GofasterFirebird

iTrader: (3)

http://vette383.tripod.com/

http://members.tripod.com/~Vette383/1987-CORVETTE.html



I think he must have the bottle. Opinions?

86FyrBrd

iTrader: (1)

Im gonna have to call no BS. I believe it!

GofasterFirebird

iTrader: (3)

Ok, what reasons to have that a Long Tube Runner car went 120 plus mph in the 1/4? Then why does everyone switch to mini, Super, LT1? Are they expecting more than 120 mph?

86FyrBrd

iTrader: (1)

He's got a 383 with higher compression, 3.45 gears, Bigger Injectors, Bigger throttle body, ported heads, pullies, cam, etc.

GofasterFirebird

iTrader: (3)

Yeah, I guess he does have pullies.....

He claims a stock chip. A stock manifold. Does that change your opinion?

86FyrBrd

iTrader: (1)

I mean I have some doubts, Im not positive, but I do think its possible.

hey maybe it just turns out to be the perfect combination.

Bort62

I called BS on that when it First Came up.

LTR & 120 mph Don't Add up.

The Same as his 350 RWHP Number and 120 Mph Do.

But then again, He does have pullies....

Bort62

Altho, I have got to say that is a FLAT Hp Curve...



11.3 at 120 mph tho seems just a little too far fetched...

Bort62

Goddamn Tripod...

Guest

http://members.tripod.com/~vette383/graph87.jpg
Nice 13 point Microsoft Excel curves there....


Seems a bit high for a 350hp car. Maybe it only weighs 2000#'s.

Brian'sIROC

The key is in the pulleys!

SQUIRLEYMOFO

Its all about hook and torque and a really good combo. Corvettes do hook better in close to stock form. If you go on the Corvette forum there are some pretty quick almost stock cars.

Vader

Screw the "pullies" (sheaves) - he's got STICKERS! It should be even faster!

82RECAROTA

Pony Killer

Well judging the rwhp and torque numbers, that are nearly 4 years old...
he's putting out between 410-430 flywheel hp, and appox 550 ftlbs of flywheel torque.

If the car's well set up for the track, grabbing good 60'ers... why call BS?

If everythings working together, which it looks like it is. no reason to belive it's not legit.
11.4@120 is right. 1.547 60'er that's right 7.261 @ 99.9... is right... all then number's work out.. what's there to question.

Rancid87

if i were running 13.5's on an AFR headed LT1-intaked roller cammed 350 i would be hesistant to call BS on anyone. Just because you need nitrous to run a certain ET doesn't mean everybody does

joezero

I'm gonna call and here's why. He's run more than once under 12 sec. but he doesn't have a roll cage. Call me crazy but don't you have to have at least a 6 point cage to run sub 12s at an NHRA track? Just a thought.

REDZ28

The 87 has a 4 point roll bar in it and Tulsa isnt a NHRA Track! Also did you see the weather for that day? Look at the top left corner of the time slip. It was a VERY GOOD AIR DAY!! Thats why it ran so good that day! On an average day it runs 11.60 at 118mph! Last nite my friends 85 with basically the same setup went 11.74 at 116.76 with no traction. So beleive what you want I ve seen it with my own eyes many times! Come to Tulsa international tonite and you will see the white 85 run. Find a member here that lives In Tulsa and send them out. You will see the truth.

GTA91

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, I can believe that. Why do you guys always have to go back to the hp/ET equation? The power numbers aren't always the factor in ET. If a car's suspension is awesome, you won't need near as much power as the guys next to you that has more power but not as much traction. Simple as that. I've seen it a hundred times. What about Mike Davis's car that runs like 11.9's with only aobut 300RWHP??? Hmmmmmm..... suspension/stall/tires maybe??? Just IMHO. Later!

joezero

Again, you're comparing apples to oranges. I'm not saying that it didn't run that time, he's got a time slip to show for it. What I am saying though is that he did not run it an an NHRA track so he didn't have to meet NHRA guidelines. I bet the car wouldn't pass safety inspection and they wouldn't even let him run. So if you want ppl to stop saying this is BS once and for all, get the guy to run it at an NHRA track and return the same time. But I bet after what's needed for him to pass safety inspection he might return to the 12s.

