New 63 Record???
#51
MBWorld Fanatic!
jrcart:
Congratulations on the time! I am glad that a non-NOS 63 is the current holder of the best 63 ET.
Don't take offense... people are just pointing out that something doesn't seem right. I would say that my car has at most 20 rwhp on yours (if that) and yet my traps have been 118.08-118.98mph in a car that weighs at least 800lbs more than yours with all the runs done in 90+ degree heat. I think the weather and altitude may be a factor....but not sure if that fully explains it. I guess the best way to test that theory is to get you to ATCO and MIR in the fall. I think we all want to see your car run the best times it is capable of...regardless of past dust-ups.
Tom
Congratulations on the time! I am glad that a non-NOS 63 is the current holder of the best 63 ET.
Don't take offense... people are just pointing out that something doesn't seem right. I would say that my car has at most 20 rwhp on yours (if that) and yet my traps have been 118.08-118.98mph in a car that weighs at least 800lbs more than yours with all the runs done in 90+ degree heat. I think the weather and altitude may be a factor....but not sure if that fully explains it. I guess the best way to test that theory is to get you to ATCO and MIR in the fall. I think we all want to see your car run the best times it is capable of...regardless of past dust-ups.
Tom
#52
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Could you get it posted so we can see the slips on here? I can't open that link for some reason. I'd like to see the 118mph slips side by side and compare them. Thanks dude
I honestly want to see Oldgixxer go against Jrcart. You guys think with the DA's Jim will be running over 120's and get solid mid 11's so he should best him at ET and MPH...but I have faith in my boy Rob. November should be fun
I honestly want to see Oldgixxer go against Jrcart. You guys think with the DA's Jim will be running over 120's and get solid mid 11's so he should best him at ET and MPH...but I have faith in my boy Rob. November should be fun
--7:12 pm----------------8:15pm---------------9:49pm
R/T- .195--------------R/T - .069-----------R/T - .475
60' - 1.802-------------60' - 1.807---------60' - 1.804
330' - 5.012------------330' - 5.011---------330' - 5.003
1/8 - 7.669-------------1/8 - 7.660---------1/8 - 7.641
MPH - 92.94-------------MPH - 93.27---------MPH - 93.61
1000'- 9.956------------1000' - 9.939--------1000'- 9.910
1/4 - 11.887------------1/4 - 11.861--------1/4 - 11.824
MPH - 117.25------------MPH - 117.80--------MPH - 118.29
Last edited by jrcart; 07-24-2008 at 10:11 AM.
#53
MBWorld Fanatic!
I believe you need Adobe Reader to open the attachment, I think every computer in the world comes with Adobe, maybe you need an update or download a newer version. I just clicked on the attachment and it opend up fine for me, the scan job is a little fuzzy, but considering I dont' have a scanner I'm not one to complain. I faxed a crystal clear copy to Juicee as well, maybe he can post up a clear version somehow. In the mean time I will type in my three fastes passes.
7:12 pm----------------8:15pm-------------9:49pm
R/T- .195--------------R/T - .069-----------R/T - .475
60' - 1.802-------------60' - 1.807----------60' - 1.804
330' - 5.012------------330' - 5.011----------330' - 5.003
1/8 - 7.669-------------1/8 - 7.660---------1/8 - 7.641
MPH- 92.94-------------MPH - 93.27---------MPH - 93.61
1000'- 9.956------------1000' - 9.939--------1000'- 9.910
1/4- 11.887------------1/4 - 11.861--------1/4 - 11.824
MPH- 117.25------------MPH - 117.80--------MPH - 118.29
7:12 pm----------------8:15pm-------------9:49pm
R/T- .195--------------R/T - .069-----------R/T - .475
60' - 1.802-------------60' - 1.807----------60' - 1.804
330' - 5.012------------330' - 5.011----------330' - 5.003
1/8 - 7.669-------------1/8 - 7.660---------1/8 - 7.641
MPH- 92.94-------------MPH - 93.27---------MPH - 93.61
1000'- 9.956------------1000' - 9.939--------1000'- 9.910
1/4- 11.887------------1/4 - 11.861--------1/4 - 11.824
MPH- 117.25------------MPH - 117.80--------MPH - 118.29
Nice work dude. Your runs kept getting better and better. Probably as the temperature went down at night the car got a bit faster. Great consistant 60's!
