Any really fast turbo cars?

[HYRDGOON]

Launching a manual with 1000 horsepower is pretty much impossible in a street driven car

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

I don't dispute that for a second... especially one that puts down that much power


You also just reminded me of an episode of Pass Time a couple years ago that was all guys with Turbo Lambos and Vipers... in Theory everyone was guessing super quick times based on what the cars were but not one of them would hook so the times were brutal

 

[lxmodguy]

Fire the tuner

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

I'm just curious. How may 9.50 second or quicker cars with street tires have you tuned at the drag strip? What type of shocks? SLR? What did they run in 60/330/660?
Doug

More than my fair share. I don't know the early b chassis which is why I was asking questions to see if it had been done before on a b body. I'll just leave it be, I can tell it's irritating a few folks that think I'm a know it all.

I'll post up some numbers once I run the car.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

 

[dvw]

More than my fair share. I don't know the early b chassis which is why I was asking questions to see if it had been done before on a b body. I'll just leave it be, I can tell it's irritating a few folks that think I'm a know it all.

I'll post up some numbers once I run the car.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

Not irritated at all, just curious. For someone that tells us how easy it is to tune there are a lot of basic suspension and shock questions being asked. Maybe we can teach each other. I for one would like to see how to bring boost in a pound or two at a time. And how boost will be limited in each gear.
Doug

 

[lxmodguy]

More than my fair share. I don't know the early b chassis which is why I was asking questions to see if it had been done before on a b body. I'll just leave it be, I can tell it's irritating a few folks that think I'm a know it all.

I'll post up some numbers once I run the car.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

Not irritated at all, just curious. For someone that tells us how easy it is to tune there are a lot of basic suspension and shock questions being asked. Maybe we can teach each other. I for one would like to see how to bring boost in a pound or two at a time. And how boost will be limited in each gear.
Doug

The problem with boost control is you need fuel control and timing control to match. The controllers we use are the ams1000 and the eboost2. In an efi setup I can command say 12.3 afr as the motor reaches boost. Then maybe 11.7 the first couple pounds, 11.5 up to about 8-10# etc. if you have a properly sized and placed waste gate you can control boost very precisely. You need a ground signal for each shift and you can control it by gear.

I guess you could do a tps sensor and a carb and control it by throttle position on a carb car if you could tune the **** out of a carb. I personally can't. I'm strictly an efi guy.

In terms of boost it's also more about charge temps and timing than it is actual psi. The setup you posted pictures of has overly high charges temps because of the turbo placement, lack of an intercooler, or lack of meth to cool it. All our big boost setups run air to water intercoolers and e85. You just can't beat it for the cooling properties of the alcohol and it's effective octane rating.

For what it's worth I have a chassis guy locally that built NSS cars. He thinks I'm crazy and the car will never hook. I don't setup race cars. I tune them. It's a very small but extremely important part of the equation.

That supercuda was obviously a dyno queen. They hadn't track tune it to bring in boost to the point where it could have a remote chance to hook. I personally think it would struggle to hook on motor only coming out of the hole.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

 

[Herr_Poopschitz]

Every one is entitled to their opinion. Truth be told it's MORE suspension than I need to hook the car. When you can control your horsepower and torque in 50 rpm increments, it's a lot easier than building a big block that has to leave at 5000 rpm with the wheels up to run a number. I have lots of respect for the old ways. It's just a shame a lot of people think their way is the only way.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

You still have yet to address any of the questions/concerns I proposed. I'm also not sure why you're apologetic to 'old ways'...are you assuming those in this thread are just old codgers? Suspension ain't rocket science. Hate to burst your bubble, but unless it's an airfoil shaped carbon wishbone w/ Ti endlinks, it's not really 'new tech'.

This is fact - if that panhard is designed correctly to account for the bends in it, it's grossly heavier than it needs to be. This can be proven mathematically. No engineer worth a damn would design something like that. This detail makes the rest of the unit suspect.

What kind of anti-squat %s can it produce?

 

[lxmodguy]

Every one is entitled to their opinion. Truth be told it's MORE suspension than I need to hook the car. When you can control your horsepower and torque in 50 rpm increments, it's a lot easier than building a big block that has to leave at 5000 rpm with the wheels up to run a number. I have lots of respect for the old ways. It's just a shame a lot of people think their way is the only way.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

You still have yet to address any of the questions/concerns I proposed. I'm also not sure why you're apologetic to 'old ways'...are you assuming those in this thread are just old codgers? Suspension ain't rocket science. Hate to burst your bubble, but unless it's an airfoil shaped carbon wishbone w/ Ti endlinks, it's not really 'new tech'.

This is fact - if that panhard is designed correctly to account for the bends in it, it's grossly heavier than it needs to be. This can be proven mathematically. No engineer worth a damn would design something like that. This detail makes the rest of the unit suspect.

What kind of anti-squat %s can it produce?