GTA91

iTrader: (1)

Does it really matter then?!?!?! He ran the time, so its not BS....... PERIOD! You just admitted it. Who cares if it can pass tech or meet NHRA req's, the fact is that it can run those times. Does anyone care about tech when you're street racing??? LATER!

joezero

Because the reason ppl are calling is BS is because he's claiming to be so fast with the setup he has. What I'm saying is stop saying you're the sh*t if you can't even run at an NHRA track. And we're not talking about street racing, we're talking about running at a track. I'm saying that he has a time slip, and I'm not saying that he faked the time slip. What I am saying is that there are a bunch of holes in his story, and this is one of them. Who knows what else has been done to the car if he runs at a track that doesn't have safety inspections. NHRA tracks require that nitrous lines be run outside of the car. This guy may have then running inside so that you can't see it. Who knows. All I'm saying is that to me (and I'm guessing others as well) I won't necessarily believe that a setup identical to his would have the same results if he were to run according to NHRA rules. Go pick up any magazine like Hotrod, and you'll see all the guys in there following NHRA rules and passing inspection. If this guy runs every week, which it seems he does, then he should have at least once run at an NHRA track so that he would truly have bragging rights. But maybe that's just me.

Oh, and I forgot to mention in the previous post. Go to the links section of the website for the vette. On there you'll find a link for NHRA, so that tells me that this guy knows what he's doing, and isn't just in some backwoods somewhere.

REDZ28

Never said he was the sh*t.I Just showed a person who asked what he needed to run 11s in 1/4 so I sent him links thats all. But the morons started talkng sh*t. ANd I just tried to explain. But hey keep coming up with reasons why its isnt or it cant, but the facts are it did!!! And by the way My friend with the 85 Vette went 11.74 at 116.76 last nite at The strip with out traction! But im sure youll find more reasons to not believe that also. But whatever. Have fun wishing while other people are doing! Oh and also the 85 doesnt have NOS, Turbo, Supercharger either!!

JAY87GTA

Why does it have to be an NHRA track? We run at Bradenton, Fl all the time. It's not an NHRA track. Does that all of a sudden make our timeslips no longer valid? We T&T an 11.50 Mustang all the time there, no cage, no firesuit. They simply told the driver that IF he wants to enter any events he needs to get it done. But we just go for the fun and T&T, so why hack the car. Some people get mad when someon is faster than them I guess

GofasterFirebird

iTrader: (3)

What makes you think my car runs 13.5 on an LT1 intake setup? Cause it is in my sig? Use judgement befroe you speak; otherwise you sound foolish.

GTA91

iTrader: (1)

Well that sounded horribly stupid. Why have it in your sig then? Don't ask us to use judgement on your "lies" about your ET then. Gees come on..... Whats it run then??



As for this vette, I agree with you guys. It still runs these times irregardless whether its NHRA teched or not. Just don't really see a point here. What about local cars here in SE Missouri that are running low 5s and high 4s in the 1/8th (hmm about high7s in1/4 if they'd go that far) and not even teched? Guess they're not really fast, honest cars then????? WTF?!?!

rdog30

Good points GTA91


I think this car can run these times. He has the slip to prove it. The vette is lighter than a f-body. 400+ hp motor should be able to run a 11.3 if everything is setup right.

Rancid87

I suggest you use spell check before you post. Otherwise you look foolish.

GofasterFirebird

iTrader: (3)

Look, I spelled a word wrong!! Big deal. Should I insult you for your capitalization? Or wouldn't you really care? Now you see my stance. And BTW, "irregardless" is not a word.

I also was unaware that my sig had to hold current times and modifications. When someone lashes out at my times with "an AFR headed, roller cammed, etc. engine" I must dispute. Story is, I swithed to the LT1 and then broke my rear end. What does it run? I am sure not 13.5. I should list I didn't run the 13.5 with the T-56, or the "parts pile" either. The times I have listed are what the car was capable of the last time I ran it. I had stock runners and chip. Yes, I did have AFR heads but I doubt they were really utilized due to the stock runners.

Now, if I could drag this post back to my original topic. Again, I see many people saying things to the effect of "The car ran the time, believe it!" Although the person saying that may understand, everyone else is left where we started. I think most will agree that the car is a freak. With the 'stock' chip and stock base manifold and even long tube runners it over achieves for its parts content.

Hodge

the part that bothers me most about this is that he has a 383 in a MAF car with the stock chip. Anyone whos been around a while should know that the 383 should pull more than the 255 g/s max values in the stock programming.

No way that car is running that good on the stock programming.

