10 sec runs broken down
11-25-2009, 03:27 PM
#26
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
2013 Chevy 427 Torch Red
Could the OP deduce the trap speed from the other splits on the slip?
I believe the answer is no.
Since you cannot prove nor disprove trap the timeslip stands as Alan has run within 1% of this in the past.
133.1*.01%=1.331
133.1-1.33=131.7
You can do reverse equations and obtain the other splits because they are already known, however if you did not know Alan's trap or think its off, we would guess it to be 127-128 mph.
Try it , please someone tell me what this car trapped based on the other information. First person to do it will get 100.00 delivered via paypal.
Here is a run with two CLS 63's from January 18th 2008
The track :California speedway
CLS 63 CLS 63
1.982 2.003
5.306 5.365
8.039 8.102
90.55 90.47
10.378 10.444
12.37 12.42
Please calculate the two trap speeds
I believe the answer is no.
Since you cannot prove nor disprove trap the timeslip stands as Alan has run within 1% of this in the past.
133.1*.01%=1.331
133.1-1.33=131.7
You can do reverse equations and obtain the other splits because they are already known, however if you did not know Alan's trap or think its off, we would guess it to be 127-128 mph.
Try it , please someone tell me what this car trapped based on the other information. First person to do it will get 100.00 delivered via paypal.
Here is a run with two CLS 63's from January 18th 2008
The track :California speedway
CLS 63 CLS 63
1.982 2.003
5.306 5.365
8.039 8.102
90.55 90.47
10.378 10.444
12.37 12.42
Please calculate the two trap speeds
11-25-2009, 03:42 PM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
There is no mathematical formula that can accurately be linked to drag racing runs. Stay away from that voodoo stuff and just take what the slip gives you.
So many things can happen that can +/- MHP at the traps.
Alan for sure could have run his 10 sec pass at any speed. Trap seeds are for spectators who want to know how fast it was going. ET and 60ft are the only numbers weekend sportsman/gal like us should care about.
Infact I can show a video of letting off for about a full second and still trapping at 118mph.
So many things can happen that can +/- MHP at the traps.
Alan for sure could have run his 10 sec pass at any speed. Trap seeds are for spectators who want to know how fast it was going. ET and 60ft are the only numbers weekend sportsman/gal like us should care about.
Infact I can show a video of letting off for about a full second and still trapping at 118mph.
I have a slip of a car that raced me ran a 9.96 I ran a 12.1 and trapped 116.47 it was at SAC whatcha think the other car trapped?? Or even better who had the faster trap?
11-25-2009, 03:45 PM
#28
MBWorld Fanatic!
11-25-2009, 04:04 PM
#29
MBWorld Fanatic!
Juicee we both know that the trap speed can only be estimated with this information. I can tell you that during the first run the car averaged 109.53 mph during the last 320 feet and the second averaged 110.42 mph. I would expect the traps to be between 112and 114 and probabilty has the 12.42 car trapping slightly higher but most importantly i don't think they would be 6 mph apart.
I wasn't sure, and I am glad you posted.
You are right about the trap speed estimate but incorrect on which car trapped higher.
The better ET car actually outrapped the car that was moving faster in your calculation of the last 320 which should be 330 ft?
I love the fact you wish to discuss this and dig deeper but since we cannot prove or disprove with math lets accept the trap and explore some of the possibilities.
Alan's car has trapped within 1% of this, he has done it on a day when several members here were present. He was depressed because he failed to hit 10's a mere 11.06 . HAAHAHA, poor guy.
Anyway please accept my apologies, I did not mean to challenge you to a math test but rather make certain we could not achieve a trap speed from the other splits.
When I get home I will post the slip, if someone can get just one of the recorded traps accurately 100 bucks will be sent to em
11-25-2009, 04:53 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
2013 Chevy 427 Torch Red
I can't tell you how relieved I am that we are all now having sensible conversation rather than dividing the party line. Understand that my motivation as a C63 owner for being in the 211 forum is simply respect and admiration. This is where the "Go Fast" crowd hangs out and the California crew are the tip of the spear. Internet conversations can easily be misinterpreted in ways that face to face dialogue would not but it remains the clear choice for connecting us all regardless.
11-25-2009, 05:08 PM
#31
MBWorld Fanatic!