I'm not a suspension expert. I'm not the engineer that designed it. I'm also not saying it's ideal to try to hook a drag car. What I am saying is that I can layer in the power anywhere I want it based on whatever traction I'm able to get. I am pretty sure I can 1.5 or 1.6 the sixty foot and still run the times I want to run.

My goal is really to drive it to the track, run it and drive it home. I'm sure I will be dialing back the power instead of turning it up. I just don't want to seem like in arguing with anyone. I'm sure a lot of you guys know these cars far better than I ever could.

I'm going to leave easy on very low boost, bring in more boost in second, and finish at probably 14# in third. Given the weight and power level , I don't think the car will have an trouble going low 9's. I've built enough of these motors to know I'll have 500+ ftlbs of torque without any boost at the tires. Not at the flywheel. That's a big difference. I figure with the right converter 1.5's should be very doable. I do realize how hard the car will have to run the back half to make up for the lazy launch.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

 

[dvw]

The problem with boost control is you need fuel control and timing control to match. The controllers we use are the ams1000 and the eboost2. In an efi setup I can command say 12.3 afr as the motor reaches boost. Then maybe 11.7 the first couple pounds, 11.5 up to about 8-10# etc. if you have a properly sized and placed waste gate you can control boost very precisely. You need a ground signal for each shift and you can control it by gear.

I guess you could do a tps sensor and a carb and control it by throttle position on a carb car if you could tune the **** out of a carb. I personally can't. I'm strictly an efi guy.

In terms of boost it's also more about charge temps and timing than it is actual psi. The setup you posted pictures of has overly high charges temps because of the turbo placement, lack of an intercooler, or lack of meth to cool it. All our big boost setups run air to water intercoolers and e85. You just can't beat it for the cooling properties of the alcohol and it's effective octane rating.

For what it's worth I have a chassis guy locally that built NSS cars. He thinks I'm crazy and the car will never hook. I don't setup race cars. I tune them. It's a very small but extremely important part of the equation.

That supercuda was obviously a dyno queen. They hadn't track tune it to bring in boost to the point where it could have a remote chance to hook. I personally think it would struggle to hook on motor only coming out of the hole.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

Never really had charge temp issues with what we were running.We chose not to run an inter cooler. What do you see wrong with the turbo placement? Running a carb benefits charge cooling better than port EFI do to the fact the intake manifold is wet. If we do run into issues we'll add Water/Meth. As far as steeping boost this is why I questioned your suspension tuning. We do step boost but no where near how you envision. You need torque to apply the tire. Whether it be from engine, gear ratio, or the correct converter. Without applying a smooth torque curve early enough in the run and maintaining it will result in a slow pass. Tuning the engine for power is only as good as the tire and track that's it's being applied to. Each tire/track combo has a certain amount of G's that it can accelerate the car before spin occurs. The amount of torque to accomplish this is not linear. As I stated before w/o knowing suspension instant center, shock settings, spring rates, starting line ratio, you'll be lost. Not to mention the power part of the equation. There are plenty of people that can make a car hook that is over tired, under powered. I've spent a good deal of time learning all different parts of racing. Not that I'm the world expert but we've had a fair amount of success. I suggest broadening your outlook on all aspects of the build if you desire your success. Who is your N/SS guy? I've run N/SS from 1989-2004 Started running again last year.
Doug

 

[lxmodguy]

How do you know what your intake charge temp is? Delivering fuel to a port vs delivering it to a plenum is far more precise and results in far more power. Delivering fuel directly to the cylinder is by far the most effective which is why the new direct injection engines do extremely well with boost. I would bet if you had an incoming air sensor you would find your temps are routinely over 200 degrees. Between the imprecise fueling, high air charge temps, and poor timing control your combo gives up an awful lot of potential power.

I hear what you are saying about the suspension. I will no doubt have to become an expert on what works on my car through a bit of trial and error. Mark Artis at Texas Thunder is the NSS guy that has done all the chassis work. He's not convinced that this rear suspension setup will work, but after reading through the instructions he isn't convinced it wont. he is pretty skeptical of what I am trying to do in general. He doesn't really care for the gen3 motors. Says "they aren't hemi's". At the end of the day if this doesn't work we can always back half the car. Just trying to avoid it if possible. Don't want to cut up a really nice car any more than I have to. I don't mind spending the money to try to avoid that.

 

[dvw]

Your right I don't know the charge temp. The intake manifold read 135* immediately after a run with a temp gun. It's the coolest intake I've measured. Timing control is MSD digital 6. As you well know not individual cylinder but very flexible. A good N/A carb car will run with a EFI car powerwise. I doubt if the drivability will be as good though. There is something to be gained, well actually lost in intake charge temp carb vs EFI (Port). Mark and I know each other well. We don't always agree. Listen to him, he's a pretty smart guy. The new Hemi is a nice piece in my opinion. But it is one ugly motor, no style.

