Dragy 60 - 130 Predictor of Horsepower ?

[TMC GT500]

I agree with this conceptually. I had a car once that pulled 146 mph with only 680 rwhp because it made 680 rwhp all the way down the track. However, if you look at the power curves on these cars pulling 7.0 60-130, they don’t really below 485 hp at any time after the launch.

I think that it is the totality of all the factors requiring significantly more power in the real world than the theoretical 485whp figure... the average power over the course of the run, including shifting, coupled with aerodynamic drag, and rolling resistance. Plus I think we tend speak in "Dynojet" whp numbers to create a universal benchmark. But other dynos (particularly load bearing dynos, i.e. Mustang Dynos) spit out "lower" whp numbers, which may correspond more directly with the mathematical calculated hp.

Sponsored

 

[vtknight]

I agree with this conceptually. I had a car once that pulled 146 mph with only 680 rwhp because it made 680 rwhp all the way down the track. However, if you look at the power curves on these cars pulling 7.0 60-130, they don’t really below 485 hp at any time after the launch.

EM - how light was this car? 680 whp and 146 MPH traps is very unusual - unless we are talking about 3000 lb. or less cars.

 

[engineermike]

EM - how light was this car? 680 whp and 146 MPH traps is very unusual - unless we are talking about 3000 lb. or less cars.

It was a full weight 4th Gen f-body plus cage, turbo system, 9” axle, water tank, etc. It was a pig.

However, the turbo 388 made a lot of torque and it had a big converter, so it would stay right in the meat of the power the whole way using just 3 gears.,

 

[vtknight]

It was a full weight 4th Gen f-body plus cage, turbo system, 9” axle, water tank, etc. It was a pig.

However, the turbo 388 made a lot of torque and it had a big converter, so it would stay right in the meat of the power the whole way using just 3 gears.,

Maybe I'm wrong but the curb weight is ~3200 lb?

 

[engineermike]

3500 dry
200 lb driver
50 lb fuel
50 lb turbocharger and plumbing
30 lb intercooler water reservoir
100 lb roll bar with swing-outs

I figured 3900-4000 lb, which seemed very heavy back then.

 

[vtknight]

3500 dry
200 lb driver
50 lb fuel
50 lb turbocharger and plumbing
30 lb intercooler water reservoir
100 lb roll bar with swing-outs

I figured 3900-4000 lb, which seemed very heavy back then.

Wow - is a fourth gen Mustang not a 2004? Maybe I am thinking about the wrong Mustang?

EDIT: I am seeing this - https://www.cjponyparts.com/resources/mustang-curb-weights

The reason I press this point is power to weight must be a significant factor - even with the valid points you make about the curve and the 3 speed. Or your dyno - is super conservative. I have seen 140+ MPH traps with 600+ whp - but the cars are light. Around 3200 lbs or so - like FBO C6Z's for example.

 

[engineermike]

4th Gen f-body not mustang ;)

 

[vtknight]

4th Gen f-body not mustang ;)

LOL - that would explain it...I read foxbody as you can tell...That said - I am even more surprised you got a fourth gen Camaro with sub 700 whp down a track to a mid 140 MPH trap speed...

 

[Andy13186]

My only 2 recorded runs after having my whipple installed were 5.96 then 5.8 both in 90+ degree weather, hoping for like 5.4 or less in cold weather. Drag pack but full weight with subwoofer , trailer hitch etc. Car dynoed 768 on a 3.75 pulley but both the recorded runs were on 3.875 pulley so I think about 750 rwhp.

 

[vtknight]

My only 2 recorded runs after having my whipple installed were 5.96 then 5.8 both in 90+ degree weather, hoping for like 5.4 or less in cold weather. Drag pack but full weight with subwoofer , trailer hitch etc. Car dynoed 768 on a 3.75 pulley but both the recorded runs were on 3.875 pulley so I think about 750 rwhp.

Nice Andy - were these runs on E85 or pump gas?

 

[Andy13186]

Nice Andy - were these runs on E85 or pump gas?

E85. Havent tried any on 93 octane, and I probably wont. I only use 93 when I have to, or when the car will be stored or at the dealer for something.

 

[vtknight]

E85. Havent tried any on 93 octane, and I probably wont. I only use 93 when I have to, or when the car will be stored or at the dealer for something.

Thanks Andy - it's a strong run as E85 gives you so much more timing - even with the 7xx whp level.

 

[Mach9310]

Whipple, 3.25 pulley, 10R80, Lund E85 tune. Full tank of gas/full weight except 17X10 rears. Was hoping to be running a 5.0-5.1 but since I have to start in 4th gear (3rd simply won’t hook) I’m sure that’s slowing me down. 3:55 gears, considering switching to 3:15s

 

[sloride]

When you guys are making these runs is it creep up to 58ish mash the throttle or is full acceleration from very little speed?

 

[vtknight]

Whipple, 3.25 pulley, 10R80, Lund E85 tune. Full tank of gas/full weight except 17X10 rears. Was hoping to be running a 5.0-5.1 but since I have to start in 4th gear (3rd simply won’t hook) I’m sure that’s slowing me down. 3:55 gears, considering switching to 3:15s

We have the same setup - and you are correct and the 5.1 prediction- the 3.15's are a key difference IMHO. I actually believe my setup will run a 4.x 60-130 with better air. I hope to have one last trip to the track to find out weather permitting.

Sponsored