#54
MBWorld Fanatic!
Here is the timeslip and DA for the pass.
07/22/2008 at 09:49 pm
Time recorded 9:55 PM
Temperature °F 66.2
Dew Point °F 60.8
Altimeter Setting 30.11 Inches Mercury
Absolute Pressure: 29.44 Inches
Density Altitude: 1275.6 feet
Track Elelvation: 632 feet
UnCorrected ET:
11.824 (sec) @ 118.29 (MPH)
Corrected ET to Sea Level:
11.663 (sec) @ 119.941 (MPH)
Here is at -1000 feet
Your results:
E.T. 11.824 (sec)
Trap Speed 118.29 (mph)
Measured DA 1275 (feet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrected to -1000(feet) DA
Corrected ET 11.542 (sec)
Corrected Trap Speed 121.243 (mph
We need to data log to see if we are getting WOT, the 63 ECU for the most part only opens throttle 80% even with the best ECU tune. Also Octane may have been a factor. looks like this car is about 2 mph off on the top end IMHO
Great driving Jim,
and Congrats on the NEW ET RECORD.
Jordan and Rob and Jim get to work!!
07/22/2008 at 09:49 pm
Time recorded 9:55 PM
Temperature °F 66.2
Dew Point °F 60.8
Altimeter Setting 30.11 Inches Mercury
Absolute Pressure: 29.44 Inches
Density Altitude: 1275.6 feet
Track Elelvation: 632 feet
UnCorrected ET:
11.824 (sec) @ 118.29 (MPH)
Corrected ET to Sea Level:
11.663 (sec) @ 119.941 (MPH)
Here is at -1000 feet
Your results:
E.T. 11.824 (sec)
Trap Speed 118.29 (mph)
Measured DA 1275 (feet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrected to -1000(feet) DA
Corrected ET 11.542 (sec)
Corrected Trap Speed 121.243 (mph
We need to data log to see if we are getting WOT, the 63 ECU for the most part only opens throttle 80% even with the best ECU tune. Also Octane may have been a factor. looks like this car is about 2 mph off on the top end IMHO
Great driving Jim,
and Congrats on the NEW ET RECORD.
Jordan and Rob and Jim get to work!!
Last edited by juicee63; 07-24-2008 at 11:18 AM.
#55
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Sunoco un-leaded 100 is what I usually run in the car. I was running the 100 on Tuesday for this pass. Since the Evosport tunning work the car has only seen 99-100 un-leaded race fuels.
#56
MBWorld Fanatic!
jrcart:
Congratulations on the time! I am glad that a non-NOS 63 is the current holder of the best 63 ET.
Don't take offense... people are just pointing out that something doesn't seem right. I would say that my car has at most 20 rwhp on yours (if that) and yet my traps have been 118.08-118.98mph in a car that weighs at least 800lbs more than yours with all the runs done in 90+ degree heat. I think the weather and altitude may be a factor....but not sure if that fully explains it. I guess the best way to test that theory is to get you to ATCO and MIR in the fall. I think we all want to see your car run the best times it is capable of...regardless of past dust-ups.
Tom
Congratulations on the time! I am glad that a non-NOS 63 is the current holder of the best 63 ET.
Don't take offense... people are just pointing out that something doesn't seem right. I would say that my car has at most 20 rwhp on yours (if that) and yet my traps have been 118.08-118.98mph in a car that weighs at least 800lbs more than yours with all the runs done in 90+ degree heat. I think the weather and altitude may be a factor....but not sure if that fully explains it. I guess the best way to test that theory is to get you to ATCO and MIR in the fall. I think we all want to see your car run the best times it is capable of...regardless of past dust-ups.
Tom
A N/A motor will make far less power in high humidity and or heat and or altitude. According to NHRA a N/A motor is effected 100% by air while a turbo and or sc is 50% effected.
#57
MBWorld Fanatic!
Here is the timeslip and DA for the pass.
