|
|
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 977
Likes: 794
Liked 275 Times in 76 Posts
|
![]()
Robert,
Are you at min weight for your class, or close to it? It is quite an accomplishment to get a car to run the index and less. Its also not just throwing go fast parts at it to make it go. Sean
__________________
Sean Marconette 84 Mustang 5060 SS/N |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nineveh, Indiana
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Right now, we're just baby stepping. Learning what we can about the car. Trust me on this one, for stock, there aren't a lot of go fast parts to throw at this car. I'm just enjoying the challenge for the moment.
__________________
Robert Swartz - Swartz & Lane 66 Chevy II Pro 95 Achieva EF/SA, 78 Mustang II U/SA (work in progress) #354 stock |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richmond Hill, Georgia
Posts: 2,003
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
![]() Quote:
Next time at the track. try disconnecting the battery for 2 minutes in the staging lanes. then go run without a burn out. I'm not familiar with GM stuff (maybe you GM guys can kick in) but on a Mopar it makes a world of difference. One big problem you are going to face with that combo is that years ago. GM made up specs as they went along, they had quite a racing program. They used a lot of "one of" custom parts. In the whole driveline. (thats one reason why I laugh at those crying about the DPs and CJ's. Because those parts were only available to a few. Back in the 90's the Quad 4 was almost as good as the turbo dodges (before the dodges got hp). I believe the Quad 4 was 175 hp.
__________________
Art Leong 2095 SS Last edited by art leong; 07-17-2012 at 06:52 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nineveh, Indiana
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
To add, not only a lot of different specs, there are quite a few versions of these engines as well. This one is rated at 150hp. From what I've garnered information wise, this model has the worst stock intake of the many different versions. For now it's mainly a toy. Just throwing some basic things at it, see what we can wring out of it. I may try that, unhook the battery for a couple minutes then make a pass. Kinda have to laugh, we still have the stock street tires on the car. Haven't even bothered with attempting a burn out. To be honest, how do you do a burnout with a FWD car? Do you plumb a line lok into the rear wheels or just set the parking break? I've never tried yet.
__________________
Robert Swartz - Swartz & Lane 66 Chevy II Pro 95 Achieva EF/SA, 78 Mustang II U/SA (work in progress) #354 stock |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
Tod Lane Swartz & Lane 66 Nova Swartz & Lane 79 H/CM Trans Am |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
The thing still has the spare and jack in it. The complete exhaust system besides being restrictive weighs something. The A/C Comp can come off, that might be the biggest single reduction. Trunk mats and hood insulation is a little more. Speakers can come out Beyond that it gets tougher. I don't know if the rule of thumb we used to use where 100 lbs equal a tenth still holds with this type of car or not.
__________________
Tod Lane Swartz & Lane 66 Nova Swartz & Lane 79 H/CM Trans Am |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sand Springs, OK
Posts: 8,132
Likes: 896
Liked 390 Times in 170 Posts
|
![]()
100 lbs is not a tenth on higher HP faster cars, but in this case I would expect so.
__________________
Ed Wright 4156 SS/JA |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|