Launch rpm and tire pressure with stiff side wall slicks ? - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 5Likes
  • 1 Post By Saleen414
  • 1 Post By AlexLTDLX
  • 1 Post By weenburner
  • 1 Post By TomR
  • 1 Post By TomR
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 34 Old 08-21-2016, 06:23 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
vortech gt's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: BOSTON,MA
Posts: 2,345
Launch rpm and tire pressure with stiff side wall slicks ?

Trying out some MT 26 inch stiff side wall slicks for the first time on a 3600lb car and was wondering whats a good starting tire pressure.t56 with 4.10 gears making 577rwhp.


96gt,svo intake,svo heads,mhs blower cams strim(2.65)pulley, IW 10% crank pulley,AFM powerpipe,60's,full fuel system,
sct2600,bbk longtubes & h pipe,4.10'water methanol.
new numbers 602rwhp,[email protected] at 3590 lbs.
best et [email protected]
vortech gt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 34 Old 08-21-2016, 08:50 PM
Corral Elite Member
 
Saleen414's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Levant, Maine
Posts: 2,265
13 to 14 psi. The key is to video tape the launch and adjust from there. Obviously the chassis has to be set properly as well or tire pressure really does not mean much.

TomR likes this.

1989 Saleen 414 358cid SBF 2.8L Kenne Bell S/C
26 X 8.5 Hoosier
Best 1/4 mile time 8.623 @ 159.82 mph with a 1.34 60' (5.57 1/8th at 128)
Best 1/8 mile time 5.339 @ 133.46 mph with a 1.29 60'
08' Bullitt #4097 N/A 340ish RWHP <<<<<FOR SALE!
Saleen414 is offline  
post #3 of 34 Old 08-22-2016, 08:46 AM
Registered User
 
TomR's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 4,941
Garage
My car likes 12 psi on slicks and 14 psi on radials but it is 3200 lbs.

I'd start at 14 and see what happens. Have someone video it and look at the tire sidewalls.

With my setup, I get better and more repeatable 60 ft times with less air until the tires wad up or it gets loose on the big end. When they wad up consistency and handling gets worse. At the right pressure it is straight as an arrow.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
89 LX. 363, single turbo, Super Vic EFI, TFS high port heads by TEA, solid roller, glide. Holley HP EFI. (exact combo varies)
TomR is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 34 Old 08-23-2016, 07:53 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
vortech gt's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: BOSTON,MA
Posts: 2,345
Thanks,will start around 14psi and work my way down.

96gt,svo intake,svo heads,mhs blower cams strim(2.65)pulley, IW 10% crank pulley,AFM powerpipe,60's,full fuel system,
sct2600,bbk longtubes & h pipe,4.10'water methanol.
new numbers 602rwhp,[email protected] at 3590 lbs.
best et [email protected]
vortech gt is offline  
post #5 of 34 Old 08-23-2016, 09:21 AM
Registered User
 
TomR's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 4,941
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by vortech gt View Post
Thanks,will start around 14psi and work my way down.

You might work up or down with a heavy car. Heavy cars and narrower tires or weaker sidewalls need more pressure to keep the sidewalls from wadding and the to keep the car stable at the big end.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
89 LX. 363, single turbo, Super Vic EFI, TFS high port heads by TEA, solid roller, glide. Holley HP EFI. (exact combo varies)
TomR is offline  
post #6 of 34 Old 08-23-2016, 10:00 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
vortech gt's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: BOSTON,MA
Posts: 2,345
When i ran Mt et streets my car like 15psi but the car moved around a lot on the big end.

96gt,svo intake,svo heads,mhs blower cams strim(2.65)pulley, IW 10% crank pulley,AFM powerpipe,60's,full fuel system,
sct2600,bbk longtubes & h pipe,4.10'water methanol.
new numbers 602rwhp,[email protected] at 3590 lbs.
best et [email protected]
vortech gt is offline  
post #7 of 34 Old 08-24-2016, 12:56 PM
Registered User
 
TomR's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 4,941
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by vortech gt View Post
When i ran Mt et streets my car like 15psi but the car moved around a lot on the big end.
I hate that feeling.

When I had QA1 shocks I could barely hang on to the car below 15 psi pressure.

With Strange shocks it is straight as an arrow (as long as the tires don't start spinning down track).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
89 LX. 363, single turbo, Super Vic EFI, TFS high port heads by TEA, solid roller, glide. Holley HP EFI. (exact combo varies)
TomR is offline  
post #8 of 34 Old 09-01-2016, 08:33 PM
Registered User
 
AlexLTDLX's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: MD
Posts: 5,087
Did you get a chance to try the slicks? I'll be putting a 8.5/26" stiff sidewall Hoosier slick on the LTD when the guy who does the mounting gets back in (hopefully next week). Would love to hear your results.
danh9250 likes this.

AlexLTDLX

'84 LTD LX - 9.83 at 140.09. Whippled 365 SBF with a glide and 3.08 gears. Driven to and from the track 60 miles without even changing tire pressure.
AlexLTDLX is offline  
post #9 of 34 Old 09-05-2016, 10:20 AM
Corral Elite Member
 
Project Reef Blue's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Aurora, Canada
Posts: 1,336
Thats a mean little tire! Def video tape the launch and watch in slomo. On my slow car I was at 16-18psi cold and 5000rpm launches to get them to roatate a couple times at the hit and not bog. . Im a firm believer that dead hooking a stick car is great for photos and bragging rights but it breaks sh*t!

