PRE-Z06

I'm stating facts as best known, why include the DA in a run? Only to give a point of reference to show that there could be improvement as I thought that's what were all here to do, go faster. If you or Robz don't have any experience of data to share in my thread (which I figured y'all would) then honestly your just wasting bandwidth paid for by others and can move on to the next thread. Give credit where it's due is all I ask, if you truly think the headwind makes it actually go faster from less downforce because of lift you're a fool IMO and should do some more research on aerodynamics as the car is not an airplane with a prop trying to fly because really overcoming gravity would then make traction an issue and you don't hear me complaining I was spinning from the headwind. That's common sense to me and I'm not claiming to be a genius or have all the answers, but seek the truth and try to share it. Appreciate anything that helps as Caleb shared what he thought it was worth and is about what I was thinking as I've seen my car back half faster with a tailwind in 1500' DA vs a headwind in 500' DA.

dennis50nj

was it from a tailwind or better shift point,was it a better back half et or mph? I told you my experience with with rental information making an average of 20 passes each renta,l perfect or best track prep you could expect, dont tell me move on because you dont like the answer. I gave my honest opinion, you ran an LS2 with LS3 heads and cam ran 10.7s we know what my LS2 ran with bolt /ons I told you concentrate on rolling weight forget the wind. all I know is i fully understand the air wind temp and dew point and can predict exactly what i will run on any given day without a weather station, and wind has never been a factor, and knowing how to put it to the ground any giving circumstance, you get really testy when texas gets mentioned

NGS

Don't forget about the help you get from the guy in the trees!

NGS

Hey now...Next Generation Sequencing ain't rocket science.

robz

Guessing I got that right?
Hope all is well. I had no idea but glad to see you back.
It was easier to figure out than Philip@HPE.

dennis50nj

Your 100% right maybe you should tell them the Knowledge they seek

NGS

Well, you bring up an interesting point, Dennis...and that is knowledge, or maybe we should call it the "knowledge-base." And I will write that Rob, you, Gary and probably a whole host of others have a knowledge-base you've aggregated over the many years you all have been running your cars. And that knowledge-base allows one to have true empirical data that can give the greatest prediction of what to expect under any given condition. Yes...there will always be some degree of uncertainty but that knowledge-base will help to normalize things so as to minimize (notice I did not write eliminate) most of that uncertainty.

dennis50nj

Interesting point! and I might add after years of testing in the trees if the wind was 0 , 25 , or gusting to 40 mph you always fell out at the same time depending of course on how many pre made Laura's burgers you ate before going up.

LSOHOLIC

NGS = Geneus ??

my money's on yes.....

PRE-Z06

I could careless, we all live in the greatest country in the world. Which I served and then when I came back from overseas actually lived in Philly for a winter and the only thing I envy about the NE is the more numerous negative DA and tracks y'all have, as I obviously ended up back in Texas lol.

You came into the thread and felt like you were trying to crap in it with your initial comment, maybe I over reacted. I then proceed to ask for knowledge gain purposes and get no data. I've asked others who have made passes that clearly not dumb luck and conveniently didn't get a response, kind of makes you wonder why as none of us are racing professionally (heck I used to make a living off here so money was on the line and still divulged more than most).
The car didn't make a a shift in the back half with 4.10 gears and the c5z trans gearing and et was same though mph slightly more. Regardless I believe my car would have went 106+ in the 1/8 and 133+ had there not been a head wind, which is faster than any manual C6 (which is slippier than a FRC) in positive DA with my minimal mods(stock unported intake and no EWP) and not being geared optimally for the 1/4. The two fastest ls2/ls3 manuals both had 4.10s and aftermarket heads that cost over twice as much as mine and I don't consider myself the greatest driver at the best track, so appears I've got something going for me. Lest you forget it's a manual that has 7 passes(I also haven't made that many in 2 years) so far with 200 miles...wouldn't consider that dialed in being it's a little more difficult to drive than an auto.