I can't tell you how relieved I am that we are all now having sensible conversation rather than dividing the party line. Understand that my motivation as a C63 owner for being in the 211 forum is simply respect and admiration. This is where the "Go Fast" crowd hangs out and the California crew are the tip of the spear. Internet conversations can easily be misinterpreted in ways that face to face dialogue would not but it remains the clear choice for connecting us all regardless.
+1
11-25-2009, 06:32 PM
#32
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Glendale Arizona
Posts: 3,193
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
C55,SL55,C63
Here is one That needs explaining
I had a flawess 11.74 pass The car shifted great and I got no wheel spin (this is in AZ) I corrected thats number on dragtimes just to see what could have been. It said my corrected time was 11.66.
I head to Famoso and run an 11.55 on a run that felt like total crap. wheel spin, trans slip. It just felt real bad. All of a sudden I'm at 11.55 and very surprised. Thats about 1 tenth faster than corrected time on a great run.
I had a flawess 11.74 pass The car shifted great and I got no wheel spin (this is in AZ) I corrected thats number on dragtimes just to see what could have been. It said my corrected time was 11.66.
I head to Famoso and run an 11.55 on a run that felt like total crap. wheel spin, trans slip. It just felt real bad. All of a sudden I'm at 11.55 and very surprised. Thats about 1 tenth faster than corrected time on a great run.
11-25-2009, 06:40 PM
#33
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
Here is one That needs explaining
I had a flawess 11.74 pass The car shifted great and I got no wheel spin (this is in AZ) I corrected thats number on dragtimes just to see what could have been. It said my corrected time was 11.66.
I head to Famoso and run an 11.55 on a run that felt like total crap. wheel spin, trans slip. It just felt real bad. All of a sudden I'm at 11.55 and very surprised. Thats about 1 tenth faster than corrected time on a great run.
I had a flawess 11.74 pass The car shifted great and I got no wheel spin (this is in AZ) I corrected thats number on dragtimes just to see what could have been. It said my corrected time was 11.66.
I head to Famoso and run an 11.55 on a run that felt like total crap. wheel spin, trans slip. It just felt real bad. All of a sudden I'm at 11.55 and very surprised. Thats about 1 tenth faster than corrected time on a great run.
11-25-2009, 06:43 PM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
11-25-2009, 09:14 PM
#36
Out Of Control!!
Could the OP deduce the trap speed from the other splits on the slip?
I believe the answer is no.
Since you cannot prove nor disprove trap the timeslip stands as Alan has run within 1% of this in the past.
133.1*.01%=1.331
133.1-1.33=131.7
You can do reverse equations and obtain the other splits because they are already known, however if you did not know Alan's trap or think its off, we would guess it to be 127-128 mph.
Try it , please someone tell me what this car trapped based on the other information. First person to do it will get 100.00 delivered via paypal.
Here is a run with two CLS 63's from January 18th 2008
The track :California speedway
CLS 63 CLS 63
1.982 2.003
5.306 5.365
8.039 8.102
90.55 90.47
10.378 10.444
12.37 12.42
Please calculate the two trap speeds
I believe the answer is no.
Since you cannot prove nor disprove trap the timeslip stands as Alan has run within 1% of this in the past.
133.1*.01%=1.331
133.1-1.33=131.7
You can do reverse equations and obtain the other splits because they are already known, however if you did not know Alan's trap or think its off, we would guess it to be 127-128 mph.
Try it , please someone tell me what this car trapped based on the other information. First person to do it will get 100.00 delivered via paypal.
Here is a run with two CLS 63's from January 18th 2008
The track :California speedway
CLS 63 CLS 63
1.982 2.003
5.306 5.365
8.039 8.102
90.55 90.47
10.378 10.444
12.37 12.42
Please calculate the two trap speeds
I trapped 127 and then did some stuff and gained 60whp and 100wtq. Guess what I trapped after? 125!
11-26-2009, 07:59 PM
#37
Hey guys, I've always been a stand up guy with the truth always being important. I will be the first to admit that my trap speeds are off but ET's are accurate. I just found this website that has many members seeing the same exact mph discrepancies as I. I'm just glad it could be put to your rest and it seems my car is just normal....LOL.
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
Last edited by bassn_07; 11-26-2009 at 08:02 PM.
11-26-2009, 08:26 PM
#38
MBWorld Fanatic!
