350hp = 1/4 ?! - TCCoA Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 13 (permalink) Old 11-28-2004, 03:09 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 30
350hp = 1/4 ?!

Whos running about 350 flywheel horse power and what kinda 1/4 times and speeds are you getting just curoiuse
LoneWolf is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 (permalink) Old 11-28-2004, 03:12 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Erie, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 3,183
Send a message via AIM to KrAzyT
im 300 at the fly and running 14.8 HP isnt everything.. my convertor is still stock

1996 Thunderbird 4.6 -Sold-
259.4 hp and 285.3 tq on mustang dyno
Bunch of motorcycles
2004 F150
KrAzyT is offline  
post #3 of 13 (permalink) Old 11-28-2004, 05:21 PM
Like Titles Matter
Moderator
 
kdanner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Austin, TX Ya'll
Age: 51
Posts: 2,129
Mine should be about 350 flywheel.

1996 Thunderbird LX- [email protected] NA
1998 GT - [email protected]
2001 Lightning - [email protected]
1996 GT 248A - [email protected]?
2011 GT - [email protected] 180 MPH at the Texas Mile


generated by sloganizer.net
kdanner is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 13 (permalink) Old 11-28-2004, 05:25 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,361
Quote:
Originally posted by kdanner
Mine should be about 350 flywheel.
Which proves it's definetly not all about horse power.
DMcBrideBoston is offline  
post #5 of 13 (permalink) Old 11-30-2004, 09:54 AM
5th Gear Poster
 
Blackicelsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Windsor, Calif
Age: 50
Posts: 456
Send a message via Yahoo to Blackicelsc
All the HP in the world is useless without a good chassis, traction, and limited weight.
HP increase does not always equal ET improvements.

I've seen guy spend thousands of dollars on HP parts, only to run slower, or the same.

get it to the ground, and you'll really feel it.

The Mark VIII is "rated" at 280 hp. if you line up a mark VIII, with another car that has 280 flwheel hp, whoever makes the best use of that HP is going to run the better ET.

Find out what causes HP drag/loss, and you can go faster with less power.

HP killers?
weight
drag
reciprocating mass
friction
chassis flex
slippage/traction

...there's plenty more.

You can play with this if you want....but it isnt very accurate at all. Just calculate a loss of at least 20% loss of HP to the rear wheels. In the case of 350 flywheel HP, if it was a A/T car, you could use a estimated HP of 280(just an example)
http://www.team3rdgen.com/modules.php?name=Dyno

according to its answers, I am making over 246 RWHP in my 4150 lb car.
I WISH!!!

Last edited by Blackicelsc; 11-30-2004 at 10:07 AM.
Blackicelsc is offline  
post #6 of 13 (permalink) Old 11-30-2004, 02:03 PM
Like Titles Matter
Moderator
 
kdanner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Austin, TX Ya'll
Age: 51
Posts: 2,129
Uh yeah that calculator is bad. It says I have 73 more RWHP than I actually do, and then says I should run over a second slower and 7 MPH less than I actually do.
kdanner is offline  
post #7 of 13 (permalink) Old 12-01-2004, 12:27 AM
Formerly Fdawg97LX
 
Fdawg03SVT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Medford, MA
Age: 36
Posts: 3,186
Send a message via AIM to Fdawg03SVT
yea its definitly way off. i put in my info (3972 lbs and 100.02 mph) it says i got 310 rwhp. never been on a dyno but i doubt i've got more than 250 rwhp.

frank

2007 Dodge Ram 1500
2008 Suzuki GSX-R1000

Previous Rides:
2003 Suzuki GSX-R750
2003 Mustang Cobra 10th Anniversary - 11.2 @ 130
1997 Thunderbird LX 4.6 - 13.7 @ 103
1993 Thunderbird LX 3.8 - Slow
1990 Thunderbird 3.8 - Slower
Fdawg03SVT is offline  
post #8 of 13 (permalink) Old 12-04-2004, 07:58 PM
Illinois Chapter Director
 
TydlwavS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Shorewood, IL
Age: 41
Posts: 1,787
Send a message via AIM to TydlwavS
I've got somewhere in that ballpark with my 3.60 pulley...maybe a bit closer to 380. I haven't dyno'ed yet to see exactly where I'm at with that pulley.

I have seen 104mph on stock tires in the 1/4. I finally got 15" drag radials so I should see a little better performance next summer if the car is still around. I ran a 13.53 letting off the throttle a bit twice and spinning off the line a tad. Once these BFG's are used up I'll be on a slick.

I need to take the car out with tires and make some passes to get used to the power. My 178hp car was much different.

"That is the worst looking car in the whole world. I'd rather look at one of your dingle berries"

Check out what we've been up to....
http://forums.tccoa.com/forumdisplay.php?f=54
TydlwavS is offline  
post #9 of 13 (permalink) Old 12-13-2004, 05:38 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 178
The HP calculator is probably close. It says I have about 220rwhp. I don't think I have that though, probably close to 200.
cman2007 is offline  
post #10 of 13 (permalink) Old 12-13-2004, 07:50 PM
High-Mileage 4.6L Thrasher
Moderator
 
Johnny Langton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,232
LOL..that thing is a joke..
says I had 322 rwhp when i made the 12.98 pass...I know for certain that it was only 254.
JL

1997 Thunderbird-4.6L/[email protected]
'05 F250 Crewcab 2WD-6.8L V10/5R110/4.10
2010 Lincoln MKT-3.5L EcoBoost V6/[email protected] stock
Fuelly
Johnny Langton is offline  
post #11 of 13 (permalink) Old 12-13-2004, 09:00 PM
5th Gear Poster
 
Blackicelsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Windsor, Calif
Age: 50
Posts: 456
Send a message via Yahoo to Blackicelsc
it truely is one of the worst HP online facoring proggies I have ever seen.

My buddy's 70 Camaro has 975, according to that thing....he really only has about 780

sorry I even posted it...I guess it is more of a joke, than a guide.
Blackicelsc is offline  
post #12 of 13 (permalink) Old 12-16-2004, 07:42 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 921
I think if it would factor in gear and tranny ratio's it MIGHT be a little more accurate..
mylittleblackbird is offline  
post #13 of 13 (permalink) Old 12-17-2004, 12:33 AM
PostWhore
 
jturmel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: OKC, OK
Posts: 1,848
Send a message via Yahoo to jturmel
Quote:
Originally posted by mylittleblackbird
I think if it would factor in gear and tranny ratio's it MIGHT be a little more accurate..
Oh really? Why is that?

1991 Sport 5.0
4R70W Converted, U4P0/SCT Controlled
[email protected], 1.948 60' - 3450 lbs
RIP 1991-2006
jturmel is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TCCoA Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome