Ford Mustang Forums banner

went to the track today!!!!!!!!!

3K views 49 replies 10 participants last post by  80Cobra308 
#1 · (Edited)
hey guys i went to the track! i only got to run 3 times in 4 hours. there were way to many people running. AND BREAKING !!!!! lol AND WAY TO HOT

well i did get into the 11's


1st run 12.45 @117 2.04 60ft

2nd run 12.20 @116 1.88 60ft

3rd run 11.99 @ 119 1.82 60ft


i definitively need to work on my 60ft times. i think a 2step along with some control arms. should help out.

but 11.99 on a BONE stock motor. stock tranny/clutch and stock suspension i really cant complain.

i plan on going in November. I NEED MORE SEAT TIME. TO WORK ON MY LAUNCHING

BOOST WAS DIALED IN AT 10 PSI.

TIRE PRESSURE ON 11.99 RUN WAS AT 13LBS

ANY ADVICE WOULD BE GREAT!!!!!!!!

THANK GUYS , BRETT

 
See less See more
#6 ·
Congrats !!!! Launch 5k+ rpm.
 
#13 ·
ok will do. i should have car back Tuesday or Wednesday ill most likely start a thread.

because Saturday im going to track as well.

with 4.10's ----- best i could get was 12.04 @ 117 at 6-7 psi (hitting rev limiter in 4th b4 traps)
So with a 3.27 gear, 10 PSI....the car went 11.99@119.......

With a 4.10, it went 12.04@117.... hitting limiter before the traps....ON 6-7 PSI...

Maybe a 3.73 gear would have worked best?
 
#17 ·
yea i think a 3.55 or so , would of bin more idea with my power level. BUT my new motor is going in this winter and im shooting for around 600rwhp. so the 3.27's will be best for that power level.
 
#25 ·
Cant expect 10s on a stock bottom end with a 1.8 60ft. Id say he ran pretty good. I believe the increase in boost came from the gear change, and main reason why it trapped 5mph higher. He would have had to crank on the boost knob to get 10psi out of the old gears. 4:10s suck on a turbo car
 
#26 ·
By looking at his slips, I don't see how you can state that a 4.10 sucks on a turbo car. Looks to me that they were pretty comparable, and the 4.10 set-up actually out performed the 3.27 set-up "boost for boost" and "mph for mph"

I agree that a 4.10 is not an optimal turbo gear in his application, but I think a 3.73 would be perfect for it.

You gain 3-4 PSI by gear changes?

You mean, if you have a 8 PSI spring...it can make 11 PSI with numerically lower gears?

Or, if you have an 8 PSI spring, it could make 4-5 PSI with 4.10's?

I better not go to a 3.27, I will be at like 12-13 PSI on my 8 lb spring!!!!!

Awesome! I have learned my tech for the day.
 
#29 ·
Does a wastegate know what combo it is on??????

I have 8lb springs in my wastegates......on an unloaded dynojet the carmade 8psi.

This isnt about dynos...its about performance.
Its the same idea. If your dyno wasnt loaded you wouldnt have been able to make any boost. What happens when you put the car in neutral and start revving the engine? Do you see 8psi then? No, you wont make any boost because the engine is not under load. I mean really, its not rocket science
 
#32 · (Edited)
ok guys lol i have a boost controller i turned it to 10psi.

last time i was at the track it was on 6-7 psi only because i was afraid to pop the motor. so the boost increase was from ME via my controller..
BUT now with the 3.27s full boost comes in much sooner in rpm. (full boost at 3200rpm)

i do believe a 3.55 would of bin more ideal if i was going to stick with this setup! but im not, new motor is going in soon.

so,,,, thats why i choose the 3.27.

also i go to track once or so a year. theres a lot of driver error!! lol

ill be running again in nov. i know there's a lot left in the car.

HELL ive only ran it down the track 3 times on Saturday.
 
#38 ·
Big head? It is common sense, in my opinion. The higher the peak power, the numerically higher gear needs to be run. (to accelerate efficiently at any given power) This is why you will see his 4.10 pass with identical sixty foot is similar in acceleration rate.....but is much slower MPH.

Boost for boost, the 4.10 will destroy the 3.27.

I am a little curious about the rev limiter. I was able to trap 120 in my 2V with 4.10's and nitrous. (stock motor) Maybe the tuner lowered the rev limiter....which is kind of scary considering it is cutting fuel with so much load.

I am on here to help. Not argue. If I know I am right, I will argue.
 
#39 ·
Common sense to me also is dont claim your car runs something it hasn't. Maybe you shouldn't worry about the gear debate so much and go fig out your car...it needs some attention. Anyone can throw a turbo kit on and mph, and make claims and excuses.

Put that time and energy you spend on here debating about gears and get in the garage! Your so worried about whos right and wrong you have sompletely made me not even care, maybe you are and maybe you aren't. ON3 basically fig's your setup for you, yet you claim to have 3000+ passes and run a shop/business. Your car has some serious potential, now show it. If not it's just another dyno queen.
I know Whipple cobras makinf 770rw barely trapping more than your supposed 110mph. Turbo cars own blower cars, go make your car "work" and that alone would be much more ammo to hype up ON3 kits and your business!

Your constant bickering with me can't be helping your business, and I for one have had enough. I like one gear and you another, great! I like Pepsi, you like Coke? Works good for me and I have proven that over and over at the track...somewhere that you need more time to TNT and get the car to work.

Are you looking for a pat on the back?

Also how long have you owned and raced a turbocharged Mustang?
 
#40 ·
Wow, you are all over the place?

That post has so many inaccuracies it is incredible.

If you would like to know more about me, then PM me. If not, don't worry.

I made a comment about how the car feels, and you have seriously taken it this far? That is awesome.

Don't worry punkin.....my stall converter is being built and should ship next week.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top