Hey guys, I've always been a stand up guy with the truth always being important. I will be the first to admit that my trap speeds are off but ET's are accurate. I just found this website that has many members seeing the same exact mph discrepancies as I. I'm just glad it could be put to your rest and it seems my car is just normal....LOL.
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
You may wish to call Beth Rice at the NHRA Glendora headquarters and ask her if SAC is 5 mph off can it be an NHRA sanctioned ?
lol
11-26-2009, 08:50 PM
#39
I hate saying it but it makes sense but as long as et's are correct I'm happy. Like Hooleyboy stated trap speeds are for the enjoyment of the spectators. I would have no problem trapping between 127-130 as long as I'm I'm the 10's.
11-26-2009, 09:22 PM
#40
Super Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 Crossfire SRT6
Hey guys, I've always been a stand up guy with the truth always being important. I will be the first to admit that my trap speeds are off but ET's are accurate. I just found this website that has many members seeing the same exact mph discrepancies as I. I'm just glad it could be put to your rest and it seems my car is just normal....LOL.
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
11-26-2009, 11:44 PM
#41
MBWorld Fanatic!
Evan,
Infineon is the 2009 Champions , I believe they came down to AZ and took the 2009 title.
The track is great but i do not believe it faster especially in the afternoon. There is a pretty big head wind slowing the cars.
It is definately cool, at sea level and well prepped. There also is fuel pumps selling about 9 different octanes..
Good luck
11-27-2009, 12:18 AM
#42
Super Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Surprise, AZ
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 Crossfire SRT6
Evan,
Infineon is the 2009 Champions , I believe they came down to AZ and took the 2009 title.
The track is great but i do not believe it faster especially in the afternoon. There is a pretty big head wind slowing the cars.
It is definately cool, at sea level and well prepped. There also is fuel pumps selling about 9 different octanes..
Good luck
Infineon is the 2009 Champions , I believe they came down to AZ and took the 2009 title.
The track is great but i do not believe it faster especially in the afternoon. There is a pretty big head wind slowing the cars.
It is definately cool, at sea level and well prepped. There also is fuel pumps selling about 9 different octanes..
Good luck
11-27-2009, 12:26 AM
#43
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thanks Josh figured you hit a few rounds there. Yep they had a good showing we tied for 2nd or 3rd don't remember. I went out 1st rd with a breakout, bummer. Well if it isn't faster and during the day, then it's not worth me driving 12 hours there. I'll still try to make the sac night event.
Course I drove 6 hours only to be knocked out because I dialed too low an ET based on what I had heard about Infineon.
My car was faster at SAC and Famoso.
Your best times will be at SAC which usually has a slight tailwind. Yeah prep is hit or miss.
The other issue with Infineon is most the open nights or days are BRACKET so you lose and you go home. You would obviously do great but driving 12 hours to lose in rd 1 would be sucky as hell
11-27-2009, 12:37 AM
#44
I was dissapointed.
Course I drove 6 hours only to be knocked out because I dialed too low an ET based on what I had heard about Infineon.
My car was faster at SAC and Famoso.
Your best times will be at SAC which usually has a slight tailwind. Yeah prep is hit or miss.
The other issue with Infineon is most the open nights or days are BRACKET so you lose and you go home. You would obviously do great but driving 12 hours to lose in rd 1 would be sucky as hell
Course I drove 6 hours only to be knocked out because I dialed too low an ET based on what I had heard about Infineon.
My car was faster at SAC and Famoso.
Your best times will be at SAC which usually has a slight tailwind. Yeah prep is hit or miss.
The other issue with Infineon is most the open nights or days are BRACKET so you lose and you go home. You would obviously do great but driving 12 hours to lose in rd 1 would be sucky as hell
Josh, If I remember correctly don't you have similar et's and traps at all three tracks? I'm not sure what the DA was but I'm curious to know. Most agree that infineon is one of the slower tracks with a slight uphill incline...is this true?
11-27-2009, 01:18 AM
#45
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Hey guys, I've always been a stand up guy with the truth always being important. I will be the first to admit that my trap speeds are off but ET's are accurate. I just found this website that has many members seeing the same exact mph discrepancies as I. I'm just glad it could be put to your rest and it seems my car is just normal....LOL.
