BEATAV8
The Engine Whisperer
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
I bet that baby would like a newer 66 turbine with a .85 A/R
273 cu. in.
- Thread starter Ttype6
- Start date
I bet that baby would like a newer 66 turbine with a .85 A/R
I like the idea of the 66,but I would be concerned that the .85 would cure my traction problems more than I would like.
Mike Licht
I was here first
- Joined
- May 23, 2001
i doubt it
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
My 274 with a 7168 .85 AR, no boost 0-60. Traction is an issue.
It started life as a 9.5" Vigilante 5 disc and has been modified by Dave with the same set-up he uses in his 9.5" 3521 converter. I didn't realize how much power was being spun away with the Vig until I drove this thing for the first time. The car accelerates much faster than it ever did before while making much less power. It puts the power to the tires instead of letting it spin away. At 12 lbs of boost,the car accelerates much faster than it used to at 28 lbs. I believe this car would be slower than it was with the 235" engine if I hadn't changed the converter because the extra torque would just blow through the converter even more than it used to.
I have thought about switching just to help traction.
I did watch your video just a few days ago.
The first time I heard that term was in the early 80s. NHRA had a limit of 500 cu. in. in pro stock,but IHRA did not. I remember Ricky Smith running his 700 cu. in. engines in IHRA pro stock back then and they were referred to as mountain motors.
Last edited:
Compression ratio?
20psiofevil
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
What cam is in yours? I don't think .85 ar upgrade is going to make any difference in spool with a p-trim. You're probably building boost now with 2600rpm?
218/218 .571" lift fast ramp roller from Dave Husek with 1.6/1 rockers. The .85 housing will certainly make a difference. It will spool slower and the lesser amount of restriction will allow more power production upstairs. Judging from the video that Undercover87T provided,it looks like spool would be acceptable. If I leave with zero boost with my current set-up,the tires loose traction in about 5'. I do like the way the throttle responds during everyday normal driving. My next step will be drive shaft,tires,and different rear suspension geometry via the upper control arms and forward relocation brackets for them that KEVINS offers.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
I believe it's just over 9:1, would have to check my records.
now work the suspension/weight transfer and put a real good tire on the back and you would be able to apply more power to the ground without losing traction.i like how soon your car comes up on boost.
that's the theory
more ex gas volumne and rpm is needed for the bigger ar, its a balance between spool time and flow and with our cars we don't have a lot of rpm/cubes to play with.I've been wanting to change the rear geometry for a few years and switch to a taller tire. Those two things will net a great deal of improvement in traction. The car is much more spirited during everyday driving and I like it a lot.
If you data log,you'll see a great difference in acceleration. If you don't data log,you'll easily feel the difference.
Similar threads
