steve cowan wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 11:05 pm
Screenshot_20220828-194607_Chrome.jpg20220806_155436.jpg
I lowered the front of my car and inch about a month ago, spent 2 days checking wheel alignment, square of car with laser off crank centreline and plumbob.
It's all factory set up but I keep rear leaf springs, shackles, caltracs loose for ease of movement.
Front camber at ride height is zero and at extension it goes through a negative 2 degrees to zero at full suspension extension.
At 3600 pounds I push my car pretty easy in staging lanes.
It's certainly not perfect but it's not bad either.
HJ 1 tonners have the front leaf mounts staggered on the chassis (right side trailing) I have one, don't know about the utes.
Interesting,
I didn't know that.
I just measured mine and same both sides
Mine showed up in the shackles, right side angled backwards left side angled forward, I have falcon insulators around the spring so I changed the center bolt holes in those to get it square. I haven't checked other models, I don't know why they did it.
Had a HK Brougham back in the day, it had a 2" twist through the shell, left hand side sat level, right hand side had a 2" rake.
Ignorance leads to confidence more often than knowledge does.
Nah, I'm not leaving myself out of the ignorant brigade....at times.
digger wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:09 pm
the engine hp curve comes from the engine torque curve and vice versa. The torque curve to the wheels which is what we are maximising as this the actual tractive force propelling the vehcile comes when you maximise power to wheels available at any instant in time/speed/position and so forth.
This of course is true. By definition at a specific rpm torque and hp both are maximized. But to maximize the hp at the wheels you need to maximize the hp at the engine, which is definitely not the torque peak. So you need to optimize the drivetrain, and therefore power and torque are not interchangeable.
David didn’t say torque peak he said torque curve. Then there is the other major point that when looking at vehicle dynamics you can’t say torque without defining where in the system you mean.
You can do the exact same calculations and come to the same answer using either engine torque curve or engine power curve that’s what interchangeable means
One thing that needs to be put into perspective is that we don’t answer to sims. Good ones guid us but the best class racers keep proving them inaccurate.
Great for aero, fuel distribution, and oil control
In road racing we are always playing with alignment. It’s a balance between handling and in lower power classes, rolling resistance. A road racing friend has a street car and bought some rear end parts from a popular drag racing aftermarket supplier. He had a hard time getting it where he wanted it and their tech support was flippant “we don’t have this problem with other people”, paraphrasing “Yeah because most everyone isn’t measuring this shit”.
I have a bit of Setup and building Circuit and roundy experience.
FYI Tom (sorry OP for getting off track) I was in Warnambool today picking up a carb I was buying. Address ended up being where a motoring museum is being set up. Guy showed me around. There was a maroon VK or VL Brad Jones Auscar (Cooper Tools) another white Auscar that memory escapes me but I don’t recall Yuasa Batteries, and an ACDelco Blue Pontiac bought over from the states but too late and never raced.
I’m a Street/Strip guy..... like to think outside the quadrilateral parallelogram.
If you data log the acceleration in any gear you will see that the G's curve follows the torque curve.
But, if I run a simulation using a CVT with the RPM locked at peak torque and another simulation with the RPM locked at peak HP because of better gearing at each point the peak HP RPM run will be faster.
Stan Weiss wrote: ↑Sun Nov 20, 2022 9:37 am
I use torque in my simulations.
If you data log the acceleration in any gear you will see that the G's curve follows the torque curve.
But, if I run a simulation using a CVT with the RPM locked at peak torque and another simulation with the RPM locked at peak HP because of better gearing at each point the peak HP RPM run will be faster.
Stan Weiss wrote: ↑Sun Nov 20, 2022 9:37 am
I use torque in my simulations.
If you data log the acceleration in any gear you will see that the G's curve follows the torque curve.
But, if I run a simulation using a CVT with the RPM locked at peak torque and another simulation with the RPM locked at peak HP because of better gearing at each point the peak HP RPM run will be faster.
F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 18, 2022 11:58 am
Your missing the point.. You are not the first guy who tried to get a 350 sbc in a 3600 lbs Street trim Camaro into the 11's...
You can make 470 hp from the 10.50:1 CR sbc. fir sure..
BUT NOT AT 6000 RPM.. It will not happen.
This engine has been built to 470 hp + and minus over 1 million times... Your will be no different.
For Calgary air you ned to build a 490 to 510 HP engine
dyno tested.. To get 470 hp in the car @ 3000 ft elevation.. ON YOUR BEST DAY.
you need to plan and account for this in your build if yiu want that xar to run 11.'s. there.
It will not happen with a 3.73 rear gear....
Best to have a reality based conversation.
Then yoy can make a plan that gets your street car to a 11 sec ET @ 3600 lbs @ 3000 ft elevation.
Umm, it's actually not that hard to make 500hp @ 6000rpm from 355 cubes, even at 10.5:1 comp.
It's not the 80's any more.
I could (& have) do that with iron heads, flat tappet cam & pump fuel.
F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 18, 2022 11:58 am
Your missing the point.. You are not the first guy who tried to get a 350 sbc in a 3600 lbs Street trim Camaro into the 11's...