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
If you plan on coming to Sac be prepared to see 3-5 mph higher traps speeds than normal but ET's are dead on. They mentions something about how they have the 2 beams setup at the end.
http://www.norcal1320.com/forums/sho...p?t=1191195801
This member from Link you provided sheds more data on the incredible back half Trap speed increases seen here.
I will have to check my log books but from what i remember the 1/8 mile times were not out of line. Sac's mph showed me gaining something ridiculous like 46mph in the back half, I wish...I am usually around 40-42 depending on weather, on the stop of course.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by B1Valiant; 10-21-2009 at 07:44 PM.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by B1Valiant; 10-21-2009 at 07:44 PM.
The MPH clocks at Sac are NOT correct. I wish they were but it simply is not and that is a fact. I ran almost 170 there two weeks ago, trust me I wish it were true. Anyone running the same MPH at Bako, Sac and Vegas would want to rake into account the DA's of those races, I can guarantee they were nowhere near each other. I race everywhere and trust me it is not right.
The air at Sac this past Saturday night was not all that great for this time of year. The DA was between 1200-1500' all night. The issue was the humidity which was in the upper 60's most of the night. Typically it is much better. For instance the WORST DA at the last Grudgefest last year was 603'. It ranged from -28' to 603' during the night. Weather is a big deal in my type of racing so we keep meticulous records of it, as well as MPH in given conditions and the MPH's from Sac since this spring have been off. Depending on how fast the car is it can be 2-5mp, lane does not matter. Take it for waht it's worth but I can show you my log book and computer and it does not lie. FWIW on the record speed, at the National Open this past summer it was a topic on conversation, and there were NO records set. Believe me once again I wish it were true as I have been 10.90 at 160.55 at Sac, everywhere else I am lucky to see 156 in the same conditions. Heck at the open I saw 156 in 3500' DA', wish it were true. I have some data from early this year just before my first race in Vegas in March and my MPH was correct, somewhere around May or so was when we started getting the funky numbers.
__________________
68 Barracuda
Last edited by B1Valiant; 10-20-2009 at 09:39 PM.
The air at Sac this past Saturday night was not all that great for this time of year. The DA was between 1200-1500' all night. The issue was the humidity which was in the upper 60's most of the night. Typically it is much better. For instance the WORST DA at the last Grudgefest last year was 603'. It ranged from -28' to 603' during the night. Weather is a big deal in my type of racing so we keep meticulous records of it, as well as MPH in given conditions and the MPH's from Sac since this spring have been off. Depending on how fast the car is it can be 2-5mp, lane does not matter. Take it for waht it's worth but I can show you my log book and computer and it does not lie. FWIW on the record speed, at the National Open this past summer it was a topic on conversation, and there were NO records set. Believe me once again I wish it were true as I have been 10.90 at 160.55 at Sac, everywhere else I am lucky to see 156 in the same conditions. Heck at the open I saw 156 in 3500' DA', wish it were true. I have some data from early this year just before my first race in Vegas in March and my MPH was correct, somewhere around May or so was when we started getting the funky numbers.
__________________
68 Barracuda
Last edited by B1Valiant; 10-20-2009 at 09:39 PM.
Last edited by Thericker; 11-27-2009 at 01:54 AM.
11-27-2009, 02:41 AM
#46
Damned interesting find Alan, kudos to finishing this debate (just think ALL the NOS accusing & arguments over DA conditions, wheel/tire combos, tailwinds etc would've never happened if we'd known this)
This member from Link you provided sheds more data on the incredible back half Trap speed increases seen here.
Though it looks like this track has been off for quite some time vs B1Valiant's noting it possibly started in May this year. Roger Ver's S65 put up these incredible NEAR 30 mph back half gains back in Dec 2006 http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-10181.html
This member from Link you provided sheds more data on the incredible back half Trap speed increases seen here.
Though it looks like this track has been off for quite some time vs B1Valiant's noting it possibly started in May this year. Roger Ver's S65 put up these incredible NEAR 30 mph back half gains back in Dec 2006 http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-10181.html
Make no mistake DA still plays a major role in how our cars are affected. This data is gathered through multiple runs at the same track. Either way I'm still going to run the Performance Box to provide a little more data. All though I know this isn't going to solve the discrepancy it will give me a better idea.
