Finally Ran 1/4mi at Sacramento Raceway
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Finally Ran 1/4mi at Sacramento Raceway
I was bored on New Year's Eve so I decided to make the long trek from LA to Sacramento to test out my 1/4 mile abilities. I was only able to get 3 runs in since the event ended early due to a horrible hotrod crash. The car lost control midway down the track at over 100+ mph and flipped over the wall. Thankfully though the driver was ok.
As for my runs, the few that I got in were quite consistent, with the best being 11.6 at 121mph. Mods at time of run included those listed in my signature, 91 octane Chevron fuel, and MT drag radials.
I must admit I was hoping for a bit better, but after considering a few points I actually felt pretty good. First, I ran the car full interior. Second, I obviously have much to learn in the way of launching the car since this run was accomplished with a horrible 1.91 60 foot (actually my best). And third, the recent correction to the Sacramento timing system seems to have overcorrected the trap speeds, where they now read 2+ mph lower than vbox. So compared to a faster track like Atco where I understand the trap reads about 1 mph higher than vbox, I'm guessing the slip would have shown more like 124mph.
Overall, I considered the trip very worthwhile to finally get some baseline track results to use going forward as I continue to mod and try to improve. Next up will be some lightweight goodies and lots of launch practice.
As for my runs, the few that I got in were quite consistent, with the best being 11.6 at 121mph. Mods at time of run included those listed in my signature, 91 octane Chevron fuel, and MT drag radials.
I must admit I was hoping for a bit better, but after considering a few points I actually felt pretty good. First, I ran the car full interior. Second, I obviously have much to learn in the way of launching the car since this run was accomplished with a horrible 1.91 60 foot (actually my best). And third, the recent correction to the Sacramento timing system seems to have overcorrected the trap speeds, where they now read 2+ mph lower than vbox. So compared to a faster track like Atco where I understand the trap reads about 1 mph higher than vbox, I'm guessing the slip would have shown more like 124mph.
Overall, I considered the trip very worthwhile to finally get some baseline track results to use going forward as I continue to mod and try to improve. Next up will be some lightweight goodies and lots of launch practice.
Last edited by xtyper; 01-02-2012 at 05:50 PM.
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
I was bored on New Year's Eve so I decided to make the long trek from LA to Sacramento to test out my 1/4 mile abilities. I was only able to get 3 runs in since the event ended early due to a horrible hotrod crash. The car lost control midway down the track at over 100+ mph and flipped over the wall. Thankfully though the driver was ok.
As for my runs, the few that I got in were quite consistent, with the best being 11.6 at 121mph. I must admit I was hoping for a bit better, but after considering a few points I actually felt pretty good. First, I ran the car full interior on 91 octane. Second, I obviously have much to learn in the way of launching the car since this run was accomplished with a horrible 1.91 60 foot (actually my best). And third, the recent correction to the Sacramento timing system seems to have overcorrected the trap speeds, where they now read 2+ mph lower than vbox. So compared to a faster track like Atco where I understand the trap reads about 1 mph higher than vbox, I'm guessing the slip would have shown more like 124mph.
Overall, I considered the trip very worthwhile to finally get some baseline track results to use going forward as I continue to mod and try to improve. Next up will be some lightweight goodies and lots of launch practice.
As for my runs, the few that I got in were quite consistent, with the best being 11.6 at 121mph. I must admit I was hoping for a bit better, but after considering a few points I actually felt pretty good. First, I ran the car full interior on 91 octane. Second, I obviously have much to learn in the way of launching the car since this run was accomplished with a horrible 1.91 60 foot (actually my best). And third, the recent correction to the Sacramento timing system seems to have overcorrected the trap speeds, where they now read 2+ mph lower than vbox. So compared to a faster track like Atco where I understand the trap reads about 1 mph higher than vbox, I'm guessing the slip would have shown more like 124mph.
Overall, I considered the trip very worthwhile to finally get some baseline track results to use going forward as I continue to mod and try to improve. Next up will be some lightweight goodies and lots of launch practice.
Either way, sounds like a good time at the track!
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
DA was pretty good, about -200ft at time of my runs. But humidity was killer, as the track was super foggy pretty much the whole time I was there. Whatever though, I did have a blast and am now really motivated to improve.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2016 G550
Right on.
+1 I'm sure you can squeeze some better times out of that beast after some more runs.
Did you remember to take the baby seat out?
That can slow you down 100th of a second.
+1 I'm sure you can squeeze some better times out of that beast after some more runs.
Did you remember to take the baby seat out?
That can slow you down 100th of a second.
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thanks Jim. Tell me about it. And also it was a Test N' Tune event, so my car was always hot by the time I made it to the front of the staging lanes, with my car sucking in all kinds of smoke from the prior hotrod's massive burnout.
DA was pretty good, about -200ft at time of my runs. But humidity was killer, as the track was super foggy pretty much the whole time I was there. Whatever though, I did have a blast and am now really motivated to improve.
DA was pretty good, about -200ft at time of my runs. But humidity was killer, as the track was super foggy pretty much the whole time I was there. Whatever though, I did have a blast and am now really motivated to improve.
Yup, that's why I hate test and tunes.
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Glad you got that beast to the track!
Quick question/observation:
Can't speak to ATCO vs. vbox, but AFAIK I've regularly heard that vbox 1/4 mi. trap speed reads a couple MPH higher than NHRA-sanctioned track readings.
Something to do with the NHRA track-reading is an average speed over the last x feet, whereas the vbox was simply grabbing the max MPH at the end of the run...?
Anyone know for certain?