You can make 470 hp from the 10.50:1 CR sbc. fir sure..
BUT NOT AT 6000 RPM.. It will not happen.
This engine has been built to 470 hp + and minus over 1 million times... Your will be no different.
For Calgary air you ned to build a 490 to 510 HP engine
dyno tested.. To get 470 hp in the car @ 3000 ft elevation.. ON YOUR BEST DAY.
you need to plan and account for this in your build if yiu want that xar to run 11.'s. there.
It will not happen with a 3.73 rear gear....
Best to have a reality based conversation.
Then yoy can make a plan that gets your street car to a 11 sec ET @ 3600 lbs @ 3000 ft elevation.
Umm, it's actually not that hard to make 500hp @ 6000rpm from 355 cubes, even at 10.5:1 comp.
It's not the 80's any more.
I could (& have) do that with iron heads, flat tappet cam & pump fuel.
F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 18, 2022 11:58 am
Your missing the point.. You are not the first guy who tried to get a 350 sbc in a 3600 lbs Street trim Camaro into the 11's...
You can make 470 hp from the 10.50:1 CR sbc. fir sure..
BUT NOT AT 6000 RPM.. It will not happen.
This engine has been built to 470 hp + and minus over 1 million times... Your will be no different.
For Calgary air you ned to build a 490 to 510 HP engine
dyno tested.. To get 470 hp in the car @ 3000 ft elevation.. ON YOUR BEST DAY.
you need to plan and account for this in your build if yiu want that xar to run 11.'s. there.
It will not happen with a 3.73 rear gear....
Best to have a reality based conversation.
Then yoy can make a plan that gets your street car to a 11 sec ET @ 3600 lbs @ 3000 ft elevation.
Umm, it's actually not that hard to make 500hp @ 6000rpm from 355 cubes, even at 10.5:1 comp.
It's not the 80's any more.
I could (& have) do that with iron heads, flat tappet cam & pump fuel.
I'am building a 350 with a flat tappet cam 250s @ .050 and fuelie heads for my truck, I'am using a air gap, but in your opinion how much would I pick up with a single plane, and which one?
Racing a NA NHRA stocker should be mandatory before any posting.
F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 18, 2022 11:58 am
Your missing the point.. You are not the first guy who tried to get a 350 sbc in a 3600 lbs Street trim Camaro into the 11's...
You can make 470 hp from the 10.50:1 CR sbc. fir sure..
BUT NOT AT 6000 RPM.. It will not happen.
This engine has been built to 470 hp + and minus over 1 million times... Your will be no different.
For Calgary air you ned to build a 490 to 510 HP engine
dyno tested.. To get 470 hp in the car @ 3000 ft elevation.. ON YOUR BEST DAY.
you need to plan and account for this in your build if yiu want that xar to run 11.'s. there.
It will not happen with a 3.73 rear gear....
Best to have a reality based conversation.
Then yoy can make a plan that gets your street car to a 11 sec ET @ 3600 lbs @ 3000 ft elevation.
Umm, it's actually not that hard to make 500hp @ 6000rpm from 355 cubes, even at 10.5:1 comp.
It's not the 80's any more.
I could (& have) do that with iron heads, flat tappet cam & pump fuel.
Not at 6000 rpm... peak. Happy dyno
Nope, stuska with depac, dead honest, not my dyno.
You need 110% ve to get there, which is not a backyard throw together, but nor is it a super stocker.
Here you go, 1st one I could find in my phone, made a good bit more than 500, but went 515hp @ 6000 on its way through.
20220603_155331.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 18, 2022 11:58 am
Your missing the point.. You are not the first guy who tried to get a 350 sbc in a 3600 lbs Street trim Camaro into the 11's...
You can make 470 hp from the 10.50:1 CR sbc. fir sure..
BUT NOT AT 6000 RPM.. It will not happen.
This engine has been built to 470 hp + and minus over 1 million times... Your will be no different.
For Calgary air you ned to build a 490 to 510 HP engine
dyno tested.. To get 470 hp in the car @ 3000 ft elevation.. ON YOUR BEST DAY.
you need to plan and account for this in your build if yiu want that xar to run 11.'s. there.
It will not happen with a 3.73 rear gear....
Best to have a reality based conversation.
Then yoy can make a plan that gets your street car to a 11 sec ET @ 3600 lbs @ 3000 ft elevation.
Umm, it's actually not that hard to make 500hp @ 6000rpm from 355 cubes, even at 10.5:1 comp.
It's not the 80's any more.
I could (& have) do that with iron heads, flat tappet cam & pump fuel.
I'am building a 350 with a flat tappet cam 250s @ .050 and fuelie heads for my truck, I'am using a air gap, but in your opinion how much would I pick up with a single plane, and which one?
No idea lol, & I am certainly not the one to tell you how to make a sbc sing!
Don't know what David is trying to achieve here?
But if you really want to optimize a combo in a drag car you need to look at the complete car, every part of it as part of that combination.
And really think about it before you do anything.
If you don't have those skills become friends with someone that races in stock or super stock on an index and learn everything you can
Cheers