Stock Block 408", TFS 11R 205, TFS EFI Carb R Intake, XFI 236HR, Tweecer, Faceplated TKO 500
10.49 @ 130mph

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Project Reef Blue is offline  
post #10 of 34 Old 09-06-2016, 05:37 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
vortech gt's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: BOSTON,MA
Posts: 2,345
Got a chance Saturday to try them out but blew a headgasket on my first pass.with 14psi and a 4k launch it bog really bad with a 1.70 60ft.should have tried a 6k launch but it was the first pass this year so took it easy.yet it still broke.


96gt,svo intake,svo heads,mhs blower cams strim(2.65)pulley, IW 10% crank pulley,AFM powerpipe,60's,full fuel system,
sct2600,bbk longtubes & h pipe,4.10'water methanol.
new numbers 602rwhp,[email protected] at 3590 lbs.
best et [email protected]
vortech gt is offline  
post #11 of 34 Old 09-08-2016, 11:13 PM
Corral Elite Member
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Wa State
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by vortech gt View Post
4k launch it bog really bad with a 1.70 60ft.should have tried a 6k launch but it was the first pass this year so took it easy.yet it still broke.
Raising staging rpm to minimize a bog basically works by packing more inertia energy into the rotating assy, which in turn forces the clutch to slip longer, to a point farther down the track before engine rpm and vehicle speed can sync…that’s the point where the clutch locks up 1:1. Because clutch lockup is delayed to a point farther down the track where the car is traveling faster, engine rpm does not drop as low as before…less noticeable bog.

Think about that for a minute though…you are adding inertia energy to the launch for the sole purpose of forcing more abuse on your clutch, basically using that added energy to force the clutch to slip longer against it’s maximum clamp pressure! Not only does this old school method add a lot of un-necessary wear to the clutch assy, it also makes the launch more violent than it needs to be. What most don’t realize is that after you have used that inertia energy to force the clutch to slip longer, that spent energy then has to be paid back in full before the engine can recover the rpm that it lost. That inertia energy transfer which initially forced the clutch to slip longer now slows the car as that energy transfer reverses, now some of the engine's power is used to recharge spent inertia energy back into the rotating assy as it gains back the lost rpm. In the end, that temporary boost of torque which forced the clutch to slip longer did not actually net you any performance gain.

Why continue the tradition of forcing the clutch to slip against it’s maximum clamp pressure? Instead, we prefer the alternate method of temporarily holding back some of the clutch’s initial clamp pressure at the throwout bearing. The clutch still slips as needed, but now it slips against much less average clamp pressure so it‘s surfaces remain cooler and wear less. The engine no longer has to lose rpm to force the clutch to slip during launch, so the chassis never sees the additional hit from that inertia energy, and the engine won’t have to pay that spent inertia energy back. This cuts the whole give/take of rotating assy inertia right out of the launch loop all together, for a smoother, less violent, and more efficient launch! No longer do the tires have to spin to minimize the bog, and less clutch wear is just icing on the cake.

There’s also that notion that you need a couple rotations of the tire off the line, the traditional way to launch a stick car on slicks with a minimum amount of bog. The engine does not typically make enough torque to break the tires loose on it’s own, needing help from a hard hitting clutch to release additional inertia energy from the engine’s rotating assy. When the tires spin the clutch does not have to slip as much which also minimizes the bog, basically trading wear/tear on the clutch for wear/tear on the tires. It’s been that way for more than 50 years now, but that’s beginning to change. We now have radials which are a much more efficient tire. Problem is, you can’t just bolt a set of radials on a traditional stick/slick setup and get all the benefits. The radials just won’t tolerate the violent hit or the same amount of wheel spin that the slicks needed to work effectively. If we eliminate the overly violent hit and excessive wheel spin, it becomes much easier to reap the benefits of radials, with a side benefit of less broken parts.
TomR likes this.

Grant

ClutchTamer.com
We make your non-adjustable clutch...ADJUSTABLE!!!
weenburner is offline  
post #12 of 34 Old 09-18-2016, 12:42 PM
Registered User
 
TomR's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 4,941
Garage
That's a very good technical summary of what really happens. Few people seem to know that.
weenburner likes this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
89 LX. 363, single turbo, Super Vic EFI, TFS high port heads by TEA, solid roller, glide. Holley HP EFI. (exact combo varies)
TomR is offline  
post #13 of 34 Old 09-19-2016, 06:57 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by weenburner View Post
Raising staging rpm to minimize a bog basically works by packing more inertia energy into the rotating assy, which in turn forces the clutch to slip longer, to a point farther down the track before engine rpm and vehicle speed can sync…that’s the point where the clutch locks up 1:1. Because clutch lockup is delayed to a point farther down the track where the car is traveling faster, engine rpm does not drop as low as before…less noticeable bog.

Think about that for a minute though…you are adding inertia energy to the launch for the sole purpose of forcing more abuse on your clutch, basically using that added energy to force the clutch to slip longer against it’s maximum clamp pressure! Not only does this old school method add a lot of un-necessary wear to the clutch assy, it also makes the launch more violent than it needs to be. What most don’t realize is that after you have used that inertia energy to force the clutch to slip longer, that spent energy then has to be paid back in full before the engine can recover the rpm that it lost. That inertia energy transfer which initially forced the clutch to slip longer now slows the car as that energy transfer reverses, now some of the engine's power is used to recharge spent inertia energy back into the rotating assy as it gains back the lost rpm. In the end, that temporary boost of torque which forced the clutch to slip longer did not actually net you any performance gain.