So what you're telling me is a CVT car that makes the same continuous power as it accelerates will not slow down as aero drag increases because it will be more than offset by the increased lift/decreased downforce lessening rolling resistance at a greater rate?

NGS

Who dat?

NGS

As my college calculus teacher use to say at the beginning of every lecture....Let's start with a function f(x).

PRE-Z06

Engineering calc 2 is where I got tired of messing with letters, if you have the knowledge please share as it's been too long and I go to my cousin when he has the time. I never claim to have all the answers and understand how efficient the c5/c6 is compared to older cars, but to say the wind has zero effect is ignorant IMO as you even agreed. I do have over 300 passes with my car in various weather conditions, so it's not my first rodeo. Please enlighten us with some data and end the beating around the bush.

NGS

I don't have as much experience as others or even yourself. I know I wouldn't want to have a head-wind or a cross-wind while drag racing...I too would believe the head-wind would/should be detrimental to ones time and a cross wind is just plain dangerous.

You need to take Dennis's comments with a grain of salt...he likes to be the provocateur...something I can appreciate. Just for transparencies sake...he lives about 10-15 minutes (if that) from Atco so he knows that track well and as he stated, he doesn't need a hand-held weather station to tell you when the conditions are right for a great time...given the track is there with regards to its prep.

And I'm not trying to beat around the bushes...you guys in Texas do get a "window" for some good weather to race in...albeit that window tends to be narrower than what we get here in the NE. If in fact you have a history (300 passes is a history) then try an empirical approach...study those time slips and think back to the run and what happened. I know RobZ puts notes on each and every time slip he gets...his memory isn't that good anymore. His success is due to a very calculated approach and not everyone necessarily appreciates that.

PRE-Z06

There are no trees blocking the wind from track if that's what you're implying, Atco has many surrounding it iirc...maybe your c6 is immune to wind being it has a lower cD than c5.

On a serious note what do you think an extra 100hp/90ft lbs should be worth over 10.9@125, dsp300c was .4/6mph faster with similar power to my new combo on our dyno in his lighter more aerodynamic c6 and I'm on his old tires from 10.5 pass...sold the used ones I bought from Eric Fischer off his green C5 at e-town in '07

PRE-Z06

I do and that's why I ask. The track here in north Texas will not run under 50* as they consider it too dangerous(really just an excuse to not prep well), so starting at 600' elevation it is difficult for us to get -DA unless pressure is really high and humidity low. I've experienced it once and there are many variables to make it difficult to get empirical data ie did I wax the car before running lol

I'll admit when I first got the vette and saw Dennis's bolt on times I questioned the legitimacy coming from a lighter, but less aerodynamic car and have since realized how great the c5/6 platform is. What has always bothered me is intentional withholding of info, not that anyone is required to tell everything as whether you run a 10.99 on a 1.4 with 400rwhp in -1000 or 10.99 with a 1.4 and 500rwhp in 6000' DA the fact that you pulled it off is what's impressive to me. It's like the feat of benching double your body weight that I chased back when power lifting, didn't matter if you were 100lbs putting up 200 or 200 putting up 400 impressive either way IMO.

Posting/bragging about your accomplishments while not giving details when asked and down playing others is what gets under my skin.

dennis50nj

believe me I revealed all my mods and and weight reduction, down to the tires and rims of each pass, even the shift points, and also my car s tune is the everyday tune, no special lean out tune just for the 1/4, even the dragtimes DA even the weight with me in the car according to atcos scale, and many people on the seen from corvette forum with tommyd on the seen, now what do you want to know specifically

dennis50nj

I think you could be wrong on that statement
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...VG2YLksWYNgehg

PRE-Z06

Now that's funny!

PRE-Z06

Sorry, wasn't directing all of my frustration towards just you...I'll concede that I've actually seen cars go slower in lower DA because they're tuned on the ragged edge and with a vararam cramming in more air at higher speeds or because of bad gas they start pulling timing on the big end. We'll just have to agree to disagree on the headwind, we can atleast agree that the same DA isn't necessary equal and that makes it hard to quantify results as well. You get my PM as I was looking for an answer to share in the C7 section.