ET vs Speed?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Aug 11, 2004 | 11:04 AM

Fastbasser

Thread Starter

Burning Brakes

Joined: Sep 2003

Posts: 1,106

Likes: 0

From: Norwich NY

ET vs Speed?

Just trying to narrow it down a bit. I did some mods (see signiture) and took it to the track earlier this year.

While

ing around the boards, one think I notice (or I think I notice) is my speed, about 113 seemed a little low for my et, 12.39.. Note, the convertor listed is new.. The one I had at the time was too small for the cam IMHO.

The car feels very strong. On item I have been "thinking" about is the stock injectors my car came with. Could it be a fuel delivery issue?

Or is it no issue at all??

Thanks in advance.

Aug 11, 2004 | 11:48 AM

C5 CU

Burning Brakes

Joined: Mar 2002

Posts: 1,176

Likes: 0

From: highland village texas

i checked your sig ... if 113mph and 12.39 was after H/C, headers, converter etc...then yes a little slow....if you have traction and not at 7000 ft elevation then car should be safely in the 11s....stock injectors good up to 450rwhp .... good luck.

Aug 11, 2004 | 11:48 AM

ragtopws6

Melting Slicks

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 2,966

Likes: 22

From: Frederick Maryland

St. Jude Donor '08-'09-'10-'11

What is your 60 FT times? That ET and MPH is not too off. My LS1 Regal ran 1.96 60 FT with 12.96 @ 108.xx. This is with Yank 2600 converter and Drag Radials.

Aug 11, 2004 | 11:51 AM

MiamiDave

Safety Car

Joined: Mar 2002

Posts: 3,556

Likes: 2

Need more info on the car mods, weights, and run 'brah...

But for the record, most LS1 C5's turning that MPH can land in the 12.7-13.0 category w/0 soft tires. With soft sticky tires, another .4-.5 tenths can usually be knocked off-so you are just about in the right zone.

Also that mph indicates about 320 +/- RWHP. Hope that helps a little...

Aug 11, 2004 | 11:58 AM

Fastbasser

Thread Starter

Burning Brakes

Joined: Sep 2003

Posts: 1,106

Likes: 0

From: Norwich NY

MiamiDave

60' times were around 1.9 w/the old convertor.. I expect them to drop a tad now..

I have seen all the posts that say the stock injectors are good till 450 rwhp.. I just feel something doesn't add up.. Most posts you read show speeds closer to 118 with my set up..

MiamiDave.. That's my point.. I am closer to 400 rwhp w/o the N02..

Last edited by Fastbasser; Aug 11, 2004 at 12:02 PM. Reason: Additional info

Aug 11, 2004 | 05:02 PM

ragtopws6

Melting Slicks

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 2,966

Likes: 22

From: Frederick Maryland

St. Jude Donor '08-'09-'10-'11

Your MPH and the ET seem normal but for the RWHP of close to 400 that IS slow. I ran with street tires once and ran 2.26 60 FT and 13.6x spinning to a 116 MPH with 374RWHP.

The stock injectors are good for 450 but the duty cycle is at it's limits. SVO 30# are what I'm using and they are not breaking a sweat.

What is your exact RWHP and TQ?

Aug 11, 2004 | 05:21 PM

mdhmi

Team Owner

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 20,474

Likes: 2

From: Detroit

Cam + headers should get you above 113 MPH ( this is obviously assuming you aren't racing in high elevation ) . With stock H/C with a Blackwing, Headers, and LS6 intake I ran 113-114 MPH on street tires. Your ET is very good for your MPH. Has your car been dyno tuned ??

Mark

Aug 11, 2004 | 08:46 PM

Fastbasser

Thread Starter

Burning Brakes

Joined: Sep 2003

Posts: 1,106

Likes: 0

From: Norwich NY

Questions/Answers....

Elevation is about sea level.

Exact RWHP is unknown at this time. I was told it dynod 369 without the new heads. Will be dynod again shortly.

Will be tuned again this month.

As stated earlier, the mph "issue" I feel feel is due to the stock injectors. Like it's running out of fuel on the top end. Any other ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Is there a difference in SVO and GM 30 lb injectors?

So many questions,, so little time??

Thanks guys.