Drag racing tonight - two questions
#41
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Outside Portland Maine
Posts: 2,023
Total Cats: 19
All you need is more power. At your power no-lift shift, launch control, a better tire seem unnecessary to me.
I would think with those times you're probably a touch under 200whp. Add another 50whp to it and you'll drop way more time than any other little thing you could change.
I would think with those times you're probably a touch under 200whp. Add another 50whp to it and you'll drop way more time than any other little thing you could change.
And the only reason I'm not at 250whp is because I don't know how much HP I have, and I'd rather have less than break something. And I'm too lazy to bring it to a dyno. They're all so far away!
#45
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Outside Portland Maine
Posts: 2,023
Total Cats: 19
What is the actual difference between proper FFS and just keeping your foot on the gas between shifts? The latter would just bounce off the rev limiter; what does the former do?
#46
I have timeslips for before ffs and after ffs, on a naturally aspirated car, not only do I chirp 2nd AND 3rd gear, but at the same mph trap speed, my ETs were .4 seconds faster, a little over .1 seconds per shift.
Since skidude would be shifting 4 times, even without a turbo, I'd estimate .5 seconds faster over all. With the turbo, not losing boost because you are never off the power would most likely benefit even more per shift.
I would say .8 seconds at the same power level, (once he gets more consistent 60 foots) is easily attainable with the ffs on his car.
Launch control will help you get your launches more consistent, leading to a more consistent 60foot.
Since skidude would be shifting 4 times, even without a turbo, I'd estimate .5 seconds faster over all. With the turbo, not losing boost because you are never off the power would most likely benefit even more per shift.
I would say .8 seconds at the same power level, (once he gets more consistent 60 foots) is easily attainable with the ffs on his car.
Launch control will help you get your launches more consistent, leading to a more consistent 60foot.
#49
Edit: 0.8 seconds? That sounds extremely optimistic. Unless it's a monster turbo that takes forever to spool between gears, which the 2560 is not.
#51
I mean, think what you want, but if a naturally aspirated car can drop over a tenth PER shift, I think it is likely that a turbo car, maintaining full boost after each gear shift, over 5 shifts, gains .3 seconds?
Even with a responsive turbo, going from vacuum to 10psi is not instantaneous.
I agree, the larger the turbo, and/or the higher the target boost pressure, the more no lift or flat foot shifting will benefit the elapsed times.
Even with a responsive turbo, going from vacuum to 10psi is not instantaneous.
I agree, the larger the turbo, and/or the higher the target boost pressure, the more no lift or flat foot shifting will benefit the elapsed times.
#52
I mean, think what you want, but if a naturally aspirated car can drop over a tenth PER shift, I think it is likely that a turbo car, maintaining full boost after each gear shift, over 5 shifts, gains .3 seconds?
Even with a responsive turbo, going from vacuum to 10psi is not instantaneous.
I agree, the larger the turbo, and/or the higher the target boost pressure, the more no lift or flat foot shifting will benefit the elapsed times.
Even with a responsive turbo, going from vacuum to 10psi is not instantaneous.
I agree, the larger the turbo, and/or the higher the target boost pressure, the more no lift or flat foot shifting will benefit the elapsed times.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post