07/22/2008 at 09:49 pm
Time recorded 9:55 PM
Temperature °F 66.2
Dew Point °F 60.8
Altimeter Setting 30.11 Inches Mercury
Absolute Pressure: 29.44 Inches
Density Altitude: 1275.6 feet
Track Elelvation: 632 feet
UnCorrected ET:
11.824 (sec) @ 118.29 (MPH)
Corrected ET to Sea Level:
11.663 (sec) @ 119.941 (MPH)
Here is at -1000 feet
Your results:
E.T. 11.824 (sec)
Trap Speed 118.29 (mph)
Measured DA 1275 (feet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrected to -1000(feet) DA
Corrected ET 11.542 (sec)
Corrected Trap Speed 121.243 (mph
We need to data log to see if we are getting WOT, the 63 ECU for the most part only opens throttle 80% even with the best ECU tune. Also Octane may have been a factor. looks like this car is about 2 mph off on the top end IMHO
Great driving Jim,
and Congrats on the NEW ET RECORD.
Jordan and Rob and Jim get to work!!
07/22/2008 at 09:49 pm
Time recorded 9:55 PM
Temperature °F 66.2
Dew Point °F 60.8
Altimeter Setting 30.11 Inches Mercury
Absolute Pressure: 29.44 Inches
Density Altitude: 1275.6 feet
Track Elelvation: 632 feet
UnCorrected ET:
11.824 (sec) @ 118.29 (MPH)
Corrected ET to Sea Level:
11.663 (sec) @ 119.941 (MPH)
Here is at -1000 feet
Your results:
E.T. 11.824 (sec)
Trap Speed 118.29 (mph)
Measured DA 1275 (feet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrected to -1000(feet) DA
Corrected ET 11.542 (sec)
Corrected Trap Speed 121.243 (mph
We need to data log to see if we are getting WOT, the 63 ECU for the most part only opens throttle 80% even with the best ECU tune. Also Octane may have been a factor. looks like this car is about 2 mph off on the top end IMHO
Great driving Jim,
and Congrats on the NEW ET RECORD.
Jordan and Rob and Jim get to work!!
I agree about the 2mph, none-the-less good runs by Jcart.
#58
MBWorld Fanatic!
That 84% humidity likely sunk you, try and get out in 60 degrees 50% or less humidity bet she traps 121!
#59
MBWorld Fanatic!
Yes and no. Our specific V12tt platform is heavily affected by air quality. Correct me if Im wrong but last i checked the NHRA only corrects for altitude not air quality.
#60
MBWorld Fanatic!
official list
http://www.nhra.com/tech_specs/altitude.html
Last edited by rflow306; 07-24-2008 at 01:32 PM.
#61
MBWorld Fanatic!
And yes you are correct they do not apply a different factor based on weather just altitude.
And at less than 1200 feet they do not have a correction. (may be 1600 feet now)
However we know that in altitude the correction allowed for an NA motor is 2x greater than that used for FI cars. Obviously FI has an advantage. That advantage dissapates a bit as the turbo spools and heat is created, same with a sc. I saw many turboed cars fall flat due to heat so I know no platform is immune. Here is my prediction.
The 63 will pick up more from cool air and sea level than any FI platform in the MB lineup.
#62
MBWorld Fanatic!
Correct, Juiece is taking the da and using the corresponding elevation correction. We have been over-this countless times with him, the NHRA's only legal correction is elevation.
official list
http://www.nhra.com/tech_specs/altitude.html
official list
http://www.nhra.com/tech_specs/altitude.html
#63
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Quinta, CALIF.
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2009 C63 Black on Black
Air Quality! GASP
no, Seriously "Air Quality" should be in the equation. I'm sure they could measure air particulates and such and factor against "Ideal Air" conditions and have this for factoring into the formula.
#64
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Quinta, CALIF.
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2009 C63 Black on Black
I forgot to mention Jangy!
They Should! Last October when we ran at Ontario it was during the forest fires surrounding the Ontario/Fontana valley. We had to wear gas masks, they issued oxygen, they had defibrilators on hand for both cars & people. Juicee passed out (no, he wasn't drinking!). Johnny Rocket was breathing hard after every run. Mo kept going to the bathroom! RARfinancial stopped smoking for the day! The runway was on fire at the end of the track
no, Seriously "Air Quality" should be in the equation. I'm sure they could measure air particulates and such and factor against "Ideal Air" conditions and have this for factoring into the formula.
no, Seriously "Air Quality" should be in the equation. I'm sure they could measure air particulates and such and factor against "Ideal Air" conditions and have this for factoring into the formula.
#65
MBWorld Fanatic!