11-27-2009, 03:23 AM
#47
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Yeah, but the discrepancy is still up in the air on how much the MPH would be off for my car. I'm still optimistic and think I have a shot at 130. The car stated above trap in the 156 mph range and he has seen as much as 5 mph which I'm hoping equates to less on my car. Time will tell when I run my car at Famoso in January...if DA is the same.
Make no mistake DA still plays a major role in how our cars are affected. This data is gathered through multiple runs at the same track. Either way I'm still going to run the Performance Box to provide a little more data. All though I know this isn't going to solve the discrepancy it will give me a better idea.
Make no mistake DA still plays a major role in how our cars are affected. This data is gathered through multiple runs at the same track. Either way I'm still going to run the Performance Box to provide a little more data. All though I know this isn't going to solve the discrepancy it will give me a better idea.
I hate saying it but it makes sense but as long as et's are correct I'm happy. Like Hooleyboy stated trap speeds are for the enjoyment of the spectators.
Alan I know these online Drag Calc's are'nt 100% but look @ what you get when you plug in your #s your E55 w/you in it including weight savings etc should weigh about 4200 LBs @ best your 563 rwhp /.82 = 686 Crank HP, ET is off but Trap seems very close, The speed is 127.91921999999 mph. a bit optimistic considering Sals SL55 has near = Curbweight w/lots of mods + about 40 rwhp & 40-55 more RWTQ w/100 oct ECU
http://www.web-cars.com/math/qtr_mile.html
Sal only trapped 127.5xx
The quarter mile acceleration time of a car that weighs 4200 pounds and has 686 horsepower is 10.656 seconds.
The speed is 127.91921999999 mph.
The speed is 127.91921999999 mph.
I think you have a 127+ mph Trap, & that's awesome
you say you're now only interested in ET's so why the conjecture? Vs all the data that speaks volumes as to why your Traps are indeed between 4-6 mph too high @ SacEven more interesting plug in Roger Ver's #'s into Calculator: 5000 lb S65 w/driver 600 rwhp = 731 BHP
The quarter mile acceleration time of a car that weighs 5000 pounds and has 731 horsepower is 11.057 seconds.
The speed is 123.28201079999 mph.
The speed is 123.28201079999 mph.
Last edited by Thericker; 11-27-2009 at 03:44 AM.
11-27-2009, 04:32 AM
#48
You see now you're contradicting what you've said earlier Now your back to fighting tooth n' nail for every last mph ending w/ @ least 130mph???
Alan I know these online Drag Calc's are'nt 100% but look @ what you get when you plug in your #s your E55 w/you in it including weight savings etc should weigh about 4200 LBs @ best your 563 rwhp /.82 = 686 Crank HP, ET is off but Trap seems very close, The speed is 127.91921999999 mph. a bit optimistic considering Sals SL55 has near = Curbweight w/lots of mods + about 40 rwhp & 40-55 more RWTQ w/100 oct ECU
http://www.web-cars.com/math/qtr_mile.html
Sal only trapped 127.5xx
Lastly we have that other E55 TX member t02? running 10.9x @ 127 mph
I think you have a 127+ mph Trap, & that's awesome you say you're now only interested in ET's so why the conjecture? Vs all the data that speaks volumes as to why your Traps are indeed between 4-6 mph too high @ Sac
Even more interesting plug in Roger Ver's #'s into Calculator: 5000 lb S65 w/driver 600 rwhp = 731 BHP
@ Sac he ran 11.069 @ 128.7 = exactly 5.418 mph off, any where else in the country that heavy S65 would trap 124 tops
Alan I know these online Drag Calc's are'nt 100% but look @ what you get when you plug in your #s your E55 w/you in it including weight savings etc should weigh about 4200 LBs @ best your 563 rwhp /.82 = 686 Crank HP, ET is off but Trap seems very close, The speed is 127.91921999999 mph. a bit optimistic considering Sals SL55 has near = Curbweight w/lots of mods + about 40 rwhp & 40-55 more RWTQ w/100 oct ECU
http://www.web-cars.com/math/qtr_mile.html
Sal only trapped 127.5xx
Lastly we have that other E55 TX member t02? running 10.9x @ 127 mph
I think you have a 127+ mph Trap, & that's awesome
you say you're now only interested in ET's so why the conjecture? Vs all the data that speaks volumes as to why your Traps are indeed between 4-6 mph too high @ SacEven more interesting plug in Roger Ver's #'s into Calculator: 5000 lb S65 w/driver 600 rwhp = 731 BHP
@ Sac he ran 11.069 @ 128.7 = exactly 5.418 mph off, any where else in the country that heavy S65 would trap 124 tops
.