 

[Ryguytoodry]

No point in boost by gear. Just make sure the car hooks up and forget about it. Too much **** can go wrong. If you're worried about too much power in first just launch off the footbrake. I will never understand why people go through all this trouble. There is proven ways to hook already sorted out for you, just follow them. If you wanted fancy technology you should have built a gtr. There is guys running 7.50 1/4's with leaf springs. I know a guy with a Turbo LSX powered Fairmont with stock suspension other than two Rawlings baseballs in the right rear and slicks and he's 9.30 in the 1/4 and 6.0 in the 1/8th.

 

[heavy d]

Are you building this car for a specific class? Or just fun? On the boost control option, the AMS5000 is a nice choice. We used it on the Grand National with stock style suspension to put power later in the run and get it off the line easy. mid 9's on a 275 drag radial

 

[lxmodguy]

Are you building this car for a specific class? Or just fun? On the boost control option, the AMS5000 is a nice choice. We used it on the Grand National with stock style suspension to put power later in the run and get it off the line easy. mid 9's on a 275 drag radial

Just building it for fun. I want a drive anywhere car that runs hard.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

 

[Sweet5ltr]

If you have a 1,000 HP at the crank, you should be running in the 9's @ 150+ MPH on a stock suspension setup with the right converter/gearing/tire/trans setup. Why not run a simplistic Super Stock Setup, their are thousands of cases of individuals running great times with the 'old stuff', meaning 1.3-1.5 60ft times. I tried to make my build simplistic, with the basics (Mopar Chassis Manual, 9th edition). I don't see the necessity to re-invent the wheel here, big power in a slightly heavier chassis should be an advantage in weight distribution if you get it right. Good luck on your build, we seem to be the only ones who can see the light at the end of the tunnel in power production (turbocharging).

 

[Ryguytoodry]

If you have a 1,000 HP at the crank, you should be running in the 9's @ 150+ MPH on a stock suspension setup with the right converter/gearing/tire/trans setup. Why not run a simplistic Super Stock Setup, their are thousands of cases of individuals running great times with the 'old stuff', meaning 1.3-1.5 60ft times. I tried to make my build simplistic, with the basics (Mopar Chassis Manual, 9th edition). I don't see the necessity to re-invent the wheel here, big power in a slightly heavier chassis should be an advantage in weight distribution if you get it right. Good luck on your build, we seem to be the only ones who can see the light at the end of the tunnel in power production (turbocharging).

Hallelujah. Glad someone is agreeing with me.

 

[lxmodguy]

If you have a 1,000 HP at the crank, you should be running in the 9's @ 150+ MPH on a stock suspension setup with the right converter/gearing/tire/trans setup. Why not run a simplistic Super Stock Setup, their are thousands of cases of individuals running great times with the 'old stuff', meaning 1.3-1.5 60ft times. I tried to make my build simplistic, with the basics (Mopar Chassis Manual, 9th edition). I don't see the necessity to re-invent the wheel here, big power in a slightly heavier chassis should be an advantage in weight distribution if you get it right. Good luck on your build, we seem to be the only ones who can see the light at the end of the tunnel in power production (turbocharging).

I plan to drive the car on the street a lot. So I don't want leaf springs. I didn't like the ride at all.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

 

[womanator]

Jim Caughlin NHRA record holder.
Is building a 7.50 Chassis car with a turbo.
This would be considered fast.

 

[Sweet5ltr]

I have a turbo b-body, unlike all the here say, making well over 700HP/700ft lbs of torque at 8psi is unreal to hook on the street with 295/60 DR's. 800+hp at 10psi with meth and you are near splitting a factory 400/440 block and the 8.75 is on it's last leg, need a D60 or 9" along with an aftermarket block. I think you are starting off with the wrong chassis for what you are looking for but that is just me.

 

[derrickmanx1]

I plan to drive the car on the street a lot. So I don't want leaf springs. I didn't like the ride at all.

Posted via Topify using iPhone/iPad

I'm with you on this one. I'm definitely going to a coil over rear on my GTX. Keep your head up you'll get there soon.

 

[lxmodguy]

I am making good progress. I am hoping the chassis works well with the new rear suspension. The 12 point cage is almost done. So I guess sooner or later we will see how it works. I do somewhat enjoy the bench racing on the internet. There are a lot of interesting opinions. I respect what everyone has to say, but at the end of the day I'm the one who is going to drive it. I know how to build and tune big power efi cars that don't break. So the drive train in the car will be solid. If the chassis does it's part it should be a lot of fun.

 

[Budnicks]

I am making good progress. I am hoping the chassis works well with the new rear suspension. The 12 point cage is almost done. So I guess sooner or later we will see how it works. I do somewhat enjoy the bench racing on the internet. There are a lot of interesting opinions. I respect what everyone has to say, but at the end of the day I'm the one who is going to drive it. I know how to build and tune big power efi cars that don't break. So the drive train in the car will be solid. If the chassis does it's part it should be a lot of fun.

Good luck & your right, there's far more than one way to skin a cat so to speak... may not be ideal, but I'm sure it will be better than stock... Have fun