I can see that the car has the right parts to run good numbers. Ported base, ASM runners, good heads and cam, 383 cubes, etc. However, it's hard to believe on the stock chip in a MAF car.

MY $.02

Hodge

Jekyll & Hyde

The original point of this argument was:

DOES IT RUN THESE TIMES WITH NITROUS? He says that he doesn't use blower or N02!!

This is not an argument of NHRA Track saftey or if his car ran these times.

REDZ28

I wouldnt say the 87 was a freak, because my other friends 85 runs the same with less gear, less converter and aftermarket Fermado chip.[Ithink thats how you spell his name.}

86FyrBrd

iTrader: (1)

Does the vette have any better programming? or a better MAF sensor? I dunno just asking.

TPI Guy

I'm not buying it, and here's why:

The guy is running a 219/219 roller cam on a stock chip in a corvette. Also, I believe he said that he was using 1.6 rockers. From putting a 219/219 in a 350 ... with the stock chip, and watching it idle at 1200-1300, I can't imagine a corvette owner deal with this for very long, even with the 33 cubes attempting to take the cam.

Along the same lines, I just installed a long tube runnered tpi system on my car with a 224/224 flat tappet cam (lsa 112) and it would idle around 600, but fall directly on it face when the pedal got more than 30% throttle. I am going to assume a similar functionality of the stock chips, and that leads me to believe his car would perform equally poorly.

Also, depending on what year his tranmission is ... that thing isn't going to hold up to that kind of power ... B and M shift kit or no. I have witnessed two of them explode with what I consider to be moderate amounts of power behind them. My point is, even if the engine can run the number, the transmission won't.

Also, I never won a spelling bee, so I would appreciate not being anally violated for spelling or other gramatical errors.

REDZ28

Some transmissions do blow thats true. But The 85 went 10 years running 11s on a stock 88 700r4 with just a trans pack shift improver kit and governor spring kit. Last week the 85 lost third gear so a friend of mine who builds transmission rebuilt the 700. Friday nite the car went 11.74 at 116.76 with that trans and no traction. no parts upgrade still stock with trans pac and governor spring kit and new clutches! So your wrong about the transmission also.

REDZ28

I have a question, would a speed density system have more or less trouble running this setup with a stock chip then a MAF system?

GTA91

iTrader: (1)

Well, I think that if you take the time to change your mods in your sig, you should change your ET or make note that you haven't run it yet with the new mods. Otherwise your car just appears SLOW!!


As for the vette, I thought it was a 350 and not a stroker????


Also, I could see it possible to run these times with a stock MAF chip. I have a buddy with a '88 Formula with a 400+ci stroker, AFRs, mystery cam, LT headers, and a miniram that runs mid low 11's THROUGH the mufflers. He hasn't done ANYTHING to the chip. He's hoping for mid 10's with a DFI setup. I'm not saying cars like this are normal, but they are out there...... JMHO Later


redz28.... good question, which would be better or run worse w. similar mods. MAF or SD??

REDZ28

You I would like to know which adapts better with out tuning the chip. I was told that speed density has idle probs with bigger cams and stock chip, is this true?

Bort62

In general MAF will run better w/o Tuning because it actually measures the amount of air enterting the engine whereas SD calculates it.

SD has a greater tuning potential however because it is not limited by the 255g/s limit of the MAF setup.

I am still having a hard time beliving this.

Todd85

I actually chatted with the owner of the vette in question and a buddy of his who ran similar times years ago on-line, I believe their results are very, very believable.... with just a bit of logic.

I too have a 383, however, I am running a unported Superram through poor flowing iron heads and 9.7-1 cr, whereas this gentlemen has utilized the best aftermarket long tube runners in my opinion (ASM), and a good stout aluminum headed 11-1 cr motor. I dynoed at 362 rwhp with my Superram 383 that is not optimized, he dynoed at 350 rwhp with a well optimized long tube runner motor..... I believe his dyno numbers very much, however, his very large torque spike is caused by the converter flash and the dyno attempting to keep up... this is very common for people who dyno with the converter unlocked. If he had locked his converter, he undoubtly would have around the neighborhood of 400-420 rwtq. I think he could have run better with a Superram, but thats another debate.

With a 3450 lb raceweight I have run a best of 11.55 @ 116.99 in pretty good air, but nothing great. However I have also ran 117.7ish traps, with a lightweight friend driving my vette (100 lbs lighter than me) he has run a best of 11.48 et and a best trap of 118.7 ish... thus the raceweight was at 3350lb with him racing.