Why continue the tradition of forcing the clutch to slip against it’s maximum clamp pressure? Instead, we prefer the alternate method of temporarily holding back some of the clutch’s initial clamp pressure at the throwout bearing. The clutch still slips as needed, but now it slips against much less average clamp pressure so it‘s surfaces remain cooler and wear less. The engine no longer has to lose rpm to force the clutch to slip during launch, so the chassis never sees the additional hit from that inertia energy, and the engine won’t have to pay that spent inertia energy back. This cuts the whole give/take of rotating assy inertia right out of the launch loop all together, for a smoother, less violent, and more efficient launch! No longer do the tires have to spin to minimize the bog, and less clutch wear is just icing on the cake.

There’s also that notion that you need a couple rotations of the tire off the line, the traditional way to launch a stick car on slicks with a minimum amount of bog. The engine does not typically make enough torque to break the tires loose on it’s own, needing help from a hard hitting clutch to release additional inertia energy from the engine’s rotating assy. When the tires spin the clutch does not have to slip as much which also minimizes the bog, basically trading wear/tear on the clutch for wear/tear on the tires. It’s been that way for more than 50 years now, but that’s beginning to change. We now have radials which are a much more efficient tire. Problem is, you can’t just bolt a set of radials on a traditional stick/slick setup and get all the benefits. The radials just won’t tolerate the violent hit or the same amount of wheel spin that the slicks needed to work effectively. If we eliminate the overly violent hit and excessive wheel spin, it becomes much easier to reap the benefits of radials, with a side benefit of less broken parts.
OR... The OP could just add a bit of air pressure to the tres and keep the same lauch RPM.

I have a question, and it's in your last paragraph.. When you refer to how violent of a launch a radial can take, how are you gaging that? Trying to understand this.. The initial "hit" of the tire? The 60's they are capable of? I will agree with you that a radial does NOT recover well from a spin, however, as far as a violent launch, they can work just fine. I've seen too many sub 1.10 60's from a radial car.. But, the kicker here, and what a lot of people don't have access to is a properly preped track.. and another thing is the chassis is off as well.

O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #14 of 34 Old 09-19-2016, 12:38 PM
Corral Elite Member
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Wa State
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88gtguy View Post
I have a question, and it's in your last paragraph.. When you refer to how violent of a launch a radial can take, how are you gaging that? Trying to understand this.. The initial "hit" of the tire? The 60's they are capable of? I will agree with you that a radial does NOT recover well from a spin, however, as far as a violent launch, they can work just fine. I've seen too many sub 1.10 60's from a radial car.. But, the kicker here, and what a lot of people don't have access to is a properly preped track.. and another thing is the chassis is off as well.
I don't think you realize just how violent the launch of a low power car can be. As an example, let's assume a car has power for 1.50 60's, but has a grabby clutch that has a capacity of 800 ft/lbs before it begins to slip. When you launch that car, the clutch is going to draw 800 ft/lbs, and the engine does not have to make 800 ft/lbs to make this possible. That clutch will draw all the torque that the engine is making at wot, then it will draw the balance of the 800 ft/lbs from stored inertia energy which will cause the rotating assy to lose rpm. That extra inertia energy makes the launch much more violent, but remember as soon engine rpm is drawn down to the point that engine rpm sync's up with vehicle speed, rpm ceases to drop and that transfer of inertia energy stops. Problem is that after you have used that inertia energy and lost the rpm, that spent energy then has to be paid back in full before the engine can recover the rpm that it lost. That inertia energy transfer which initially made the car launch harder now slows the car, as it reverses and some of the engine's power must be used to recharge spent inertia energy back into the rotating assy. In the end, that temporary torque boost from inertia energy did not actually net you any performance gain.

Understanding that, now let's compare that 1.5 60' car with a grabby clutch, to a car that has power for 1.1 second 60's but does not lose rpm when it launches. If that 1.1 60' car does not lose rpm during launch, that indicates no inertia energy was used and it launched on engine power alone...
…2800 lb Car #1 has power for 1.5 second 60’s (1.66 G‘s), which requires a 60’ average of 4648 lbs of thrust at the tire
…2800 lb Car #2 has power for 1.1 second 60’s (3.08 G’s), which requires a 60’ average of 8624 lbs of thrust at the tire

The 1.5 60' car averages 4648 lbs of thrust over the initial 60', but remember that the clutch in Car #1 draws 800 ft/lbs of energy before it begins to slip. Multiply that 800 ft/lbs by it's 1st gear ratio (3.35 for example), rear gear ratio (perhaps 4.30), factor in some drive train loss (13% sounds good) and the 28” tire’s lever moment at the contact patch, that 1.5 second 60' car easily matches the 8600 lb thrust of the 1.1 60' car during that very short period of time before the clutch locks up! That initial boost to 8600 lbs of thrust before the clutch locked up is then offset by a reduction of thrust below the average while the lost rpm is recovered. Even though thrust peaked at around 8600 lbs briefly, it's still just a 1.5 60' car. Add in violent pressure fluctuations at the contact patch from an unsorted chassis, it’s easy to see how a lower power car can easily upset a tire that's otherwise capable of amazing 1.1 second 60’s.

