Vic,

Congrats!!! That is an amazing accomplishment. 4-5mph more than the fastest trap is sweet. Damn, that's just insane speed for a 4,200lbs car running only on motor.

 

I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade, but Napierville Dragway is notorious for inflated trap speeds. Some examples include a fully loaded Charger SRT-8 with only 3 bolt-ons trapping 116 MPH and a Grand Cherokee SRT-8 with only 4 bolt-ons trapping 113.79 there. Most of the guys who run there and at other tracks agree that reported trap speeds at Napierville are 3-4 MPH faster than they really are. I'm not sure what the reason is but in the past this particular track has also had problems with the 1/4 mile trap speed not showing up at all on some days.

 

The 1/8 mile trap speed will tell all, as soon as Vic gets the slip we will be able to tell further.

 

They use a primitive timing system there, so there are no 1/8 mile trap speeds on the timeslips. There are also no 330ft or 1000ft times. I'm not sure though if the "bare bones" timing system is the reason for the 1/4 mile traps being off.

 

Okay Fleebee, it's up to you because I guess the Canucks have optimistic tracks................ Vic????

Take a camera, provide a time sheet and don't let us down. Good, bad or ugly post it up!!!!

 

Marc,

Are we both talking about the Napierville Dragway in Montreal, Canada?

Its an NHRA certified track. They have jet cars and alcohol cars that run some nights that do 7s, 8s, etc. I am sure if the Pros use this track it has to be accurate.

Anything under 11.5 and they kick you off if you dont have the proper safety equipment. My buddy has run every car he's had there.

His 996TT with Proto upgrades ran 11.3 @ 125.6mph
His CL55 with Renntech stage 1 ran 12.02 @ 116mph

Everything he has run came out trapping what should be expected. If what you are saying is true, then his 996 would of only trapped 122mph and the CL55 w/ RT stage 1 113mph?? I cant believe that.

That night there were probably 300 people running at the track and the cars that he was watching he said ran accordingly to their expected traps.

I mentioned this post to him and he said in all the times he has gone there he has never heard of this and doesn't believe this to be true. All of his own personal cars and his buddies cars that have run all came out as expected.

 

Here is a copy of the faxed slip.. it didnt come out very good, but you can make out most of the info.. He was in the right lane..

Reaction Time: .337
60ft: 2.127
1/8mile: 8.162
1/4mile: 12.297
MPH: 128.792

 

damn.. what was he racing against a Ford Pinto 78 mph trap lol...

 

................Total respect!!

...........Tuner finally doing it right!

Ted

 

Yes, although you misspelled it in your original post.

ETs there are accurate, but not trap speeds.

This is simply not true. I know of plenty of cars that ran quicker than 11.50 there without the proper safety equipment and the track officials did not kick them out even though NHRA rules say they should have been. Chris Tapp's Eclipse ran 9's there without a cage and his A4 ran 10's without a cage. He never got booted. There are lots of others.

Did you see the Cherokee SRT-8 that trapped 113.79 with just 4 bolt-ons? There's also a Charger SRT-8 that trapped 116+ there with just 3 bolt-ons! Nowhere else in the country is there a Cherokee SRT-8 or Charger SRT-8 that traps anywhere close to those with the same kind of bolt-ons.

Did you see the timeslip and how there are no data for the 330', 1000', or 1/8 mile trap speed? On some days, the 1/4 mile trap speeds aren't working there at all.

Tell your buddy to run his E55 at Sanair in Saint-Pie, Quebec. It's only an hour away from Napierville. They have a street night there every Friday night:

http://www.sanairracing.net/z_eng/schedule.htm

 

Marc,

What a silly arguement.

The ET's are very, very impressive. Even if the track is fast, I'm still impressed.

 

you can have a good E.T.but a crappy mph if the d/a is horrible

 

That is an incredible trap!!!

 

Way to go Vic!




Marc=My assumptions r crazy!!
Dude, R U 4 Real?

 

Actually looking at the time slip it definately is not consistant with other modded 55's. Actually the data seems to be off. Only a car on spray could make up that kind of trap on the back 1/8th. The car did pick up on the back 1/8th as measured by the splits. Take the 10.58's pass by Stephen and actually all Mercedes Benz 1/4 mile times. No car has ever (Mercedes) picked up 35-40 mph over the 1/8th mile split. This E55 would have had to pick up 32-38 mph to attain a 128 trap , Stephens car on juice picked up 28 mph.

The 12.2 is likely accurate and the car did slightly pick up on the back 1/8th,

I think Marc may be right the equipment may be off and perhaps it is due to missing measurements at the other splits during the run?

Only thing to do is to do it again and dont waste the run by not attaining traction, get the Mickey Thompson's 26X11.5 ET streets on a 17" rim, they will dead hook with little to no burnout!!

My best estimate is that the 1/8th mile split is ether 1 second off or the trap is 10 mph too high, a 7.1 1/8th mile ET could get you a 11.2 @ 128 so maybe the ET is a second off and trap is right or trap is off and ET is right. Something is definately off

 

The thing is that track apparently does not have an 1/8 mile trap sensor so its hard to tell for sure. That car would have to run at least 101 mph at the 1/8 to run those numbers. The nos has nothing to do with the difference, a strong e55 can pick up 26-27 mph on boost alone. The only difference with the nos is the sooner you spray the higher the 1/8 mile trap and the lower the trap difference. For example I hit the nos after or right at the 60ft so my 1/8 mile traps will be lower and show higher mph gains out the back door.

 

I agree, but looking at ET, it is obviously a measure of distance and time, getting through the 1/8th at over 8 seconds would require tremendous acceleration to achieve 128 mph in 12.2. On an 11.2 slip I would buy this trap without question but a 12.X? Something is off

 

chill out, he's likely on to something and has been polite about voicing his opinion.

 

G55K,

Not to take anything away from this E55 because it looks like a beast in the videos, but how is its ET of 12.297 impressive considering all the mods? Haven't some bone stock E55 AMGs on this forum ran quicker?

I realize the 12.29 was due to severe traction problems (as evidenced by the 2.1 60ft), but still don't see how you can say the ET was impressive.

 

this is likely a low 11 second car but the slip seems completely off to me, we know the car was going 0 mph at the start and we know it took over 8 seconds to reach 660 feet, at this point it is accelerating like a typical E55. By 1320 feet the car is going 128 miles per hour and still recording a 12.29, I am fairly certain this is a bad slip, not as bad as the 335 mph trap recorded at Famoso for an E63 but definately violating some laws of physics.

 

I agree juice I ran a 11.7 with a 1.9 60' and only traped 121.5 My 1/8 was 7.6 at 94.4 MPH
there is no way that this car could make up all that MPH. Unless he just cruized the first half and hammered it the last half.lol

 

It was actually 12.78 @ 316.97 mph at Fontana, but who's counting

https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/227107-e63-sets-world-record-trap-speed.html

 

Last summer I was at the track in a completely stock S55 without a helmet and had to keep the runs slower than 13.9. I'd pace the slower cars down to around the 1/8th and then WOT to the finish. This would result in 14.XX usually around 114MPH traps.

 

Will it pass CA Smog?

 

Rocket, is that time and trap before or after your cams and custom tune?