#66
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Quinta, CALIF.
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2009 C63 Black on Black
We gotta do it again!
I'm gonna try to hook up with you guys in the late fall/ early winter again.
Regards
#67
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
They Should! Last October when we ran at Ontario it was during the forest fires surrounding the Ontario/Fontana valley. We had to wear gas masks, they issued oxygen, they had defibrilators on hand for both cars & people. Juicee passed out (no, he wasn't drinking!). Johnny Rocket was breathing hard after every run. Mo kept going to the bathroom! RARfinancial stopped smoking for the day! The runway was on fire at the end of the track
no, Seriously "Air Quality" should be in the equation. I'm sure they could measure air particulates and such and factor against "Ideal Air" conditions and have this for factoring into the formula.
no, Seriously "Air Quality" should be in the equation. I'm sure they could measure air particulates and such and factor against "Ideal Air" conditions and have this for factoring into the formula.
Ahhhh.......... good times
We'll definitely do it again
#68
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lake In The Hills, IL
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 E55 AMG, 2006 Pontiac GTO
Here is the timeslip and DA for the pass.
07/22/2008 at 09:49 pm
Time recorded 9:55 PM
Temperature °F 66.2
Dew Point °F 60.8
Altimeter Setting 30.11 Inches Mercury
Absolute Pressure: 29.44 Inches
Density Altitude: 1275.6 feet
Track Elelvation: 632 feet
UnCorrected ET:
11.824 (sec) @ 118.29 (MPH)
Corrected ET to Sea Level:
11.663 (sec) @ 119.941 (MPH)
Here is at -1000 feet
Your results:
E.T. 11.824 (sec)
Trap Speed 118.29 (mph)
Measured DA 1275 (feet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrected to -1000(feet) DA
Corrected ET 11.542 (sec)
Corrected Trap Speed 121.243 (mph
We need to data log to see if we are getting WOT, the 63 ECU for the most part only opens throttle 80% even with the best ECU tune. Also Octane may have been a factor. looks like this car is about 2 mph off on the top end IMHO
Great driving Jim,
and Congrats on the NEW ET RECORD.
Jordan and Rob and Jim get to work!!
07/22/2008 at 09:49 pm
Time recorded 9:55 PM
Temperature °F 66.2
Dew Point °F 60.8
Altimeter Setting 30.11 Inches Mercury
Absolute Pressure: 29.44 Inches
Density Altitude: 1275.6 feet
Track Elelvation: 632 feet
UnCorrected ET:
11.824 (sec) @ 118.29 (MPH)
Corrected ET to Sea Level:
11.663 (sec) @ 119.941 (MPH)
Here is at -1000 feet
Your results:
E.T. 11.824 (sec)
Trap Speed 118.29 (mph)
Measured DA 1275 (feet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrected to -1000(feet) DA
Corrected ET 11.542 (sec)
Corrected Trap Speed 121.243 (mph
We need to data log to see if we are getting WOT, the 63 ECU for the most part only opens throttle 80% even with the best ECU tune. Also Octane may have been a factor. looks like this car is about 2 mph off on the top end IMHO
Great driving Jim,
and Congrats on the NEW ET RECORD.
Jordan and Rob and Jim get to work!!
#72
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Ya, I raced that guy in the IROC Z 2 times, he is car #291 on the time slips, his bark is much worse than his bite. The cars does friggin wheelies but I got him by .834 and .927 down the stretch. I hope my car can do wheelies with slicks
Last edited by jrcart; 07-25-2008 at 01:56 PM.
#75
MBWorld Founder
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ones too fast according to CHP!
Do you guys think I am making up my WHP figures??? I have three reputable shops that have all dyno tested my car on different dates not knowing what the figures should be and they where all less than 2% apart in their findings...hell that could have been the damn weather. Not sure what you guys are getting at but even using the calculator one of you provided it was right there as well. Not sure of the exact weight on the car, but I know it's well over 3800 with fluids, I was running with about 3/4 of a tank of fuel and I'm an honest 215lbs. Your calculator had me at 499.89hp, pretty close to my lowest dyno reading of 501.20.
BTW, one person mentioned that you might be spinning tires at the shift. BINGO! When the car shifts, JRCart is losing traction and having to lift. That should be rectified with the MT's.
Thanks
Brad