If that 800 ft/lb clutch in the 1.5 60' car were replaced with a 500 ft/lb version, the duration of clutch slip would be roughly 60% longer, which means the car would be traveling much faster at the point where rpm and vehicle speed finally sync up...much less bog. Now the tires only see a peak of around 5400 lbs of thrust instead of 8600 lbs in that brief period before the clutch locks up. Not only does the drivetrain see less abuse, but the engine does not lose as many rpm after launch and after the shifts...the engine will be pulling from a higher average rpm where it makes more power. It might be hard to believe, but even though the 500 ft/lb clutch slips longer and puts less stress on the drivetrain, the car will actually be quicker than it was with the 800 ft/lb clutch, and be much less likely to break the tires loose even with an un-sorted chassis.

These are not numbers from actual cars, just something i plugged in to help illustrate the concept.

Grant

ClutchTamer.com
We make your non-adjustable clutch...ADJUSTABLE!!!

Last edited by weenburner; 09-19-2016 at 11:34 PM.
weenburner is offline  
post #15 of 34 Old 09-19-2016, 11:11 PM
Registered User
 
TomR's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 4,941
Garage
Just something to think about. If you allow 1 inch of circumferential sidewall yield in a bias tire, it translates to 1/4.10 = .244 inches of driveshaft yield.

If a radial tire has no yield at all (it will have some yield) all you gain is 1/4 inch of cushion on rotation.

This does not seem like enough to significantly change shock load as the engine inertia unloads. Both the radial and bias would be far far shorter yield than the yield needed to move down on the stored energy.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
89 LX. 363, single turbo, Super Vic EFI, TFS high port heads by TEA, solid roller, glide. Holley HP EFI. (exact combo varies)
TomR is offline  
post #16 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 06:14 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by weenburner View Post
I don't think you realize just how violent the launch of a low power car can be. As an example, let's assume a car has power for 1.50 60's, but has a grabby clutch that has a capacity of 800 ft/lbs before it begins to slip. When you launch that car, the clutch is going to draw 800 ft/lbs, and the engine does not have to make 800 ft/lbs to make this possible. That clutch will draw all the torque that the engine is making at wot, then it will draw the balance of the 800 ft/lbs from stored inertia energy which will cause the rotating assy to lose rpm. That extra inertia energy makes the launch much more violent, but remember as soon engine rpm is drawn down to the point that engine rpm sync's up with vehicle speed, rpm ceases to drop and that transfer of inertia energy stops. Problem is that after you have used that inertia energy and lost the rpm, that spent energy then has to be paid back in full before the engine can recover the rpm that it lost. That inertia energy transfer which initially made the car launch harder now slows the car, as it reverses and some of the engine's power must be used to recharge spent inertia energy back into the rotating assy. In the end, that temporary torque boost from inertia energy did not actually net you any performance gain.

Understanding that, now let's compare that 1.5 60' car with a grabby clutch, to a car that has power for 1.1 second 60's but does not lose rpm when it launches. If that 1.1 60' car does not lose rpm during launch, that indicates no inertia energy was used and it launched on engine power alone...
…2800 lb Car #1 has power for 1.5 second 60’s (1.66 G‘s), which requires a 60’ average of 4648 lbs of thrust at the tire
…2800 lb Car #2 has power for 1.1 second 60’s (3.08 G’s), which requires a 60’ average of 8624 lbs of thrust at the tire

The 1.5 60' car averages 4648 lbs of thrust over the initial 60', but remember that the clutch in Car #1 draws 800 ft/lbs of energy before it begins to slip. Multiply that 800 ft/lbs by it's 1st gear ratio (3.35 for example), rear gear ratio (perhaps 4.30), factor in some drive train loss (13% sounds good) and the 28” tire’s lever moment at the contact patch, that 1.5 second 60' car easily matches the 8600 lb thrust of the 1.1 60' car during that very short period of time before the clutch locks up! That initial boost to 8600 lbs of thrust before the clutch locked up is then offset by a reduction of thrust below the average while the lost rpm is recovered. Even though thrust peaked at around 8600 lbs briefly, it's still just a 1.5 60' car. Add in violent pressure fluctuations at the contact patch from an unsorted chassis, it’s easy to see how a lower power car can easily upset a tire that's otherwise capable of amazing 1.1 second 60’s.

If that 800 ft/lb clutch in the 1.5 60' car were replaced with a 500 ft/lb version, the duration of clutch slip would be roughly 60% longer, which means the car would be traveling much faster at the point where rpm and vehicle speed finally sync up...much less bog. Now the tires only see a peak of around 5400 lbs of thrust instead of 8600 lbs in that brief period before the clutch locks up. Not only does the drivetrain see less abuse, but the engine does not lose as many rpm after launch and after the shifts...the engine will be pulling from a higher average rpm where it makes more power. It might be hard to believe, but even though the 500 ft/lb clutch slips longer and puts less stress on the drivetrain, the car will actually be quicker than it was with the 800 ft/lb clutch, and be much less likely to break the tires loose even with an un-sorted chassis.

These are not numbers from actual cars, just something i plugged in to help illustrate the concept.