11-27-2009, 01:05 PM
#49
MBWorld Fanatic!
You see now you're contradicting what you've said earlier Now your back to fighting tooth n' nail for every last mph ending w/ @ least 130mph???
Alan I know these online Drag Calc's are'nt 100% but look @ what you get when you plug in your #s your E55 w/you in it including weight savings etc should weigh about 4200 LBs @ best your 563 rwhp /.82 = 686 Crank HP, ET is off but Trap seems very close, The speed is 127.91921999999 mph. a bit optimistic considering Sals SL55 has near = Curbweight w/lots of mods + about 40 rwhp & 40-55 more RWTQ w/100 oct ECU
http://www.web-cars.com/math/qtr_mile.html
Sal only trapped 127.5xx
Lastly we have that other E55 TX member t02? running 10.9x @ 127 mph
I think you have a 127+ mph Trap, & that's awesome you say you're now only interested in ET's so why the conjecture? Vs all the data that speaks volumes as to why your Traps are indeed between 4-6 mph too high @ Sac
Even more interesting plug in Roger Ver's #'s into Calculator: 5000 lb S65 w/driver 600 rwhp = 731 BHP
@ Sac he ran 11.069 @ 128.7 = exactly 5.418 mph off, any where else in the country that heavy S65 would trap 124 tops
Alan I know these online Drag Calc's are'nt 100% but look @ what you get when you plug in your #s your E55 w/you in it including weight savings etc should weigh about 4200 LBs @ best your 563 rwhp /.82 = 686 Crank HP, ET is off but Trap seems very close, The speed is 127.91921999999 mph. a bit optimistic considering Sals SL55 has near = Curbweight w/lots of mods + about 40 rwhp & 40-55 more RWTQ w/100 oct ECU
http://www.web-cars.com/math/qtr_mile.html
Sal only trapped 127.5xx
Lastly we have that other E55 TX member t02? running 10.9x @ 127 mph
I think you have a 127+ mph Trap, & that's awesome
you say you're now only interested in ET's so why the conjecture? Vs all the data that speaks volumes as to why your Traps are indeed between 4-6 mph too high @ SacEven more interesting plug in Roger Ver's #'s into Calculator: 5000 lb S65 w/driver 600 rwhp = 731 BHP
@ Sac he ran 11.069 @ 128.7 = exactly 5.418 mph off, any where else in the country that heavy S65 would trap 124 tops
Explain this:
The E55 next to Alan is effected by the higher DA and traps lower than it does on average. Alan hits within 1% of his 133 trap, and the other car is trapping normal, how could the beams be off for one car and not the other?
Also on July 3rd 2009, Alan hit 128.1 in 1200 DA remember the DA on his record trap was near 0 100-200 ft. I also ran my car this day and trapped 114.86 which is below my best trap at Famoso of 116.62
Last edited by juicee63; 11-27-2009 at 01:09 PM.
11-27-2009, 01:39 PM
#50
Explain this:
The E55 next to Alan is effected by the higher DA and traps lower than it does on average. Alan hits within 1% of his 133 trap, and the other car is trapping normal, how could the beams be off for one car and not the other?
Also on July 3rd 2009, Alan hit 128.1 in 1200 DA remember the DA on his record trap was near 0 100-200 ft. I also ran my car this day and trapped 114.86 which is below my best trap at Famoso of 116.62
Attachment 170732
The E55 next to Alan is effected by the higher DA and traps lower than it does on average. Alan hits within 1% of his 133 trap, and the other car is trapping normal, how could the beams be off for one car and not the other?
Also on July 3rd 2009, Alan hit 128.1 in 1200 DA remember the DA on his record trap was near 0 100-200 ft. I also ran my car this day and trapped 114.86 which is below my best trap at Famoso of 116.62
Attachment 170732
The time will soon come when Sal, Sun, and myself will be at the same track on the same day. Maybe Sean could make it to run along with us to see if all the data he collected through out the years will translate into some awesome times. I've never been scared or intimidated to race my car and will always be up for a challenge....win or lose. That's the greatest thing about racing, the possibility of defeat
.