The vette in question in this thread raceweight is unknown, however its pretty easy to get a C4 down to 3000-3050 lbs, thus if the driver is 150-200 lbs, his raceweight will be 3150 to 3250 lbs, thus I believe his Corvette can trap what I trap, and even add 1 mph. Therefore, in average air, I'll bet a nickel he traps around 117 give or take a mph.... in pretty good air 118-119 traps and in very good air 120 mph traps, I know mine would run about 1 mph lower than the numbers I just stated.

It can be seen on his timeslip he was running in 47 degree temps, 30.45 barometer and 42% humidity which equals a 26 deg dewpoint. I also know after a quick check at my dragstrip locater, that Tulsa International is 700 feet actual elevation track. The above #'s equate to a "Negative 474 feet Densisty Altitude"..... this is classified as very, very good air as every bracket racer would tell you. Thus accounting for his very impressive 120 mph trap speed.

I actually think he could have ran better.... his 1.54 60 ft was a solid hook, but not a perfect hook, I think with an absolute perfect hook he could have knocked off another 1/2 tenth or so of his 11.39 et. with a 1.50-1.52 60 ft time.

Its all logical, I believe he ran it, I also believe in the summer air its a mid to high 11 second vette depending on the air and track conditions.....

As a final and more clear comparison.... I have run a best trap speed of 117.7 in a DA roughly at 800 feet at a raceweight of 3450 lbs with 362 rwhp ------ The Corvette in question has run a 120.1 in a DA at Negative 400 feet in an unknown raceweight, but could be guessed as around a 3300 lbs with 350 rwhp..... very logical and believable, however, thats only if you believe my numbers.

Its in the air and raceweight....

As a note, MAF cars can easily go deep 11's and possibly even high 10's, we currently have a corvetteforum member running a 85 vette 406 Superrammed motor with a solid roller cam who has coerced 11.1's @ 122 mph out of his corvette through a maf with the cooling fins and screens removed and 24lb injectors. He's working on 10's.... dunno if he will get there, but he is obviously getting pretty close.

cheers,
Todd

REDZ28

Ok thanks bort. And thanks Todd!! Another voice of reason. That same day My friends 85 vette with almost the same combo as the 87 went 11.34 at 118 and last friday it went 11.74 at 116.76 with a 1.67 no traction 60 ft. I would like to know more about your guys cars where could i get more info on those vettes. thanks!!

GofasterFirebird

iTrader: (3)

Todd, I value your opinion: I have questions


Do you think the results of your car and combination "typical"? How about the car in question?

Is your chip stock, also?

Have you flowed your heads?

If these times can be achieved on the Long tube runner setup, why do you believe the SR, miniram, LT1, and etc are so popular?

Do you not believe the Superram to be far superior to the Long tube runner setup in the quarter mile?


EDIT
I went backand read your web page again. You pretty much disband the Long Tube runners as performance pieces. Also, I see your chip is probably far from stock. I also do not think compression is an issue here as you have steel head with 9.8. Thanks

REDZ28

Ive wondered that my self, I dont understand the popularity of those set ups when I ve seen these long tube runner cars run like they do. Thast why Im not changing from my long tubes!!

Todd85

Red, no problem.

To learn more about my set-up, I have a personal webpage, however its a bit emberassing right now due to the limited webspace I have right now,.... I used to have video's and what have not, but had to get rid of as according to my host. ... but you can still see some information at:

www.corvetteforum.net/c4/beach_bum/

The low 11 second corvette I mention in the above post has a webpage:

http://hometown.aol.com/aheis46312/myhomepage/auto.html

His name is Corkvette1 on the corvetteforum if you have any questions. His recent 1/4 mile times were witnessed by 50+ corvetteforum members at a recent Corvette Challenge event at Etown.

Hope you enjoy.

Gofaster,

I think my performance results are very average at best.... I do not have an optimized set-up. However, I am making the most out of what I have.... I believe with better aluminum heads that flow more and I can run a compression ratio closer to 11-1, and a ported Superram and maybe Corkvettes TPIS roller cam I can run very, very low 11's and possibly high 10's.... but right now to answer your question, I am average. However, many do the same modifications and do not achieve the same performance, however this is typically due to something being wrong and they don't know it... the motor will run smoothly, however, it will be missing a lot of power.... typically the valvetrain is my guess, but varies from car to car. You MUST pay attention to every detail to achieve the results your motor is capable of. It takes patience to extract the power... sticky tires and the right converter too.