You do realize you're breaking your own argument right? First, your G numbers are "off" at least compared to what I've seen collected.. whether it being my own racepak logs or looking at other's data. Most quick, or what I consider quick radial cars are topping the g-meter at the 2.6"ish" range. At least on runs that go down.. Not saying it couldn't happen.. but I haven't seen it yet.

So if a car that 60's in the 1.1 area AVERAGES your magical 8624 lbs of thrust but the 1.5 60' car CAN PEAK at 8624 lbs of thrust.. why is it the 1.1 60' car does down, and 1.5 60' car will kick the tire? It's shocks and chassis set up..

BTW, an auto car looses RPM on lauch as well as the conveter "catches" the engine. It's that converter rollover that you work to get out so you keep the engine accelerating.

I know you're selling a gaget and whatnot.. and I won't say it doesn't work. However, how you describe thing makes me think you've never seen lauch data from cars that are getting in done on the front half.

O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #17 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 09:01 AM
Registered User
 
SRTthis798's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (15)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,619
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88gtguy View Post
You do realize you're breaking your own argument right? First, your G numbers are "off" at least compared to what I've seen collected.. whether it being my own racepak logs or looking at other's data. Most quick, or what I consider quick radial cars are topping the g-meter at the 2.6"ish" range. At least on runs that go down.. Not saying it couldn't happen.. but I haven't seen it yet.

So if a car that 60's in the 1.1 area AVERAGES your magical 8624 lbs of thrust but the 1.5 60' car CAN PEAK at 8624 lbs of thrust.. why is it the 1.1 60' car does down, and 1.5 60' car will kick the tire? It's shocks and chassis set up..

BTW, an auto car looses RPM on lauch as well as the conveter "catches" the engine. It's that converter rollover that you work to get out so you keep the engine accelerating.

I know you're selling a gaget and whatnot.. and I won't say it doesn't work. However, how you describe thing makes me think you've never seen lauch data from cars that are getting in done on the front half.
uhhh umm...

DT Racing and Fabrication

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Crew Chief
Roche Racing engines Billet headed windsor! BMF on 275s!
my car-88lx- 408" stock block gangster!!!
SRTthis798 is offline  
post #18 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 09:21 AM
Registered User
 
AlexLTDLX's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: MD
Posts: 5,087
I'm posting because I wanted to follow up on the small tire/stiff sidewall thing. I did go ahead and get the 26x8.5 Hoosier C11 stiff sidewalls slicks mounted up. Let me tell you - they're fantastic. I ran 17 psi in them, and they dead hook, even at 3,500 rpm on the trans brake (which is over 13 psi of boost on the brake - see the data log below). I was able to drop .06 in the 60' over the previous Friday; and they still could've taken more.

But this is incorrect:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 88gtguy View Post
BTW, an auto car looses RPM on lauch as well as the conveter "catches" the engine. It's that converter rollover that you work to get out so you keep the engine accelerating.

I know you're selling a gaget and whatnot.. and I won't say it doesn't work. However, how you describe thing makes me think you've never seen lauch data from cars that are getting in done on the front half.
The only time my car's ever lost rpm on launch was when the accel pump settings led to an extreme rich or lean condition. Here's a closeup of a transbrake launch from Friday:



White line is RPM. You can see the "hit" pulled my foot off the throttle even (green line), and still the rpm didn't drop.

Going back to the slicks - they are excellent. Highly recommended. And they drive very well.

AlexLTDLX

'84 LTD LX - 9.83 at 140.09. Whippled 365 SBF with a glide and 3.08 gears. Driven to and from the track 60 miles without even changing tire pressure.
AlexLTDLX is offline  
post #19 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 10:15 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexLTDLX View Post
I'm posting because I wanted to follow up on the small tire/stiff sidewall thing. I did go ahead and get the 26x8.5 Hoosier C11 stiff sidewalls slicks mounted up. Let me tell you - they're fantastic. I ran 17 psi in them, and they dead hook, even at 3,500 rpm on the trans brake (which is over 13 psi of boost on the brake - see the data log below). I was able to drop .06 in the 60' over the previous Friday; and they still could've taken more.

But this is incorrect:



The only time my car's ever lost rpm on launch was when the accel pump settings led to an extreme rich or lean condition. Here's a closeup of a transbrake launch from Friday:



White line is RPM. You can see the "hit" pulled my foot off the throttle even (green line), and still the rpm didn't drop.

Going back to the slicks - they are excellent. Highly recommended. And they drive very well.
I would attribute your grah to two things.. a 3.08 (if that's still the situation in the back) and the boost level you're already at as you let the button go.

I can post some UGLY ones of mine ( as soon as I figure it out..lol) Runs will be low 4.90's passes, pulling roughly 2.4 G's. with 60's in the mid 1.teen's They show a FAR different story. I wasn't ultilzing the power I had very well AT ALL!!!! I also think in a boosted application, it might be a touch less violent on the converter by comparison to a nitrous car..


But bringing back to the slick.. I've also seen them work killer..

O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #20 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 10:28 AM
Registered User
 
AlexLTDLX's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: MD
Posts: 5,087
3.73's and no boost (naturally aspirated):


AlexLTDLX

'84 LTD LX - 9.83 at 140.09. Whippled 365 SBF with a glide and 3.08 gears. Driven to and from the track 60 miles without even changing tire pressure.
AlexLTDLX is offline  
post #21 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 11:26 AM
Corral Elite Member
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Wa State
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88gtguy View Post
You do realize you're breaking your own argument right? First, your G numbers are "off" at least compared to what I've seen collected.. whether it being my own racepak logs or looking at other's data. Most quick, or what I consider quick radial cars are topping the g-meter at the 2.6"ish" range. At least on runs that go down.. Not saying it couldn't happen.. but I haven't seen it yet.

