...Can't fault a car that runs 1.5 60 foot times with nothing but adjustable shocks.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adh4BnfBMBg[/ame]


I've had these cars since 97 (4 of them) with stock torque arms, alot of racing and street driving and never have I once found the stock torque arm to be an issue. Most certainly on a street car that makes moderate power. You are a rare case my friend.

As a matter of fact, this particular car tried aftermarket control arms and torque arm and found no gains what so ever, (it just added weight) so the stock stuff went back on.

[Firebirdjones]

PM Rel3rd, he's still on here from time to time, I chatted with him a while back. He'll be the first to tell ya how many runs he's had on this combo without a hickup, and lifting the front tire to boot. He was relentless with the car making over 100 passes or more.

There are others......

[shady milkman]

Are you m6? Spin off the line? Gear ratio?

a4, not really spinning at all..no audio cue at least. i am running 3.23s

[Spaz]

Here ya go,,,,stock torque arm, stock lower control arms, stock panhard bar.....you don't need all that suspension crap to go fast with these cars...Can't fault a car that runs 1.5 60 foot times with nothing but adjustable shocks.


I've had these cars since 97 (4 of them) with stock torque arms, alot of racing and street driving and never have I once found the stock torque arm to be an issue. Most certainly on a street car that makes moderate power. You are a rare case my friend.

As a matter of fact, this particular car tried aftermarket control arms and torque arm and found no gains what so ever, (it just added weight) so the stock stuff went back on.

i'm sure they are some that do... but my case is definitly not rare... i've been around ls1's since 99 and lt1's since 94... so i'm definitly not a noob in that department ...

[Spaz]

a4, not really spinning at all..no audio cue at least. i am running 3.23s

time for a stall!!!

[shady milkman]

You had drag radials and ran 2.00 60 foot times??? I'm guessing an automatic then without a converter???

i ran them at 21-22psi and at 18-19psi

stock converter

[shady milkman]

time for a stall!!!

for sure ...but what concerns me is the fact that last year will A/S i would get 2.1 60 fts ..break loose on the shift to second (thank you frost ) and have to let off to correct and still got 13.6s-13.8s ...so with drag radials and better 60ft times + not getting out of it.. i only was able to to shave .3 :S that is my only concern...if this wasnt the case i wouldnt feel so bad about my times.....


oh thought i would mention ..thinking on it some more i am running TTMs at the track..they are for sure heavier than stockers ...i guess there are many variables.