I have a Formato chip right now, I also own a TPIS level 5 chip and a couple of self modifed chips.... they all run about the same in my set-up... I cannot run a stock chip, it will not run right, but this has more to do with my very, very slow bastard 85 ecm than anything else.

My heads flow 255/185 as per my head porter at .550 lift and 260/190 at .600 lift (Which it never gets too), thus I am making the power I am with 255/185 flow numbers. These are ported Iron Dart 2 heads with 64cc chamber and 200 cc intake runners, which I wouldn't let him touch. AFR 190's flow better than that out of the box and you can run another point of compression with a 50-60 lb weight savings.... obvious I have the wrong set of heads on my motor at the moment.

I think the vette in question is a shining example of what a long tube runnered motor can run with everything done right, well matched heads, cam, right converter and gears with sticky tires in great weather. However, I believe the Superram is superior to all long tube runner motors simply because of potential, I think the corvette in question could have run 11.1ish @ 122-124 mph in that weather with everything working.... however, he probably would have wanted another 3-4 hundred rpm stall to keep the same 60ft. The very nice thing about a SR motor, you can pull to 6000 rpm, yet the motor will be perfectly happy with a 2500-2800 rpm converter and stock 3.07 gears.... you kind of have your cake and eat it too.... but make no mistake about it, the SR is a torque manifold and not a rpm manifold.... you will make more peak torque and average torque with a SR than long tube runners, but not at 2500 rpm.

The Miniram or LT-1 conversion offer even more potential than the SR, but at a cost and that is additional stall and/or converter to optimize with a lot more cam..... I think most nowadays understand this.

I will say that it seems that the ASM runners always get a bit more out of them than the other long tube runners.... they seem to be the bridge between other long tube runners and the SR.... not sure though, just a casual observation.

I think Fbodies can run the same or at least close to the same numbers as a Corvette with these motors.... not sure but the aerodynamics appear to be similar, I think the Fbodies might be a bit heavier, but you can knock that down with some clever weight loss tactics.... no other reason I can think of they can't.

talk to you later
Todd

REDZ28

I found your site the other nite Todd didnt realise it was you. Nice car! Runs great!! You have a very informative site and good history on your car. You went threw alot of the same stuff my friend in the white 85 did. The red 87 basically just copied it as close as he could. The 85 has less gear and stock converter and ran .05 faster that same nite the 87 went the 11.39 but the 87 had a littler more mph kinda wierd. Also the 85 has a formato chip too! It was perfect weather and a good track it made for a one time great run for both cars!! Your know alot about these cars thats for sure. Thanks again for your educated input to this thread!!

GofasterFirebird

iTrader: (3)

http://www.phil.tobin.net/Hoover/top.html


I am sure many of you have seen this. IMO, this is what it takes to run fast. Just look at the performance before the final few attempts. It runs similar to the car in question. Yet the car in question has far, far less parts on it. I am just stunned at the difference of the money spent.

Also, Todd, what cam is that your would like to have? Reasons? Duration? Thanks!

tpi_roc

Hoover is your daddy.

Todd85

Thanks Red !! Good to hear somebody actually read that page.

Gofaster,

The Cam I am interested in is a TPIS solid roller cam, you can see the specs and part # within the link above for Corkvette. The reason is that Corkvette's performance jumped from roughly the same times I run to low 11's at over 120 mph with no other changes.... because a Superram is still a low rpm manifold, nobody really has gone to a solid roller with it, really didn't think it would help more than 10-15 hp myself.... guess I was wrong.

I think if it wasn't for Corkvette experimenting, nobody would have know the performance increase to be so dramatic.... this doesn't mean I will receive the same gain, I've learned no matter how much two set-ups look alike on paper, they will both react differently to the same modification 1/2 the time.... I find myself scratching my head all the time.

I communicate fairly regular with Phil via Email, his set-up truly is one of the great ones..... if you have an LT-1, not a bad idea to carefully listen & learn from his set-up.... that 10 second LT-1 is a driver too.... doesn't sit in the garage collecting dust. He really knows his stuff too.

cheers,
Todd

86IROCTHD

were these times corrected for elevation?

REDZ28

Nope! They are actuall!