So if a car that 60's in the 1.1 area AVERAGES your magical 8624 lbs of thrust but the 1.5 60' car CAN PEAK at 8624 lbs of thrust.. why is it the 1.1 60' car does down, and 1.5 60' car will kick the tire? It's shocks and chassis set up..

BTW, an auto car looses RPM on lauch as well as the conveter "catches" the engine. It's that converter rollover that you work to get out so you keep the engine accelerating.

I know you're selling a gaget and whatnot.. and I won't say it doesn't work. However, how you describe thing makes me think you've never seen lauch data from cars that are getting in done on the front half.
You did see the last sentence in my post, right? I'm trying to make this easy to understand. My "G" numbers are based on what it actually takes to cover 60' from a standing start, which make it easier to calculate the thrust required. It's not important that the numbers match up to an actual run. On an actual run, rollout due to front tire size and spindle centerline offset actually shortens the measured travel distance and get you a rolling start on the clock. The 60' data you see on a typical timeslip is not actually a measure of running 60' from a standing start, it's more like running a little less than 59' with like a 5-10mph head start. Add that to in-car G meter readings being affected by changes to the cars attitude, those real world variables just muddy things up more than i wanted to.

Grant

ClutchTamer.com
We make your non-adjustable clutch...ADJUSTABLE!!!
weenburner is offline  
post #22 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 07:23 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexLTDLX View Post
3.73's and no boost (naturally aspirated):

So you not see your converter rollover and stall out the engine acceleration in that graph??

O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #23 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 07:53 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
This pass was a [email protected]

I stopped the cursor at max G's, and as you can see in the light blue... the converter had rolled over and the engine acceleration had stalled out. At that point in the run, I would imagine I was making a bit north of 1000hp.. Vehicle weight was just north of 3100lbs. I believe I was running a 4.56 gear.. 1.69 first in the trans.. Again.. This is from 2012 I think.. But the illustration is still valid.


O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #24 of 34 Old 09-20-2016, 09:09 PM
Registered User
 
AlexLTDLX's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: MD
Posts: 5,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88gtguy View Post
So you not see your converter rollover and stall out the engine acceleration in that graph??
No where does it "loose" (sic) rpm - as you claimed. And this is with the tightest possible 10" BTE can make, designed for a positive displacement blower, being run behind a low compression (8.8:1), NA 365 ci motor with a glide. This is about as bad as it can get (1.8-1.9 60') and it's not doing what you said an auto car does - in either graph.

It looks like your car has some tuning issues that need to be worked out - those are pretty erratic looking acceleration curves.

AlexLTDLX

'84 LTD LX - 9.83 at 140.09. Whippled 365 SBF with a glide and 3.08 gears. Driven to and from the track 60 miles without even changing tire pressure.
AlexLTDLX is offline  
post #25 of 34 Old 09-21-2016, 09:03 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexLTDLX View Post
No where does it "loose" (sic) rpm - as you claimed. And this is with the tightest possible 10" BTE can make, designed for a positive displacement blower, being run behind a low compression (8.8:1), NA 365 ci motor with a glide. This is about as bad as it can get (1.8-1.9 60') and it's not doing what you said an auto car does - in either graph.

It looks like your car has some tuning issues that need to be worked out - those are pretty erratic looking acceleration curves.
I'll have pull another one up.. but I do consider that stalling out in the same category..

I won't argue.. my graph is UGLY!!! But as far as g-meters go.. I can't tell if you've got one or not.. they're not as smooth as you think... I'd love to have this motor back.. there's a TON left on the table with that one.. I was doing crap back then that'd like slap myself now for thinking it would work!! lol

O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #26 of 34 Old 09-21-2016, 09:43 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
Here's another one.. with a dip this time.. this was a 4.95 pass.. I turned off the G graph as it was pretty much right on top of the RPM one. I have others that dip as well, but it's a total pain to move them over.. My "race" computer I don't connect to the net.. it's 8-9 years old runs XP, and is SLOW.. So I take a dan pic of the screen and move that around.. But the g-meter is just as ugly..


O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #27 of 34 Old 09-22-2016, 01:17 AM
Corral Elite Member
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Wa State
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88gtguy View Post
Here's another one.. with a dip this time.. this was a 4.95 pass.. I turned off the G graph as it was pretty much right on top of the RPM one. I have others that dip as well, but it's a total pain to move them over.. My "race" computer I don't connect to the net.. it's 8-9 years old runs XP, and is SLOW.. So I take a dan pic of the screen and move that around.. But the g-meter is just as ugly..

G meters are going to register the front coming up as an increase in g's, when the nose comes back down they swing the other way and show a dip in g's, even if acceleration rate was actually constant. Any change in the car's attitude is going to be reflected in the g-graph. Even if a Racepac's mounting vibrates a little due to some resonance, it's going to affect the G.

In your case i think DS speed is the one telling the story. Lay a straight edge against it and you will see DS climbs at a pretty constant rate and only begins to nose over a bit just before the shift. Looking at it from that perspective, your runs don't look nowhere near as bad as the g-meter makes them out to be.