Quick question/observation:
And third, the recent correction to the Sacramento timing system seems to have overcorrected the trap speeds, where they now read 2+ mph lower than vbox. So compared to a faster track like Atco where I understand the trap reads about 1 mph higher than vbox, I'm guessing the slip would have shown more like 124mph.
Something to do with the NHRA track-reading is an average speed over the last x feet, whereas the vbox was simply grabbing the max MPH at the end of the run...?
Anyone know for certain?
Trending Topics
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Congrats does are some nice times with a 1.9 60 foot
Get u 60 down u et will get lower and u trap will get higher.
If u worries about vbox results in 1/4 mines are always .2 mph an .2 et slower at atco and Mir.
Get u 60 down u et will get lower and u trap will get higher.
If u worries about vbox results in 1/4 mines are always .2 mph an .2 et slower at atco and Mir.
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
Glad you got that beast to the track!
Quick question/observation:
Can't speak to ATCO vs. vbox, but AFAIK I've regularly heard that vbox 1/4 mi. trap speed reads a couple MPH higher than NHRA-sanctioned track readings.
Something to do with the NHRA track-reading is an average speed over the last x feet, whereas the vbox was simply grabbing the max MPH at the end of the run...?
Anyone know for certain?
Quick question/observation:
Can't speak to ATCO vs. vbox, but AFAIK I've regularly heard that vbox 1/4 mi. trap speed reads a couple MPH higher than NHRA-sanctioned track readings.
Something to do with the NHRA track-reading is an average speed over the last x feet, whereas the vbox was simply grabbing the max MPH at the end of the run...?
Anyone know for certain?
But (btw thats my highest vbox trap on my car)
My other runs all avg 2-3mph lower on vbox
Some of my 127 traps showed 124mph my 1st pass shows 122 and real track trap speed was 125.
Last edited by mthis; 01-02-2012 at 06:16 PM.
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Glad you got that beast to the track!
Quick question/observation:
Can't speak to ATCO vs. vbox, but AFAIK I've regularly heard that vbox 1/4 mi. trap speed reads a couple MPH higher than NHRA-sanctioned track readings.
Something to do with the NHRA track-reading is an average speed over the last x feet, whereas the vbox was simply grabbing the max MPH at the end of the run...?
Anyone know for certain?
Quick question/observation:
Can't speak to ATCO vs. vbox, but AFAIK I've regularly heard that vbox 1/4 mi. trap speed reads a couple MPH higher than NHRA-sanctioned track readings.
Something to do with the NHRA track-reading is an average speed over the last x feet, whereas the vbox was simply grabbing the max MPH at the end of the run...?
Anyone know for certain?
Last edited by xtyper; 01-02-2012 at 06:24 PM.
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
I've heard that one of the lanes at Atco reads high, the other reads low. Were all of your runs in the same lane? If not, then I bet that's the explanation.
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
#14
MBWorld Fanatic!
FYI, I ran identical trap and ET to what u posted, near Seattle last August. It was + DA and humid, but I can't recall what. It was a test and tune, so no hot lapping. And my best run was the last of four. I had catless mhp headers w Hoosiers. My best 60 was about 1.8. And FWIW, my car consistently dyno'd 445 whp/424 tq.
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
FYI, I ran identical trap and ET to what u posted, near Seattle last August. It was + DA and humid, but I can't recall what. It was a test and tune, so no hot lapping. And my best run was the last of four. I had catless mhp headers w Hoosiers. My best 60 was about 1.8. And FWIW, my car consistently dyno'd 445 whp/424 tq.
Wow
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 2,207
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2012 CTS-V
Nice job Eric!
Once you improve on the 60' times your ET's will drop considerably.
Test N Tune's are hit or miss. I've attended some were I made 15 runs and others were I made 0 runs.
Once you improve on the 60' times your ET's will drop considerably.
Test N Tune's are hit or miss. I've attended some were I made 15 runs and others were I made 0 runs.
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
My goal for the next Famoso outing is 11.3x @ 123.x mph. If I want to have any chance at joining the 125+ mph club, some weight reduction (seats, rotors, rims) will definitely be called for. A Famoso private rental can't come fast enough for me!
Last edited by xtyper; 01-03-2012 at 05:23 PM.
#20
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
So noting real dyno numbers closer to 475whp, that Sacramento trap now reads low compared to other popular tracks, the bad 60 ft launches, and the high humidity conditions, I think the results are right where they should be.
With lots of launch practice and repeated runs, I bet the car would have run more like an 11.3x at 125.x mph at a track like Atco or MIR under good conditions (better launch worth about 0.3 improvement and Sacramento vs. Atco trap differential about 4-5 mph).
Last edited by xtyper; 01-03-2012 at 05:21 PM.
#21
MBWorld Fanatic!
Yes, well I honestly think the dyno I used for the recent 500whp pull reads high, so I'm going back to my usual spot later this week to verify. Given my last pull there of 470whp, I expect to be around 475whp now with the addition of the ROW airboxes.
So noting real dyno numbers closer to 475whp, that Sacramento trap now reads low compared to other popular tracks, the bad 60 ft launches, and the high humidity conditions, I think the results are right where they should be.
With lots of launch practice and repeated runs, I bet the car would have run more like an 11.3x at 125.x mph at a track like Atco or MIR under good conditions (better launch worth about 0.3 improvement and Sacramento vs. Atco trap differential about 4-5 mph).
So noting real dyno numbers closer to 475whp, that Sacramento trap now reads low compared to other popular tracks, the bad 60 ft launches, and the high humidity conditions, I think the results are right where they should be.
With lots of launch practice and repeated runs, I bet the car would have run more like an 11.3x at 125.x mph at a track like Atco or MIR under good conditions (better launch worth about 0.3 improvement and Sacramento vs. Atco trap differential about 4-5 mph).
#22
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter