Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

Larry has certainly contributed to my program that's for sure.

Nice job . Can you FedEx some of that 2000 da air up to central states.lol. By time season starts in Midwest it will suck. I feel your pain, when I lived in Colorado all I looked at was the baro, when I moved to Texas I leaned to really only look at the humidity and grains of water, that's the kill...

.... this would be an "Ideal Run" that would show 650 Peak HP with a very flat TQ and HP Curve something to shoot for ! VortecPro_Ideal_Run_650HP.png   Larry, What are you using for Cd and FA? I long time ago I found somewhere on the internet. 70 Chevelle .42 Cd 25.52 FA Stan Thanks for t...

maxracesoftware wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 12:57 pm .... this would be an "Ideal Run" that would show 650 Peak HP with a very flat TQ and HP Curve
something to shoot for !

VortecPro_Ideal_Run_650HP.png

 

Thanks again for taking the time! Here you go.....

Steve I ran 6.17 @ 108.8 @ 2050 DA, 5 MPH head cross wind @ 3470, I will get into the details tonight. Impressive nice job. What's interesting is Chooper Scott on here with his camaro ran that exact time in the 1/8 then ran 9.81 @134 but he is 400lb lighter #-o then you and made 665hp with his 434....

Looking like you are extremely close to Larry calculated, very impressive. Looking forward to some details, appreciate you sharing. Here's how this all went down, my customer bought this engine from me years ago and it developed a leak, didn't leak on the dyno, but did in his car, so he sent it bac...

steve cowan wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 1:51 pm Slide rule says 9.95 @ 134 mph @ 3500 pds and 650 hp

Steve

I ran 6.17 @ 108.8 @ 2050 DA, 5 MPH head cross wind @ 3470, I will get into the details tonight.

maxracesoftware wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 12:57 pm .... this would be an "Ideal Run" that would show 650 Peak HP with a very flat TQ and HP Curve
something to shoot for !

VortecPro_Ideal_Run_650HP.png

 

Thanks Larry, I was hoping you would add that, I will post the data tonight, your right on the money!

I used 3500 and guessed at a few things. 60 Foot ET = 1.3451 330 Foot ET = 4.0295 1/8 Mile ET = 6.3696 1/8 Mile MPH = 104.4593 1000 Foot ET = 8.4108 1/4 Mile ET = 10.1480 1/4 Mile MPH = 129.8599 In better air close to DA = 0 60 Foot ET = 1.3132 330 Foot ET = 3.9323 1/8 Mile ET = 6.2165 1/8 Mile MPH...

I used 3500 and guessed at a few things. 60 Foot ET = 1.3451 330 Foot ET = 4.0295 1/8 Mile ET = 6.3696 1/8 Mile MPH = 104.4593 1000 Foot ET = 8.4108 1/4 Mile ET = 10.1480 1/4 Mile MPH = 129.8599 In better air close to DA = 0 60 Foot ET = 1.3132 330 Foot ET = 3.9323 1/8 Mile ET = 6.2165 1/8 Mile MPH...

The car: My 1968 Chevelle, T350 4.56 gear, (not optimum) 30x9 radial slick. Exact weight will be posted when I run across the scales Sunday. The results from the first lackluster test were: 10.50 @ 124.5 140 60 foot, 6.61 660 @ 102 MPH #-o Same engine this time drag tested in different conditions. ...

Stan I don't know anything about the test you posted above, but here is the 496 dyno test data. You're only going to have 660 foot data to work with, thanks for your time. It would be great if Larry would like to contribute as well! Observed HP @ 6400 feet elevation was 460 HP 23.7 baro approx. Can...

Stan

I don't know anything about the test you posted above, but here is the 496 dyno test data. You're only going to have 660 foot data to work with, thanks for your time. It would be great if Larry would like to contribute as well! Observed HP @ 6400 feet elevation was 460 HP 23.7 baro approx.

I should mention the 496 in my test makes 650 STP corrected HP @ 6200 RPM.

Good lucky Mark. Thanks, working on it, should have last of the testing done today. Little river drag strip 4/12/24. 4/13/24 so far Track elevation 475 feet 76 degrees Barometer uncorrected 29.68 54% humidity + 1558 Density altitude So far I've been 107.3 MPH in the 660. I will go across the scales...