Grant

ClutchTamer.com
We make your non-adjustable clutch...ADJUSTABLE!!!
weenburner is offline  
post #28 of 34 Old 09-22-2016, 06:59 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by weenburner View Post
G meters are going to register the front coming up as an increase in g's, when the nose comes back down they swing the other way and show a dip in g's, even if acceleration rate was actually constant. Any change in the car's attitude is going to be reflected in the g-graph. Even if a Racepac's mounting vibrates a little due to some resonance, it's going to affect the G.

In your case i think DS speed is the one telling the story. Lay a straight edge against it and you will see DS climbs at a pretty constant rate and only begins to nose over a bit just before the shift. Looking at it from that perspective, your runs don't look nowhere near as bad as the g-meter makes them out to be.
The g-meter isn't good.. But not for the reason Alex seems to be thinking. I don't think he's seen many. But I could very well be wrong with him... .

I KNOW I was leaving .2-.3 on the table with that motor at the time. There was a lot of new tech I was trying, I was changing trans first gears around.. I never had the time to really work with it because I was also in grad school at thet time.. I got frustrated.. I had that motor a year.. and had dumped 10K just in maintenece on it and told myself, enough is enough.. and sold it. Such is life... lol

O.G. X275 racer
1.17 60' [email protected] with the angry peanut!
1.16 60' [email protected] on 1 gun (In testing)
88gtguy is offline  
post #29 of 34 Old 09-22-2016, 09:46 AM
Registered User
 
TomR's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 4,941
Garage
If you know how converters work, you would realize they cannot "lock" and load an engine down. If there is a bog, it is tune or engine related or you are initially slipping elsewhere (like the tires) and then the slip is stopping.

Nitrous systems are notorious for getting nitrous and fuel out of sync on the initial hit. This is because two greatly different time constant solenoids are controlling vastly different medias. One solenoid has a very low impedance to overcome a large spring pressure and gas pressure (near 1000 psi) while the other generally has light spring pressure and is only being held closed by 40 psi or less.

At the hit, one media or the other floods the system. It is almost impossible to make them a perfect ratio for some fraction of a second. Generally the fuel has to initially be ramped in more at first while nitrous is slowly starting. Otherwise the risk of a backfire goes way up.

I've been dealing with this in a friend's car, doing bench and track testing. We are having a tough time getting the short loss of power out while bringing a system on at the transbrake release. I came up with a solution for this, but being a grudge racer he prefers to not help others (and it is his car).
AlexLTDLX likes this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
89 LX. 363, single turbo, Super Vic EFI, TFS high port heads by TEA, solid roller, glide. Holley HP EFI. (exact combo varies)
TomR is offline  
post #30 of 34 Old 09-22-2016, 10:10 AM
Registered User
 
AlexLTDLX's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: MD
Posts: 5,087
88gtguy - I wasn't looking at your g meter graph. I can see issues with your converter or tune, and in your DS - either sensor or something else. I think your g meter graph will smooth out in the beginning when you get your converter/tune issues sorted.

Either way, we're straying from the OP's topic - which is why I came in here in the first place. I'm running similar tires now.

AlexLTDLX

'84 LTD LX - 9.83 at 140.09. Whippled 365 SBF with a glide and 3.08 gears. Driven to and from the track 60 miles without even changing tire pressure.
AlexLTDLX is offline  
post #31 of 34 Old 09-22-2016, 10:13 AM
Corral Elite Member
 
Saleen414's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Levant, Maine
Posts: 2,265
Here is one of my data logs from last weekend. You can see the rpm flat line a bit after the initial hit. This corresponds with the tire slip and then it dead hooks . You can see the driveshaft rpm rate change from spin to hook. There is also a blip on the 1-2 shift in driveshaft rpm as the tires slipped a little bit.


1989 Saleen 414 358cid SBF 2.8L Kenne Bell S/C
26 X 8.5 Hoosier
Best 1/4 mile time 8.623 @ 159.82 mph with a 1.34 60' (5.57 1/8th at 128)
Best 1/8 mile time 5.339 @ 133.46 mph with a 1.29 60'
08' Bullitt #4097 N/A 340ish RWHP <<<<<FOR SALE!
Saleen414 is offline  
post #32 of 34 Old 09-22-2016, 10:11 PM
Registered User
 
TomR's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 4,941
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saleen414 View Post
Here is one of my data logs from last weekend. You can see the rpm flat line a bit after the initial hit. This corresponds with the tire slip and then it dead hooks . You can see the driveshaft rpm rate change from spin to hook. There is also a blip on the 1-2 shift in driveshaft rpm as the tires slipped a little bit.

That makes sense. But that is tire spin related, not torque converter.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
89 LX. 363, single turbo, Super Vic EFI, TFS high port heads by TEA, solid roller, glide. Holley HP EFI. (exact combo varies)
TomR is offline  
post #33 of 34 Old 09-25-2016, 08:37 AM
Registered User
 
bamabox's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Hartford, CT
Posts: 676
Garage
This is an interesting conversation for anyone like myself who has a stick car and looking to get the most out of what they have. At this point, I'm still using the stock clutch that came on my 03 Mach 1 crate motor from FRPP, a 03 cobra T56 rebuild from D&D and the motor is NA and stock from the heads down. I did P&P the intake and just went to a 90mm Lightning and 39lb injectors with a Dez racing tune. 4.56's out back with a spool on Strange 33 spline race axles. Running the Hoosier stiffwall 26.0/ 8.5 x15. Awesome tire. Yesterday I had my best 60' ever, a 1.49, which in turn yielded my best ET to date of a 11.85. I try and launch right at 6000, don't have a 2-step. I've got in the neighborhood of 200 passes on that stock clutch, so I was planning on a new clutch as a winter project. After reading this thread, appears I have some homework to do.

