Fwd chassis versus RWD Et - Page 4

mtkawboy · 12-30-2014, 09:23 PM

Aero wise at Bonneville the 4th gen Camaro looks to be better but the 3rd gen is actually the better of the two

Ed Wright · 12-30-2014, 09:46 PM

I don't have one to look at right now, but can somebody that has looked both over tell is the engine is set back as far in a 3rd gen? Having to drag less tire down the track is equal to more hp. I would expect that to be worth more than the aero difference. The 3rd gens I see around here have some big tires. May just be for bracket mode?

Andrew Hill · 12-30-2014, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

I don't have one to look at right now, but can somebody that has looked both over tell is the engine is set back as far in a 3rd gen? Having to drag less tire down the track is equal to more hp. I would expect that to be worth more than the aero difference. The 3rd gens I see around here have some big tires. May just be for bracket mode?

I imagine the tire companies would know the rolling resistance of their tires at different pressures. It would be interesting to know that info for the commonly run tires. I bet the rolling resistance changes for bias ply tires as they grow, radials probably don't change as much.

Mike Pearson · 12-31-2014, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Wright

I don't have one to look at right now, but can somebody that has looked both over tell is the engine is set back as far in a 3rd gen? Having to drag less tire down the track is equal to more hp. I would expect that to be worth more than the aero difference. The 3rd gens I see around here have some big tires. May just be for bracket mode?

Ed
My buddies gen 3 firebird is at my shop. I will take a look at it when I get home this weekend and let you know where the engine is positioned. It does sit back quite a bit in comparison to my gen 1 Camaro. His engine is in the near stock location

SSDiv6 · 12-31-2014, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Pearson

Ed
My buddies gen 3 firebird is at my shop. I will take a look at it when I get home this weekend and let you know where the engine is positioned. It does sit back quite a bit in comparison to my gen 1 Camaro. His engine is in the near stock location

There are many of these cars that due to the engine setback with engines with a rear distributor, they have a removal cowl grill.

Dick Butler · 12-31-2014, 10:00 AM

Next check the spindle position on an earlier vette.

Ed Wright · 12-31-2014, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

There are many of these cars that due to the engine setback with engines with a rear distributor, they have a removal cowl grill.

I need to spend more money (no end) in a belt driven short dist up front. I was given a regular MSD for the rear. It does not come out without pulling the manifold. They come out together. Fun deal. Takes two people. Have to buy something for my Jessel belt drive to do that also. Have to buy something to run the oil pump too, don't know if it would come out alone with my Hogan intake. Easier with a single plane intake, but I could not make one run as fast.

Sure be nice to have all the money I have spent on parts that didn't run as fast. LOL

Mark Markow · 12-31-2014, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

http://www.icarinfo.net/ has some good info, including drag coefficient, frontal area, and aerodynamic resistance. According to their numbers, a Dodge Stratus would be worth 15+ HP over my Volare at just 100 mph.

wow I always wondered how much I was giving up to one of the jelly bean modifieds, after lokking the info in this link my s10 is uses 39.2hp to just to overcome aero drag at only 60mph where the c-5 vette was listed as only using 18.6 hp for the same . not sure how much that changes at 150+ . I never really thought of the s-10 being that bad? I guess I need to re-think that.

Mark Yacavone · 12-31-2014, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Markow

wow I always wondered how much I was giving up to one of the jelly bean modifieds, after lokking the info in this link my s10 is uses 39.2hp to just to overcome aero drag at only 60mph where the c-5 vette was listed as only using 18.6 hp for the same . not sure how much that changes at 150+ . I never really thought of the s-10 being that bad? I guess I need to re-think that.

Mark, The S10 has a pretty tall profile ..Look at yours in the staging lanes sometime.
You can always find it.

12-30-2014, 09:23 PM	#31
mtkawboy Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Billings Mt Posts: 282 Likes: 186 Liked 54 Times in 18 Posts	Re: Fwd chassis versus RWD Et Aero wise at Bonneville the 4th gen Camaro looks to be better but the 3rd gen is actually the better of the two

12-30-2014, 09:46 PM	#32
Ed Wright Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sand Springs, OK Posts: 8,132 Likes: 896 Liked 390 Times in 170 Posts	Re: Fwd chassis versus RWD Et I don't have one to look at right now, but can somebody that has looked both over tell is the engine is set back as far in a 3rd gen? Having to drag less tire down the track is equal to more hp. I would expect that to be worth more than the aero difference. The 3rd gens I see around here have some big tires. May just be for bracket mode? __________________ Ed Wright 4156 SS/JA Last edited by Ed Wright; 12-30-2014 at 09:49 PM.

12-31-2014, 10:00 AM	#36
Dick Butler VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Richmond Indiana Posts: 1,196 Likes: 5 Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts	Re: Fwd chassis versus RWD Et Next check the spindle position on an earlier vette.