95' Camaro
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: oak lawn, IL
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
95' Camaro
Hey guys, i've got a friend that I know is running 12.5's in the quarter, i've seen the timeslips. i was wondering how much hp and tq he's running, because i have a chance to buy it from him for a nice price. thanx guys
Trending Topics
#9
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kensington, CT
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12.5 at 127, is not a traction problem, it is a crappy driver! I have seen 12.5 from 106 mph traps. With that mph and figuring he would go much faster with traction he would have well over 500 hp at the flywheel!
#10
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kona, Hawaii / Redlands, CA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91' RS
Engine: Built 355
Transmission: Probuilt 700r4
OK....
Originally posted by 5.0mustang
12.5 at 127, is not a traction problem, it is a crappy driver! I have seen 12.5 from 106 mph traps. With that mph and figuring he would go much faster with traction he would have well over 500 hp at the flywheel!
12.5 at 127, is not a traction problem, it is a crappy driver! I have seen 12.5 from 106 mph traps. With that mph and figuring he would go much faster with traction he would have well over 500 hp at the flywheel!
500 horsepower out of an LS1 will probably spin the tires all the way down the track until the top of 3rd. Keep that in mind.
#11
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kensington, CT
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually before YOU jump to conclusions I have driven many 120+ mph cars, Hard! I have a feeling with all that money he spent some on traction devices and all he could pull was a 12.5.
I just saw a video of an 11 second run on 18" wheels and tires! He actually trapped lower than 127 also!
I am sorry, but unless he had 19" wheels and a road course suspension, he should be in the 11s, from what I have driven and seen!
I just saw a video of an 11 second run on 18" wheels and tires! He actually trapped lower than 127 also!
I am sorry, but unless he had 19" wheels and a road course suspension, he should be in the 11s, from what I have driven and seen!
#12
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kona, Hawaii / Redlands, CA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91' RS
Engine: Built 355
Transmission: Probuilt 700r4
Originally posted by 5.0mustang
Actually before YOU jump to conclusions I have driven many 120+ mph cars, Hard! I have a feeling with all that money he spent some on traction devices and all he could pull was a 12.5.
I just saw a video of an 11 second run on 18" wheels and tires! He actually trapped lower than 127 also!
I am sorry, but unless he had 19" wheels and a road course suspension, he should be in the 11s, from what I have driven and seen!
Actually before YOU jump to conclusions I have driven many 120+ mph cars, Hard! I have a feeling with all that money he spent some on traction devices and all he could pull was a 12.5.
I just saw a video of an 11 second run on 18" wheels and tires! He actually trapped lower than 127 also!
I am sorry, but unless he had 19" wheels and a road course suspension, he should be in the 11s, from what I have driven and seen!
Also, you are ASSUMING the guy spent money on traction, he obviously did not spend enough.
#13
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kensington, CT
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But if you compare my time with my mph, it is very close. If you compare his time to his mph, there is something wrong.
If I were running 15.5 with a 99 mph trap it would be the same thing.
Who ever said I was a great driver. Most of those cars had DRs, which made it much easier, and most were autos, leaving no tire spin, or very minimal between shifts.
I have a feeling that his mph is wrong, and that he might mean 117, not 127!
If I were running 15.5 with a 99 mph trap it would be the same thing.
Who ever said I was a great driver. Most of those cars had DRs, which made it much easier, and most were autos, leaving no tire spin, or very minimal between shifts.
I have a feeling that his mph is wrong, and that he might mean 117, not 127!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
84z96L31vortec
Tech / General Engine
7
08-20-2017 12:16 AM