99 coupe. C4/8” 5000 stall w/2003 Mach crate motor FRPP stock N/A, Kooks LT's and X,dumps no muffs. 4.56's
Best ET 11.42 Best MPH 116.33Best 60" 1.49
Coincidence. A convenient and overused word for the mentally lazy.
bamabox is offline  
post #34 of 34 Old 09-25-2016, 01:02 PM
Corral Elite Member
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Wa State
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamabox View Post
This is an interesting conversation for anyone like myself who has a stick car and looking to get the most out of what they have. At this point, I'm still using the stock clutch that came on my 03 Mach 1 crate motor from FRPP, a 03 cobra T56 rebuild from D&D and the motor is NA and stock from the heads down. I did P&P the intake and just went to a 90mm Lightning and 39lb injectors with a Dez racing tune. 4.56's out back with a spool on Strange 33 spline race axles. Running the Hoosier stiffwall 26.0/ 8.5 x15. Awesome tire. Yesterday I had my best 60' ever, a 1.49, which in turn yielded my best ET to date of a 11.85. I try and launch right at 6000, don't have a 2-step. I've got in the neighborhood of 200 passes on that stock clutch, so I was planning on a new clutch as a winter project. After reading this thread, appears I have some homework to do.
Here's a copy/paste from my website on pressure plate choices, hopefully it's not wandering too far from the OP's original topic...

The lightest clutch assy is not necessarily be the quickest when it comes to exploiting clutch slip to maximum advantage, as the clutch needs to have enough thermal capacity to absorb some slip without overheating/warping. Having plenty of clutch capacity for the task is the 1st requirement, then it's a simple matter of controlling the application of clutch pressure to match engine power. Ultra-lightweight circle track or road racing flywheels/clutches will likely not be able to tolerate much slipping without permanent damage.

Diaphragm Pressure Plates-...the modern diaphragm style pressure plate actually has a lot going for it, especially for a Street/Strip application. The most noticeable advantage is less pedal pressure per pound of clamp pressure, due in part to less friction at it's pivot points. Beyond that, the diaphragm style spring design gradually gains a little clamp pressure as the disc wears to around the 1/2 way point, then clamp pressure begins to gradually work it's way back down. By the time the clutch disc needs replacement, clamp pressure is about what it was when the disc was new. Because diaphragm clamp pressure varies less over the life of the disc, you can more closely match clamp pressure to the actual application, which minimizes overall pressure required to depress the clutch pedal.

Borg & Beck and Long style pressure plates- any pressure plate that uses coil springs is going to lose clamp pressure from day 1 as the disc wears. Making matters worse, the typical way to increase clamp pressure for performance applications is to increase the coil’s spring rate, which only increases the amount of clamp pressure loss over the life of the disc. For this reason you MUST choose a coil spring pressure plate with too much clamp pressure when it's new, so that you will have enough clamp pressure to handle the engine's torque when the disc is worn! Not only does this make the clutch overly aggressive, it also dictates that the clutch pedal will be hardest to depress when the clutch disc is new. The addition of the ClutchTamer addresses the harsh engagement, as it makes it possible to dial back the initial aggressiveness that comes with excessive clamp pressure. Now it's possible to use radial tires without the added maintenance of constantly adding, then removing, shims from the pressure plate or manually adjusting clamp pressure to keep clutch clamp pressure in it's sweet spot.

What about pressure plates that feature centrifugal assist?...if you plan WOT shifts at hi rpms- any pressure plate that features any sort of centrifugal assist is going to hit the drivetrain hardest after the shift, making it more likely to break parts or knock the tires loose. Counterweight style clutches produce an RPM drop trace on a graph that looks like a "backwards J" with a hook at the bottom. Their sharp, near vertical drop indicates a quick loss of rpm (intense discharge of inertia energy), which transitions into a gradual "hook" near the bottom as the clutch begins to slip more. That hook area at the bottom of the "J" is where most of an adjustable's slip actually occurs. The intense vertical drop is something you have limited control over, as a centrifugal design dictates that rpm must come down before clamp pressure can be reduced. This is a big reason SoftLoc style clutches are only marginally effective when trying to run radials, as they still have a relatively intense discharge of inertia energy just after the shift, until rpm comes down enough for the bulk of their slipping to occur.

Grant

ClutchTamer.com
We make your non-adjustable clutch...ADJUSTABLE!!!

Last edited by weenburner; 09-25-2016 at 01:06 PM.
weenburner is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
600+hp gear ratio and RPM help TomasV Drag Racing 10 04-12-2016 11:16 AM
Take my 306 to the limit MH60SMECH 5.0/5.8 Engine Tech 64 07-25-2015 01:29 PM
what kinda 60 ft times on mt et drag radials ? vortech gt Drag Racing 108 07-21-2015 06:31 AM
What rpms should I be launching and shifting at? JOHNNY HORSEPOWER Drag Racing 8 02-24-2013 01:54 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome